Search

Background: The 2018 ASCO pleural mesothelioma (PM) treatment guideline states that "a trial of expectant observation may be offered" in patients with asymptomatic inoperable epithelioid mesothelioma with low disease burden. The aim of our analysis was to evaluate clinical characteristics and outcomes in PM-patients managed with initial observation and deferred treatment initiation., Methods: We retrospectively collected clinicodemograhic and outcome data of patients with inoperable PM. Patients were assigned to 2 treatment decision groups: decision to start immediate systemic treatment (Immediate Treatment Group) versus observation and deferring treatment (Deferred Treatment group)., Results: Of 222 patients with advanced PM, systemic treatment was started immediately in the majority of patients (189, 85%; immediate group); treatment was deferred in 33 (15%) patients (deferred group); systemic therapy was chemotherapy-based in 91% and 79% respectively. Patients in the deferred group were older (70 vs 67 years, p = .05), less likely to have stage IV disease (28% vs. 51%, p = .08) and more often had epithelioid histology (90% vs. 70%, p = .03). Nineteen patients (58%) in the deferred group eventually received treatment. With a median follow-up time of 10.9 months median overall survival (OS) in the entire cohort was 12.4 months and was significantly longer in the deferred group (20.6 months vs. 11.5 months, p = .02). No difference in median progression-free survival (PFS) in first-line treatment between groups was seen (5.4 and 5.3 months)., Conclusion: This real-world analysis suggests that deferral of systemic therapy and close observation may not impact OS or physician-assessed PFS in selected PM-patients., Competing Interests: Disclosures SS: Grants (institutional): AstraZeneca, Janssen, BMS; Advisory boards (institutional): MSD, Merck, BMS; AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Janssen, Roche; Travel support: Takeda, MSD, Amgen and Roche. PB: Advisory Boards: Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Abbvie, Astra Zeneca (no financial remuneration), Mirati (no financial remuneration), RAPT Therapeutics (no financial remuneration); Honorarium: Merck, Eli Lilly. GL: Advisory (institutional): Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Takeda, Pfizer, Hoffman La Roche, Abbvie, EMD Serono, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Jazz. Grants(institutional): Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, AstraZeneca. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Molecularly targeted agents are increasingly being studied in the treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to try and improve cure. However, phase 3 data on neoadjuvant therapy have largely been conducted in a biomarker agnostic manner with inconsistent exclusion of EGFR and ALK alterations. Our objective was to develop IND.242 as a large-scale neoadjuvant platform trial to introduce novel agents into the preoperative window for molecularly-defined NSCLC patient populations. Given that KRAS G12C mutations are common in the overall NSCLC patient population, ranging from 9.4% to 13% of cases across different cohorts, and may be associated to worse prognosis, the initial IND.242A Substudy was designed to test neoadjuvant JDQ443 (opnurasib), a selective KRAS G12C inhibitor. This current trial report describes the multicenter, Canadian Cancer Trials Group (CCTG)-led IND.242 neoadjuvant phase 2 platform master protocol and its first Substudy (IND.242A) of neoadjuvant opnurasib KRAS G12C inhibitor for patients with surgically resectable NSCLC (AJCC 8th edition stage IA2 to IIIA). In IND.242A, a maximum of 27 patients will be accrued in participating Canadian sites. The primary objective is the rate of major pathological response (MPR) following neoadjuvant opnurasib. Secondary objectives include safety and tolerability of the treatment regimen, objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1 for the neoadjuvant treatment period, pathological complete response (pCR) rate, event-free survival (EFS) at 2 years, and surgical outcomes. Exploratory objectives are to explore patient related outcomes (PROs) and identify potential predictive biomarkers of response and mechanisms of resistance on tissue and peripheral blood samples., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: JS; received speaker fees, honoraria or consulting fees from Merck, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Novartis, Amgen, Protalix Biotherapeutics, Xenetic Biosciences, Regeneron, Eisai, Peerview, OncLive, and Medscape; and received research grants from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Roche, CLS Therapeutics and Protalix Biotherapeutics. SO; participated in advisory boards for Roche, Novocure, Takeda, Novartis and Bristol Myers Quibb; and has received honoraria from AstraZeneca. QC; participated in advisory boards for AbbVie, Amgen, AnHeart, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daichii Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; has received research funding from AstraZeneca; and has participated on data and safety monitoring boards for Merck. CL; participated on advisory boards or had a speaker's agreement with AbbVie, Alethia Therapeutics Inc., Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Jounce Therapeutics, LEO Pharma, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Trizell Ltd, United Therapeutics and Xcovery. BS; participated on advisory boards for Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Takeda, Janssen and Pfizer; and had a speaker's agreement with AstraZeneca. JK; employee and stockholder of Novartis. AFF; employee and stockholder of Novartis. MST; received research funding from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi; and received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Bayer, Sanofi, Regeneron, and Daichii-Sankyo. BK; participated on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Merck, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Medtronic. RJ; participated on advisory boards for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Sorono, Fusion Pharmaceuticals, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Lilly, Merck Sharpe and Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda; has received research funding from Alkermes, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bold Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Fusion Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Macrogenics, Merck Sharpe and Dohme, and Novartis; acted as a consultant for Bristal Myers Squibb, Merck Sharpe & Dhome, and Pfizer; and received honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Novartis, Roche, and Takeda. PAB; received honoraria from Merck, Abbvie, Lilly, and Pfizer; participated on advisory boards for Boehringer Ingelheim, Mirati, AstraZeneca and RAPT Therapeutics; and participated on data and safety monitoring boards for Mirati., (Crown Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: We evaluated outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who presented with brain-only metastatic (BOM) disease overall and by EGFR/ALK mutation status., Methods: We analyzed clinico-demographic, treatment and survival data for all NSCLC patients who presented to our center between 2014 and 2016 with BOM as their first presentation of metastatic disease. Differences in overall survival (OS) were evaluated using log-rank tests for NSCLC wildtype (NSCLCwt ) versus NSCLC with an ALK-rearrangement/EGFR-mutation (NSCLCmut+)., Results: Of 109 patients with BOM, median age was 68 years; 51 % were female; 69 % Caucasian; 76 % ever-smoker; 76 % adenocarcinoma; and 25 % NSCLCmut+. While 41 patients (38 %) had subsequent brain-only progressive disease (PD), 22 (20 %) developed extracranial metastases. A higher proportion of NSCLCmut+ ( vs -wt) subsequently progressed outside the brain (37 % vs 15 %, p = 0.03). Median time-to-first-extracranial-metastases was 8.5 (NSCLCmut+ ) vs 21.0 months (NSCLCwt; p = 0.23).With 17.7 months median follow-up, median-OS was 15.9 months [95%CI: 11.5-21.3; all patients]; 12.3 [7.4-18.4; NSCLCwt] and 38.9 [21.3-not reached (NR); NSCLCmut+] (p = 0.09). In 33 of 80 patients with de novo BOM, the primary tumor was treated with surgery or radiotherapy. In patients with NSCLCwt, there was no OS benefit associated with local lung tumor treatment (p = 0.68), whereas in NSCLCmut + pts, local lung tumor treatment correlated with greater OS (median-OS NR vs 21.5 months; p = 0.05)., Conclusion: In patients with NSCLCwt with BOM, we observed a -predominant pattern of brain-only secondary progression, however patients with NSCLCmut + more often progressed extracranially. In patients with NSCLCmut+ and BOM, definitive primary tumor treatment correlated with improved survival., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:Sabine Schmid reports a relationship with MSD, Merck, BMS, AstraZeneca (all paid to institution) that includes: consulting or advisory. Sabine Schmid reports a relationship with 10.13039/100004325AstraZeneca, 10.13039/100014554Janssen, 10.13039/100008021BMS, 10.13039/100014554Janssen (all paid to institution) that includes: funding grants. Sabine Schmid reports a relationship with Swiss Cancer League that includes: funding grants. Sabine Schmid reports a relationship with Takeda, MSD, Amgen that includes: travel reimbursement. Geoffrey Liu reports a relationship with Boehringer Ingelheim, 10.13039/100004325AstraZeneca, 10.13039/100008021Bristol Myers Squibb, 10.13039/100004334Merck, 10.13039/100016040Takeda, 10.13039/100004319Pfizer, Hoffman La Roche, 10.13039/100006483Abbvie, 10.13039/100004755EMD Serono, Eli Lilly (all insitutional) that includes: consulting or advisory and funding grants. