Search

For patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), dual immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) with CTLA4 inhibitors and PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors (hereafter, PD-(L)1 inhibitors) is associated with higher rates of anti-tumour activity and immune-related toxicities, when compared with treatment with PD-(L)1 inhibitors alone. However, there are currently no validated biomarkers to identify which patients will benefit from dual ICB 1,2 . Here we show that patients with NSCLC who have mutations in the STK11 and/or KEAP1 tumour suppressor genes derived clinical benefit from dual ICB with the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab and the CTLA4 inhibitor tremelimumab, but not from durvalumab alone, when added to chemotherapy in the randomized phase III POSEIDON trial 3 . Unbiased genetic screens identified loss of both of these tumour suppressor genes as independent drivers of resistance to PD-(L)1 inhibition, and showed that loss of Keap1 was the strongest genomic predictor of dual ICB efficacy-a finding that was confirmed in several mouse models of Kras-driven NSCLC. In both mouse models and patients, KEAP1 and STK11 alterations were associated with an adverse tumour microenvironment, which was characterized by a preponderance of suppressive myeloid cells and the depletion of CD8 + cytotoxic T cells, but relative sparing of CD4 + effector subsets. Dual ICB potently engaged CD4 + effector cells and reprogrammed the tumour myeloid cell compartment towards inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS)-expressing tumoricidal phenotypes that-together with CD4 + and CD8 + T cells-contributed to anti-tumour efficacy. These data support the use of chemo-immunotherapy with dual ICB to mitigate resistance to PD-(L)1 inhibition in patients with NSCLC who have STK11 and/or KEAP1 alterations., Competing Interests: Competing interests F.S. reports consulting for AstraZeneca, Amgen, Revolution Medicines, Novartis, BridgeBio, Beigene, BergenBio, Guardant Health, Calithera Biosciences, Tango Therapeutics, Hookipa Pharma, Novocure, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche; grant or research support from Amgen, Mirati Therapeutics, Revolution Medicines, Pfizer, Novartis, Merck & Co; stockholder in BioNTech, Moderna; and honoraria from ESMO, Japanese Lung Cancer Society, Medscape, Intellisphere, VSPO McGill Universite de Montreal, RV Mais Promocao Eventos, MJH Life Sciences, IDEOlogy Health, MI&T, PER, CURIO, DAVA Oncology, the American Association for Cancer Research and the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. M.M. reports stockholder in Roche Holdings. N.J. reports shareholder and former employee of Pionyr Immunotherapeutics. J.M.J. reports stock of D2G Oncology. C.M., Y.Y., X.P. and A.H. report employee of Tango Therapeutics. K.C.A. reports personal fees from Sanofi Genzyme and other support from Revolution Medicines, Genentech, and Mirati outside the submitted work. N.V. receives consulting fees from Sanofi Genzyme, Oncocyte, Eli Lilly, Regeneron, and research funding to the institution from Mirati, Oncocyte, and Circulogene, outside the submitted work. P.D.P. reports advisory fees from AstraZeneca and Jazz Pharmaceuticals. M.E.M. reports research funding from Eli Lilly (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Merck (Inst), Genentech (Inst); consulting role with AstraZeneca, Novocure, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Takeda, Blueprint Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ikena; honorarium from Thermo Fisher Scientific; and stock in Merck, Johnson & Johnson. M.M.A. reports grants and personal fees from Genentech, Bristol Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca; grants from Lilly; and personal fees from Maverick, Blueprint Medicine, Syndax, Nektar, Gritstone, ArcherDX, Mirati, NextCure, Novartis, EMD Serono and Panvaxal/NovaRX, outside of the submitted work. J.C.M. reports consulting or honoraria: MJH Life Sciences, Johnson & Johnson and Doximity; and research funding (to institution): Merck via the Conquer Cancer Foundation. J.F.G. reports served as a compensated consultant or received honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech (Roche), Takeda, Loxo (Lilly), Blueprint Medicine, Gilead, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Mariana Therapeutics, Mirati, Jounce, Merus Pharmacueticals, Nuvalent, Pfizer, Novocure, AI Proteins, Novartis, Merck, iTeos, Karyopharm and Silverback Therapeutics; research support from Novartis, Genentech (Roche) and Takeda; institutional research support from Bristol Myers Squibb, Palleon, Tesaro, Moderna, Blueprint, Jounce, Array Biopharma, Merck, Adaptimmune, Novartis and Alexo; has equity in AI Proteins; and has an immediate family member who is an employee with equity at Ironwood Pharmaceuticals. A.D. reports honoraria: Intellisphere, Roche (Genentech); ad board: TP Therapeutics, Guardant Health, AnHeart Therapeutics, ChromaCode; clinical trial support: Syntrix Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Merck, AnHeart Therapeutics, Sorrento Therapeutics, Guardant Health and Philogen. C. M. Bestvina reports consulting or advisory role: AstraZeneca, Genentech, AbbVie, Curio Science, OncLive Clinical Congress Consultants, Seagen, Creative Educational Concepts, Takeda, Janssen, CVS, Bristol Myers Squibb (Celgene), Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Sanofi–Regeneron and Novocure; speakers’ bureau: Merck; research funding: Bristol Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca. C.A.S. reports advisory boards to AstraZeneca, Gilead, Janssen, Genentech, Mirati, Takeda and Arcus Biosciences. J.W.R. reports honoraria or consulting (self): Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Turning Point Roche (Genentech), Biodesix, EMD Serono, Daiichi Sankyo, Blueprint, Novartis, Regeneron, Sanofi, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, Beigene, Merus and Seagen; research support (to institution): ArriVent, Merck, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Spectrum, Revolution Medicines, IO Biotech and Kinnate. C. M. Blakely reports research funding: AstraZeneca, Novartis, Mirati, Spectrum, Takeda, Puma and Pfizer; and consulting: Janssen and Bayer. C.V.P. reports a founder and equity and intellectual property in EnFuego Therapeutics. F.T. reports speaker bureau or honoraria: Roche, AstraZeneca, Novartis and Takeda. M.S. reports institutional support: Dracen Pharmaceuticals; advisory board: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Siemens Healthineers, Takeda Pharmaceuticals and Bristol Myers Squibb; leadership or fiduciary role: ESMO and EORTC. S.D. reports independent image analysis for hospital-contracted clinical research trials programs for Merck, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Roche, Polaris, Cascadian, Abbvie, Gradalis, Bayer, Zai laboratories, Biengen, Resonance and Analise; research grants from Lunit, GE, Qure AI; and an honorarium from Siemens. M.J.M. reports AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb and Istari Oncology & Regeneron. A.G.S. reports AstraZeneca, Genentech (Roche) and Bristol Myers Squibb. A.N.S. reports serving as a consultant and/or advisory board member for Eli Lilly, Daiichi Sankyo and Zymeworks; and research funding from Eli Lilly, Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Memgen, Mersana, Turning Point Therapeutics, BioAtla and Genmab to his institution. J.R. reports consulting fees or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Takeda, Sanofi Genzyme, Genentech, Guardant Health, Summit, G1 Therapeutics, BioAtla, Jazz, Amgen, and Janssen; contracted for research (institutional) with AstraZeneca, BioAtla, Blueprint Medicines, EpimAb Biotherapeutics, LOXO Oncology, Enliven, Redcloud and ORIC. T.S. reports advisory board or consulting fees for Seagen, Astellas and AstraZeneca; and research grant GRAIL. S.B.G. reports research funding from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and Mirati; and consulting or advisory board member for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, Amgen, Blueprint Medicine, Sanofi Genzyme, Daiichi Sankyo, Takeda, Janssen, Summit Therapeutics, Merck and Regeneron. J.K. reports for Arterys. K.S. reports consultant, advisor or speaker for Clinica Alemana Santiago, Shattuck Labs, AstraZeneca, EMD Serono, Takeda, Torque/Repertoire Therapeutics, CSRlife, Agenus, Genmab, OnCusp, Parthenon Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Molecular Templates, Abbvie, Sanofi, Merck, PeerView, PER and Forefront Collaborative; research funding from Navigate BP, Tesaro/GSK, Moderna, Takeda, Surface Oncology, Pierre-Fabre, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Ribon Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Genentech (Roche) and Akoya Biosciences. K.D.D. reports consulting fees or other remuneration from Rain Therapeutics. V.A. reports research funding to Johns Hopkins University from AstraZeneca and Personal Genome Diagnostics, has received research funding to Johns Hopkins University from Bristol Myers Squibb and Delfi Diagnostics in the past five years and is an advisory board member for Neogenomics and AstraZeneca. V.A. is an inventor on patent applications (63/276,525, 17/779,936, 16/312,152, 16/341,862, 17/047,006 and 17/598,690) submitted by Johns Hopkins University related to cancer genomic analyses, ctDNA therapeutic response monitoring and immunogenomic features of response to immunotherapy that have been licensed to one or more entities. Under the terms of these license agreements, the University and inventors are entitled to fees and royalty distributions. K.A.M. reports consulting or advisory fees from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Janssen, Mirati Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo (Lilly) and Puma Biotechnology, as well as honoraria from AstraZeneca. K.A.M. receives research funding to Johns Hopkins University from Bristol Myers Squibb and Mirati Therapeutics. P.M.F. reports consulting fee (for example, advisory board): Ascendis, AstraZeneca, BMS, Curevac, Novartis, Regeneron, G1, Genelux, Genentech, Gritstone, Merck, Janssen, F-Star, Sanofi, Amgen, Fosun, Teva, Synthekine, Flame, Iteos, Tavotek and Teva; contracted research: AstraZeneca, BMS, Novartis, Regeneron and BioNTech. B.R. reports advisory board or consultant: Regeneron, AstraZeneca, Amgen; honoraria: Targeted Oncology. E.M.V.A reports advisory or consulting: Tango Therapeutics, Genome Medical, Genomic Life, Enara Bio, Manifold Bio, Monte Rosa, Novartis Institute for Biomedical Research, Riva Therapeutics and Serinus Bio; research support: Novartis, BMS and Sanofi; equity: Tango Therapeutics, Genome Medical, Genomic Life, Syapse, Enara Bio, Manifold Bio, Microsoft, Monte Rosa, Riva Therapeutics and Serinus Bio; patents: institutional patents filed on chromatin mutations and immunotherapy response, and methods for clinical interpretation; intermittent legal consulting on patents for Foaley & Hoag; editorial boards: JCO Precision Oncology and Science Advances. A.L.C. reports consulting for AstraZeneca, Merus and Tempus; research funds from AstraZeneca, Genentech (Roche), Merck and Novartis. J.W.G. reports research grants: AstraZeneca, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Merck and Pfizer; consulting fees: AstraZeneca, BMS, Genentech, Gilead, Gritstone, Eli Lilly, Pfizer and Regeneron. C.A. reports consulting or advisory role: Genentech, Lilly, Celgene, Merck, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Genetics, Shionogi, Daiichi Sankyo–AstraZeneca, Sanofi/Regeneron, Eisai, BeiGene, Turning Point Therapeutics, Pfizer, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim; research funding: Genentech/Roche (Inst), Incyte (Inst), Macrogenics (Inst), Merck Sharp & Dohme (Inst) and AstraZeneca–MedImmune (Inst). L.R. reports honoraria: Merck, AstraZeneca, Genzyme, EMD Serono and Astellas Pharmas; consulting or advisory role: Amgen. J.W.N. reports honoraria: CME Matters, Clinical Care Options CME, Research to Practice CME, Medscape CME, Biomedical Learning Institute CME, MLI Peerview CME, Prime Oncology CME, Projects in Knowledge CME, Rockpointe CME, MJH Life Sciences CME, Medical Educator Consortium, HMP education consulting or advisory role: AstraZeneca, Genentech (Roche), Exelixis, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Amgen, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Blueprint Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Natera, Sanofi, D2G Oncology, Surface Oncology, Turning Point Therapeutics, Mirati Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Abbive, Summit Therapeutics, Novartis, Novocure, Janssen Oncology, Anheart Therapeutics Research Funding: Genentech (Roche), Merck, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Exelixis, Nektart Therapeutics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Adaptimmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Abbvie Pharmaceuticals and Novocure. Y.Y.E. reports honoraria: CME Matters, Clinical Care Options CME, Research to Practice CME, Medscape CME, Biomedical Learning Institute CME, MLI Peerview CME, Prime Oncology CME, Projects in Knowledge CME, Rockpointe CME, MJH Life Sciences CME, Medical Educator Consortium, HMP education consulting or advisory role: AstraZeneca, Genentech (Roche), Exelixis, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Amgen, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Blueprint Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Natera, Sanofi, D2G Oncology, Surface Oncology, Turning Point Therapeutics, Mirati Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Abbive, Summit Therapeutics, Novartis, Novocure, Janssen Oncology, Anheart Therapeutics Reserach Funding: Genentech/Roche, Merck, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Exelixis, Nektart Therapeutics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Adaptimmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Abbvie Pharmaceuticals and Novocure. M.V.N. reports research funding to institution: Mirati, Novartis, Checkmate (ended), Alaunos, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Genentech, Navire; consultant or advisory board: Mirati, Merck/MSD, Novartis and Genentech. X.L. reports receiving consulting or advisory fees from EMD Serono (Merck KGaA), AstraZeneca, Spectrum Pharmaceutics, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Hengrui Therapeutics, Janssen, Blueprint Medicines, Regeneron, Sensei Biotherapeutics, Abion and Abbvie, and research funding from Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Janssen, ArriVent, Teligene, BlackDiamond, Regeneron and Boehringer Ingelheim. V.K.L. reports consultant or advisory role for Takeda, Seattle Genetics, BMS, AstraZeneca, Guardant Health and AnHeart Therapeutics and has received research funding from GSK, BMS, AstraZeneca, Merck and Seattle Genetics. W.E.L. reports advisory boards: Eisai and Takeda, Grand Rounds and BMS for repotrectinib. J.A.R. reports consultancy, stock, Genprex; patents issued and pending. T.C. reports speaker fees or honoraria from the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC), Mark Foundation for Cancer Research, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Medscape, IDEOlogy Health, Physicians’ Education Resource (PER), OncLive and PeerView; travel and/or food/beverage expenses from SITC, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, PER, Dava Oncology, IDEOlogy Health, AstraZeneca and Bristol Myers Squibb; advisory role or consulting fees from MedImmune–AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Genentech, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer and Regeneron; and institutional research funding from MedImmune–AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb and EMD Serono. J.Z. reports grants from Merck, grants and personal fees from Johnson & Johnson and Novartis, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, GenePlus, Innovent and Hengrui outside the submitted work. G.R.B. reports grant or contract for clinical trial from MacroGenics; grants from Amgen, Bayer, Adaptimmune, Exelixis, Daiichi Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Immatics, Immunocore, Incyte, Kite Pharma, MacroGenics, Torque, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Genentech, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Xcovery, Tmunity Therapeutics, Regeneron, BeiGene, Repertoire Immune Medicines, Verastem, CytomX Therapeutics and Duality Biologics; consulting fees from AbbVie, Adicet, Amgen, Ariad, Bayer, Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Instil Bio, Genentech, Genzyme, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Tyme Oncology, Xcovery, Virogin Biotech, Maverick Therapeutics, BeiGene, Regeneron, Cytomx Therapeutics, Intervenn Biosciences and Onconova Therapeutics; participation in advisory boards at Virogin Biotech and Maverick Therapeutics; stock in Virogin Biotech; and employment of family member at Johnson & Johnson/Janssen. C.G. reports member of the advisory board at Jazz Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca and Bristol Myers Squibb and served as speaker for AstraZeneca and BeiGene. L.A.B. reports consulting fees and research funding from AstraZeneca, GenMab and Sierra Oncology and research funding from Tolero Pharmaceuticals and served as advisor or consultant for PharmaMar, AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Alethia, Merck, Pfizer, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Genentech and Debiopharm Group. D.L.G. reports AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Menarini Richerche, 4D Pharma, Onconova Therapeutics and Sanofi. A.T. reports Ariad, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Gilead Sciences and Summit Therapeutics. T.G.B. reports Chan-Zuckerberg Biohub. D.R.C. reports CoI Company sponsored trials at institution (PI roles): AZ, Roche (Genentech) advisory role: ad hoc advisory boards or consultations 2023: Abbvie (steering committee), Anheart, Beigene (IDMC), Eli Lilly (IDMC), Imagene, Immunocore, Janssen, Mirati (IDMC), Prelude, Seattle Genetics, Valencee; 2022: Abbvie, Anheart, Appolomics (SRC), AstraZeneca–Daiichi (ILD adjudication committee), Beigene (DSMB) Dizal, EMD Serono, Elevation, Hengrui, (DSMB), Hummingbird, Janssen, Medtronic, Mersana (ILD adjudication committee), Mirati, Nalo Therapeutics, Onkure, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, Theseus, Xcovery; 2021: Abbvie, Amgen, Anheart, Apollomics (SRC), AstraZeneca (SRC/SC), Beigene (DSMC), Bio-Thera (DSMB), Blueprint, Daiichi Sankyo (ILD adjudication committee), Elevation (SRC), Eli Lilly (DSMB and NCCN), EMD Serono, Helsinn (DSMB), Hengrui (DSMC), Janssen, Kestrel (SAB, Shares), Mersana, Nuvalent (SAB), Puma (NCCN), Ribon, Roche (Genentech), Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda and Turning Point. J.E.G. reports honoraria: Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Merck and OncoCyte; consulting or advisory role: AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Lilly, Sanofi, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Loxo, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, AstraZeneca–MedImmune, Janssen Scientific Affairs, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, AbbVie and Regeneron; research funding: Merck (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Boehringer Ingelheim (Inst), Genentech (Roche) (Inst), G1 Therapeutics (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research (Inst), SWOG (Inst), Array BioPharma (Inst) and ECOG-ACRIN (Inst). N.L. reports CME and research funding: AstraZeneca. B.L. reports Genentech (Roche), Eli Lilly, Merck, Pfizer, Janssen, Daiichi Sankyo, Takeda, Mirati, Novartis and Guardant 360. J.R.B. reports grant funding: AstraZeneca; advisory board: AstraZeneca, Amgen, Novartis, Incyte, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, Janssen, Sanofi, Regeneron, Merck, GlaxoSmithKline; DSMB: Sanofi, Janssen and GlaxoSmithKline. M.C.G. reports AstraZeneca, Abion, MSD International, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim Italia S.p.A, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Seattle Genetics, Mirati, Daiichi Sankyo, Regeneron, Merck, Blueprint, Janssen, Sanofi, AbbVie, BeiGenius, Oncohost and Medscape. D.R.G. reports institutional research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Genentech and Merck; consultant or advisory board for Adagene, AstraZeneca, Roche (Genentech), Guardant, IO Biotech, Oncocyte, OncoHost, Lilly, Merck and Novartis. E.B.G. reports consulting or advisory role: Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Boehringer Ingelheim, Shionogi, Eisai, Bristol Myers Squibb, ABL Bio, Xilio Therapeutics, Natera, Sanofi–Regeneron, Lilly, Personalis, Gilead Sciences, AstraZeneca, AbbVie–Abbott, Arcus Biosciences, Seagan and Summit Therapeutics; research funding: Merck (Inst), Genentech (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Lilly (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Mirati Therapeutics (Inst), Dynavax Technologies (Inst), Iovance Biotherapeutics (Inst), Neon Therapeutics (Inst), EMD Serono (Inst), ABL Bio (Inst) and Daiichi Sankyo–UCB Japan (Inst); patents, royalties, other intellectual property: diagnosistic and therapeutic use of ‘Motif Neoepitopes’ as defined by Cummings et al.76. N.A.R. reports an employee at Synthekine and holds equity at Synthekine and Gritstone. G.V.S. reports honoraria, research funding and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene Switzerland, F. Hoffman–La Roche, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Takeda Oncology, Tesaro and Verastem outside the submitted work. J.W. reports advisory boards and lecture fees: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Ignyta, Janssen, Lilly, Loxo, Merck, Mirati, MSD (Merck Sharp & Dohme), Novartis, Nuvalent, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Takeda and Turning Point; research support (to institution): BMS, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and AstraZeneca. B.B. reports receiving grants from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Ellipse, EISAI, Genmab, Genzyme Corporation, Hedera Dx, Inivata, IPSEN, Janssen, MSD, PharmaMar, Roche (Genentech), Sanofi, Socar Research, Tahio Oncology and Turning Point Therapeutics. R.S.H. reports consulting roles with AbbVie Pharmaceuticals, ARMO Biosciences, AstraZeneca, Biodesix, Bolt Biotherapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cybrexa Therapeutics, eFFECTOR Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech (Roche), Genmab, Halozyme Therapeutics, Heat Biologics, I-Mab Biopharma, Immunocore, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Loxo Oncology, Merck, Mirati Therapeutics, Nektar, Neon Therapeutics, NextCure, Novartis, Oncternal Therapeutics, Pfizer, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Shire, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, STCube Pharmaceuticals, Symphogen, Takeda, Tesaro, Tocagen and WindMIL Therapeutics; advisory board roles with AstraZeneca, Bolt Biotherapeutics, Cybrexa Therapeutics, EMD Serono, I-Mab Biopharma, Immunocore, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Neon Therapeutics, Novartis and STCube Pharmaceuticals; research support from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Genentech (Roche) and Merck; and non-executive board membership for Junshi Pharmaceuticals and Immunocore. H.A.W. reports grants or contracts from any entity: Bayer, Arrys Therapeutics, AstraZeneca–Medimmune, BMS, Clovis Oncology, Genentech (Roche), Merck, Novartis, Seagen, Xcovery and Helsinn; advisory board: Mirati, Merck and Genentech (Roche); leadership: International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC), President; ECOG-ACRIN, executive committee. N.A.P. reports an employee at Synthekine and holds equity at Synthekine and Gritstone. A.T.S. is currently an employee of Novartis. P.A.J. reports stock and other ownership interests: Gatekeeper Pharmaceuticals and Loxo; consulting or advisory role: Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Merrimack, Chugai, Roche (Genentech), Loxo, Mirati Therapeutics, Araxes Pharma, Ignyta, Lilly, Takeda, Novartis, Biocartis, Voronoi Health Analytics, SFJ Pharmaceuticals Group, Sanofi, Daiichi Sankyo, Silicon Therapeutics, Nuvalent, Eisai, Bayer, Syndax, AbbVie, Allorion Therapeutics, Accutar Biotech, Transcenta, Monte Rosa Therapeutics, Scorpion Therapeutics, Merus, Frontier Medicines, Hongyun Biotech and Duality Biologics; research funding: AstraZeneca (Inst), Astellas Pharma (Inst), Daiichi Sankyo (Inst), Lilly (Inst), Boehringer Ingelheim (Inst), Puma Biotechnology (Inst), Takeda (Inst) and Revolution Medicines (Inst); patents, royalties, other intellectual property: I am a co-inventor on a DFCI owned patent on EGFR mutations licensed to Lab Corp. I receive post-marketing royalties from this invention. D.P.C. reports advisory boards or consulting: Abbvie, Arcus Biosciences, AstraZeneca, BMS Israel, G1 Therapeutics, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, InThought, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Janssen, Jazz, JNJ, Merck–EMD Serono, Merck KGaA, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Novocure, OncoHost, Pfizer Egypt, Regeneron, Roche and Sanofi; KOL/presentation/education/forum: AstraZeneca, Curio Science, Intellisphere, Merck US, OncLive, Pfizer, PPD Development and Roche Taiwan. M.D.H. is an employee of and stockholder in AstraZeneca. C.M.R. reports consulted regarding oncology drug development with AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, D2G, Daiichi Sankyo, Epizyme, Genentech (Roche), Ipsen, Jazz, Kowa, Lilly, Merck and Syros. He serves on the scientific advisory boards of Auron, Bridge Medicines, DISCO, Earli and Harpoon Therapeutics. L.A. is an employee of Foundation Medicine and a stockholder of Roche Holding AG. H.M. reports full-time employee of AstraZeneca and stock/shares. Z.Z. reports employee of AstraZeneca as well as stockholder of AstraZeneca and Pfizer. Z.L. reports full-time employee and stock owner of AstraZeneca. R.S. reports other support from AstraZeneca during the conduct of the study, as well as other support from Pfizer outside the submitted work. S.P. reports consultation or advisory role: AbbVie, Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beigene, BerGenBio, Biocartis, BioInvent, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, F-Star, Fishawack, Foundation Medicine, Genzyme, Gilead, GSK, Hutchmed, Illumina, Incyte, Ipsen, iTeos, Janssen, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Mirati, Nykode Therapeutics, Novartis, Novocure, PharmaMar, Promontory Therapeutics, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche (Genentech), Sanofi, Seattle Genetics and Takeda; Board of Directors position: Galenica; talk in a company’s organized public event: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Foundation Medicine, GSK, Illumina, Ipsen, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Mirati, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche (Genentech), Sanofi and Takeda; receipt of grants or research support: principal investigator in trials (institutional financial support for clinical trials) sponsored by Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, iTeos, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Mirati, PharmaMar, Promontory Therapeutics, Roche (Genentech) and Seattle Genetics. J.M.J. and M.J.R. are employees and shareholders of D2G Oncology. I.P.W. is a co-founder, employee and shareholder of D2G Oncology. M.M.W. is a co-founder, shareholder, member of the board of directors and compensated scientific advisor of D2G Oncology. I.P.W. and M.M.W. are co-inventors of patents relating to technologies for an autochthonous mouse model of human cancer, which D2G Oncology has exclusively licensed from Stanford University. V.A.P. reports Pfizer employee and stockholder. K.K.W. is a founder and equity holder of G1 Therapeutics and has sponsored research agreements with Takeda, TargImmune, Bristol Myers Squibb, Mirati, Merus and Alkermes, and consulting and sponsored research agreements with AstraZeneca, Janssen, Pfizer, Novartis, Merck, Zentalis, BridgeBio and