Search

Purpose: Transcriptomic subtyping holds promise for personalized therapy in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). In this study, we aimed to assess intratumoral transcriptomic subtype diversity and to identify biomarkers of long-term chemoimmunotherapy benefit in human ES-SCLC., Experimental Design: We analyzed tumor samples from 58 patients with ES-SCLC enrolled in two multicenter single-arm phase IIIb studies evaluating frontline chemoimmunotherapy in Spain: n = 32 from the IMfirst trial and n = 26 from the CANTABRICO trial. We used the GeoMx Digital Spatial Profiler system to perform multi-region transcriptomic analysis. For subtype classification, we performed hierarchical clustering using the relative expression of ASCL1 (SCLC-A), NEUROD1 (SCLC-N), POU2F3 (SCLC-P), and YAP1 (SCLC-Y)., Results: Subtype distribution was found to be similar between bothcohorts, except for SCLC-P, which was not identified in the CANTABRICO_DSP cohort. A total of 44% of the patients in both cohorts had tumors with multiple coexisting transcriptional subtypes. Transcriptional subtypes or subtype heterogeneity was not associated with outcomes. Most potential targets did not show subtype-specific expression. Consistently in both cohorts, tumors from patients with long-term benefit (time to progression ≥12 months) contained an IFNγ-dominated mRNA profile, including enhanced capacity for antigen presentation. Hypoxia and glycolytic pathways were associated with resistance to chemoimmunotherapy., Conclusions: This work suggests that intratumoral heterogeneity, inconsistent association with outcome, and unclear subtype-specific target expression might be significant challenges for subtype-based precision oncology in SCLC. Preexisting IFNγ-driven immunity and mitochondrial metabolism seem to be correlates of long-term efficacy in this study, although the absence of a chemotherapy control arm precludes concluding that these are predictive features specific for immunotherapy., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Although checkpoint inhibitors have improved first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a therapeutic need remains for patients whose disease does not respond or who experience disease progression after anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy. CONTACT-01 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04471428) evaluated atezolizumab plus cabozantinib versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic NSCLC who developed disease progression after concurrent or sequential treatment with anti-PD-L1/PD-1 and platinum-containing chemotherapy., Methods: This multicenter, open-label, phase III trial randomly assigned patients 1:1 to atezolizumab 1,200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks (q3w) plus cabozantinib 40 mg orally once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 intravenously once every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS)., Results: One hundred eighty-six patients were assigned atezolizumab plus cabozantinib, and 180 docetaxel. Minimum OS follow-up was 10.9 months. Median OS was 10.7 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 12.3) with atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 10.5 months (95% CI, 8.6 to 13.0) with docetaxel (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.16]; P = .3668). Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 5.6) and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.1 to 4.4), respectively (stratified HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92]). Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71 (38.4%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 73 (39.5%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 5 AEs occurred in 14 (7.6%) and 10 (6.0%) patients in the atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and docetaxel arms, respectively (treatment-related in four [2.2%] and one [0.6%], respectively)., Conclusion: Atezolizumab plus cabozantinib after disease progression following anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy and platinum-containing chemotherapy for metastatic NSCLC did not improve OS compared with docetaxel. Safety was consistent with known profiles of these agents.

Lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) is a molecularly heterogeneous disease. In addition to genomic alterations, cancer transcriptional profiling can be helpful to tailor cancer treatment and to estimate each patient's outcome. Transcriptional activity levels of 50 molecular pathways were inferred in 4573 LUAD patients using Gene Set Variation Analysis (GSVA) method. Seven LUAD subtypes were defined and independently validated based on the combined behavior of the studied pathways: AD (adenocarcinoma subtype) 1-7. AD1, AD4, and AD5 subtypes were associated with better overall survival. AD1 and AD4 subtypes were enriched in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations, whereas AD2 and AD6 showed higher tumor protein p53 (TP53) alteration frequencies. AD2 and AD6 subtypes correlated with higher genome instability, proliferation-related pathway expression, and specific sensitivity to chemotherapy, based on data from LUAD cell lines. LUAD subtypes were able to predict immunotherapy response in addition to CD274 (PD-L1) gene expression and tumor mutational burden (TMB). AD2 and AD4 subtypes were associated with potential resistance and response to immunotherapy, respectively. Thus, analysis of transcriptomic data could improve patient stratification beyond genomics and single biomarkers (i.e., PD-L1 and TMB) and may lay the foundation for more personalized treatment avenues, especially in driver-negative LUAD., (© 2023 The Authors. Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies.)

