Search

William G North,1 Fuli Liu,1 Konstantin H Dragnev,1,2 Eugene Demidenko3 1Department of Molecular and Systems Biology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA; 2Department of Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA; 3Department of Community and Family Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA Background: Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) has a poor prognosis since there is currently no effective therapy for commonly recurring disease. In our previous study, both primary and recurrent human tumors have been shown to express functional N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, and blockade of these receptors with GluN1 and GluN2B antagonists decreased tumor cell viability in vitro, and growth of tumor xenografts in nu/nu mice. Materials and methods: In this study, we examine the influence of the GluN2B antagonist ifenprodil and the channel-blocker antagonist memantine, on cell viability and growth of tumor xenografts of recurrent SCLC (rSCLC) in mice. Results: Both antagonists significantly reduced cell viability and levels of components of the ERK1/2 pathway, increased apoptosis, and at very safe levels significantly reduced the growth of tumors in mice. Each antagonist and topotecan had additive effects to reduce cell viability with significant synergy demonstrated for the case of memantine. More significantly, combination treatments of xenografts in mice with ifenprodil and the chemotherapeutic agent topotecan produced clear additive effects that completely stopped tumor growth. Moreover, the ifenprodil and topotecan combination showed excellent supra-addition or synergy of inhibition for tumors ≤300 mm in size (P=4.7E−4). Combination treatment of memantine with topotecan also showed clear addition but, unlike ifenprodil, no synergy for the doses chosen. Conclusion: Since topotecan is a drug of choice for treatment of rSCLC, our findings suggest that combining this agent with NMDA receptor blockade using the GluN2B antagonist, ifenprodil, will significantly improve patient outcomes. Keywords: small-cell lung cancer, NMDA receptors, inhibitors, combination therapy