Blueprint. P.J. reports employee and stock or stock options of AstraZeneca. I.I.W. reports honoraria from Genentech (Roche), Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Merck, Guardant Health, Flame, Novartis, Sanofi, Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, Janssen, Merus, G1 Therapeutics, Abbvie, Catalyst Therapeutics, Regeneron, Oncocyte, Medscape, Platform Health and Physicians’ Education Resources; research support from Genentech, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Medimmune, Adaptive, Adaptimmune, EMD Serono, Pfizer, Takeda, Amgen, Karus, Johnson & Johnson, Bayer, Iovance, 4D, Novartis and Akoya. A.G.P. reports Pfizer. J.V.H. reports Advisory Committees: Genentech, Mirati Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Regeneron, Takeda, BerGenBio, Jazz, Curio Science, Novartis, AstraZeneca, BioAlta, Sanofi, Spectrum, GlaxoSmithKline, EMD Serono, BluePrint Medicine and Chugai; research support: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Spectrum, Mirati, Bristol Myers Squibb and Takeda; licensing or royalties: Spectrum. H.A.A., M.T.D., A.G.C., Y.Q., R.P., D.M., D.H.O., R.M., J.A.H., L.M., S.C.M.L., R.P.J., C.L., Z.W., M.G.W., D.V., H.S., M.K., S.K., Y.N., J.T.A., J.S., L.L., H.N.K., B.C., S.S., R.L., T.Z., J.J.L., D.P., M.L.J. T.T., A.P., Y.K. and J.L.: no disclosures were reported by these authors., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) the efficacy of chemo-immunotherapy is affected by the high expression of drug efflux transporters as ABCC1 and by the low expression of ABCA1, mediating the isopentenyl pyrophosphate (IPP)-dependent anti-tumor activation of Vγ9Vδ2 T-lymphocytes. In endothelial cells ABCA1 is a predicted target of the transcription factor EB (TFEB), but no data exists on the correlation between TFEB and ABC transporters involved in the chemo-immuno-resistance in NSCLC., Methods: The impact of TFEB/ABCC1/ABCA1 expression on NSCLC patients' survival was analyzed in the TCGA-LUAD cohort and in a retrospective cohort of our institution. Human NSCLC cells silenced for TFEB (shTFEB) were analyzed for ABC transporter expression, chemosensitivity and immuno-killing. The chemo-immuno-sensitizing effects of nanoparticles encapsulating zoledronic acid (NZ) on shTFEB tumors and on tumor immune-microenvironment were evaluated in Hu-CD34 + mice by single-cell RNA-sequencing., Results: TFEB low ABCA1 low ABCC1 high and TFEB high ABCA1 high ABCC1 low NSCLC patients had the worst and the best prognosis, respectively, in the TCGA-LUAD cohort and in a retrospective cohort of patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy or immunotherapy as first-line treatment. By silencing shTFEB in NSCLC cells, we demonstrated that TFEB was a transcriptional inducer of ABCA1 and a repressor of ABCC1. shTFEB cells had also a decreased activity of ERK1/2/SREBP2 axis, implying reduced synthesis and efflux via ABCA1 of cholesterol and its intermediate IPP. Moreover, TFEB silencing reduced cholesterol incorporation in mitochondria: this event increased the efficiency of OXPHOS and the fueling of ABCC1 by mitochondrial ATP. Accordingly, shTFEB cells were less immuno-killed by the Vγ9Vδ2 T-lymphocytes activated by IPP and more resistant to cisplatin. NZ, which increased IPP efflux but not OXPHOS and ATP production, sensitized shTFEB immuno-xenografts, by reducing intratumor proliferation and increasing apoptosis in response to cisplatin, and by increasing the variety of anti-tumor infiltrating cells (Vγ9Vδ2 T-lymphocytes, CD8 + T-lymphocytes, NK cells)., Conclusions: This work suggests that TFEB is a gatekeeper of the sensitivity to chemotherapy and immuno-killing in NSCLC, and that the TFEB low ABCA1 low ABCC1 high phenotype can be predictive of poor response to chemotherapy and immunotherapy. By reshaping both cancer metabolism and tumor immune-microenvironment, zoledronic acid can re-sensitize TFEB low NSCLCs, highly resistant to chemo- and immunotherapy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Treatment of homologous recombination repair-deficient (HRD)-tumors with PARP inhibitors has the potential to further increase tumor immunogenicity, suggesting a synergistic effect with immunotherapy. Here we present the preliminary results of niraparib in combination with dostarlimab for pleural mesothelioma (PM) or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring HRR mutations., Patients and Methods: UNITO-001 is a phase II, prospective, study aiming to investigate the combination of niraparib plus dostarlimab in pretreated patients with HRD and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) ≥1% NSCLC and/or PM. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: Seventeen of 183 (10%) screened patients (12 PM and 5 NSCLC) were included. The objective response rate (ORR) was 6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.1-28.7] and the disease control rate (DCR) was 53% (95% CI: 27.8-77). Median PFS was 3.1 (95% CI: 2.7-N.A) and median overall survival (OS) was 4.2 (95% CI: 1.58-NA) months. The PFS was 14.1 months in one PM patient harboring a germline BAP1 mutation. The treatment duration was 9.8 months in one PM patient harboring a somatic BRCA2 mutation. The most common adverse events (AE) were grade 1-2 lymphopenia (59%), anemia (35%), hyponatremia (29%), and hypokalemia (29%). Grade ≥3 AEs were reported in 23% of the patients., Conclusions: This preliminary analysis highlighted the lack of antitumor activity for the combination of niraparib and dostarlimab in patients with PM and/or advanced NSCLC harboring BAP1 somatic mutations. A potential antitumor activity emerged for PM with germline BAP1 and/or BRCA2 somatic mutations along with a good tolerability profile., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Introduction: With global adoption of computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening, there is increasing interest to use artificial intelligence (AI) deep learning methods to improve the clinical management process. To enable AI research using an open-source, cloud-based, globally distributed, screening CT imaging data set and computational environment that are compliant with the most stringent international privacy regulations that also protect the intellectual properties of researchers, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer sponsored development of the Early Lung Imaging Confederation (ELIC) resource in 2018. The objective of this report is to describe the updated capabilities of ELIC and illustrate how this resource can be used for clinically relevant AI research., Methods: In this second phase of the initiative, metadata and screening CT scans from two time points were collected from 100 screening participants in seven countries. An automated deep learning AI lung segmentation algorithm, automated quantitative emphysema metrics, and a quantitative lung nodule volume measurement algorithm were run on these scans., Results: A total of 1394 CTs were collected from 697 participants. The LAV950 quantitative emphysema metric was found to be potentially useful in distinguishing lung cancer from benign cases using a combined slice thickness more than or equal to 2.5 mm. Lung nodule volume change measurements had better sensitivity and specificity for classifying malignant from benign lung nodules when applied to solid lung nodules from high-quality CT scans., Conclusions: These initial experiments revealed that ELIC can support deep learning AI and quantitative imaging analyses on diverse and globally distributed cloud-based data sets., (Copyright © 2023 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) often differs between genders in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but metanalyses results are controversial, and no clear mechanisms are defined. We aim at clarifying the molecular circuitries explaining the differential gender-related response to anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 agents in NSCLC., Experimental Design: We prospectively analyzed a cohort of patients with NSCLC treated with ICI as a first-line approach, and we identified the molecular mechanisms determining the differential efficacy of ICI in 29 NSCLC cell lines of both genders, recapitulating patients' phenotype. We validated new immunotherapy strategies in mice bearing NSCLC patient-derived xenografts and human reconstituted immune system ("immune-PDXs")., Results: In patients, we found that estrogen receptor α (ERα) was a predictive factor of response to pembrolizumab, stronger than gender and PD-L1 levels, and was directly correlated with PD-L1 expression, particularly in female patients. ERα transcriptionally upregulated CD274/PD-L1 gene, more in females than in males. This axis was activated by 17-β-estradiol, autocrinely produced by intratumor aromatase, and by the EGFR-downstream effectors Akt and ERK1/2 that activated ERα. The efficacy of pembrolizumab in immune-PDXs was significantly improved by the aromatase inhibitor letrozole, which reduced PD-L1 and increased the percentage of antitumor CD8+T-lymphocytes, NK cells, and Vγ9Vδ2 T-lymphocytes, producing durable control and even tumor regression after continuous administration, with maximal benefit in 17-β-estradiol/ERα highfemale immune-xenografts., Conclusions: Our work unveils that 17-β-estradiol/ERα status predicts the response to pembrolizumab in patients with NSCLC. Second, we propose aromatase inhibitors as new gender-tailored immune-adjuvants in NSCLC. See related commentary by Valencia et al., p. 3832., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Considering the established contribution of environmental factors to the development of thoracic malignancies, the inherited susceptibility of these tumors has rarely been explored. However, the recent introduction of next-generation sequencing-based tumor molecular profiling in the real-word setting enabled us to deeply characterize the genomic background of patients with lung cancer with or without smoking-related history, increasing the likelihood of detecting germline mutations with potential prevention and treatment implications. Pathogenic germline variants have been detected in 2% to 3% of patients with NSCLC undergoing next-generation sequencing analysis, whereas the proportion of germline mutations associated with the development of pleural mesothelioma widely varies across different studies, ranging between 5% and 10%. This review provides an updated summary of emerging evidence about germline mutations in thoracic malignancies, focusing on pathogenetic mechanisms, clinical features, therapeutic implications, and screening recommendations for high-risk individuals., (Copyright © 2023 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Molecular modifiers of KRASG12C inhibitor (KRASG12Ci) efficacy in advanced KRASG12C-mutant NSCLC are poorly defined. In a large unbiased clinicogenomic analysis of 424 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we identified and validated coalterations in KEAP1, SMARCA4, and CDKN2A as major independent determinants of inferior clinical outcomes with KRASG12Ci monotherapy. Collectively, comutations in these three tumor suppressor genes segregated patients into distinct prognostic subgroups and captured ∼50% of those with early disease progression (progression-free survival ≤3 months) with KRASG12Ci. Pathway-level integration of less prevalent coalterations in functionally related genes nominated PI3K/AKT/MTOR pathway and additional baseline RAS gene alterations, including amplifications, as candidate drivers of inferior outcomes with KRASG12Ci, and revealed a possible association between defective DNA damage response/repair and improved KRASG12Ci efficacy. Our findings propose a framework for patient stratification and clinical outcome prediction in KRASG12C-mutant NSCLC that can inform rational selection and appropriate tailoring of emerging combination therapies., Significance: In this work, we identify co-occurring genomic alterations in KEAP1, SMARCA4, and CDKN2A as independent determinants of poor clinical outcomes with KRASG12Ci monotherapy in advanced NSCLC, and we propose a framework for patient stratification and treatment personalization based on the comutational status of individual tumors. See related commentary by Heng et al., p. 1513. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1501., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: KRAS mutation-positive (KRAS-positive), advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is characterized by a poor prognosis. KRAS mutations are extremely heterogeneous from a biologic point of view, and real-world data by mutation subtype in the era of immunotherapy are still incomplete., Methods: The objective of this study was to retrospectively analyze all consecutive patients with advanced/metastatic, KRAS-positive NSCLC who were diagnosed at a single academic institution since the advent of immunotherapy. The authors report on the natural history of the disease as well as the efficacy of first-line treatments in the entire cohort and by KRAS mutation subtypes as well as the presence/absence of co-mutations., Results: From March 2016 to December 2021, the authors identified 199 consecutive patients who had KRAS-positive, advanced or metastatic NSCLC. The median overall survival (OS) was 10.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.5-12.9 months), and there were no differences by mutation subtype. Among 134 patients who received first-line treatment, the median OS was 12.2 months (95% CI, 8.3-16.1 months), and the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.5-6.6 months). At multivariate analysis, only an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 was associated with significantly shorter progression-free survival and OS., Conclusions: KRAS-positive, advanced NSCLC is characterized by a poor prognosis despite the introduction of immunotherapy. Survival was not associated with KRAS mutation subtype., Plain Language Summary: This study evaluated the efficacy of systemic therapies for advanced/metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer harboring KRAS mutations, along with the potential predictive and prognostic role of mutation subtypes. The authors found that advanced/metastatic, KRAS-positive nonsmall cell lung cancer is characterized by a poor prognosis and that first-line treatment efficacy is not related to different KRAS mutations, although a numerically shorter median progression-free survival was observed in patients who had p.G12D and p.G12A mutations. These results underline the need for novel treatment options in this population, such as next-generation KRAS inhibitors, which are in clinical and preclinical development., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