Background: Targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) is recommended to screen actionable genomic alterations (GAs) in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We determined the feasibility to detect actionable GAs using TruSight™ Oncology 500 (TSO500) in 200 consecutive patients with NSCLC., Materials and Methods: DNA and RNA were sequenced on an Illumina® NextSeq 550 instrument and processed using the TSO500 Docker pipeline. Clinical actionability was defined within the molecular tumour board following European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines for oncogene-addicted NSCLC. Overall survival (OS) was estimated as per the presence of druggable GAs and treatment with targeted therapy., Results: Most patients were males (69.5%) and former or current smokers (86.5%). Median age was 64 years. The most common histological type and tumour stage were lung adenocarcinoma (81%) and stage IV (64%), respectively. Sequencing was feasible in most patients (93.5%) and actionable GAs were found in 26.5% of patients. A high concordance was observed between single-gene testing and TSO500 NGS panel. Patients harbouring druggable GAs and receiving targeted therapy achieved longer OS compared to patients without druggable GAs. Conversely, patients with druggable GAs not receiving targeted therapy had a trend toward shorter OS compared with driver-negative patients., Conclusions: Hybrid capture sequencing using TSO500 panel is feasible to analyse clinical samples from patients with NSCLC and is an efficient tool for screening actionable GAs., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Approximately 20% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receive a diagnosis of stage III disease. There is no current consensus regarding the most appropriate treatment for these patients., Methods: In this open-label, phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC to receive neoadjuvant nivolumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (experimental group) or chemotherapy alone (control group), followed by surgery. Patients in the experimental group who had R0 resections received adjuvant treatment with nivolumab for 6 months. The primary end point was a pathological complete response (0% viable tumor in resected lung and lymph nodes). Secondary end points included progression-free survival and overall survival at 24 months and safety., Results: A total of 86 patients underwent randomization; 57 were assigned to the experimental group and 29 were assigned to the control group. A pathological complete response occurred in 37% of the patients in the experimental group and in 7% in the control group (relative risk, 5.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34 to 21.23; P = 0.02). Surgery was performed in 93% of the patients in the experimental group and in 69% in the control group (relative risk, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.74). Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival at 24 months were 67.2% in the experimental group and 40.9% in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression, disease recurrence, or death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.88). Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival at 24 months were 85.0% in the experimental group and 63.6% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.98). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 11 patients in the experimental group (19%; some patients had events of both grades) and 3 patients in the control group (10%)., Conclusions: In patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC, perioperative treatment with nivolumab plus chemotherapy resulted in a higher percentage of patients with a pathological complete response and longer survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; NADIM II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03838159; EudraCT number, 2018-004515-45.)., (Copyright © 2023 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Despite immunotherapy advancements for patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), pivotal first-line trials were limited to patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-1 and a median age of 65 years or younger. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of first-line atezolizumab monotherapy with single-agent chemotherapy in patients ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy., Methods: This trial was a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled study conducted at 91 sites in 23 countries across Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. Eligible patients had stage IIIB or IV NSCLC in whom platinum-doublet chemotherapy was deemed unsuitable by the investigator due to an ECOG PS 2 or 3, or alternatively, being 70 years or older with an ECOG PS 0-1 with substantial comorbidities or contraindications for platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Patients were randomised 2:1 by permuted-block randomisation (block size of six) to receive 1200 mg of atezolizumab given intravenously every 3 weeks or single-agent chemotherapy (vinorelbine [oral or intravenous] or gemcitabine [intravenous]; dosing per local label) at 3-weekly or 4-weekly cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were conducted in the safety-evaluable population, which included all randomised patients who received any amount of atezolizumab or chemotherapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03191786., Findings: Between Sept 11, 2017, and Sept 23, 2019, 453 patients were enrolled and randomised to receive atezolizumab (n=302) or chemotherapy (n=151). Atezolizumab improved overall survival compared with chemotherapy (median overall survival 10·3 months [95% CI 9·4-11·9] vs 9·2 months [5·9-11·2]; stratified hazard ratio 0·78 [0·63-0·97], p=0·028), with a 2-year survival rate of 24% (95% CI 19·3-29·4) with atezolizumab compared with 12% (6·7-18·0) with chemotherapy. Compared with chemotherapy, atezolizumab was associated with stabilisation or improvement of patient-reported health-related quality-of-life functioning scales and symptoms and fewer grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (49 [16%] of 300 vs 49 [33%] of 147) and treatment-related deaths (three [1%] vs four [3%])., Interpretation: First-line treatment with atezolizumab monotherapy was associated with improved overall survival, a doubling of the 2-year survival rate, maintenance of quality of life, and a favourable safety profile compared with single-agent chemotherapy. These data support atezolizumab monotherapy as a potential first-line treatment option for patients with advanced NSCLC who are ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy., Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech Inc, a member of the Roche group., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests SML declares support from Roche for attending meetings and travelling to present the first-line atezolizumab versus single-agent chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer ineligible for treatment with a platinum-containing regimen (IPSOS) trial at the European Society of Medical Oncology 2022 meeting, and membership for the UK commission on Human Medicines and the Oncology and Haematology Expert Advisory Group. CS declares provision of study material from Roche; clinical trial support, consulting fees, and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events, from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; and support for attending meetings or travel from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, and Takeda. KP declares institutional funding from Alkem Laboratories and Roche. DK declares membership on an advisory board for Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Amgen, Roche, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Takeda, Sanofi-Aventis, and Janssen. AR declares consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche and support for attending meetings or travel from Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, and Roche. TT declares payment for advisory board activity relating to atezolizumab in early-stage NSCLC. DV declares consulting fees from Lilly, Roche, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, and Gilead; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AstraZeneca, Roche, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Gilead, Takeda, and Bayer; and support for attending meetings or travel from AstraZeneca and Pfizer. RC declares receiving a grant to run the study; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly Oncology, Roche, Pfizer, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, Bayer, Sanofi, Novartis, and Janssen; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly Oncology, Roche, Pfizer, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, Bayer, Sanofi, Novartis, and Janssen; support for attending meetings or travel from MSD, Takeda, Roche, and Janssen; participation on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly Oncology, Roche, Pfizer, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, Bayer, Sanofi, Novartis, and Janssen; and owning stock or stock options for Leaders in Oncology at The Christie Private Care. DC declares payment for speakers bureaus or scientific advisory from MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Amgen, and Sanofi Genzyme. GL declares institutional grants or contracts from the US National Cancer