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Objectives: KRAS mutations, particularly KRAS G12C , are prevalent in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been a frontline treatment, but recently developed KRAS G12C -selective inhibitors, such as sotorasib, present new therapeutic options. We conducted a multi-center retrospective cohort study to gain insights into real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with KRAS G12C -positive advanced NSCLC receiving systemic therapy post-ICI treatment., Methods: From the CAnadian CAncers With Rare Molecular Alterations-Basket Real-world Observational Study (CARMA-BROS), a cohort of 102 patients with KRAS G12C -positive advanced NSCLC across 9 Canadian centers diagnosed between 2015 and 2021 was analyzed. Clinico-demographic and treatment data were obtained from electronic health records. Survival outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models., Results: The patients (median age 66 years; 58 % female; 99 % current/former tobacco exposure; 59 % PD-L1 ≥ 50 %), exhibited heterogeneous treatment patterns post-ICI. Most patients received ICIs as a first-line therapy, with varying subsequent lines including chemotherapy and targeted therapy. In patients receiving systemic therapy post-ICI, median overall survival was 12.6 months, and real-world progression-free survival was 4.7 months. KRAS G12C -selective targeted therapy post-ICI (n = 20) showed longer real-world progression-free survival compared to single-agent chemotherapy (aHR = 0.39, p = 0.012)., Conclusion: This study contributes valuable real-world data on KRAS G12C -positive advanced NSCLC post-ICI treatment. The absence of a standard treatment sequencing post-ICI underscores the need for further investigation and consensus-building in the evolving landscape of KRAS G12C -targeted therapies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: The study was supported by Amgen. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is a paucity of information about the characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with single organ metastasis (SOM)., Methods: This retrospective cohort study includes all patients with a diagnosis of stage IV NSCLC diagnosed from 2014 to 2016 and treated at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. We compared baseline characteristics and patterns of metastatic sites between patients with SOM versus multiple (M)OM. Additionally, we identified treatment modalities and outcomes for patients with SOM. Cox multivariable models (MVA) were utilized to evaluate differences in overall survival (OS) between the SOM and MOM cohorts., Results: Of 893 pts analyzed, 457 (51 %) had SOM, while 436 (49 %) had MOM at initial diagnosis. Demographics were comparable between the two groups. Brain was the most common site of metastasis for SOM patients. When compared to the MOM group, the SOM group had lower percentages of liver and adrenal metastases. Amongst SOM patients, 54 % received single modality treatment, and 20 % did not receive any treatment for their SOM. In MVA, patients with liver (HR 2.4), bone (HR 1.8), and pleural (HR 1.7) metastasis as their SOM site had the worst outcomes, with median OS of 6.8 months, 12.1 months, and 13.0 months respectively. Patients with SOM had a significantly improved median OS compared to those with MOM (15.9 months vs. 10.6 months; HR 0.56, 95 % CI 0.47-0.66, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: In NSCLC patients who presented with SOM, survival correlated with the initial organ involved and was better overall compared to patients with MOM. SOM NSCLC may benefit from specific management strategies and SOM patients could be considered as a specific subgroup for survival analyses in observational and non-randomized interventional studies. In clinical trials, SOM can be considered as a stratification factor in the future., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest 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 © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has shown promise in capturing primary resistance to immunotherapy. BR.36 is a multi-center, randomized, ctDNA-directed, phase 2 trial of molecular response-adaptive immuno-chemotherapy for patients with lung cancer. In the first of two independent stages, 50 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer received pembrolizumab as standard of care. The primary objectives of stage 1 were to ascertain ctDNA response and determine optimal timing and concordance with radiologic Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) response. Secondary endpoints included the evaluation of time to ctDNA response and correlation with progression-free and overall survival. Maximal mutant allele fraction clearance at the third cycle of pembrolizumab signified molecular response (mR). The trial met its primary endpoint, with a sensitivity of ctDNA response for RECIST response of 82% (90% confidence interval (CI): 52-97%) and a specificity of 75% (90% CI: 56.5-88.5%). Median time to ctDNA response was 2.1 months (90% CI: 1.5-2.6), and patients with mR attained longer progression-free survival (5.03 months versus 2.6 months) and overall survival (not reached versus 7.23 months). These findings are incorporated into the ctDNA-driven interventional molecular response-adaptive second stage of the BR.36 trial in which patients at risk of progression are randomized to treatment intensification or continuation of therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04093167 ., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: NSCLC with MET exon 14 skipping mutation ( MET ex14) is associated with poor outcomes. Integration of novel targeted therapies is challenging because of barriers in testing and drug access. We, therefore, sought to characterize the treatment patterns, outcomes, and emerging issues of treatment sequencing in patients with MET ex14-mutant NSCLC., Methods: We reviewed all NSCLC cases with MET ex14 alterations between 2014 and 2020 across four Canadian cancer centers. Demographics, disease characteristics, systemic therapy, overall response rates (ORRs), survival, and toxicity were summarized., Results: Among 64 patients with MET ex14-mutant NSCLC, the median overall survival was 23.1 months: 127.0 months in stage 1, 27.3 months in resected stage 2 and 3, and 16.6 months in unresectable stage 3 or 4 disease, respectively. In patients with advanced disease, 22% were too unwell for systemic treatment. MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) were administered to 28 patients with an ORR of 33%, median progression-free survival of 2.7 months, and 3.8 months for selective TKIs. Programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitors were given to 25 patients-the ORR was 44% and progression-free survival was 10.6 months. No responses were seen with subsequent MET TKIs after initial TKI treatment. Grade 3 or higher toxicities occurred in 64% of patients who received MET TKI after PD-1 inhibitors versus 8% in those who did not receive PD-1 inhibitors., Conclusions: Many patients with advanced MET ex14 NSCLC were too unwell to receive treatment. PD-1 inhibitors seem effective as an initial treatment, although greater toxicity was seen with subsequent MET TKIs. Thus, timely testing for MET ex14 skipping and initial therapy are imperative to improving patient survival., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Importance: Liquid biopsy has emerged as a complement to tumor tissue profiling for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The optimal way to integrate liquid biopsy into the diagnostic algorithm for patients with newly diagnosed advanced NSCLC remains unclear., Objective: To evaluate the use of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) genotyping before tissue diagnosis among patients with suspected advanced NSCLC and its association with time to treatment., Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-group nonrandomized clinical trial was conducted among 150 patients at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre-University Health Network (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) between July 1, 2021, and November 30, 2022. Patients referred for investigation and diagnosis of lung cancer were eligible if they had radiologic evidence of advanced lung cancer prior to a tissue diagnosis., Interventions: Patients underwent plasma ctDNA testing with a next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay before lung cancer diagnosis. Diagnostic biopsy and tissue NGS were performed per standard of care., Main Outcome and Measures: The primary end point was time from referral to treatment initiation among patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC using ctDNA testing before diagnosis (ACCELERATE [Accelerating Lung Cancer Diagnosis Through Liquid Biopsy] cohort). This cohort was compared with a reference cohort using standard tissue genotyping after tissue diagnosis., Results: Of the 150 patients (median age at diagnosis, 68 years [range, 33-91 years]; 80 men [53%]) enrolled, 90 (60%) had advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. The median time to treatment was 39 days (IQR, 27-52 days) for the ACCELERATE cohort vs 62 days (IQR, 44-82 days) for the reference cohort (P < .001). Among the ACCELERATE cohort, the median turnaround time from sample collection to genotyping results was 7 days (IQR, 6-9 days) for plasma and 23 days (IQR, 18-28 days) for tissue NGS (P < .001). Of the 90 patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC, 21 (23%) started targeted therapy before tissue NGS results were available, and 11 (12%) had actionable alterations identified only through plasma testing., Conclusions and Relevance: This nonrandomized clinical trial found that the use of plasma ctDNA genotyping before tissue diagnosis among patients with suspected advanced NSCLC was associated with accelerated time to treatment compared with a reference cohort undergoing standard tissue testing., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04863924.