The identification of actionable targets in oncogene-addicted non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has fueled biomarker-directed strategies, especially in advanced stage disease. Despite the undeniable success of molecular targeted therapies, duration of clinical response is relatively short-lived. While extraordinary efforts have defined the complexity of tumor architecture and clonal evolution at the genetic level, not equal interest has been given to the dynamic mechanisms of phenotypic adaptation engaged by cancer during treatment. At the clinical level, molecular targeted therapy of EGFR-mutant and ALK-rearranged tumors often results in epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and histological transformation of the original adenocarcinoma without the acquisition of additional genetic lesions, thus limiting subsequent therapeutic options and patient outcome. Here we provide an overview of the current understanding of the genetic and non-genetic molecular circuits governing this phenomenon, presenting current strategies and potentially innovative therapeutic approaches to interfere with lung cancer cell plasticity., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Despite the progress in outcomes seen with immunotherapy in various malignancies, including nonsmall cell lung cancer, the benefits are less in small cell lung cancer, malignant pleural mesothelioma and thymic epithelial tumours. New effective treatment options are needed, guided via more in-depth insights into the pathophysiology of these rare malignancies. This review comprehensively presents an overview of the clinical presentation, diagnostic tools, staging systems, pathophysiology and treatment options for these rare thoracic cancers. In addition, opportunities for further improvement of therapies are discussed., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: D.W. Dumoulin reports personal fees from Roche, BMS, MSD, Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Novartis. P. Bironzo declares honoraria from AstraZeneca, BMS, BeiGene, Roche and Takeda; an institutional research grant from Roche and Pfizer; and virtual meeting registration from Amgen and Daiichi Sankyo. F. Passiglia declares advisory/consultant fees from MSD, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Amgen, Sanofi, Beigene and Thermofisher Scientific. G.V. Scagliotti declares honoraria from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Johnson & Johnson and Takeda; consulting or advisory roles for Eli Lilly, Beigene, AstraZeneca and Verastem; institutional research funding from Eli Lilly, MSD and Tesaro; and travel and accommodation from Bayer. J.G.J.V. Aerts declares honoraria and nonfinancial support from MSD, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amphera, Eli Lilly, Takeda, Bayer, Roche and AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. In addition, J.G.J.V. Aerts has a patent allogenic tumour cell lysate licensed to Amphera, a patent combination immunotherapy in cancer pending, and a patent biomarker for immunotherapy pending., (Copyright ©The authors 2023.)

Introduction: Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fusions identify a limited subset of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, whose therapeutic approach have been radically changed in recent years. However, diagnostic procedures and clinical-radiological responses to specific targeted therapies remain heterogeneous and intrinsically resistant or poor responder patients exist., Methods: A total of 290 patients with advanced NSCLC defined as ALK+ by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or fluorescent in situ hybridisation (FISH) test and treated with single or sequential multiple ALK inhibitors (ALKi) from 2011 to 2017 have been retrospectively retrieved from a multicentre Italian cancer network database. In 55 patients with enough leftover tumour tissue, specimens were analysed with both targeted and customised next generation sequencing panels. Identified fusion variants have been correlated with clinical outcomes., Results: Of the 55 patients, 24 received crizotinib as first-line therapy, 1 received ceritinib, while 30 received chemotherapy. Most of the patients (64%) received ALKi in sequence. An ALK fusion variant was identified in 73% of the cases, being V3 variant (E6A20) the most frequent, followed by V1 (E13A20) and more rare ones (e.g. E6A19). In three specimens, four new EML4-ALK fusion breakpoints have been reported. Neither fusion variants nor brain metastases were significantly associated with overall survival (OS), while it was predictably longer in patients receiving a sequence of ALKi. The presence of V1 variant was associated with progression-free survival (PFS) improvement when crizotinib was used (p = 0.0073), while it did not affect cumulative PFS to multiple ALKi., Conclusion: Outcomes to sequential ALKi administration were not influenced by fusion variants. Nevertheless, in V1+ patients a prolonged clinical benefit was observed. Fusion variant identification by NGS technology may add relevant information about rare chromosomal events that could be potentially correlated to worse outcomes., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Extra-pulmonary neuroendocrine carcinomas (EPNEC) represent a group of rare and heterogenous neoplasms with adverse clinical outcome. Their molecular profile is largely unexplored. Our aim was to investigate if the major transcriptional drivers recently described in high-grade pulmonary neuroendocrine carcinomas characterize distinct molecular and clinical subgroups of EPNEC. Gene expression of ASCL1, NEUROD1, DLL3, NOTCH1, INSM1, MYCL1, POU2F3, and YAP1 was investigated in a series of 54 EPNEC (including 10 cases with mixed components analyzed separately) and in a group of 48 pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas (P-LCNEC). Unsupervised hierarchical cluster analysis classified the whole series into four major clusters. P-LCNEC were classified into two major clusters, the first ASCL1/DLL3/INSM1-high and the second (including four EPNEC) ASCL1/DLL3-low but INSM1-high. The remaining EPNEC cases were sub-classified into two other clusters. The first showed INSM1-high and alternative ASCL1/DLL3 or NEUROD1 high expression. The second was characterized mainly by MYCL1 and YAP1 overexpression. In the ten cases with mixed histology, ASCL1, DLL3, INSM1, and NEUROD1 genes were significantly upregulated in the neuroendocrine component. Higher gene-expression levels of NOTCH1 and INSM1 were associated with lower pT stage and negative nodal status. Low INSM1 gene expression was associated with shorter overall survival in the entire case series (p = 0.0017) and with a trend towards significance in EPNEC, only (p = 0.06). In conclusion, our results show that EPNEC possess distinct neuroendocrine-lineage-specific transcriptional profiles; moreover, low INSM1 gene expression represents a novel potential unfavorable prognostic marker in high-grade NECs including those in extra-pulmonary location., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Lung cancers account for over 90% of thoracic malignancies and the rapid development of specific cytotoxic drugs and molecular therapies requires a detailed identification of the different histologies, gene drivers or immune microenvironment biomarkers. Nevertheless, the heterogeneous clonal evolution, the emergency of drug-induced resistance and the limited occurrence of genetic alterations claim the need of a deep integration of the tumor's and the patient's biological features. The aim of the present study is to generate a tecnological platform for precision medicine in order to set predictive personalized algorithms for patient diagnosis and therapy. All resectable patients having histologically confirmed stage IB-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer will be enrolled for tissue sampling. A large biobank of lung cancer samples and the corresponding healthy tissues and biological components (ie, blood, stools, etc.) with complete clinical, pathological and molecular information will be collected. The platform will include: a) digital patient data collection; b) whole NGS molecular analyses (exome, transcriptome, methylome) for tumor characterization; c) exploitation and collection of organoids from tissue patients; d) Surface Amplified Raman Spectroscopy; e) microfluidic-based technological drug screening; f) preclinical in vivo models based on patient-derived xenografts; g) generation of specific predictive algorithms taking into account all collected multiparameters. The project will lay the basis of a knowledge hub and qualified technology aimed not only at answering the medical and scientific community's questions, but also meant to be useful to individual patients by predicting the response to adjuvant and second-line drugs in case of relapse of the disease., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Now that immunotherapy plus chemotherapy (CT) is one standard option in first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), there exists a medical need to assess the efficacy of second-line treatments (2LT) with antiangiogenics (AA). We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to validate the efficacy of these combinations as 2LT., Methods: Randomised trials of AA plus standard 2LT compared to 2LT alone that ended accrual before 2015 were eligible. Fixed-effect models were used to compute pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS, main end-point), progression-free survival (PFS) and subgroup analyses., Results: Sixteen trials were available (8,629 patients, 64% adenocarcinoma). AA significantly prolonged OS (HR = 0.93 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.89; 0.98], p = 0.005) and PFS (0.80 [0.77; 0.84], p < 0.0001) compared with 2LT alone. Absolute 1-year OS and PFS benefit for AA were +1.8% [-0.4; +4.0] and +3.5% [+1.9; +5.1], respectively. The OS benefit of AA was higher in younger patients (HR = 0.87 [95% CI: 0.76; 1.00], 0.89 [0.81; 0.97], 0.94 [0.87; 1.02] and 1,04 [0.93; 1.17] for patients <50, 50-59, 60-69 and ≥ 70 years old, respectively; trend test: p = 0.02) and in patients who started AA within 9 months after starting the first-line therapy (0.88 [0.82; 0.99]) than in patients who started AA later (0.99 [0.91; 1.08]) (interaction: p = 0.03). Results were similar for PFS. AA increased the risk of hypertension (p < 0.0001), but not the risk of pulmonary thromboembolic events (p = 0.21)., Conclusions: In the 2LT of advanced NSCLC, adding AA significantly prolongs OS and PFS, but the benefit is clinically limited, mainly observed in younger patients and after shorter time since the start of first-line therapy., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement RH, MR, EBG, GVS, RR, NH, JV, KY, HG, JH and RH are authors for some of the trials included in this meta-analysis. Other authors have not reported any conflict of interest related to this study., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: To evaluate the effects of the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on lung cancer trials, we surveyed investigators and collected aggregate enrollment data for lung cancer trials across the world before and during the pandemic., Methods: A Data Collection Survey collected aggregate monthly enrollment numbers from 294 global lung cancer trials for 2019 to 2020. A 64-question Action Survey evaluated the impact of COVID-19 on clinical trials and identified mitigation strategies implemented., Results: Clinical trial enrollment declined from 2019 to 2020 by 14% globally. Most reductions in enrollment occurred in April to June where we found significant decreases in individual site enrollment (p = 0.0309). Enrollment was not significantly different in October 2019 to December of 2019 versus 2020 (p = 0.25). The most frequent challenges identified by the Action Survey (N = 172) were fewer eligible patients (63%), decrease in protocol compliance (56%), and suspension of trials (54%). Patient-specific challenges included access to trial site (49%), ability to travel (54%), and willingness to visit the site (59%). The most frequent mitigation strategies included modified monitoring requirements (47%), telehealth visits (45%), modified required visits (25%), mail-order medications (25%), and laboratory (27%) and radiology (21%) tests at nonstudy facilities. Sites that felt the most effective mitigation strategies were telehealth visits (85%), remote patient-reported symptom collection (85%), off-site procedures (85%), and remote consenting (89%)., Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic created many challenges for lung cancer clinical trials conduct and enrollment. Mitigation strategies were used and, although the pandemic worsened, trial enrollment improved. A more flexible approach may improve enrollment and access to clinical trials, even beyond the pandemic., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Advanced stage malignant mesothelioma (asMM) patients have poor prognosis. Several trials investigated the role of programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and its ligand 1 (PD-L1) immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in pre-treated asMM., Methods: A systematic review of the literature of clinical trials testing single-agent anti PD-1/PD-L1 ICIs in pre-treated asMM was performed. Objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) data were extracted. The predictive role of PD-L1 was assessed., Results: We selected 13 studies including 888 patients. ORR and DCR were 18.