Institute, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute (Canada), AstraZeneca, Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Amgen; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, EMD Serono, Takeda, Jazz, and Novartis; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, Pfizer, EMD Serono, Merck, AbbVie, Jazz, Takeda, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Lilly. MR declares consulting fees, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events, and support for attending meetings or travel from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Mirati, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Roche; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Sanofi and Daiichi-Sankyo. RP declares consulting fees from AstraZeneca; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Guardant Health and Pfizer; support for attending meetings or travel from MSD; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca. MPM declares honoraria for lectures from Roche and MSD. YH and SM are employed by Roche. EH declares study support from Roche, discounted prices on stocks as a Roche employee, and employment by Roche. MC declares stocks as part of employment at Genentech and employment at Genentech. HKV is employed by Roche and declares holding stock for Roche. SP declares consultation or an advisory role for AbbVie, AiCME, Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Biocartis, BioInvent, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Clovis, Daiichi-Sankyo, Debiopharm, ecancer, Eli Lilly, Elsevier, F-Star, Fishawack, Foundation Medicine, Genzyme, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Illumina, Imedex, IQVIA, Incyte, Ipsen, iTeos, Janssen, Medscape, Medtoday, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Novartis, Novocure, OncologyEducation, PharmaMar, Phosplatin Therapeutics, Physicians' Education Resource, Peerview, Pfizer, PRIME, Regeneron, RMEI, Roche and Genentech, Research to Practice, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, and Vaccibody; speaking in a company's organised public event for AiCME, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, ecancer, Eli Lilly, Foundation Medicine, GlaxoSmithKline, Illumina, Imedex, Ipsen, Medscape, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mirati, Novartis, PER, Peerview, Pfizer, Prime, Roche and Genentech, RTP, Sanofi, and Takeda; and receipt of grants and research support (institutional financial support for clinical trials) as a principal investigator in trials sponsored by Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Roche and Genentech. SML is partially supported by the University College London Hospitals and University College London Biochemical Research Centre. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This retrospective observational study analyzed the clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes of 120 patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ALK+ NSCLC) according to data collected between November 2019 and October 2020 in 38 Spanish hospitals. Patients had progressed after 1-5 prior treatment lines (which included crizotinib in any prior line) and received subsequent therapy with alectinib in a local expanded access program. Median age was 58.7 years, 50% of patients were female, 64.1% had ECOG PS of 0-1, 85% presented stage IV, 95% had adenocarcinoma histology and 20.8% had brain metastases. After a median 9.6 months of alectinib treatment, objective response rate (ORR) was 54.5%, disease control rate (DCR) was 80%, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months and median overall survival (OS) was 24.1 months. Patients with brain metastases achieved an intracranial DCR of 71.4%. Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 35.8% of patients (14.2% of AEs were grade ≥3). Over 40% of patients received some treatment after alectinib, most frequently lorlatinib (65.2%) and brigatinib (32.6%). This study provides information on real-world treatment patterns and confirms the tolerability and prolonged PFS and OS observed with alectinib in clinical trials, in unselected pretreated patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC., Competing Interests: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST R. B.-C. reports advisory honoraria from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and AstraZeneca; speaker honoraria from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Amgen; and grants from Roche. P. G. reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck-Sharp-Dome, Medscape, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda and Sanofi, and speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Merck-Sharp-Dome, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda. R. G.-C. reports consultancy fees and speaker honoraria from Merck-Sharp-Dome, Bristol-Myers, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Takeda, Bayer and Janssen. R. P. reports speaker honoraria from Guardant Health, Pfizer, Roche, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli-Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and Merck-Sharp-Dome; travel/meeting attendance expenses from Merck-Sharp-Dome and Roche, and membership of data safety monitoring from Boehringer-Ingelheim and Roche. A. A. reports consultancy fees from Roche, Takeda, AstraZeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. C. B. reports consultancy fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim and AstraZeneca; speaker honoraria from Pfizer, Merk, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Merck-Sharp-Dome, and Amgen; meeting and courses attendance expenses from Merck-Sharp-Dome, Roche, Merk, AstraZeneca and Boehringer-Ingelheim. D. R.-A. reports honoraria for lectures and consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD and Hoffmann-La Roche. M. L.-B. reports travel grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Pfizer, and Merck-Sharp-Dome; speaker honoraria, consulting fees and continuing medical education expenses from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck-Sharp-Dome, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Takeda. A. P. declares no conflicts of interests. D. V. reports speaker honoraria from Merck-Sharp-Dome, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca; and travel/accommodation expenses from Merck-Sharp-Dome, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. J. M. S.-T. reports consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; and travel/accommodation expenses from Boehringer-Ingelheim, Merck-Sharp-Dome, and Roche. M. M. reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, and AstraZeneca; personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Roche, Merck-Sharp-Dome, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Takeda, Sanofi-Aventis, Novartis, Vifor and Bayer. P. D. reports speaker honoraria and consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Roche, Merck-Sharp-Dome, and Takeda; speaker honoraria from Pfizer and Amgen; institutional research grants from AstraZeneca and Mirati, and personal and institutional research grants from AstraZeneca and Roche. R. G. and M. G. are Roche Farma employees. J. d. C. reports educational fees from Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck-Sharp-Dome, and Roche; consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, Merck-Sharp-Dome, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda. All potential conflicts of interests were outside of the submitted work., (Copyright: © 2022 Bernabé-Caro et al.)

Purpose: Treatment guidelines for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) recommend broad molecular profiling for targeted therapy selection. This study prospectively assessed comprehensive next-generation sequencing (NGS) of cell-free circulating tumor DNA (cfDNA) compared with standard-of-care (SOC) tissue-based testing to identify guideline-recommended alterations in aNSCLC., Patients and Methods: Patients with treatment-naïve aNSCLC were tested using a well-validated NGS cfDNA panel, and results were compared with SOC tissue testing. The primary objective was noninferiority of cfDNA vs. tissue analysis for the detection of two guideline-recommended biomarkers ( EGFR and ALK ) and an additional six actionable biomarkers. Secondary analyses included tissue versus cfDNA biomarker discovery, overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) to targeted therapy, and positive predictive value (PPV) of cfDNA., Results: The primary objective was met with cfDNA identifying actionable mutations in 46 patients versus 48 by tissue ( P < .05). In total, 0/186 patients were genotyped for all eight biomarkers with tissue, compared with 90.8% using cfDNA. Targetable alterations or KRAS were identified in 80.7% when cfDNA was used first versus 57.1% when tissue was used first. PPV for cfDNA-detected EGFR was 100.0% (25/25). ORR and PFS in patients receiving targeted therapy based on tissue or cfDNA were similar to those previously reported., Conclusion: This prospective study confirms a previous report that comprehensive cfDNA testing is noninferior to SOC tissue testing in detecting aNSCLC-recommended biomarkers. Furthermore, cfDNA-based first-line therapy produced outcomes similar to tissue-based testing, demonstrating the clinical utility of comprehensive cfDNA genotyping as the initial genotyping modality in patients with treatment-naïve aNSCLC when tissue is insufficient or when all actionable biomarkers cannot be rapidly assessed.