Close monitoring after diagnosis of patients with stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) may result in fitter patients with lower disease burden at the time of metastatic recurrence or progression compared to patients diagnosed initially as stage IV (de novo). We compared the presentation, treatments, and outcomes of patients with KRAS G12C -mutated NSCLC with de novo versus recurrent stage IV disease. Of 109 patients, 94% had a smoking history. When compared to patients with KRAS G12C -mutated NSCLC who developed stage IV disease at recurrence (n = 38), de novo stage IV patients (n = 71) had worse ECOG performance status (p = 0.007), greater numbers of extra-thoracic metastatic sites (p = 0.001), and were less likely to receive 2nd/3rd line systemic therapy (p = 0.05, p = 0.002) or targeted therapy (p = 0.001). De novo metastatic patients had shorter overall survival than metastatic patients at recurrence (9.1 versus 24.2 months; adjusted-hazard-ratio=1.94 (95% CI: 1.14-3.28; p = 0.01)). There is a critical need for well-tolerated targeted therapies in the first-line setting for metastatic patients with de novo, high-burden, stage IV KRAS G12C -mutated NSCLCs., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest 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. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objectives: This real-world analysis describes treatment patterns, sequencing and clinical effectiveness, toxicities, and health utility outcomes in advanced-stage, incurable ALK-positive NSCLC patients across five different ALK-TKIs., Materials and Methods: Clinicodemographic, treatment, and toxicity data were collected retrospectively in patients with advanced-stage ALK-positive NSCLC at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Patient-reported symptoms, toxicities, and health utilities were collected prospectively., Results: Of 148 ALK-positive NSCLC patients seen July 2009-May 2021, median age was 58.9 years; 84 (57%) were female; 112 (76%) never-smokers; 54 (47%) Asian and 40 (35%) white; 139 (94%) received at least one ALK-TKI: crizotinib (n = 74; 54%) and alectinib (n = 61; 44%) were administered mainly as first-line ALK-TKI, ceritinib, brigatinib and lorlatinib were administered primarily after previous ALK-TKI failure. Median overall survival (OS) was 54.0 months; 31 (21%) patients died within two years of advanced-stage diagnosis. Treatment modifications were observed in 35 (47%) patients with crizotinib, 19 (61%) with ceritinib, 41 (39%) with alectinib, 9 (41%) with brigatinib and 8 (30%) with lorlatinib. Prevalence of dose modifications and self-reported toxicities were higher with early versus later generation ALK-TKIs (P<.05). The presence of early treatment modification was not negatively associated with progression-free survival (PFS) and OS analyses., Conclusion: Serial ALK-TKI sequencing approaches are viable therapeutic options that can extend quality of life and quantity-of-life, though a fifth of patients died within two years. No best single sequencing approach could be determined. Clinically relevant toxicities occurred across all ALK-TKIs. Treatment modifications due to toxicity may not necessarily compromise outcomes, allowing multiple approaches to deal with ALK-TKI toxicities., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Continued smoking after a diagnosis of cancer negatively impacts cancer outcomes, but the impact of tobacco on newer treatments options is not well established. Collecting and evaluating tobacco use in clinical trials may advance understanding of the consequences of tobacco use on treatment modalities, but little is known about the frequency of reporting and analysis of tobacco use in cancer cooperative clinical trial groups., Patients and Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify cancer cooperative group clinical trials published from January 2017-October 2019. Eligible studies evaluated either systemic and/or radiation therapies, included ≥100 adult patients, and reported on at least one of: overall survival, disease/progression-free survival, response rates, toxicities/adverse events, or quality-of-life., Results: A total of 91 studies representing 90 trials met inclusion criteria with trial start dates ranging from 1995 to 2015 with 14% involving lung and 5% head and neck cancer patients. A total of 19 studies reported baseline tobacco use; 2 reported collecting follow-up tobacco use. Seven studies reported analysis of the impact of baseline tobacco use on clinical outcomes. There was significant heterogeneity in the reporting of baseline tobacco use: 7 reported never/ever status, 10 reported never/ex-smoker/current smoker status, and 4 reported measuring smoking intensity. None reported verifying smoking status or second-hand smoke exposure. Trials of lung and head and neck cancers were more likely to report baseline tobacco use than other disease sites (83% versus 6%, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Few cancer cooperative group clinical trials report and analyze trial participants' tobacco use. Significant heterogeneity exists in reporting tobacco use. Routine standardized collection and reporting of tobacco use at baseline and follow-up in clinical trials should be implemented to enable investigators to evaluate the impact of tobacco use on new cancer therapies., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Testing for tumor programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression was initially developed with histology specimens in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, cytology specimens are widely used for primary diagnosis and biomarker studies in clinical practice. Limited clinical data exist on the predictiveness of cytology-derived PD-L1 scores for response to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy., Methods: We reviewed all NSCLC specimens clinically tested at the University Health Network (UHN) for PD-L1 with 22C3pharmDx, from 01/2013 to 04/2021. Treatment outcomes in patients treated with single agent ICI therapy were reviewed and compared according to cytology- and histology-derived PD-L1 scores., Results: We identified 494 and 1942 unique patients with cytology- and histology-derived tumor proportion scores, respectively, during the study period. Informative testing rates were 95 % vs 98 % for cytology and histology, respectively. Clinical data were available for 152 patients treated with single agent ICI: 61 cytology and 91 histology. Overall response rates (ORR) were similar for cytology and histology (36 % vs 34 %; p = 0.23), as well as median progression free survival (PFS) (4.9 vs 4.2 months; p = 0.99) and overall survival (23.4 vs 19.7 months; p = 0.99). The results remained similar even after adjusting for PD-L1 expression levels and line of ICI treatment (PFS HR 1.15; 95 %CI 0.78-1.70; p = 0.47)., Conclusions: Treatment outcomes to single agent ICI based on cytology-derived PD-L1 scores were comparable to histology controls. Our results support PD-L1 biomarker testing on both cytology and histology specimens., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

With the advent of immunotherapy as one of the keystones of the treatment of our patients with cancer, a number of atypical patterns of response to these agents has been identified. These include pseudoprogression, where the tumor initially shows objective growth before decreasing in size, and hyperprogression, hypothesized to be a drug-induced acceleration of the tumor burden. Despite it being >10 years since the first immune-oncology drug was approved, neither the biology behind these paradoxical responses has been well understood, nor their incidence, identification criteria, predictive biomarkers, or clinical impact have been fully described. Immune-based Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (iRECIST) guidelines have been published as a revision to the RECIST V.1.1 criteria for use in trials of immunotherapeutics, and the iRECIST subcommittee (of the RECIST Working Group) is working on elucidating these aspects, with data sharing a current major challenge to move forward with this unmet need in immuno-oncology., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Complementary medicines (CM) are frequently used by patients with cancer. Controversy exists over the effectiveness and risk that CM may add to conventional cancer therapy. The incidence of CM use among patients enrolled in phase III clinical trials is unknown., Methods: Medication lists from 6 international phase III clinical trials were retrospectively reviewed to identify patients using CM. Patients had metastatic breast, colorectal, or lung cancers. Quality of life, adverse events, overall survival, and progression-free survival were compared between CM users and non-users. Baseline differences between groups were adjusted with propensity score matching groups., Results: Seven hundred and six of 3446 patients (20.5%) used at least one CM. CM use was highest among patients with breast cancer (35.6%). CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors (ECOG 0-1, non-smoking status, younger age, and fewer metastases). CM use was associated with lower rates of adverse events (50% vs. 62%, P = .002) and quality of life was similar between both groups. After adjustment with propensity score matching, CM use was also associated with longer overall survival in patients with lung cancer (adjusted hazard ratio 0.80, 95%CI, 0.68-0.94, P =.0054). However, several key control variables like EGFR status were not available., Conclusion: One in 5 patients in phase III clinical trials report using CM. CM was not associated with worse cancer-specific outcomes. However, CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors, and likely other confounders that may have contributed to improved outcomes observed in the lung cohort. Physicians should monitor for CM use and potential interactions with clinical trial drugs., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Introduction: First-line therapy for patients with metastatic NSCLC includes checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy, dual checkpoint inhibition, or combination with chemotherapy. We compared outcomes with combination chemoimmunotherapy versus dual checkpoint inhibition as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic NSCLC., Methods: This open-label, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 44 sites in Canada and Australia. Patients with treatment-naive, metastatic NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK alterations were randomized (1:1) to receive treatment with durvalumab plus tremelimumab with or without platinum-doublet chemotherapy. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were progression-free survival, overall response rate, and safety., Results: A total of 301 patients were randomized. Median OS was 16.