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 13.9-22.8%) and 55.4% (95% CI: 48.1-62.5%), respectively. Median PFS and OS ranged from 2.1 to 5.9 and from 6.7 to 20.9 months, respectively. ORR according to PD-L1 was 27.0% (95% CI: 18.7-36.2%)., Conclusions: Anti-PD-(L)1 ICIs might be considered a treatment option for chemotherapy-resistant asMM, even if reliable predictive factors are still lacking., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The 2021 WHO Classification of Thoracic Tumours was published earlier this year, with classification of lung tumors being one of the chapters. The principles remain those of using morphology first, supported by immunohistochemistry, and then molecular techniques. In 2015, there was particular emphasis on using immunohistochemistry to make classification more accurate. In 2021, there is greater emphasis throughout the book on advances in molecular pathology across all tumor types. Major features within this edition are (1) broader emphasis on genetic testing than in the 2015 WHO Classification; (2) a section entirely dedicated to the classification of small diagnostic samples; (3) continued recommendation to document percentages of histologic patterns in invasive nonmucinous adenocarcinomas, with utilization of these features to apply a formal grading system, and using only invasive size for T-factor size determination in part lepidic nonmucinous lung adenocarcinomas as recommended by the eighth edition TNM classification; (4) recognition of spread through airspaces as a histologic feature with prognostic significance; (5) moving lymphoepithelial carcinoma to squamous cell carcinomas; (6) update on evolving concepts in lung neuroendocrine neoplasm classification; (7) recognition of bronchiolar adenoma/ciliated muconodular papillary tumor as a new entity within the adenoma subgroup; (8) recognition of thoracic SMARCA4-deficient undifferentiated tumor; and (9) inclusion of essential and desirable diagnostic criteria for each tumor., (Crown Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a tumour associated with asbestos exposure. Approximately, 10% of patients with MPM carry a germline pathogenic variant (PV), mostly in DNA repair genes, suggesting the occurrence of inherited predispositions., Aim: This article aimed to 1) search for new predisposing genes and assess the prevalence of PVs in DNA repair genes, by next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis of germline DNA from 113 unselected patients with MPM and 2) evaluate whether these patients could be sensitive to tailored treatments., Methods: NGS was performed using a custom panel of 107 cancer-predisposing genes. To investigate the response to selected drugs in conditions of DNA repair insufficiency, we created a three-dimensional-MPM cell model that had a defect in ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM), the master regulator of DNA repair., Results: We identified PVs in approximately 7% of patients with MPM (8/113) and a new PV in BAP1 in a further patient with familial MPM. Most of these PVs were in genes involved or supposedly involved in DNA repair (BRCA1, BRIP1, CHEK2, SLX4, FLCN and BAP1). In vitro studies showed apoptosis induction in ATM-silenced/inhibited MPM spheroids treated with an enhancer of zeste homologue 2 inhibitor (tazemetostat)., Conclusions: Overall these data suggest that patients with MPM and DNA repair insufficiency may benefit from this treatment, which induces synthetic lethality., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Grosso reports outside the submitted work personal fees for advisory role, speaker engagements and travel and accommodation expenses from Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Novocure, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, PharmaMar and Novartis. Scagliotti reports outside the submitted work personal fees for lectures, presentations, speaker bureaus, article writing and educational events from Eli Lilly, Roche, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novartis, MSD, Takeda and Beigene. Scagliotti reports participation on a data safety monitoring board and advisory board from Beigene, Takeda, MSD, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche and Eli Lilly outside the submitted work. Mirabelli received payment to discuss court cases with asbestos-related neoplasms from the public prosecution office at the Verbania Court and Turin Court. Magnani received payment for participation in different trials regarding asbestos-related diseases from the public prosecution office and research funding (BRIC Project) from INAIL outside the submitted work. Dianzani has been appointed by the public prosecution office to discuss court cases with asbestos-related neoplasms. The remaining authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Although precision medicine has had a mixed impact on the clinical management of patients with advanced-stage cancer overall, for NSCLC, and more specifically for lung adenocarcinoma, the advances have been dramatic, largely owing to the genomic complexity and growing number of druggable oncogene drivers. Furthermore, although tumor tissue is historically the "accepted standard" biospecimen for these molecular analyses, there are considerable innate limitations. Thus, liquid biopsy represents a practical alternative source for investigating tumor-derived somatic alterations. Although data are most robust in NSCLC, patients with other cancer types may also benefit from this minimally invasive approach to facilitate selection of targeted therapies. The liquid biopsy approach includes a variety of methodologies for circulating analytes. From a clinical point of view, plasma circulating tumor DNA is the most extensively studied and widely adopted alternative to tissue tumor genotyping in solid tumors, including NSCLC, first entering clinical practice for detection of EGFR mutations in NSCLC. Since the publication of the first International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) liquid biopsy statement in 2018, several additional advances have been made in this field, leading to changes in the therapeutic decision-making algorithm for advanced NSCLC and prompting this 2021 update. In view of the novel and impressive technological advances made in the past few years, the growing clinical application of plasma-based, next-generation sequencing, and the recent Food and Drug and Administration approval in the United States of two different assays for circulating tumor DNA analysis, IASLC revisited the role of liquid biopsy in therapeutic decision-making in a recent workshop in October 2020 and the question of "plasma first" versus "tissue first" approach toward molecular testing for advanced NSCLC. Moreover, evidence-based recommendations from IASLC provide an international perspective on when to order which test and how to interpret the results. Here, we present updates and additional considerations to the previous statement article as a consensus from a multidisciplinary and international team of experts selected by IASLC., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose of Review: In this review, we report a complete and updated summary of the most recent treatment advances in the fields of oncogene-addicted disease and provide expert perspectives on the evolving paradigm of precision medicine in lung cancer patients., Recent Findings: The advent of innovative genome sequencing technologies is rapidly increasing the number of targetable molecular alterations in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), leading to the introduction of novel selective inhibitors into the clinical arena, showing unprecedent tumor responses against rare and elusive NSCLC targets. The results of the ADAURA trial suggested that targeting EGFR pathway in the adjuvant setting is a feasible and effective strategy. The routine use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) is currently recommended as new standard approach to profile advanced NSCLC samples while recent findings suggest the potential application of a plasma-based first approach for tumor genotyping. Innovative umbrella trials provide the right infrastructure to investigate the role of precision medicine in advanced NSCLC, but failed to show clinical benefit., Summary: Implementing NGS-based molecular screening, increasing patients' access to biomarker driven-clinical trials, ensuring equal access to molecular testing and innovative treatments, overcoming disparities and preserve health systems' financial sustainability represents the main challenges of precision medicine worldwide., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Access to targeted therapies for lung cancer depends on the accurate identification of patients' biomarkers through molecular testing. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) conducted an international survey to evaluate perceptions on current practice and barriers to implementation of molecular testing., Methods: We distributed the survey to IASLC members and other health care professionals around the world. The survey included a seven-question introduction for all respondents, who then answered according to one of three tracks: (1) requesting tests and treating patients, (2) performing and interpreting assays, or (3) tissue acquisition. Barriers to implementing molecular testing were provided in free-response fields. The chi-square test was used for regional comparisons., Results: A total of 2537 respondents from 102 countries participated. Most respondents who test and treat patients believe that less than 50% of patients with lung cancer in their country receive molecular testing, but reported higher rates within their own practice. Although many results varied by region, the five most frequent barriers cited in all regions were cost, quality and standards, access, awareness, and turnaround time. Many respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the current state of molecular testing for lung cancer, including 41% of those performing and interpreting assays. Issues identified included trouble understanding results (37%) and the quality of the samples (23% reported >10% rejection rate). Despite concerns regarding the quality of testing, 47% in the performing and interpreting track stated there is no policy or strategy to improve quality in their country. In addition, 33% of respondents who request tests and treat patients were unaware of the most recent College of American Pathologists, IASLC, and Association for Molecular Pathology guidelines for molecular testing., Conclusions: Adoption of molecular testing for lung cancer is relatively low across the world. Barriers include cost, access, quality, turnaround time, and lack of awareness., (Copyright © 2020 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Immunotherapy-based options for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are increasing at an unprecedented pace, carrying the promise to prolong survival of this deadly disease. To maximize responses and extend benefit to a larger portion of patients, immunotherapy combination strategies are currently under investigation, with chemo-immunotherapy already in use. Combinations of programmed death-1/ligand-1 (PD-1/L1) and cytotoxic T lymphocytes antigen-4 (CTLA-4) were developed with the rationale of targeting complementary pathways involved in T cell activation, and already showed to be highly active in other malignancies. Recently, the phase III Checkmate 227 trial showed that combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab provided survival benefit in untreated advanced NSCLC patients. However, accurate patients' selection and appropriate sequencing of different immunotherapy-based approaches remain unsolved. In this review, we provide an overview of the currently available evidence on double immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) for NSCLC treatment and discuss current issues and future perspectives., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The global coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic continues to escalate at a rapid pace inundating medical facilities and creating substantial challenges globally. The risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in patients with cancer seems to be higher, especially as they are more likely to present with an immunocompromised condition, either from cancer itself or from the treatments they receive. A major consideration in the delivery of cancer care during the pandemic is to balance the risk of patient exposure and infection with the need to provide effective cancer treatment. Many aspects of the SARS-CoV-2 infection currently remain poorly characterized and even less is known about the course of infection in the context of a patient with cancer. As SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious, the risk of infection directly affects the cancer patient being treated, other cancer patients in close proximity, and health care providers. Infection at any level for patients or providers can cause considerable disruption to even the most effective treatment plans. Lung cancer patients, especially those with reduced lung function and cardiopulmonary comorbidities are more likely to have increased risk and mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 as one of its common manifestations is as an acute respiratory illness. The purpose of this manuscript is to present a practical multidisciplinary and international overview to assist in treatment for lung cancer patients during this pandemic, with the caveat that evidence is lacking in many areas. It is expected that firmer recommendations can be developed as more evidence becomes available., (Copyright © 2020 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In the past 10 years, a deeper understanding of the immune landscape of cancers, including immune evasion processes, has allowed the development of a new class of agents. The reactivation of host antitumor immune response offers the potential for long-term survival benefit in a portion of patients with thoracic malignancies. The