MET inhibitors have shown activity in non-small-cell lung cancer patients (NSCLC) with MET amplification and exon 14 skipping (METΔex14). However, patient stratification is imperfect, and thus, response rates have varied widely. Here, we studied MET alterations in 474 advanced NSCLC patients by nCounter, an RNA-based technique, together with next-generation sequencing (NGS), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), immunohistochemistry (IHC), and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), exploring correlation with clinical benefit. Of the 474 samples analyzed, 422 (89%) yielded valid results by nCounter, which identified 13 patients (3%) with METΔex14 and 15 patients (3.5%) with very-high MET mRNA expression. These two subgroups were mutually exclusive, displayed distinct phenotypes and did not generally coexist with other drivers. For METΔex14, 3/8 (37.5%) samples positive by nCounter tested negative by NGS. Regarding patients with very-high MET mRNA, 92% had MET amplification by FISH and/or NGS. However, FISH failed to identify three patients (30%) with very-high MET RNA expression, among which one received MET tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment deriving clinical benefit. Our results indicate that quantitative mRNA-based techniques can improve the selection of patients for MET-targeted therapies., (© 2020 The Authors. Published by FEBS Press and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background and Objective: Radiation pneumonitis (RP) could be a lethal complication of lung cancer treatment. No reliable predictors of RP severity have been recognized. This prospective pilot study was performed to identify early predictors of high grade lung toxicity and to evaluate clinical, biological or dosimetric features associated with different grades of toxicity., Method: Sixteen patients with non-small cell lung cancer with indication of concurrent chemoradiotherapy using 60 Gy/2 Gy/fraction starting at cycle one of platinum based chemotherapy were included. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), pulmonary function testing (PFT), and 18 F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron-emission tomography was performed before radiotherapy (RT), after three weeks of treatment, and two months post-RT. For analysis, patients were grouped by grade (low [G1-G2] vs. high [G3-G5]). The two groups were compared to identify predictors of RP. Protein expression BAL and lung tissue metabolism was evaluated in two patients (RP-G1 vs. RP-G3). Categorical variables such as comorbidities, stages and locations were summarized as percentages. Radiation doses, pulmonary function values and time to RP were summarized by medians with ranges or as means with standard deviation. Longitudinal analysis PFT was performed by a T-test., Results: All 16 patients developed RP, as follows: G1 (5 pts; 31.3%); G2 (5 pts; 31.3%); G3 (5 pts; 31.3%); and G5 (1 pts; 6.1%). Patients with high grade RP presented significant decrease (p = 0.02) in diffusing lung capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) after three weeks of RT. No correlation between dosimetric values and RP grades was observed. BAL analysis of the selected patients showed that CXCL-1, CD154, IL-1ra, IL-23, MIF, PAI-1 and IFN-γ were overexpressed in the lungs of the RP-G3 patient, even before treatment. The pre-RT SUVmax value in the RP-G3 patient was non-significantly higher than in the patient with RP-G1., Conclusions: RT induces some degree of RP. Our data suggest that decrease in DLCO% is the most sensitive parameter for the early detection of RP. Moreover, we detect biological differences between the two grades of pneumonitis, highlighting the potential value of some cytokines as a prognostic marker for developing high grade lung toxicity. Further multicenter studies with larger sample size are essential to validate these findings.

Introduction: Uncommon epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations (u-EGFRm) are a heterogeneous group of molecular alterations and have also been reported as comutations with other EGFR mutations (complex mutations) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Afatinib has shown activity against some u-EGFRm, and we examined its efficacy in Spanish clinical practice., Patients and Methods: Data of 67 patients with advanced NSCLC with u-EGFRm treated with afatinib between 2012 and 2017 at 23 Spanish institutions were reviewed. u-EGFRm were analyzed as complex mutations (group A), EGFR exon 20 insertions (ins20; group B), or single mutations (group C). Efficacy was evaluated in terms of overall survival (OS) and tumor response., Results: Group A complex u-EGFRm consisted of double mutations of G719X+E709F, G719X+S768I, G719X+L861Q, L858R+T790M, L858R+S768I, L858R+S765I, del19+S768I, del19+L747S, or R776C+L861Q. No differences in clinical characteristics were found between groups A (n = 20), B (n = 23), and C (n = 24). Afatinib was administered as first-line therapy in 80% of patients. Median time of receipt of therapy was 4.2 months (range, 2.0-12.9 months). Median OS for the entire cohort was 19.9 months (95% confidence interval, 9.7, 30.1). Hazard ratios for OS were 0.26 (95% confidence interval, 0.10, 0.71; P = .008) and 0.40 (95% confidence interval, 0.17, 0.95; P = .037) for groups A and C compared to B, respectively. Response was significantly higher in groups A (70%) and C (54%) compared to B (13%; pairwise comparison P < .001 and .008, respectively)., Conclusion: In clinical practice, afatinib was active in patients with u-EGFRm NSCLC, particularly in complex and single mutations. Further strategies are needed for patients with ins20, a subgroup u-EGFRm with a lower clinical benefit with afatinib., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Longitudinal evaluation of mutations in blood samples was a prespecified secondary objective in the BELIEF trial of erlotinib and bevacizumab in advanced EGFR-positive NSCLC. Here, we report the testing results and explore the correlation of EGFR status in blood with clinical outcomes., Methods: Blood samples were prospectively collected from patients at baseline, at response evaluation, and at progression and sent to a central laboratory. Circulating free DNA was purified and EGFR mutations were analyzed with a validated real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay., Results: EGFR exon 19/21 mutations were detected in 55 of 91 baseline blood samples (60.4%) and correlated with a significantly worse progression-free survival: 11.