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.6-19.1) with chemotherapy plus immunotherapy and 14.1 months (95% CI: 10.6-18.3) with immunotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.88, 90% CI: 0.67-1.16, p = 0.46). Median progression-free survival with chemotherapy plus immunotherapy was 7.7 months (95% CI: 5.5-8.5) and 3.2 months (95% CI: 2.7-5.1) with immunotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52-0.88). The overall response rate with chemoimmunotherapy was 42.4% and 29.3% with immunotherapy (adjusted OR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.04-2.76). The percentage of patients with grade 3 or higher adverse events was 82% in the chemotherapy plus immunotherapy group and 70% in the immunotherapy group. Exploratory analyses of programmed death-ligand 1 expression and blood-based tumor mutation burden revealed no differential treatment effect on OS., Conclusions: The addition of chemotherapy to durvalumab plus tremelimumab in the first-line treatment of stage IV NSCLC did not improve survival compared with durvalumab plus tremelimumab alone. Further study is warranted to identify patients that benefit from initial immunotherapy alone versus combination chemotherapy plus immunotherapy as first-line treatment., (Copyright © 2021 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Recent advances in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) treatments necessitate a better understanding of real-world health utility scores (HUS) in patients treated under current standards to facilitate robust pharmaco-economic assessments., Methods: In this single institution cohort observational study, HUS were evaluated in patients with SCLC through EQ-5D questionnaires at outpatient visits (encounters). In addition, patients completed questionnaires relating to treatment toxicities and cancer symptoms. Clinical and pathological variables were abstracted from electronic medical records and disease status at each patient visit was documented. The impact of these variables on HUS were explored., Results: There were 282 clinical encounters (12% newly diagnosed; 37% stable on treatment; 22% progressing on treatment; 29% stable off therapy/other) in 111 SCLC patients (58% male; 64% extensive stage (ES) SCLC). At the first encounter 29% of patients had an ECOG performance status (PS) ≥ 2. ES-SCLC, bone metastases, female sex, progressive disease and/or PS were each significantly associated with decreased HUS in multivariable analyses. Patients clinically stable on first line therapy had generally steady HUS longitudinally, with differences in HUS between limited disease (LD) and ES patients emerging as treatment progressed. Decreased HUS were associated with increased severity of the majority of measured symptoms (fatigue/tiredness, loss of appetite, pain, drowsiness, shortness of breath, anxiety, depression, and overall well-being; each p<0.001), supporting the value of EQ-5D-derived HUS in assessing health utility., Conclusion: Our HUS values in chemotherapy-treated SCLC are clinically relevant and are associated with specific clinico-demographic, symptom and toxicity factors., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Overall survival (OS) for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) in vulnerable subgroups remains poorly understood with scarce data available to guide treatment decisions. The study describes real-world detailed treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with advanced MPM overall and specifically in elderly and poor performance status (PS) patients., Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed for all patients with histologically confirmed MPM seen at University Health Network/Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (UHN-PM)., Results: A total of 667 patients with MPM were identified and 304 advanced-disease MPM (aMPM) patients had continuing care at UHN-PM (UP-cohort). In the UP-cohort, 77% of patients received ≥ one line of systemic treatment. Systemic therapy trial participation was 39%. Patients not treated with systemic therapy (29%) were more likely to be ≥ 75 years and PS ≥ 2. Median OS was 15.3 months (95%CI 13.6-18.3), with longer survival in treated vs. untreated patients (17.4 vs. 10.6 months; P = .01). Longer survival with systemic treatment was seen in patients ≥75 years (12.7 vs. 6.6 months) and patients with poor PS (9.1 vs. 5.9 months). Median progression-free-survival (PFS) and OS for patients treated with second-line therapy was poor (3.0 and 8.9 months, respectively)., Discussion: In our real-world analysis of patients with aMPM treated at an academic referral centre, systemic treatment was given to the majority of patients and benefit was seen even in the elderly and poor PS patients frequently underrepresented in clinical trials. Trial participation was potentially facilitated by the formation of a dedicated multidisciplinary MPM clinic., Competing Interests: Disclosure Sabine Schmid: Advisory (institutional): Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, BMS; Research grants (institutional): BMS, Astra Zeneca; Travel support: Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD Adrian Sacher: Consulting, Advisory Boards: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Genentech-Roche, BMS, KisoJi; Honoraria & Sponsored CME/Symposia: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Merck, Genentech-Roche, Bayer, BMS, Pfizer, Tesaro, KisoJi, Iovance, Galvanize Therapeutics; Sponsored Research: AstraZeneca, Genentech imCORE Marc de Perrot: Speaker's bureau: Bayer; Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, Actelion Penelope Bradbury: Financial- Honoraria: Merck; Advisory Board: Boehringer Ingelheim; Advisory Boards without financial remuneration: Abbvie, BMS, AstraZeneca Geoffrey Liu: Honoraria/Advisory: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Takeda, Novartis, Abbvie, Bayer, Roche; Speaker's bureau: AstraZeneca, Takeda, EMD Serono; Grants (to institution): AstraZeneca, Takeda, Boehringer Ingerheim. None for LZ, KD, KK, MC, MH, DP, FZ, NL, RF, FS, LD, JC, (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Standard molecular testing for patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the Canadian publicly funded health system includes single gene testing for EGFR, ALK, and ROS-1. Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) may broaden treatment options for patients. This study examined the impact of CGP in a publicly funded health system., Methods: Consenting patients with stage IV NSCLC without known targetable alterations underwent CGP on diagnostic samples. Patients that had progressed on targeted therapy were also eligible. The CGP assay was a hybrid capture next generation sequencing (NGS) panel (Oncomine Comprehensive Assay Version 3, ThermoFisher). The number of actionable alterations, changes in treatment, clinical trial eligibility and costs as a result of CGP were evaluated and patient willingness-to-pay., Results: Of 182 screened patients,134 (74%) had successful CGP testing. Twenty percent had received prior targeted therapy. Incremental actionable alterations were identified in 31% of patients. The most common novel targets identified were mutations in ERBB2 (exon 20 insertions), MET (exon 14 skipping) and KRAS (G12C). At data cut off (31/12/2020), 16% of patients had a change in treatment as a result of CGP. Additional clinical trial options were identified for 75% of patients. The incremental direct laboratory cost for CGP beyond public reimbursement for single gene tests was $747 CAD/case., Conclusion: CGP identifies additional actionable targets beyond single gene tests with a direct impact on patient treatment and increased clinical trial eligibility. These benefits highlight the value of CGP in patients with NSCLC in public health systems., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Introduction: In addition to the higher prevalence of EGFR mutations found among lung cancer cases in East Asian patients, it is unclear whether there are differences in treatment outcomes by ethnicity-that is, East Asian versus non-East Asian., Methods: Patients diagnosed with EGFR-mutant lung cancer between January 2004 and October 2014 at a single center were reviewed. Data captured included demographics, tumor and treatment information, and survival. Survival of patients of East Asian and non-East Asian ancestry was compared, including in the subgroup that received EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) for advanced disease and in those with early-stage disease that underwent surgical resection., Results: A total of 348 patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC were identified. There was a higher proportion of nonsmokers among those of East Asian ethnicity. No significant difference in survival was seen between patients of East Asian and non-East Asian ethnicity, median 6.7 years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.4-not applicable) and 5.4 years (95% CI: 4.1-7.2), respectively ( p  = 0.09). Among 196 patients that received treatment with EGFR TKI, the median survival from TKI initiation was also similar for those of East Asian and non-East Asian ethnicity, 3.0 years (95% CI: 2.1-3.5) and 2.7 years (95% CI: 2.2-3.5), respectively. Among the early-stage patients that underwent surgical resection (n = 163), those of East Asian ethnicity had similar median recurrence-free survival from surgery compared with non-East Asian patients, 5.3 years (95% CI: 3.5-not applicable) and 5.1 years (95% CI: 3.3-7.2), respectively., Conclusions: In a cohort of patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancer with access to uniform standards of care, East Asian ethnicity was not associated with improved survival after treatment with EGFR TKI or surgical resection., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Introduction: The addition of durvalumab after chemoradiation therapy (CRT) in unresectable stage III NSCLC significantly improves survival. The benefit of this approach in elderly patients is controversial given the toxicity associated with CRT and, thus, may be underutilized. We sought to investigate the outcomes of elderly patients treated with CRT without or without durvalumab at our center., Methods: We reviewed all stage III patients with NSCLC treated with CRT between 2018 and 2020. Patients were analyzed on the basis of age: less than 70 years and 70 years and older. The end points evaluated were treatment patterns, toxicity, progression-free survival, and overall survival., Results: The baseline characteristics including Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and comorbidities were similar among the 115 patients (44 elderly, 71 young). Completion rates of CRT (100%, 97%) and chemotherapy dose intensity (97%, 97%) were high in elderly and young patients, respectively. There was a trend toward increased hospitalizations in elderly patients because of infections (27% versus 13%, p  = 0.08). Of those who did not have primary progression after CRT, 78% of eldery and 81% of young patients received durvalumab. The incidence of grade 3 or higher immune-related adverse events was 9% in elderly and 6% in young patients ( p  = 0.67). The median progression-free survival was similar (15.6 versus 10.5 mo, p  = 0.10), even after adjusting for comorbidities (hazard ratio = 0.6, p  = 0.09). The 12-month overall survival rates were 78% in the elderly and 76% in young patients ( p  = 0.98)., Conclusions: Well-selected elderly patients can be treated safely with CRT followed by durvalumab with similar survival benefits compared with their younger counterparts. We would advocate for the referral of all elderly patients for oncologic assessment to avoid undertreatment., (© 2021 THE AUTHORS.)