advent of programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death ligand-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), both as single agents and in combination with chemotherapy, and more recently, the combination of ICI, anti-programmed cell death protein 1, and anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 antibody, have led to breakthrough therapeutic advances for patients with advanced NSCLC, and to a lesser extent, patients with SCLC. Encouraging activity has recently emerged in pretreated patients with thymic carcinoma (TC). Conversely, in malignant pleural mesothelioma, pivotal positive signs of activity have not been fully confirmed in randomized trials. The additive effects of chemoradiation and immunotherapy suggested intriguing potential for therapeutic synergy with combination strategies. This has led to the introduction of ICI consolidation therapy in stage III NSCLC, creating a platform for future therapeutic developments in earlier-stage disease. Despite the definitive clinical benefit observed with ICI, primary and acquired resistance represent well-known biological phenomena, which may affect the therapeutic efficacy of these agents. The development of innovative strategies to overcome ICI resistance, standardization of new patterns of ICI progression, identification of predictive biomarkers of response, optimal treatment duration, and characterization of ICI efficacy in special populations, represent crucial issues to be adequately addressed, with the aim of improving the therapeutic benefit of ICI in patients with thoracic malignancies. In this article, an international panel of experts in the field of thoracic malignancies discussed these topics, evaluating currently available scientific evidence, with the final aim of providing clinical recommendations, which may guide oncologists in their current practice and elucidate future treatment strategies and research priorities., (Copyright © 2020 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Currently, there is no established guidance on how to process and evaluate resected lung cancer specimens after neoadjuvant therapy in the setting of clinical trials and clinical practice. There is also a lack of precise definitions on the degree of pathologic response, including major pathologic response or complete pathologic response. For other cancers such as osteosarcoma and colorectal, breast, and esophageal carcinomas, there have been multiple studies investigating pathologic assessment of the effects of neoadjuvant therapy, including some detailed recommendations on how to handle these specimens. A comprehensive mapping approach to gross and histologic processing of osteosarcomas after induction therapy has been used for over 40 years. The purpose of this article is to outline detailed recommendations on how to process lung cancer resection specimens and to define pathologic response, including major pathologic response or complete pathologic response after neoadjuvant therapy. A standardized approach is recommended to assess the percentages of (1) viable tumor, (2) necrosis, and (3) stroma (including inflammation and fibrosis) with a total adding up to 100%. This is recommended for all systemic therapies, including chemotherapy, chemoradiation, molecular-targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or any future novel therapies yet to be discovered, whether administered alone or in combination. Specific issues may differ for certain therapies such as immunotherapy, but the grossing process should be similar, and the histologic evaluation should contain these basic elements. Standard pathologic response assessment should allow for comparisons between different therapies and correlations with disease-free survival and overall survival in ongoing and future trials. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer has an effort to collect such data from existing and future clinical trials. These recommendations are intended as guidance for clinical trials, although it is hoped they can be viewed as suggestion for good clinical practice outside of clinical trials, to improve consistency of pathologic assessment of treatment response., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: The phase II, single-arm ASCEND-3 study assessed the efficacy and safety of ceritinib in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor (ALKi)-naive patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC who had received at least three previous lines of chemotherapy. Here, we report the final efficacy and safety results., Methods: Eligible patients (including those with asymptomatic or neurologically stable brain metastases) received oral ceritinib (750 mg/day, fasted). The primary end point was investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR). Secondary end points were Blinded Independent Review Committee-assessed ORR; investigator- and Blinded Independent Review Committee-assessed overall intracranial response rate, duration of response, time to response, disease control rate, and progression-free survival (PFS); overall survival (OS); and safety. Exploratory end points included patient-reported outcomes., Results: Of the 124 patients enrolled, 122 (98.4%) had received previous antineoplastic medications (31 patients [25.0%] received at least three regimens), and 49 (39.5%) had baseline brain metastases. The median follow-up time (data cutoff: January 22, 2018) was 52.1 (range, 48.4-60.1) months. The investigator-assessed ORR was 67.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 58.8-75.9), and the median PFS was 16.6 months (95% CI: 11.0-23.2). The median OS was 51.3 months (95% CI: 42.7-55.3). Most common adverse events (all grades, ≥60% of patients, all-causality) were diarrhea (85.5%), nausea (78.2%), and vomiting (71.8%). Overall, 18 patients (14.5%) had an adverse event leading to treatment discontinuation. Health-related quality of life was maintained during ceritinib treatment., Conclusions: Ceritinib exhibited prolonged and clinically meaningful OS, PFS, and duration of response in chemotherapy-pretreated (at least three lines), ALKi-naive patients with ALK+ NSCLC. The safety profile was consistent with that reported in previous studies., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The outcomes of patients with SCLC have not yet been substantially impacted by the revolution in precision oncology, primarily owing to a paucity of genetic alterations in actionable driver oncogenes. Nevertheless, systemic therapies that include immunotherapy are beginning to show promise in the clinic. Although, these results are encouraging, many patients do not respond to, or rapidly recur after, current regimens, necessitating alternative or complementary therapeutic strategies. In this review, we discuss ongoing investigations into the pathobiology of this recalcitrant cancer and the therapeutic vulnerabilities that are exposed by the disease state. Included within this discussion, is a snapshot of the current biomarker and clinical trial landscapes for SCLC. Finally, we identify key knowledge gaps that should be addressed to advance the field in pursuit of reduced SCLC mortality. This review largely summarizes work presented at the Third Biennial International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer SCLC Meeting., (Copyright © 2020 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The hepatocyte growth factor receptor mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) is reported to be a negative prognostic marker in EGFR-mutant NSCLC and involved in resistance to EGFR inhibitors. Emibetuzumab, a humanized immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal bivalent MET antibody, blocks ligand-dependent and ligand-independent hepatocyte growth factor/MET signaling. This phase 2 study compared erlotinib with and without emibetuzumab in first-line treatment of EGFR-mutant metastatic NSCLC., Methods: Patients with stage IV EGFR-mutant NSCLC and disease control after an 8-week lead-in with erlotinib (150 mg daily) were randomized to continue taking erlotinib with or without emibetuzumab (750 mg every 2 weeks). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Additional end points included overall survival, overall response rate, safety, pharmacokinetics, and exploratory analysis of MET expression., Results: No significant difference in median PFS was observed in the intent-to-treat population (9.3 months with emibetuzumab + erlotinib versus 9.5 months with erlotinib monotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.89, 90% confidence interval (CI): 0.64-1.23]). The median overall survival was 34.3 months with emibetuzumab plus erlotinib versus 25.4 months with erlotinib (HR = 0.74, 90% CI: 0.49-1.11). Emibetuzumab plus erlotinib was well tolerated, with peripheral edema and mucositis as the only adverse events occurring 10% or more frequently relative to erlotinib. Exploratory post hoc analysis showed an improvement of 15.3 months in median PFS for the 24 patients with the highest MET expression (MET expression level of 3+ in ≥90% of tumor cells) (20.7 with emibetuzumab + erlotinib versus 5.4 months with erlotinib [HR = 0.39, 90% CI: 0.17-0.91])., Conclusions: No statistically significant difference in PFS was noted in the intent-to-treat population. Exploratory analysis confirmed that high MET expression is a negative prognostic marker for patients treated with erlotinib, indicating that emibetuzumab plus erlotinib may provide clinically meaningful benefit., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneous disease. Front-line therapy may affect responses to subsequent treatment regimens, thus influencing second-line therapy decision making. In the randomised phase 3 REVEL study, second-line ramucirumab plus docetaxel (ram+doc) versus docetaxel (doc) improved survival of patients with metastatic NSCLC. We explore efficacy, safety and quality-of-life (QoL) in REVEL based on front-line therapy., Methods: Patients were grouped by specific front-line therapy received. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, safety and QoL were assessed descriptively. Kaplan-Meier estimation and Cox proportional hazards modelling were used; frequencies reported in percentages., Results: Baseline characteristics of 1253 patients were generally well balanced between treatment arms within each front-line therapy subgroup. For patients with non-squamous disease (n=912), induction therapies included platinum-based chemotherapy plus a taxane (n=227; 25%) or pemetrexed (n=449; 49%), with (n=172; 19%) or without bevacizumab. For patients with squamous disease (n=328), induction therapies included platinum-based chemotherapy plus gemcitabine (n=176; 54%) or a taxane (n=69; 21%). A highly selected subgroup (n=127; 14%) received pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy. Ram+doc improved median OS and PFS versus doc across front-line therapy subgroups, as reflected by HRs ranging from 0.78 to 0.91 and 0.66 to 0.92, respectively, similar to results in the overall intention-to-treat cohort (HRs: 0.86 and 0.76, respectively). High-grade treatment-emergent adverse events of special interest (including neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, leucopenia and hypertension) were generally higher in ram+doc-treated patients relative to doc-treated patients regardless of front-line therapy. No clear differences in safety or QoL were seen across front-line therapy subgroups; outcomes were consistent with those reported in the overall intention-to-treat cohort., Conclusions: Results of this exploratory analysis suggest that second-line ram+doc may be effective regardless of prior treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy plus a taxane, pemetrexed, gemcitabine or bevacizumab. Overall, ram+doc is clinically beneficial across a wide range of patients with metastatic NSCLC who have progressed after various front-line therapies., Trial Registration Number: NCT01168973., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The following authors declared conflicts of interests. GCC, AHZ, ABO, PL, KW, and VJS are full-time employees and stockowners of Eli Lilly and Company. EA is a former employee and stockowner of Eli Lilly and Company. EBG has received honoraria from Dracen and EMD Serono, and his institution has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Genentech, Dynavax, Iovance, Mirati, and Neon. GVS has received honoraria from Eli Lilly and Company, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Regeneron, Novartis, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Pfizer, and Roche and has served on the speaker’s bureaus of Eli Lilly and Company, AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and Novartis. MR has received honoraria for lectures from and functions in an advisory/consulting role for Eli Lilly and Company, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Hoffman-La Roche, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer. MT has received Advisory Board honoraria from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Novartis, Roche, Takeda; speaker’s honoraria from Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Takeda; research funding from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Roche; and travel grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and Novartis. HK has received reimbursement for meeting expenses and/or has functioned in an advisory/consultancy role for Eli Lilly and Company, Genesis Pharma, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche and has received reimbursement for meeting expenses from Enorasis. J-HK serves in an advisory/consultancy role for and his institution has received grant funding for clinical trials from Eli Lilly and Company, including during the conduct of this study, and from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Roche. OTB has received honoraria from Eli Lilly and Company, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim (for research funding and advisory/consultancy role), GlaxoSmithKline (for research funding), Merck (for advisory/consultancy role), Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche (for research funding). MP has received honoraria for speaking, advisory and consultancy roles for Eli Lilly and Company., (© Author (s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Background: O6-methylguanine-methyltransferase (MGMT) is a key enzyme for the DNA repair machinery strongly associated with response to alkylating agents in different tumors. Data on its expression and related clinical impact in neuroendocrine tumors are limited to the gastro-entero-pancreatic system, with controversial results in terms of prognostic or predictive value. In lung carcinoids, although clinical efficacy of alkylating agents has been shown in small studies, very few data to date are available on MGMT status., Objective: To assess MGMT status in lung carcinoids using multiple assays and to compare data with major clinical and pathological features., Methods: A retrospective series of 95 lung carcinoids and 51 control cases of high-grade neuroendocrine lung carcinomas was analyzed for MGMT promoter methylation, MGMT gene expression, and MGMT protein expression using pyrosequencing, quantitative real-time PCR, and immunohistochemistry, respectively., Results: MGMT protein expression was inversely correlated with MGMT promoter methylation and positively with MGMT gene expression. MGMT promoter methylation progressively increased from carcinoids to high-grade carcinomas. In the carcinoid group, decreased MGMT gene expression was significantly associated with aggressive features (atypical histotype, grade G2, larger tumor size, higher T stage, and positive nodal status) but not with survival. MGMT promoter methylation was associated with lower stage and negative nodal status., Conclusions: Our study investigated MGMT status in a large series of lung carcinoids in the attempt to move forward a rational use of alkylating agents in these tumors. Interestingly, low MGMT gene expression defines a subgroup of lung carcinoids with aggressive features., (© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Objectives: We previously reported that quality of life (QoL) is not included among trial endpoints and QoL results are underreported in a significant proportion of phase III oncology trials. Here we describe QoL adoption, reporting and methodology of QoL analysis in lung cancer trials., Materials and Methods: We selected all primary publications of lung cancer phase III trials assessing anticancer drugs published between 2012 and 2018 by 11 major journals., Results: 122 publications were included. In 39 (32.0%) publications, QoL was not listed among endpoints: in 10/17 (58.8%) early stage/locally advanced NSCLC, in 15/54 (27.8%) first-line of advanced NSCLC; in 10/41 (24.4%) second and further lines of advanced NSCLC, in 4/10 (40.0%) SCLC. Proportion of trials not including QoL was similar over time: 32.9% publications in 2012-2015 vs. 30.6% in 2016-2018. Out of 83 trials including QoL among endpoints, QoL results were absent in 36 primary publications (43.4%). Proportion of trials without QoL results in primary publication increased over time (30.6% 2012-2015 vs. 61.8% 2016-2018, p = 0.005). Overall, QoL data were not available in 75/122 (61.5%) primary publications, due to the absent endpoint or unpublished results. QoL data were lacking in 48/68 (70.6%) publications of trials with overall survival as primary endpoint, 27/54 (50.0%) with other primary endpoints and 28/54 (51.9%) publications with a positive result. For trials including QoL among endpoints but lacking QoL results in primary publication, probability of secondary publication was 6.3%, 30.1% and 49.8% after 1, 2 and 3 years respectively, without evidence of improvement comparing 2012-2015 vs. 2016-2018., Conclusion: QoL is not assessed or published in many phase III lung cancer trials, a setting where QoL value should be highly considered, due to high symptom burden and generally limited life expectancy. Timely inclusion of results in primary publications is worsening in recent years., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Improved outcome has been shown in patients with synchronous oligometastatic (sOM) NSCLC when treated with radical intent. As a uniform definition of sOM NSCLC is lacking, we developed a definition and diagnostic criteria by a consensus process., Methods: A pan-European multidisciplinary consensus group was established. Consensus questions were built on the basis of current controversies, and definitions were extracted from a survey, cases and a systematic review. This statement was formulated during a consensus meeting., Results: It was determined that definition of sOM NSCLC is relevant when a radical treatment that may modify the disease course (leading to long-term disease control) is technically feasible for all tumor sites with acceptable toxicity. On the basis of the review, a maximum of five metastases and three organs was proposed. Mediastinal lymph node involvement was not counted as a metastatic site. Fludeoxyglucose F 18 positron emission tomography-computed tomography and brain imaging were considered mandatory. A dedicated liver magnetic resonance imaging scan was advised for a solitary liver metastasis, and thoracoscopy and biopsies of distant ipsilateral pleural sites were recommended for a solitary pleural metastasis. For mediastinal staging, fludeoxyglucose F 18 positron emission tomography-computed tomography was deemed the minimum requirement, with pathological confirmation recommended if this influences the treatment strategy. Biopsy of a solitary metastatic location was mandated unless the multidisciplinary team is of the opinion that the risks outweigh the benefits., Conclusion: A multidisciplinary consensus statement on the definition and staging of sOM NSCLC has been formulated. This statement will help to standardize inclusion criteria in future clinical trials., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: A comprehensive analysis of the immune cell infiltrate collected from pleural fluid and from biopsy specimens of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) may contribute to understanding the immune-evasion mechanisms related to tumor progression, aiding in differential diagnosis and potential prognostic stratification. Until now such approach has not routinely been verified., Methods: We enrolled 275 patients with an initial clinical diagnosis of pleural effusion. Specimens of pleural fluids and pleural biopsy samples used for the pathologic diagnosis and the immune phenotype analyses were blindly investigated by multiparametric flow cytometry. The results were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test. The Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were used to correlate immune phenotype data with patients' outcome., Results: The cutoffs of intratumor T-regulatory (>1.1%) cells, M2-macrophages (>36%), granulocytic and monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC; >5.1% and 4.2%, respectively), CD4 molecule-positive (CD4 + ) programmed death 1-positive (PD-1 + ) (>5.2%) and CD8 + PD-1 + (6.4%) cells, CD4 + lymphocyte activating 3-positive (LAG-3 + ) (>2.8% ) and CD8 + LAG-3 + (>2.8%) cells, CD4 + T cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain 3-positive (TIM-3 + ) (>2.5%), and CD8 + TIM-3 + (>2.6%) cells discriminated MPM from pleuritis with 100% sensitivity and 89% specificity. The presence of intratumor MDSC contributed to the anergy of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. The immune phenotype of pleural fluid cells had no prognostic significance. By contrast, the intratumor T-regulatory and MDSC levels significantly correlated with progression-free and overall survival, the PD-1 + /LAG-3 + /TIM-3 + CD4 + tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes correlated with overall survival., Conclusions: A clear immune signature of pleural fluids and tissues of MPM patients may contribute to better predict patients' outcome., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We report a case of a 37-year-old man with metastatic differentiated thyroid carcinoma, previously submitted to total thyroidectomy, radio-iodine therapy and lung metastasectomy, who underwent systemic treatment with lenvatinib for tumor recurrence in the lung, mediastinal lymph nodes, left gluteus and left orbit. Lenvatinib induced rapid and durable disease regression; the drug effect has continued after >1 year, as well as a very considerable clinical benefit. The results achieved by lenvatinib in treatment of metastatic differentiated thyroid carcinoma are clear and irrefutable. Real-life data, obtained by case reports and retrospective studies, are equally important to increase the knowledge about this drug and improve the clinical management.

Background: Nintedanib targets VEGF receptors 1-3, PDGF receptors α and β, FGF receptors 1-3, and Src and Abl kinases, which are all implicated in malignant pleural mesothelioma pathogenesis. Here, we report the final results of the phase 3 part of the LUME-Meso trial, which aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed plus cisplatin combined with nintedanib or placebo in unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma., Methods: This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial was done at 120 academic medical centres and community clinics in 27 countries across the world. Chemotherapy-naive adults (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable epithelioid malignant pleural mesothelioma and ECOG performance status 0-1 were randomly assigned 1:1 via an independently verified random number-generating system to receive up to six 21-day cycles of pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2 ) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m 2 ) on day 1, then nintedanib (200 mg twice daily) or matched placebo on days 2-21. Patients without disease progression after six cycles received nintedanib or placebo maintenance on days 1-21 of each cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (investigator-assessed according to mRECIST) in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01907100., Findings: Between April 14, 2016, and Jan 5, 2018, 541 patients were screened and 458 were randomly assigned to either the nintedanib group (n=229) or the placebo group (n=229). Median treatment duration was 5·3 months (IQR 2·8-7·3) in the nintedanib group and 5·1 months (2·7-7·8) in the placebo group. After 250 events, progression-free survival was not different between the nintedanib group (median 6·8 months [95% CI 6·1-7·0]) and the placebo group (7·0 months [6·7-7·2]; HR 1·01 [95% CI 0·79-1·30], p=0·91). The most frequently reported grade 3 or worse adverse event in both treatment groups was neutropenia (73 [32%] in the nintedanib group vs 54 [24%] in the placebo group). Serious adverse events were reported in 99 (44%) patients in the nintedanib group and 89 (39%) patients in the placebo group. The only serious adverse event occurring in at least 5% of patients in either group was pulmonary embolism (13 [6%] vs seven [3%])., Interpretation: The primary progression-free survival endpoint of the phase 3 part of LUME-Meso was not met and phase 2 findings were not confirmed. No unexpected safety findings were reported., Funding: Boehringer Ingelheim., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The VeriStrat test provides accurate predictions of outcomes in all lines of therapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated the predictive and prognostic role of VeriStrat in patients enrolled on the MARQUEE phase III trial of tivantinib plus erlotinib (T+E) versus placebo plus erlotinib (P+E) in previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC., Methods: Pretreatment plasma samples were available for 996 patients and were analyzed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry to generate VeriStrat labels (good, VS-G, or poor, VS-P)., Results: Overall, no significant benefit in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were observed for the addition of tivantinib to erlotinib. Regardless of treatment arm, patients who were classified as VS-G had significantly longer PFS (3.8 mo for T+E arm, 2.0 mo for P+E arm) and OS (11.6 mo for T+E, 10.2 mo for P+E arm) than patients classified as VS-P (PFS: 1.9 mo for both arms, hazard ratio [HR], 0.584; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.468-0.733; p < .0001 for T+E, HR, 0.686; 95% CI, 0.546-0.870; p = .0015 for P+E; OS: 4.0 mo for both arms, HR, 0.333; 95% CI, 0.264-0.422; p < .0001 for T+E; HR, 0.449; 95% CI, 0.353-0.576; p < .0001 for P+E). The VS-G population had higher OS than the VS-P population within Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score (PS) categories. VS-G patients on the T+E arm had longer PFS, but not OS, than VS-G patients on the P+E arm ( p = .0108). Among EGFR mutation-positive patients, those with VS-G status had a median OS more than twice that of any other group (OS: 31.6 mo for T+E and 22.8 mo for P+E), whereas VS-P patients had similar survival rates as VS-G, EGFR-wild type patients (OS: 13.7 mo for T+E and 6.5 mo for P+E)., Conclusion: In these analyses, VeriStrat showed a prognostic role within EGOC PS categories and regardless of treatment arm and EGFR status, suggesting that VeriStrat could be used to identify EGFR mutation-positive patients who will have a poor response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors., Implications for Practice: This study suggests that VeriStrat testing could enhance the prognostic role of performance status and smoking status and replicates findings from other trials that showed that the VeriStrat test identifies EGFR mutation-positive patients likely to have a poor response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Although these findings should be confirmed in other populations, VeriStrat use could be considered in EGFR mutation-positive patients as an additional prognostic tool, and these results suggest that EGFR mutation-positive patients with VeriStrat "poor" classification could benefit from other therapeutic agents given in conjunction with TKI monotherapy., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2018.)