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.0-14.8 mo) for the patients who were positive versus 22.9 months (95% CI: 9.5-33.9 mo) for those who were negative (log-rank p = 0.0020). Among the 74 samples at response, exon 19/21 mutations were detected only in three samples (4.1%). In contrast, 29 of 58 patients (50.0%) were exon 19/21 positive at progression and showed a significantly worse median overall survival of 21.7 months (95% CI: 17.0-30.9 mo) compared with 37.4 months (95% CI: 22.6-53.1 mo) for those who were negative (log-rank p = 0.011). Blood samples at the three time points were available for 48 patients. Of those, among 14 exon 19/21 EGFR-negative at presentation, 13 (93%) were persistently negative for the sensitizing mutations after progression and the p.T790M could only be detected in the blood of two patients., Conclusions: Longitudinal testing of EGFR mutations in blood can offer valuable clinical information. In patients of the BELIEF study, detection of EGFR mutations in circulating free DNA at presentation was associated with shorter progression-free survival, whereas positivity at progression correlated with shorter overall survival. Finally, patients negative in blood at presentation were almost invariably negative at relapse., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The etiology and the molecular basis of lung adenocarcinomas (LuADs) in nonsmokers are currently unknown. Furthermore, the scarcity of available primary cultures continues to hamper our biological understanding of non-smoking-related lung adenocarcinomas (NSK-LuADs)., Patients and Methods: We established patient-derived cancer cell (PDC) cultures from metastatic NSK-LuADs, including two pairs of matched EGFR-mutant PDCs before and after resistance to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), and then performed whole-exome and RNA sequencing to delineate their genomic architecture. For validation, we analyzed independent cohorts of primary LuADs., Results: In addition to known non-smoker-associated alterations (e.g. RET, ALK, EGFR, and ERBB2), we discovered novel fusions and recurrently mutated genes, including ATF7IP, a regulator of gene expression, that was inactivated in 5% of primary LuAD cases. We also found germline mutations at dominant familiar-cancer genes, highlighting the importance of genetic predisposition in the origin of a subset of NSK-LuADs. Furthermore, there was an over-representation of inactivating alterations at RB1, mostly through complex intragenic rearrangements, in treatment-naive EGFR-mutant LuADs. Three EGFR-mutant and one EGFR-wild-type tumors acquired resistance to EGFR-TKIs and chemotherapy, respectively, and histology on re-biopsies revealed the development of small-cell lung cancer/squamous cell carcinoma (SCLC/LuSCC) transformation. These features were consistent with RB1 inactivation and acquired EGFR-T790M mutation or FGFR3-TACC3 fusion in EGFR-mutant tumors., Conclusions: We found recurrent alterations in LuADs that deserve further exploration. Our work also demonstrates that a subset of NSK-LuADs arises within cancer-predisposition syndromes. The preferential occurrence of RB1 inactivation, via complex rearrangements, found in EGFR-mutant tumors appears to favor SCLC/LuSCC transformation under growth-inhibition pressures. Thus RB1 inactivation may predict the risk of LuAD transformation to a more aggressive type of lung cancer, and may need to be considered as a part of the clinical management of NSK-LuADs patients., (Copyright © 2019 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Diabetes is related with increased cancer mortality across multiple cancer types. Its role in lung cancer mortality is still unclear. We aim to determine the prognostic value of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and diabetes mellitus in patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy., Methods: One-hundred seventy patients with stage III NSCLC received definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy from 2010 to 2014. Clinico-pathological data and clinical outcome was retrospectively registered. Fifty-six patients (33%), met criteria for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) at baseline. The prognostic value of FPG and other clinical variables was assessed. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional models and log-rank test were used., Results: With a median follow-up of 36 months, median PFS was 8.0 months and median OS was 15.0 months in patients with FPG ≥7 mmol/L compared to 20 months (HR 1.13; 95% CI 1.07-1.19, p < 0.001) and 31 months (HR 1.09; 95% CI 1.04-1.15; p < 0.001) respectively, for patients with FPG < 7 mmol/L. In the multivariate analysis of the entire cohort adjusted by platinum compound and comorbidities, high levels of FPG as a continuous variable (HR 1.14; 95% CI 1.07-1.21; p < 0.001), the presence of comorbidity (HR 1.72; 95% CI 1.12-2.63; p = 0.012), and treatment with carboplatin (HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.26-2.99; p = 0.002) were independent predictors for shorter OS. In additional multivariate models considering non-diabetic patients as a reference group, diabetic patients with poor metabolic control (HbA1c > 8.5%) (HR 4.53; 95% CI 2.21-9.30; p < 0.001) and those receiving insulin (HR 3.22; 95% CI 1.90-5.46 p < 0.001) had significantly independent worse OS., Conclusion: Baseline FPG level is an independent predictor of survival in our cohort of patients with locally advanced NSCLC treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Studies in larger cohorts of patients are warranted to confirm this relevant association.