Background: Systemic inflammatory response (SIR) may influence prognosis in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated (m) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Pretreatment SIR markers (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR], platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio [LMR], lactate dehydrogenase [LDH], and lung immune prognostic index [LIPI]) were assessed as prognostic factors in NSCLC survival., Patients and Methods: Retrospective survival analysis (overall survival [OS] and progression-free survival [PFS]) of EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre were performed separately for early (I-IIIa) and late (IIIb-IV) stage disease for individual SIR variables, dichotomized by optimal cutoff points by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling. A systematic review and meta-analysis of known SIR studies in patients with late-stage EGFR-mutated were also performed., Results: From 2012 to 2019, in 530 patients, significant adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) for OS comparing high versus low NLR were 2.12 for early stage and 1.79 for late stage disease. Additionally, late stage cohorts had significant associations, as follows: high versus low derived NLR, aHR = 1.53; LMR, aHR = 0.62; LDH, aHR = 2.04; and LIPI, aHR = 2.04. Similar patterns were found for PFS in early stage NLR (aHR = 1.96) and late stage NLR (aHR = 1.46), while for PFS, only late stage derived NLR (aHR = 1.34), LDH (aHR = 1.75), and LIPI (aHR = 1.66) were significant. A meta-analysis confirmed that NLR, LMR, LDH, and LIPI were all significantly associated with OS and PFS in the late stage., Conclusion: This primary study and meta-analysis demonstrated that LMR and LDH were significantly associated with late stage EGFR-mutated NSCLC outcomes, and the LIPI scoring system was prognostic. NLR remained an independent prognostic factor across all stages and could represent an early marker of immuno-oncology interactions., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Approximately 20% of patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a history of prior (non-lung) cancer. Patients with prior cancer are frequently excluded from clinical trials. We aimed to assess the potential impact of prior cancer on commonly used clinical trial endpoints., Materials and Methods: Clinical trials of systemic therapy for incurable NSCLC from clinicaltrials.gov were reviewed to determine the frequency of exclusion on the basis of prior cancer. A cohort of patients with incurable NSCLC and prior cancer, treated with first-line systemic treatment at our institution were reviewed as a surrogate clinical trial population. A list of priori events was developed to capture the potential for prior cancer to negatively affect clinical trial conduct or endpoints. The proportions of patients that developed an outcome were assessed., Results: Among trials registered on clinicaltrials.gov, 66% listed prior cancer in the eligibility criteria, and of these 35% excluded patients with prior cancer in the last 5 years. Of NSCLC patients treated with systemic therapy at Princess Margaret Cancer Center, 20% had prior cancer, of these, breast (20%) and prostate (19%) were the most common malignancies. Median time between prior cancer and NSCLC was 82 months. Median survival was 20 months. For patients without evidence of active prior cancer at baseline, and not on active therapy for prior cancer, no patients had evidence of a recurrence of prior cancer during the treatment and follow-up for the NSCLC, nor died from prior cancer. However, two patients developed new primaries., Conclusions: A history of prior cancer has a low likelihood of impacting clinical trial endpoints in patients with incurable NSCLC, if not active or requiring treatment. These findings should be validated in larger data sets., (© 2021 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: MEK inhibition is a potential therapeutic strategy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This phase I study evaluates the MEK inhibitor binimetinib plus carboplatin and pemetrexed in stage IV non-squamous NSCLC patients (NCT02185690)., Methods: A standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was used. Binimetinib 30 mg BID (dose level 1 [DL1]) or 45 mg BID (dose level 2 [DL2]) was given with standard doses of carboplatin and pemetrexed using an intermittent dosing schedule. The primary outcome was determination of the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) and safety of binimetinib. Secondary outcomes included efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and an exploratory analysis of response based on mutation subtype., Results: Thirteen patients (6 DL1, 7 DL2) were enrolled: 7 KRAS, 5 EGFR, and 1 NRAS mutation. The RP2D was binimetinib 30 mg BID. Eight patients (61.5%) had grade 3/4 adverse events, with dose limiting toxicities in 2 patients at DL2. Twelve patients were evaluated for response, with an investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) of 50% (95% CI 21.1%-78.9%; ORR 33.3% by independent-review, IR), and disease control rate 83.3% (95% CI 51.6%-97.9%). Median progression free survival (PFS) was 4.5 months (95% CI 2.6 months-NA), with a 6-month and 12-month PFS rate of 38.5% (95% CI 19.3%-76.5%) and 25.6% (95% CI 8.9%-73.6%), respectively. In an exploratory analysis, KRAS/NRAS-mutated patients had an ORR of 62.5% (ORR 37.5% by IR) vs. 25% in KRAS/NRAS wild-type patients. In MAP2K1-mutated patients, the ORR was 42.8%., Conclusion: The addition of binimetinib to carboplatin and pemetrexed appears to have manageable toxicity with evidence of activity in advanced non-squamous NSCLC., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is low among EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), although prolonged responses have occasionally been reported. We investigated the association between mutation subtypes and ICI outcomes among HER2- and EGFR-mutated NSCLC., Patients and Methods: This retrospective single-center study analyzed patients with EGFR- and HER2-mutated advanced NSCLC who received at least 1 cycle of ICI between 2013 and 2019. Patient characteristics, mutation subtype, and ICI outcomes., Results: Among 48 patients with advanced NSCLC, 14 (29%) had HER2 mutations and 34 (71%) had EGFR mutations. EGFR mutations included 16 (47%) exon 19 deletion, 7 (21%) L858R, 5 (15%) uncommon, and 6 (18%) exon 20 insertion. Compared to EGFR-sensitizing mutations (ESMs), HER2 and EGFR exon 20 mutations were associated with a trend toward better response (respectively, ESM, HER2, and EGFR exon 20: 11%, 29%, and 50%; P = .07) and significantly better disease control rates (respectively, 18%, 57%, and 67%; P = .008). Compared to ESM, HER2 mutations (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.35; P = .02) and EGFR exon 20 mutations (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.37; P = .10 trend) were also associated with improved PFS. Programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression remained an independent predictor of PFS (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.76; P = .004). The 6-month PFS rates were 29% (HER2), 33% (EGFR exon 20), and 4% (ESM). ICIs were generally well tolerated in this population. Importantly, no immune-related toxicity was observed in 10 patients who received a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) as the immediate next line treatment after ICI., Conclusion: HER2 and EGFR exon 20 mutations derive greater benefit from ICIs with comparable PFS to wild-type historical second/third-line unselected cohorts. ICIs remain a treatment option for this genomic subgroup, given the absence of approved targeted therapies for these rare mutations., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have excellent systemic activity and are standard first line treatment in EGFR/ALK wild type metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, their role in patients with brain metastases, which affects over 20% of patients and cause significant morbidity, is less clear., Methods: We reviewed patients with EGFR/ALK wild-type mNSCLC with CNS metastases. Serial MRIs were reviewed to determine the time to intracranial progression (iPFS). Multivariate regression was performed to adjust for the disease-specific graded prognostic score (ds-GPA)., Results: We identified 36 ICI- and 33 chemotherapy-treated patients with baseline CNS metastases and available serial MRIs (average frequency:3.5 months). Baseline radiation was given except for 2 chemotherapy-treated patients with asymptomatic solitary metastasis. The CNS burden of disease was higher in the ICI-treated group (ICI:22% vs. chemotherapy:0% had >10 lesions; p = 0.02), but the utilization of WBRT was not (ICI:31% vs. chemotherapy:45%; p = 0.09). At the time of progression, CNS involvement was identified in 30 % of ICI-treated patients compared to 64 % of chemotherapy controls (p = 0.02). ICI-treated patients had superior iPFS (13.5 vs 8.4 months) that remained significant in multivariate analysis (HR 1.9; 95%CI 1.1--3.4). Superior CNS outcomes in ICI-treated patients were driven by the PD-L1 high subgroup where the 12-month cumulative incidence rate of CNS progression was 19% in ICI-treated PD-L1 ≥ 50%, 50% in ICI-treated PD-L1 < 50% and 58% in chemotherapy-treated patients (p = 0.03)., Conclusions: Remarkable CNS disease control is seen with baseline RT plus ICIs in patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50%. Strategies for delaying WBRT should be investigated in this subgroup of patients., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis is routine for genotyping of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, early response assessment using plasma ctDNA has yet to be well characterized., Materials and Methods: Patients with advanced EGFR -mutant NSCLC across three phase I NCI osimertinib combination trials were analyzed in this study, and an institutional cohort of patients with KRAS- , EGFR- , and BRAF -mutant advanced NSCLC receiving systemic treatment was used for validation. Plasma was collected before treatment initiation and serially before each cycle of therapy, and key driver mutations in ctDNA were characterized by droplet digital polymerase chain reaction. Timing of plasma versus imaging response was compared in a separate cohort of patients with EGFR -mutant NSCLC treated with osimertinib. Across cohorts, we also studied ctDNA variability before treatment start., Results: In the NCI cohort, 14/16 (87.5%) patients exhibited ≥ 90% decrease in mutation abundance by the first on-treatment timepoint (20-28 days from treatment start) with minimal subsequent change. Similarly, 47/56 (83.9%) patients with any decrease in the institutional cohort demonstrated ≥ 90% decrease in mutation abundance by the first follow-up draw (7-30 days from treatment start). All 16 patients in the imaging cohort with radiographic partial response showed best plasma response within one cycle, preceding best radiographic response by a median of 24 weeks (range: 3-147 weeks). Variability in ctDNA levels before treatment start was observed., Conclusion: Plasma ctDNA response is an early phenomenon, with the majority of change detectable within the first cycle of therapy. These kinetics may offer an opportunity for early insight into treatment effect before standard imaging timepoints., (© 2021 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly fatal disease associated with significant morbidity, with a need for real-world symptom and health utility score (HUS) data. HUS can be measured using an EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, however most captured data is available in non-SCLC (NSCLC) only. As new treatment regimens become available in SCLC it becomes important to understand factors which influence health-related quality of life and health utility., Methods: A prospective observational cohort study (2012-2017) of ambulatory histologically confirmed SCLC evaluated patient-reported EQ-5D-5L-derived HUS, toxicity and symptoms. A set of NSCLC patients was used to compare differential factors affecting HUS. Clinical and demographic factors were evaluated for differential interactions between lung cancer types. Comorbidity scores were documented for each patient., Results: In 75 SCLC and 150 NSCLC patients, those with SCLC had lower mean HUS ((SCLC vs NSCLC: mean 0.69 vs 0.79); (p < 0.001)) when clinically stable and with progressive disease: ((SCLC mean HUS = 0.60 vs NSCLC mean HUS = 0.77), (p = 0.04)). SCLC patients also had higher comorbidity scores ((1.11 vs 0.73); (p < 0.015)). In multivariable analyses, increased symptom severity and comorbidity scores decreased HUS in both SCLC and NSCLC (p < 0.001); however, only comorbidity scores differentially affected HUS (p < 0.0001), with a greater reduction of HUS adjusted per unit of comorbidity in SCLC., Conclusion: Patients with advanced SCLC had significantly lower HUS than NSCLC. Both patient cohorts are impacted by symptoms and comorbidity, however, comorbidity had a greater negative effect in SCLC patients.