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a global health issue, the principal cause of which is exposure to asbestos. The prevalence is anticipated to rise over the next 2 decades, particularly in developing countries, due to the 30-50-year latency period between exposure to asbestos and carcinogenic development. Unresectable MPM has a poor prognosis and limited treatment options and, as such, there is a broad range of therapeutic targets of interest, including angiogenesis, immune checkpoints, mesothelin, as well as chemotherapeutic agents. Recently, the results of several randomized trials in the first-line setting combining antiangiogenic agents with chemotherapy have been reported. This review examines the scientific rationale for targeting angiogenesis in the treatment of unresectable MPM and analyzes recent clinical results with antiangiogenic agents in development (bevacizumab, nintedanib, and cediranib) for the management of MPM., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

This Review Article provides a multi-stakeholder view on the current status of neoadjuvant therapy in lung cancer. Given the success of oncogene-targeted therapy and immunotherapy for patients with advanced lung cancer, there is a renewed interest in studying these agents in earlier disease settings with the opportunity to have an even greater impact on patient outcomes. There are unique opportunities and challenges with the neoadjuvant approach to drug development. To achieve more rapid knowledge turns, study designs, endpoints, and definitions of pathologic response should be standardized and harmonized. Continued dialogue with all stakeholders will be critical to design and test novel induction strategies, which could expedite drug development for patients with early lung cancer who are at high risk for metastatic recurrence., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The administration of pemetrexed requires routine supplementation with vitamin B12 and folate, even if blood concentrations are normal, in order to mitigate its hematologic toxicity. Emerging data suggest that such premedication can be initiated less than 1 week before starting chemotherapy. The current available data on later administration of vitamin B12 in patients with thoracic tumors are placed into a general context, and the possible role of such strategy in the era of immunooncology is discussed., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The isolation and analysis of circulating cell-free tumor DNA in plasma is a powerful tool with considerable potential to improve clinical outcomes across multiple cancer types, including NSCLC. Assays of this nature that use blood as opposed to tumor samples are frequently referred to as liquid biopsies. An increasing number of innovative platforms have been recently developed that improve not only the fidelity of the molecular analysis but also the number of tests performed on a single specimen. Circulating tumor DNA assays for detection of both EGFR sensitizing and resistance mutations have already entered clinical practice and many other molecular tests - such as detection of resistance mutations for Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK) receptor tyrosine kinase rearrangements - are likely to do so in the near future. Due to an abundance of new evidence, an appraisal was warranted to review strengths and weaknesses, to describe what is already in clinical practice and what has yet to be implemented, and to highlight areas in need of further investigation. A multidisciplinary panel of experts in the field of thoracic oncology with interest and expertise in liquid biopsy and molecular pathology was convened by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer to evaluate current available evidence with the aim of producing a set of recommendations for the use of liquid biopsy for molecular analysis in guiding the clinical management of advanced NSCLC patients as well as identifying unmet needs. In summary, the panel concluded that liquid biopsy approaches have significant potential to improve patient care, and immediate implementation in the clinic is justified in a number of therapeutic settings relevant to NSCLC., (Copyright © 2018 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This exploratory subgroup analysis of the MARQUEE study evaluated the efficacy and safety of erlotinib plus tivantinib in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC., Methods: Patients with advanced, nonsquamous, EGFR and mesenchymal-epithelial transition inhibitor-naive NSCLC previously treated with one or two lines of systemic therapy were randomized to oral erlotinib (150 mg once daily) plus tivantinib (360 mg twice daily) or to erlotinib plus placebo. The primary end point was overall survival., Results: Among 1048 patients enrolled, 109 (10.4%) had EGFR-mutant disease. Erlotinib plus tivantinib improved progression-free survival in this subpopulation; median progression-free survival was 13.0 months for erlotinib plus tivantinib (n = 56) and 7.5 months for erlotinib plus placebo (n = 53) (hazard ratio = 0.49, 95% confidence interval: 0.31-0.77). Deaths occurred in 73 patients (67%), and median overall survival was 25.5 months in the erlotinib plus tivantinib arm versus 20.3 months in the erlotinib plus placebo arm (hazard ratio = 0.68, 95% confidence interval: 0.43-1.08). Common adverse events included diarrhea, rash, and asthenia. Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were more common with erlotinib plus tivantinib., Conclusions: Erlotinib plus tivantinib was tolerable and showed improved efficacy over erlotinib monotherapy in previously treated EGFR-mutant NSCLC., (Copyright © 2018 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is moderately active in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) due to intrinsic drug resistance and to low immunogenicity of MPM cells. CAAT/enhancer binding protein (C/EBP)-β LIP is a pro-apoptotic and chemosensitizing transcription factor activated in response to endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress., Materials and Methods: We investigated if LIP levels can predict the clinical response to cisplatin and survival of MPM patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy. We studied the LIP-dependent mechanisms determining cisplatin-resistance and we identified pharmacological approaches targeting LIP, able to restore cisplatin sensitiveness, in patient-derived MPM cells and animal models. Results were analyzed by a one-way analysis of variance test., Results: We found that LIP was degraded by constitutive ubiquitination in primary MPM cells derived from patients poorly responsive to cisplatin. LIP ubiquitination was directly correlated with cisplatin chemosensitivity and was associated with patients' survival after chemotherapy. Overexpression of LIP restored cisplatin's pro-apoptotic effect by activating CHOP/TRB3/caspase 3 axis and up-regulating calreticulin, that triggered MPM cell phagocytosis by dendritic cells and expanded autologous anti-tumor CD8 + CD107 + T-cytotoxic lymphocytes. Proteasome inhibitor carfilzomib and lysosome inhibitor chloroquine prevented LIP degradation. The triple combination of carfilzomib, chloroquine and cisplatin increased ER stress-triggered apoptosis and immunogenic cell death in patients' samples, and reduced tumor growth in cisplatin-resistant MPM preclinical models., Conclusion: The loss of LIP mediates cisplatin resistance, rendering LIP a possible predictor of cisplatin response in MPM patients. The association of proteasome and lysosome inhibitors reverses cisplatin resistance by restoring LIP levels and may represent a new adjuvant strategy in MPM treatment., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare, highly aggressive, and relatively chemoresistant and radioresistant malignancy with limited therapeutic options. Our objective was to investigate the prevalence of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and the characteristics of the immune environment in this disease., Methods: A total of 99 archival tumors from advanced-stage MPM were immunohistochemically tested in parallel for PD-L1 in two different laboratories, and 87 of them were profiled for immune gene expression by NanoString analysis for 800 genes. A prior study on the same samples indicated a low mutational load with a complex mutational landscape of genetic variations more frequently associated with the p53/DNA repair and phosphoinisitide-3-kinase pathways., Results: PD-L1 expression was found in 16% of the MPM tumor samples, either in the tumor cells or the infiltrating immune cells. Gene expression analysis suggested that MPM is an inflamed tumor type and can be classified into three different subgroups on the basis of the different expression profiles of immune-related genes, of which two groups showed varying degrees of expression of immune-related genes. Overall, these molecular findings suggest that these subgroups of MPM associated with PD-L1 positivity and expression of immune-related genes accounting for 60% of MPMs represent a candidate subtype that may respond to cancer immunotherapy., Conclusions: These data suggest that 60% of patients with MPM characterized by either PD-L1 expression or an inflamed status are attractive candidates for cancer immunotherapeutic options., (Copyright © 2017 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) inevitably develops resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment. In 5-20% of cases, this can be attributed to aberrant c-Met activity, providing a clear rationale for the use of c-Met inhibitors in these patients. EGFR TKI-resistant tumors often remain sensitive to EGFR signaling, such that c-Met inhibitors are likely to be most effective when combined with continued EGFR TKI therapy. The phase III trials of the c-Met inhibitors onartuzumab and tivantinib, which failed to demonstrate significant benefit in patients with NSCLC but excluded patients with EGFR TKI-resistant disease, do not allow c-Met to be dismissed as a rational target in EGFR TKI-resistant NSCLC. Selective c-Met TKIs exhibit more favorable properties, targeting both hepatocyte growth factor (HGF)-dependent and -independent c-Met activity, with a reduced risk of toxicity compared to non-selective c-Met TKIs. Phase Ib/II trials of the selective c-Met TKIs capmatinib and tepotinib have shown encouraging signs of efficacy. Factors affecting the success of ongoing and future trials of c-Met inhibitors in patients with EGFR TKI-resistant, c-Met-positive NSCLC are considered., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose LUME-Meso is a phase II/III randomized, double-blind trial designed to assess efficacy and safety of nintedanib plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Phase II results are reported here. Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naïve patients with unresectable, nonsarcomatoid MPM (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1), stratified by histology (epithelioid or biphasic), were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to up to six cycles of pemetrexed and cisplatin plus nintedanib (200 mg twice daily) or placebo followed by nintedanib plus placebo monotherapy until progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results Eighty-seven patients were randomly assigned. The median number of pemetrexed and cisplatin cycles was six; the median treatment duration for nintedanib was 7.8 months and 5.3 months for placebo. Primary PFS favored nintedanib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.91; P = .017), which was confirmed in updated PFS analyses (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.87; P = .010). A trend toward improved overall survival also favored nintedanib (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.29; P = .319). Benefit was evident in epithelioid histology, with a median overall survival gain of 5.4 months (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.40 to 1.21; P = .197; median [nintedanib v placebo], 20.6 months v 15.2 months) and median PFS gain of 4.0 months (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.82; P = .006; median [nintedanib v placebo], 9.7 v 5.7 months). Neutropenia was the most frequent grade ≥ 3 adverse event (AE; nintedanib 43.2% v placebo 12.2%); rates of febrile neutropenia were low (4.5% in nintedanib group v 0% in placebo group). AEs leading to discontinuation were reported in 6.8% of those receiving nintedanib versus 17.1% of those in the placebo group. Conclusion Addition of nintedanib to pemetrexed plus cisplatin resulted in PFS improvement. AEs were manageable. The clinical benefit was evident in patients with epithelioid histology. The confirmatory phase III part of the study is ongoing.