Background: Anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has improved the survival of patients. However, a substantial percentage of patients do not respond to this treatment. We examined the use of DNA methylation profiles to determine the efficacy of anti-PD-1 treatment in patients recruited with current stage IV NSCLC., Methods: In this multicentre study, we recruited adult patients from 15 hospitals in France, Spain, and Italy who had histologically proven stage IV NSCLC and had been exposed to PD-1 blockade during the course of the disease. The study structure comprised a discovery cohort to assess the correlation between epigenetic features and clinical benefit with PD-1 blockade and two validation cohorts to assess the validity of our assumptions. We first established an epigenomic profile based on a microarray DNA methylation signature (EPIMMUNE) in a discovery set of tumour samples from patients treated with nivolumab or pembrolizumab. The EPIMMUNE signature was validated in an independent set of patients. A derived DNA methylation marker was validated by a single-methylation assay in a validation cohort of patients. The main study outcomes were progression-free survival and overall survival. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to estimate progression-free and overall survival, and calculated the differences between the groups with the log-rank test. We constructed a multivariate Cox model to identify the variables independently associated with progression-free and overall survival., Findings: Between June 23, 2014, and May 18, 2017, we obtained samples from 142 patients: 34 in the discovery cohort, 47 in the EPIMMUNE validation cohort, and 61 in the derived methylation marker cohort (the T-cell differentiation factor forkhead box P1 [FOXP1]). The EPIMMUNE signature in patients with stage IV NSCLC treated with anti-PD-1 agents was associated with improved progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0·010, 95% CI 3·29 × 10 -4 -0·0282; p=0·0067) and overall survival (0·080, 0·017-0·373; p=0·0012). The EPIMMUNE-positive signature was not associated with PD-L1 expression, the presence of CD8+ cells, or mutational load. EPIMMUNE-negative tumours were enriched in tumour-associated macrophages and neutrophils, cancer-associated fibroblasts, and senescent endothelial cells. The EPIMMUNE-positive signature was associated with improved progression-free survival in the EPIMMUNE validation cohort (0·330, 0·149-0·727; p=0·0064). The unmethylated status of FOXP1 was associated with improved progression-free survival (0·415, 0·209-0·802; p=0·0063) and overall survival (0·409, 0·220-0·780; p=0·0094) in the FOXP1 validation cohort. The EPIMMUNE signature and unmethylated FOXP1 were not associated with clinical benefit in lung tumours that did not receive immunotherapy., Interpretation: Our study shows that the epigenetic milieu of NSCLC tumours indicates which patients are most likely to benefit from nivolumab or pembrolizumab treatments. The methylation status of FOXP1 could be associated with validated predictive biomarkers such as PD-L1 staining and mutational load to better select patients who will experience clinical benefit with PD-1 blockade, and its predictive value should be evaluated in prospective studies., Funding: "Obra Social" La Caixa, Cellex Foundation, and the Health and Science Departments of the Generalitat de Catalunya., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Bavituximab is a monoclonal antibody that targets phosphatidylserine in the presence of β2 glycoprotein 1 (β2GP1) to exert an antitumor immune response. This phase III trial determined the efficacy of bavituximab combined with docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: Key eligibility criteria included advanced non-squamous NSCLC with disease progression after treatment with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy, evidence of disease control after at least two cycles of first-line therapy, presence of measurable disease, ECOG performance status 0 or 1, adequate bone marrow and organ function, and no recent history of clinically significant bleeding. Eligible patients were randomized 1 : 1 to receive up to six 21-day cycles of docetaxel plus either weekly bavituximab 3 mg/kg or placebo until progression or toxicity. The primary end point was overall survival (OS)., Results: A total of 597 patients were enrolled. Median OS was 10.5 months in the docetaxel + bavituximab arm and was 10.9 months in the docetaxel + placebo arm (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.88-1.29; P = 0.533). There was no difference in progression-free survival (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.82-1.22; P = 0.990). Toxicities were manageable and similar between arms. In subset analysis, among patients with high baseline serum β2GP1 levels ≥200 µg/ml, a nonsignificant OS trend favored the bavituximab arm (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.63-1.06; P = 0.134). Among patients who received post-study immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, OS favored the bavituximab arm (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.26-0.81; P = 0.006)., Conclusions: The combination of bavituximab plus docetaxel is not superior to docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC. The addition of bavituximab to docetaxel does not meaningfully increase toxicity. The potential benefit of bavituximab observed in patients with high β2GP1 levels and in patients subsequently treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors requires further investigation., Clinical Trial Number: NCT01999673.

Background: Although concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) increases survival in patients with inoperable, locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), there is no consensus on the treatment of elderly patients. The aim of this study was to determine the prognostic value of the comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and its ability to predict toxicity in this setting., Methods: We enrolled 85 consecutive elderly (⩾75 years) participants, who underwent CGA and the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13). Those classified as fit and medium-fit by CGA were deemed candidates for cCRT (platinum-based chemotherapy concurrent with thoracic radiation therapy), while unfit patients received best supportive care., Results: Fit (37%) and medium-fit (48%) patients had significantly longer median overall survival (mOS) (23.9 and 16.9 months, respectively) than unfit patients (15%) (9.3 months, log-rank P=0.01). In multivariate analysis, CGA groups and VES-13 were independent prognostic factors. Fit and medium-fit patients receiving cCRT (n=54) had mOS of 21.1 months (95% confidence interval: 16.2, 26.0). In those patients, higher VES-13 (⩾3) was associated with shorter mOS (16.33 vs 24.3 months, P=0.027) and higher risk of G3-4 toxicity (65 vs 32%, P=0.028)., Conclusions: Comprehensive geriatric assessment and VES-13 showed independent prognostic value. Comprehensive geriatric assessment may help to identify elderly patients fit enough to be treated with cCRT.