Background: A novel approach for managing malignant pleural mesothelioma, surgery for mesothelioma after radiotherapy (SMART), consisting of a short accelerated course of high-dose, hemithoracic, intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) followed by extrapleural pneumonectomy was developed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical feasibility of the SMART protocol., Methods: In this single-centre, phase 2 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, with histologically proven, resectable, cT1-3N0M0 disease who had previously untreated malignant pleural mesothelioma were eligible for inclusion. Patients received 25 Gy in five daily fractions over 1 week to the entire ipsilateral hemithorax with a concomitant 5 Gy boost to high risk areas followed by extrapleural pneumonectomy within 1 week. Adjuvant chemotherapy was offered to patients with ypN+ disease on final pathology. The primary endpoint was feasibility, which was defined as the number of patients with 30-day perioperative treatment-related death (grade 5 events) or morbidity (grade 3 or 4 events). A key secondary endpoint was cumulative incidence of distant recurrence. The final analysis was done on an intention-to-treat basis (including all eligible patients). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00797719., Findings: Between Nov 1, 2008, and Oct 31, 2019, 102 patients were enrolled onto the trial and 96 eligible patients were treated with SMART on protocol and included in the analysis. Extrapleural pneumonectomy was done at a median of 5 days (range 2-12) after completing IMRT. 47 (49%) patients had 30-day perioperative grade 3-4 events and one (1%) patient died within 30 days perioperatively (grade 5 event; pneumonia). After a median follow-up of 46·8 months (IQR 13·4-61·2), the 5-year cumulative incidence of distant recurrence was 62 (63·3% [95% CI 52·3-74·4]). The most common first sites of recurrence were the contralateral chest (33 [46%] of 72 patients) and the peritoneal cavity (32 [44%])., Interpretation: Results from this study suggest that extrapleural pneumonectomy after radiotherapy can be done with good early and long-term results. However, minimising grade 4 events on the protocol is technically demanding and might affect survival beyond the post-operative period., Funding: Princess Margaret Hospital Foundation Mesothelioma Research Fund., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The PACIFIC trial demonstrated that durvalumab therapy following chemoradiation (CRT) was associated with improved overall survival (OS) in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). It is unclear whether the results obtained as part of randomised controlled trials are a reflection of real-world (RW) data. Several questions remain unanswered with regard to RW durvalumab use, such as optimal time to durvalumab initiation, incidence of pneumonitis and response in PD-L1 subgroups., Methods: In this multicentre retrospective analysis, 147 patients with stage III NSCLC treated with CRT followed by durvalumab were compared with a historical cohort of 121 patients treated with CRT alone. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of standard prognostic factors for durvalumab use., Results: Median OS was not reached in the durvalumab group, compared with 26.9 months in the historical group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.85, p = 0.001). In the durvalumab group, our data suggest improved 12-month OS in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% (100% vs 86%, HR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.11-0.58, p = 0.007). There was no difference in OS between patients with a PD-L1 expression of 1-49% and patients with PD-L1 expression <1%. Delay in durvalumab initiation beyond 42 days did not impact OS. Incidence of pneumonitis was similar in the durvalumab and historical groups. In the durvalumab group, patients who experienced any-grade pneumonitis had a lower 12-month OS than patients without pneumonitis (85% vs 95%, respectively; HR: 3.3, 95% CI: 1.2-9.0, p = 0.006)., Conclusions: This multicentre analysis suggests that PD-L1 expression ≥50% was associated with favourable OS in patients with stage III NSCLC treated with durvalumab after CRT, whereas the presence of pneumonitis represented a negative prognostic factor., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement B.R., H.B. and A.E. report grant support from AstraZeneca. The additional authors have no conflict of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (tkis) have dramatically improved the survival of patients with ALK -rearranged ( ALK +) non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc). Clinical trial data can generally compare drugs in a pair-wise fashion. Real-world collection of health utility data, symptoms, and toxicities allows for the direct comparison between multiple tki therapies in the population with ALK + nsclc., Methods: In a prospective cohort study, outpatients with ALK + recruited between 2014 and 2018, treated with a variety of tkis, were assessed every 3 months for clinico-demographic, patient-reported symptom and toxicity data and EQ-5D-derived health utility scores (hus)., Results: In 499 longitudinal encounters of 76 patients with ALK + nsclc, each tki had stable longitudinal hus when disease was controlled, even after months to years: the mean overall hus for each tki ranged from 0.805 to 0.858, and longitudinally from 0.774 to 0.912, with higher values associated with second- or third-generation tkis of alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib. Disease progression was associated with a mean hus decrease of 0.065 (95% confidence interval: 0.02 to 0.11). Health utility scores were inversely correlated to multiple symptoms or toxicities: rho values ranged from -0.094 to -0.557. Fewer symptoms and toxicities were associated with the second- and third-generation tkis compared with crizotinib. In multivariable analysis, only stable disease state and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were associated with improved hus., Conclusions: There was no significant decrease in hus when patients with ALK + disease were treated longitudinally with each tki, as long as patients were clinically stable. Alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib had the best toxicity profiles and exhibited high mean hus longitudinally in the real-world setting., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES We have read and understood Current Oncology’s policy on disclosing conflicts of interest, and we declare the following interests: GL has received honoraria or research funding from Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda. AGS is a consultant or advisor, has received honoraria, or has participated in clinical trials with AstraZeneca, Amgen, Merck, Pfizer, Bayer, Genentech–Roche, KisoJi Biotechnology, Bristol Myers Squibb, Tesaro, Spectrum, and GlaxoSmithKline. The remaining authors have no conflicts to disclose., (2020 Multimed Inc.)

Background The IND.226 study was a phase Ib study to determine the recommended phase II dose of durvalumab + tremelimumab in combination with standard platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Sequential administration of multiple agents increases total chair time adding costs overall and inconvenience for patients. This cohort of the IND.226 study evaluated the safety and tolerability of durvalumab + tremelimumab given either sequentially (SEQ) or concurrently (CON). Methods Patients with advanced solid tumours were enrolled and randomised to either SEQ tremelimumab 75 mg IV over 1 h followed by durvalumab 1500 mg IV over 1 h q4wks on the same day, or CON administration over 1 h. The serum pharmacokinetic profile of SEQ versus CON of durvalumab and tremelimumab administration was also evaluated. Results 14 patients either received SEQ (n = 7pts) or CON (n = 7 pts). There were no infusion related reactions. Drug related adverse events (AEs) were mainly low grade and manageable, and comparable in frequency between SEQ/CON- fatigue (43%/57%), rash (43%/43%), pruritus (43%/29%) and nausea (14%/29%). One patient in each cohort discontinued treatment due to toxicity. The PK profiles of durvalumab and tremelimumab were similar between CON and SEQ, and to historical reference data. Conclusions Concurrent administration of durvalumab and tremelimumab over 1 h is safe with a comparable PK profile to sequential administration.