Objectives: Dysregulation of the downstream PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway is a proposed mechanism of resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs). We investigated safety and antitumor activity of afatinib plus sirolimus as a potential combination to reverse acquired resistance to EGFR-TKIs in a phase IB trial in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (EGFR mut NSCLC) and/or disease progression following prior erlotinib/gefitinib., Materials and Methods: Patients with EGFR mut NSCLC and/or disease progression following at least prior erlotinib/gefitinib were included in the trial. The primary endpoint was incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Four initial dose cohorts were proposed to evaluate DLTs. Other endpoints included tumor response, safety, progression-free survival (PFS) and pharmacokinetics., Results: Thirty-nine patients received afatinib and sirolimus. Additional dose cohorts were added since the second cohort (afatinib 40mg/day and sirolimus 5mg/day) was considered to have excessive toxicity. All patients experienced adverse events (AE) [grade 3: 66.7%; serious AE: 56.4%]. The most frequent AEs were diarrhea (94.9%), mucosal inflammation (64.1%), asthenia (53.8%) and rash (53.8%). Discontinuations and dose reduction due to AEs occurred in 23.1% and 25.6% of patients. MTD was determined as afatinib 30mg and sirolimus 1mg. Responses were observed in 5 patients (12.8%) [2 (5.1%) with confirmed partial response (PR); 3 (7.7%) with unconfirmed PR], and stable disease in 18 patients (46.2%). Four of the 5 responses were at doses above MTD. PFS at 6 months was estimated in 33.3% (median PFS 3.4 months). Pharmacokinetic parameters of afatinib and sirolimus were similar after single administration or in combination., Conclusion: The combination of afatinib and sirolimus showed lower responses than expected. Together with increased AEs and poor tolerability, this precludes clinical use and further clinical development of this combination. No pharmacokinetic interactions were observed. CLINICALTRIALS., Gov Identifier: NCT00993499., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib improves the outcomes of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) harbouring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. The coexistence of the T790M resistance mutation with another EGFR mutation in treatment-naive patients has been associated with a shorter progression-free survival to EGFR inhibition than in the absence of the T790M mutation. To test this hypothesis clinically, we developed a proof-of-concept study, in which patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC were treated with the combination of erlotinib and bevacizumab, stratified by the presence of the pretreatment T790M mutation., Methods: BELIEF was an international, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial done at 29 centres in eight European countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had treatment-naive, pathologically confirmed stage IIIB or stage IV lung adenocarcinoma with a confirmed, activating EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation). Patients received oral erlotinib 150 mg per day and intravenous bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 21 days and were tested centrally for the pretreatment T790M resistance mutation with a peptide nucleic acid probe-based real-time PCR. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. The primary efficacy analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and was stratified into two parallel substudies according to the centrally confirmed pretreatment T790M mutation status of enrolled patients (T790M positive or negative). The safety analysis was done in all patients that have received at least one dose of trial treatment. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01562028., Findings: Between June 11, 2012, and Oct 28, 2014, 109 patients were enrolled and included in the efficacy analysis. 37 patients were T790M mutation positive and 72 negative. The overall median progression-free survival was 13·2 months (95% CI 10·3-15·5), with a 12 month progression-free survival of 55% (95% CI 45-64). The primary endpoint was met only in substudy one (T790M-positive patients). In the T790M-positive group, median progression-free survival was 16·0 months (12·7 to not estimable), with a 12 month progression-free survival of 68% (50-81), whereas in the T790M-negative group, median progression-free survival was 10·5 months (9·4-14·2), with a 12 month progression-free survival of 48% (36-59). Of 106 patients included in the safety analysis, five had grade 4 adverse events (one acute coronary syndrome, one biliary tract infection, one other neoplasms, and two colonic perforations) and one died due to sepsis., Interpretation: The BELIEF trial provides further evidence of benefit for the combined use of erlotinib and bevacizumab in patients with NSCLC harbouring activating EGFR mutations., Funding: European Thoracic Oncology Platform, Roche., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement selectively respond to ALK inhibitors. Thus, identification of ALK rearrangements has become a standard diagnostic test in advanced NSCLC patients. Our institution has been a referral center in Spain for ALK determination by Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). The aim of our study was to assess the feasibility and the FISH patterns of the ALK gene and to evaluate the clinical and pathological features of patients with ALK alterations., Methods: Between 2010 and 2014, 1092 samples were evaluated for ALK using FISH technique (927 histological samples, 165 cytological samples). Correlation with available clinical-pathological information was assessed., Results: ALK rearrangement was found in 35 patients (3.2%). Cytological samples (using either direct smears or cell blocks), were more frequently non-assessable than histological samples (69% versus 89%, respectively) (p < 0.001). Within the ALK-rearranged cases the majority were female, non-smokers, and stage IV., Conclusions: Although assessable in cytological samples, biopsies are preferred when available for ALK evaluation by FISH. The ALK translocation prevalence and the associated clinico-pathological features in Spanish NSCLC patients are similar to those previously reported.