Objective: Patient-derived xenografts (PDX) are useful preclinical models to study cancer biology and mechanisms of drug response/resistance, particularly in molecularly targetable tumors. However, PDX engraftment may not be stochastic. We investigated clinical, histological and molecular features associated with PDX engraftment in a large cohort of EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD)., Material and Methods: Samples were collected by different methods from patients at various disease stages and phases of treatment. PDX engraftment was defined as an ability to passage tumors twice in NOD-SCID mice. Uni- and multivariate logistic regression evaluated factors associated with engraftment., Results: Among 138 EGFR-mutated LUAD implanted into NOD-SCID mice, the overall engraftment rate was only 10% (14/138). However, engraftment was significantly higher in specimens from surgical resections or core-needle biopsies collected from metastatic sites (5/5; 100%) or from patients who had progressed on EGFR-inhibitors (7/10; 70%). Engrafted tumors usually showed poor histological differentiation, a solid morphologic pattern, and presence of either EGFR T790 M and/or TP53 mutations., Conclusions: Population level analyses of mutant EGFR-PDX show that these models might not fully recapitulate the inter-patient heterogeneity of EGFR-LUAD. However, mutant EGFR-PDXs may be useful to address key clinical questions, notably development of resistance to EGFR-inhibitors and disease progression to distant metastases., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

This multicenter phase Ib study aimed to establish a recommended phase II dose for durvalumab (Du) ± tremelimumab (Tr) in combination with standard platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Eligible patients were enrolled into one of six dose levels (DL) of Du ± Tr which included concomitant treatment with standard platinum-doublet regimens; (pemetrexed, gemcitabine, etoposide, (each with cisplatin or carboplatin) or nab-paclitaxel (with carboplatin)). Dose escalation was according to a Rolling Six type design. Both weight-based and fixed dosing of Du and Tr were explored. Du was continued until progression. Tr dosing was finite (up to 6 doses) with increasing dose and/or frequency by DL. 136 patients were enrolled. The majority of drug-related adverse events (AEs) were ≤ grade 2 and attributable to chemotherapy. AEs considered related to immunotherapy were mainly ≤ grade 2; the most frequent (occurring ≥10 %) were colitis/diarrhea, skin, and thyroid dysfunction. Seven patients had DLTs including pneumonitis, myocarditis, diarrhea, encephalitis, motor neuropathy, and enterocolitis. There were 2 treatment-related deaths. Tr and Du exposures did not appear affected by chemotherapy. Among the 73 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated, the objective response rate was 51 % (95 %CI = 38.7-62.6 %) with a median progression-free and overall survival of 6.5 months (95 % CI = 5.5-9.4 months) and 19.8 months (95 % CI = 14.8 months - not yet reached) respectively. Anti-tumour activity was observed across PD-L1 subtypes. Du 1500 mg q3w and Tr 75 mg q3wx5 can be safely combined with platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Efficacy among NSCLC patients appears comparable to results from other immunotherapy and chemotherapy combination trials. NCT02537418., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2020.04.30). AZ reports grants and personal fees from BMS, MSD, Roche, and AZ, outside the submitted work. LK reports she was previously (in the last 2 years) an employee of AstraZeneca plc. This was conducted independently from the submitted work. CL reports personal fees from Merck, Brystol-Myers Squibb, Astra Zeneca, and Pfizer, outside the submitted work. GL reports Honoraria from Merck, Pfizer, Novartis, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Serano, Roche, Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Bayer. PB reports Honoraria from Abbvie, Lilly, Merck, Pfizer, advisory boards Abbvie, BI. NL reports institutional research funding outside submitted work from Roche, AZ, Array, Guardant; honoraria and/or travel for independent CME lectures outside submitted work from AZ, BMS, MSD, Roche, Pfizer; Advisor (compensated) for Excovery. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Brahma (BRM), of the SWI/SNF complex, has two 6 to 7 bp insertion promoter polymorphisms (BRM-741/BRM-1321) that cause epigenetic BRM suppression, and are associated with risk of multiple cancers. BRM polymorphisms were genotyped in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) cases and asbestos-exposed controls. Multivariable logistic regression (risk) and Cox regression (prognosis) were performed, including stratified analyses by smoking status to investigate the effect of polymorphisms on MPM risk and prognosis. Although there was no significant association overall between BRM-741/BRM-1321 and risk in patients with MPM, a differential effect by smoking status was observed (P-interaction < .001), where homozygous variants were protective (aOR of 0.18-0.28) in ever smokers, while never smokers had increased risk when carrying homozygous variants (aOR of 2.7-4.4). While there was no association between BRM polymorphisms and OS in ever-smokers, the aHR of carrying homozygous-variants of BRM-741, BRM-1321 or both were 4.0 to 8.6 in never-smokers when compared to wild-type carriers. Mechanistically, lower mRNA expression of BRM was associated with poorer general cancer prognosis. Electrophoretic mobility shift assays and chromatin immunoprecipitation experiments (ChIP) revealed high BRM insertion variant homology to MEF2 regulatory binding sites. ChIP experimentation confirmed MEF2 binding only occurs in the presence of insertion variants. DNA-affinity purification assays revealed YWHA scaffold proteins as vital to BRM mRNA expression. Never-smokers who carry BRM homozygous variants have an increased chance of developing MPM, which results in worse prognosis. In contrast, in ever-smokers, there may be a protective effect, with no difference in overall survival. Mechanisms for the interaction between BRM and smoking require further study., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: In lung cancer, brain metastases (BM) and their treatment are associated with high economic burden and inferior health-related quality of life. In the era of targeted therapy, real world evidence through health utility scores (HUS) is critical for economic analyses., Materials and Methods: In a prospective observational cohort study (2014-2016), outpatients with stage IV lung cancer completed demographic and EQ-5D-3L surveys (to derive HUS). Health states and clinicopathologic variables were obtained from chart abstraction. Patients were categorized by the presence or absence of BM; regression analyses identified factors that were associated with HUS. A subset of patients prospectively completed neurocognitive function (NCF) tests and/or the FACT-brain (FACT-Br) questionnaire, which were then correlated with HUS (Spearman coefficients; regression analyses)., Results: Of 519 patients with 1,686 EQ-5D-3L-derived HUS, 94 (18%) completed NCF tests and 107 (21%) completed FACT-Br; 301 (58%) never developed BM, 24 (5%) developed first BM during study period, and 194 (37%) had BM at study entry. The sample was enriched (46%) for EGFR mutations ( EGFR m) and ALK -rearrangements ( ALK r). There were no HUS differences by BM status overall and in subsets by demographics. In multivariable analyses, superior HUS was associated with having EGFR m/ ALK r ( p < .0001), no prior radiation for extracranial disease ( p < .001), and both intracranial ( p = .002) and extracranial disease control ( p < .01). HUS correlated with multiple elements of the FACT-Br and tests of NCF., Conclusion: Having BM in lung cancer is not associated with inferior HUS in a population enriched for EGFR m and ALK r. Patients exhibiting disease control and those with oncogene-addicted tumors have superior HUS., Implications for Practice: In the setting of EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangement non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a diagnosis of brain metastases no longer consigns the patient to an inferior health state suggesting that new economic analyses in NSCLC are needed in the era of targeted therapies. Additionally, the EQ-5D questionnaire is associated with measures of health-related quality of life and neurocognitive scores suggesting this tool should be further explored in prospective clinical studies., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2019.)

Background: Multimodality therapy with preoperative radiation (RT) followed by extrapleural pneumonectomy (EP) for patients with operable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has demonstrated encouraging results. At relapse, there are few data on the tolerance and efficacy of systemic therapies after prior multimodality therapy., Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with relapsed MPM after RT and EPP ± adjuvant chemotherapy to determine overall survival (OS; date of relapse to death) and the proportion of patients that received systemic therapy and associated response rate (RR). OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and potential prognostic variables were examined., Results: Fifty-three patients were included (2008-2016). Median OS was 4.8 months (median follow-up 4.4 months, range 0.03-34.8). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) ≥2, disease-free interval (DFI) <1 year, and hemoglobin ≤110 g/L at recurrence were associated with worse prognosis. Thirty-six percent of patients received any systemic therapy, whereas it was omitted in 62% because of poor PS. RR was 15% (0 complete responses, 15% partial responses) in 13 individuals with response-evaluable disease. Therapy was discontinued because of toxicity (6/15) or disease progression (5/15), and median number of cycles was four., Conclusion: Patients with relapsed MPM following RT and EPP, especially those with ECOG PS ≥2, DFI <1 year, and hemoglobin ≤110 g/L at recurrence, have poor prognosis and low RR to first-line systemic therapy. Earlier detection and novel diagnostic markers of relapse as well as potential neoadjuvant or adjuvant systemic therapy should be investigated in future studies., Implications for Practice: The results of this study have reinforced the importance of careful selection of appropriate candidates for this combined-modality approach and favor prompt detection of recurrence with early and regular postoperative imaging and biopsy of suspected relapsed disease along with rapid initiation of systemic therapy even in patients with very low burden of disease. Furthermore, with the emergence of new systemic agents targeting different histological subtypes of malignant pleural mesothelioma, histological sampling of recurrence could inform therapeutic decisions in the future., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2018.)