Objectives: Vorinostat or suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) is a novel histone deacetylase inhibitor with demonstrated antiproliferative effects due to drug-induced accumulation of acetylated proteins, including the heat shock protein 90. We prospectively studied the activity of vorinostat plus erlotinib in EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients with progression to tyrosine kinase inhibitors., Patients and Methods: We conducted this prospective, non-randomized, multicenter, phase I/II trial to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose, toxicity profile and efficacy of erlotinib and vorinostat. Patients with advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations and progressive disease after a minimum of 12 weeks on erlotinib were included. The maximum tolerated dose of vorinostat plus erlotinib was used as recommended dose for the phase II (RDP2) to assess the efficacy of the combination. The primary end point was progression-free-survival rate at 12 weeks (PFSR12w). Pre-treatment plasma samples were required to assess T790M resistant mutation., Results: A total of 33 patients were enrolled in the phase I-II trial. The maximum tolerated dose was erlotinib 150 mg p.o., QD, and 400mg p.o., QD, on days 1-7 and 15-21 in a 28-day cycle. Among the 25 patients treated at the RDP2, the most common toxicities included anemia, fatigue and diarrhea. No responses were observed. PFSR12w was 28% (IC 95%: 18.0-37.2); median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8 weeks (IC 95%: 7.43-8.45) and overall survival (OS) 10.3 months (95% CI: 2.4-18.1)., Conclusion: Full dose of continuous erlotinib with vorinostat 400mg p.o., QD on alternative weeks can be safely administered. Still, the combination has no meaningful activity in EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients after TKI progression., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Erlotinib has been shown to improve progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy when given as first-line treatment for Asian patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with activating EGFR mutations. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of erlotinib compared with standard chemotherapy for first-line treatment of European patients with advanced EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC., Methods: We undertook the open-label, randomised phase 3 EURTAC trial at 42 hospitals in France, Italy, and Spain. Eligible participants were adults (> 18 years) with NSCLC and EGFR mutations (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation in exon 21) with no history of chemotherapy for metastatic disease (neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy ending ≥ 6 months before study entry was allowed). We randomly allocated participants (1:1) according to a computer-generated allocation schedule to receive oral erlotinib 150 mg per day or 3 week cycles of standard intravenous chemotherapy of cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) on day 1) or gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8). Carboplatin (AUC 6 with docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) or AUC 5 with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2)) was allowed in patients unable to have cisplatin. Patients were stratified by EGFR mutation type and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0 vs 1 vs 2). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received study drug (≥ 1 dose). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00446225., Findings: Between Feb 15, 2007, and Jan 4, 2011, 174 patients with EGFR mutations were enrolled. One patient received treatment before randomisation and was thus withdrawn from the study; of the remaining patients, 86 were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib and 87 to receive standard chemotherapy. The preplanned interim analysis showed that the study met its primary endpoint; enrolment was halted, and full evaluation of the results was recommended. At data cutoff (Jan 26, 2011), median PFS was 9·7 months (95% CI 8·4-12·3) in the erlotinib group, compared with 5·2 months (4·5-5·8) in the standard chemotherapy group (hazard ratio 0·37, 95% CI 0·25-0·54; p < 0·0001). Main grade 3 or 4 toxicities were rash (11 [13%] of 84 patients given erlotinib vs none of 82 patients in the chemotherapy group), neutropenia (none vs 18 [22%]), anaemia (one [1%] vs three [4%]), and increased amino-transferase concentrations (two [2%] vs 0). Five (6%) patients on erlotinib had treatment-related severe adverse events compared with 16 patients (20%) on chemotherapy. One patient in the erlotinib group and two in the standard chemotherapy group died from treatment-related causes., Interpretation: Our findings strengthen the rationale for routine baseline tissue-based assessment of EGFR mutations in patients with NSCLC and for treatment of mutation-positive patients with EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors., Funding: Spanish Lung Cancer Group, Roche Farma, Hoffmann-La Roche, and Red Temática de Investigacion Cooperativa en Cancer., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Although concurrent chemotherapy and radiation is the standard approach for good risk unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, there is no optimal concurrent chemotherapy regimen. Administration of chemotherapy at full dose with maximal activity against local and micrometastatic disease is highly desirable. This study tested the feasibility of 3 cycles of full dose cisplatin and pemetrexed concurrent with definitive thoracic radiotherapy followed by consolidation pemetrexed, without the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) exceeding 33% of the patients., Methods: Patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC, good performance status and no serious comorbidity were eligible. Patients received thoracic radiation to a dose of 66 Gy concurrently with three 21-day cycles of pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2), and cisplatin at escalating doses from 60 to 75 mg/m(2). Consolidation chemotherapy of pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) was provided for 3 more 21-day cycles. Cisplatin doses were escalated as far as no more than 1/3 of the patients in a level developing dose limiting toxicities (DLT)., Results: Fifteen eligible patients were enrolled: nine in the first dose level and 3 in the second and third dose levels respectively. Two out of 9 patients in the first dose level experienced DLT (grade 3 esophagitis resulting in delay in treatment administration). The major serious acute toxicities were esophagitis (40%) and febrile neutropenia (20%). With a median follow up time of 22 months, median time to progression and overall survival has not been reached. The rate of survival at 24 months was 57.5% (95% CI: 27.5-87.4%) of the patients., Conclusions: Three systemic dose levels of pemetrexed and cisplatin could be administered concurrently with radiotherapy. The rate of survival at 24 months was encouraging., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) confer hypersensitivity to the tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefitinib and erlotinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We evaluated the feasibility of large-scale screening for EGFR mutations in such patients and analyzed the association between the mutations and the outcome of erlotinib treatment., Methods: From April 2005 through November 2008, lung cancers from 2105 patients in 129 institutions in Spain were screened for EGFR mutations. The analysis was performed in a central laboratory. Patients with tumors carrying EGFR mutations were eligible for erlotinib treatment., Results: EGFR mutations were found in 350 of 2105 patients (16.6%). Mutations were more frequent in women (69.7%), in patients who had never smoked (66.6%), and in those with adenocarcinomas (80.9%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). The mutations were deletions in exon 19 (62.2%) and L858R (37.8%). Median progression-free survival and overall survival for 217 patients who received erlotinib were 14 months and 27 months, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratios for the duration of progression-free survival were 2.94 for men (P<0.001); 1.92 for the presence of the L858R mutation, as compared with a deletion in exon 19 (P=0.02); and 1.68 for the presence of the L858R mutation in paired serum DNA, as compared with the absence of the mutation (P=0.02). The most common adverse events were mild rashes and diarrhea; grade 3 cutaneous toxic effects were recorded in 16 patients (7.4%) and grade 3 diarrhea in 8 patients (3.7%)., Conclusions: Large-scale screening of patients with lung cancer for EGFR mutations is feasible and can have a role in decisions about treatment., (2009 Massachusetts Medical Society)