Introduction Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) is a potent inhibitor of MEK1/2, thereby inhibiting phosphorylation of ERK2. We investigated the toxicity and the recommended phase II dose of the combination of selumetinib with two platinum based first line chemotherapy combinations in non-small cell lung cancer. Methods This was a phase I trial of escalating doses of selumetinib with carboplatin (AUC 6), paclitaxel (200 mg/m 2 ) (cohort 1) or pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2 ) and cisplatin (75 mg/m 2 ) (cohort 2) in patients with chemotherapy naïve, advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Patients enrolled on cohort 2 had non-squamous histology. Dose escalation of selumetinib proceeded using a 3 + 3 design: 50 mg b.i.d. days 2-19 (dose level 1); 75 mg b.i.d. days 2-19 (dose level 2); and 75 mg b.i.d. continuously. Adverse events were evaluated using CTC AE v4 and response by RECIST 1.1. Results Thirty-nine patients were enrolled (cohort 1 n = 16; cohort 2, n = 23). There were no dose limiting toxicities in either cohort and the recommended phase II dose for both regimens was standard doses of carboplatin, paclitaxel or pemetrexed and cisplatin with continuous selumetinib at a dose of 75 mg b.i.d. Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2 and were predominantly diarrhea, nausea, stomatitis, peripheral edema, neutropenia, and skin rash. Response rate was 37.5% for cohort 1 and 30.4% for cohort 2. Conclusion Selumetinib at a dose of 75 mg b.i.d continuously can be safely combined with paclitaxel and carboplatin or pemetrexed and cisplatin in patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC. This trial provided the dose for the regimens used in a randomized phase II trial in NSCLC (CCTG IND.219).

ENMD-2076, an aurora-A kinase inhibitor with anti-angiogenic properties, has shown activity in solid and hematologic malignancies. We investigated oral ENMD-2076 in an open-label, single-arm phase II study using 275 mg daily on a 28-day cycle in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcomas (STS) receiving ≤1 line of prior therapy. Primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) with ≤15% indicating no interest, and ≥40% indicating further interest in ENMD-2076. Secondary/exploratory endpoints included clinical benefit (CBR ≥6-months) and objective response (ORR) rates, PFS, OS, safety, and whole-exome sequencing (WES) for potentially associated biomarkers. Overall, 23/25 (92%) patients receiving ENMD-2076 were efficacy evaluable with median follow-up of 14 months (range 2.2-39.5). Common subtypes were leiomyosarcoma (n = 10), undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (n = 3), angiosarcoma (n = 3), and alveolar soft-part sarcoma (n = 3). The 6-month PFS was 20.8% (95% CI:3.2-38.4) with a CBR of 17% (95% CI:1.55-33.23) and ORR of 9% (95% CI:3.08-20.46). Median PFS was 2.5 months (95% CI:2.20-4.47) and OS was 14.1 months (95% CI:6.07-20.07). The most common high-grade treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (60%). WES identified PTPRB mutations in 3/4 patients (p = 0.018) benefiting from ENMD-2076. Although this study failed to meet its primary endpoint, occasional responses and prolonged stable disease was noted. ENMD-2076 evaluation in PTPRB mutated tumors and/or angiosarcoma is warranted.

Background: Peripheral blood sampling for detection of EGFR T790M in cell-free circulating tumour (ct) DNA in TKI-resistant EGFR mutant (EGFRm) lung cancer is now standard. The value of more comprehensive sequencing is unknown., Methods: Prospective ctDNA analysis in patients with EGFRm NSCLC was performed using a next generation sequencing (NGS) panel of regions of 11 genes detecting single nucleotide variants and small insertions/deletions at ≥0.1% variant allele frequency (VAF) was performed. Patients were grouped according to treatment phase, including: (A) pre EGFR-TKI, (B) stable or responding to EGFR-TKI, (C) radiographic progression during EGFR-TKI, and (D) during chemotherapy treatment., Results: Seventy-two patients with stage IV EGFRm NSCLC were enrolled and first blood samples were analysed. Primary sensitizing mutations in del19 or L858R were present in 66 (92%) and uncommon EGFRm in 6 (8%). Mutations in ctDNA were found in 53 samples (74%). T790M was detected in 3 of 4 patients with T790M-negative tissue. Other co-occurring EGFRm were found in 10 patients (7%) including K745R during first-line osimertinib. TP53 (n = 10), KRAS (n = 1), PI3KCA (n = 1) and ALK (n = 3) gene mutations also were detected. The presence of an EGFRm (excluding T790M) was associated with untreated or progressive disease, p = 0.04. In TKI-treated patients without radiologic progression, median progression free survival (PFS) was 10 months versus 2.1 months (HR 2.22, 95% CI: 0.89-5.54, p = 0.08) if an EGFRm in ctDNA was detected. If T790M was present in ctDNA, median PFS was 3.0 months versus 9.7 months (HR 4.59, 95% CI: 1.43-14.73, p = 0.005). High % VAF of both EGFRm and T790M correlated with inferior PFS (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03 respectively)., Conclusion: In addition to the emergence of resistance mutations, the presence of the primary or co-occurring EGFRm in patients receiving EGFR-TKIs may associate with shorter PFS and may be useful in longitudinal analyses of ctDNA to direct therapy., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: KRAS and TP53 are common mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The Lung Adjuvant Cisplatin Evaluation Biological Program group found adjuvant chemotherapy to be deleterious in patients with coexisting KRAS/TP53 mutations., Patients and Methods: To validate these results, patients with NSCLC tested for KRAS and TP53 mutations and receiving chemotherapy for any stage NSCLC were selected. Mutation status was analyzed using next generation sequencing (Illumina) or multiplex recurrent mutation detection (MassARRAY, Agena Biosciences) assays, and was correlated with clinical and demographic data. Disease-free (DFS) or progression-free survival (PFS) was the main endpoint, and overall survival (OS) was the secondary endpoint., Results: Among 218 patients, 28 had coexisting KRAS/TP53 mutations, 77 TP53, 37 KRAS, 76 had neither KRAS nor TP53 mutation (WT/WT). There was no DFS/PFS difference for the KRAS/TP53 group versus all others among 99 patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-2.44; P = .57), 27 stage III patients who received chemo-radiation (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.32-2.38; P = .8), and 63 patients who received palliative chemotherapy (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.31-1.48; P = .33). OS was longer in the WT/WT group compared with any other group (KRAS: HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.02-3.43; P = .043; TP53: HR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.3-3.61; P = .0028; KRAS/TP53: HR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.09-3.88; P = .026). No OS difference was seen for KRAS/TP53 compared with the other groups (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.75-2.13; P = .38)., Conclusions: There was no significant difference in DFS/PFS between the 4 groups. However, OS was longer for patients with TP53 and KRAS wild-type NSCLC who received chemotherapy for any stage compared with patients with KRAS, TP53 mutation, or double mutant tumors., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Economic evaluations are an integral component of many clinical trials. Costs used in those analyses are based on the prices of branded drugs when they first enter the market. The effect of genericization on the cost-effectiveness (ce) or cost-utility (cu) of an intervention is unknown because economic analyses are rarely updated using the costs of generic drugs., Methods: We re-examined the ce or cu of regimens previously evaluated in Canadian Cancer Trials Group (cctg) studies that included prospective economic evaluations and where genericization has occurred or is anticipated in Canada. We incorporated the new costs of generic drugs to characterize changes in ce or cu. We also determined acceptable cost levels of generic drugs that would make regimens reimbursable in a publicly funded health care system., Results: The four randomized controlled trials included (representing 1979 patients) were cctg br.10 (early lung cancer, adjuvant vinorelbine-cisplatin vs. observation, n = 172), cctg br.21 (metastatic lung cancer, erlotinib vs. placebo, n = 731), cctg co.17 (metastatic colon cancer, cetuximab vs. best supportive care, n = 557), and cctg ly.12 (relapsed or refractory lymphoma, gemcitabine-dexamethasone-cisplatin vs. cytarabine-dexamethasone-cisplatin, n = 619). Since the initial publication of those trials, the genericization of vinorelbine, erlotinib, cetuximab, and cisplatin has taken place or is expected in Canada. Costs of generics improved the ces and cus of treatment significantly. For example, genericization of erlotinib ($1460.25 per 30 days) resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (icer) of $45,746 per life-year gained compared with $94,638 for branded erlotinib. Likewise, genericization of cetuximab ($275.80 per 100 mg) produced an icer of $261,126 per quality-adjusted life-year (qaly) gained compared with $299,613 for branded cetuximab. Decreases in the cost of generic cetuximab to $129.39 and $63.51 would further improve the icer to $150,000 and $100,000 per QALY respectively., Conclusions: Genericization of a costly oncology drug can modify the ce and cu of a regimen significantly. Failure to revisit economic analyses with the costs of generics could be a missed opportunity for funding bodies to optimize value-based allocation of health care resources. At current levels, the costs of generics might not be sufficiently low to sustain publicly funded health care systems., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES We have read and understood Current Oncology’s policy on disclosing conflicts of interest, and we declare that we have none.