Lung carcinogenesis is a chronic and multi-step process resulting in malignant lung tumors. This progression from normal to neoplastic pulmonary cells or tissues could be arrested or reversed through pharmacologic treatments, which are known as cancer chemoprevention. These therapeutic interventions should reduce or avoid the clinical consequences of lung cancer by treating early neoplastic lesions before the development of clinically evident signs or symptoms of malignancy. Preclinical, clinical, and epidemiologic findings relating to different classes of candidate chemopreventive agents provide strong support for lung cancer prevention as an attractive therapeutic strategy. Smoking prevention and smoking cessation represent an essential approach to reduce the societal impact of tobacco carcinogenesis. However, even if all the goals of the national antismoking efforts were met, there still would be a large population of former smokers who would be at increased risk for lung cancers. Lung cancer also can occur in those persons who never have smoked. This article focuses on what is now known about pharmacologic strategies for lung cancer prevention. Randomized clinical trials using beta-carotene, retinol, isotretinoin or N-acetyl-cysteine did not show benefit for primary and tertiary lung cancer prevention. There is also evidence that the use of beta-carotene and isotretinoin for lung cancer chemoprevention in high-risk individuals may increase the risk for lung cancer, especially in individuals who continue to smoke. There is a need for relevant in vitro models to identify pathways that activate chemopreventive effects in the lung. An improved understanding of cancer prevention mechanisms should aid in the design of clinical trials and in the validation of candidate chemopreventive targets as well as the discovery of new targets. Until such studies are completed, no agent or combination of agents should be used for lung cancer prevention outside of a clinical trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this secondary analysis of specimens from the CANTOS trial, the investigators find that patients with clonal hematopoiesis mutations, particularly in the TET2 gene, predict a benefit of decreased cancer risk with the administration of the anti-IL1β agent canakinumab. Despite small numbers and the need for prospective validation, the findings are exciting as they demonstrate the potential for personalized chemoprevention approaches. Such personalized approaches can potentially enhance the feasibility of cancer prevention trials. See related article by Woo et al., p. 429., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Introduction: Squamous cell cancer (SqCC) is a lung cancer subtype with few targeted therapy options. Molecular characterization, that is, by next-generation sequencing (NGS), is needed to identify potential targets. Lung Cancer Master Protocol Southwest Oncology Group S1400 enrolled patients with previously treated stage IV or recurrent SqCC to assess NGS biomarkers for therapeutic sub-studies., Methods: Tumors underwent NGS using Foundation Medicine's FoundationOne research platform, which sequenced the exons and/or introns of 313 cancer-related genes. Mutually exclusive gene set analysis and Selected Events Linked by Evolutionary Conditions across Human Tumors were performed to identify mutually exclusive and co-occurring gene alterations. Comparisons were performed with data on 495 lung SqCC downloaded from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess associations between genetic variants and survival., Results: NGS data are reported for 1672 patients enrolled on S1400 between 2014 and 2019. Mutually exclusive gene set analysis identified two non-overlapping sets of mutually exclusive alterations with a false discovery rate of less than 15%: NFE2L2, KEAP1, and PARP4; and CDKN2A and RB1. PARP4, a relatively uncharacterized gene, showed three frequent mutations suggesting functional significance: 3116T>C (I1039T), 3176A>G (Q1059R), and 3509C>T (T1170I). When taken together, NFE2L2 and KEAP1 alterations were associated with poorer survival., Conclusions: As the largest dataset to date of lung SqCC profiled on a clinical trial, the S1400 NGS dataset establishes a rich resource for biomarker discovery. Mutual exclusivity of PARP4 and NFE2L2 or KEAP1 alterations suggests that PARP4 may have an uncharacterized role in a key pathway known to impact oxidative stress response and treatment resistance., Competing Interests: Disclosure Dr. Kozono discloses consulting for Vertex and Roche/Genentech and honoraria from RefleXion outside the submitted work. Dr. Tolba discloses employment at Foundation Medicine. Dr. Waqar discloses holding positions on scientific advisory boards for AstraZeneca and Gilead Sciences. Dr. Dragnev discloses receiving institutional research funding from Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, G1 Therapeutics, Merck, Molecular Templates, Novartis, Roche/Genentech. Dr. Cheng discloses receiving honoraria from AstraZeneca, Janssen, G1 Therapeutics, and research grants from AstraZeneca, and Genentech. Dr. Hirsch discloses holding positions on scientific advisory boards for BMS, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, Novartis, AbbVie, Novocure, NextCure, Merus, G1 Therapeutics, Regeneron, none related to this work, and holding patent for EGFR protein and gene copy number as predictive biomarkers for EGFR-directed therapies (through University of Colorado), no royalties. Dr. Mack discloses being a consultant for Amgen, Guardant Health, and Vivance Therapeutics, and receiving honoraria from AbbVie (educational lecture). Dr. Gray discloses being a consultant for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Daiichi Sankyo, EMD Serono – Merck, Gilead Sciences, IDEOlogy Health, Janssen Scientific Affairs, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Loxo Oncology, Merck and Company, Novartis, OncoCyte Biotechnology, Spectrum ODAC, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Triptych Health Partners; research support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, G1 Therapeutics, Ludwig Institute of Cancer Research, Merck and Company, Novartis, Pfizer. Dr. Borghaei discloses receiving research support for clinical trials from BMS, Lilly, Amgen and holding positions on advisory board/consultant for BMS, Lilly, Genentech, Pfizer, Merck, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Genmab, Regeneron, BioNTech, Amgen, Axiom, PharmaMar, Takeda, Mirati, Daiichi Sankyo, Guardant, Natera, Oncocyte, Beigene, iTEO, Jazz, Janssen, Puma, BerGenBio, Bayer, Iobiotech, Grid Therapeutics, holding position on data and safety monitoring board for University of Pennsylvania: CAR T Program, Takeda, Incyte, Novartis, Springworks, holding position on the scientific advisory board for Sonnetbio (stock options), Inspirna (formerly Rgenix, stock options), Nucleai (stock options), and receiving honoraria from Amgen, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Regeneron, travel support from Amgen, BMS, Merck, Lilly, EMD-Serono, Genentech, Regeneron, Mirati. Dr. Herbst discloses holding positions on the board of directors for Immunocore, Junshi Pharmaceuticals, being consultant for AbbVie Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Bolt Biotherapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Candel Therapeutics, Checkpoint Therapeutics, Cybrexa Therapeutics, DynamiCure Biotechnology, eFFECTOR Therapeutics, Eli Lilly and Company, EMD Serono, Genentech, Gilead, HiberCell, I-Mab Biopharma, Immune-Onc Therapeutics, Immunocore, Janssen, Johnson and Johnson, Loxo Oncology, Merck and Company, Mirati Therapeutics, NextCure, Normunity, Novartis, Ocean Biomedical, Oncocyte Corp, Oncternal Therapeutics, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Revelar Biotherapeutics, Ribbon Therapeutics, Roche, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Xencor, receiving research support from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Genentech/Roche, Merck and Company, and holding leadership roles in American Association for Cancer Research, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer, Southwest Oncology Group. Dr. Gandara discloses being a consultant for Adagene (institutional), AstraZeneca (institutional), Guardant Health (institutional), IO Biotech (institutional), Oncocyte (institutional), Oncohost (institutional), Merck (consultant), Roche-Genentech (institutional) and receiving institutional research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Merck. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Neurofibromatosis type 1, a genetic disorder caused by pathogenic germline variations in NF1, predisposes individuals to the development of tumors, including cutaneous and plexiform neurofibromas (CNs and PNs), optic gliomas, astrocytomas, juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia, high-grade gliomas and malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs), which are chemotherapy- and radiation-resistant sarcomas with poor survival. Loss of NF1 also occurs in sporadic tumors, such as glioblastoma (GBM), melanoma, breast, ovarian and lung cancers. We performed a high-throughput screen for compounds that were synthetic lethal with NF1 loss, which identified several leads, including the small molecule Y102. Treatment of cells with Y102 perturbed autophagy, mitophagy and lysosome positioning in NF1-deficient cells. A dual proteomics approach identified BLOC-one-related complex (BORC), which is required for lysosome positioning and trafficking, as a potential target of Y102. Knockdown of a BORC subunit using siRNA recapitulated the phenotypes observed with Y102 treatment. Our findings demonstrate that BORC might be a promising therapeutic target for NF1-deficient tumors., Competing Interests: Competing interests The authors declare no competing or financial interests., (© 2024. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd.)

Clinical trials are essential for advancing oncology treatment strategies and have contributed significantly to the decline in cancer mortality rates over the past decades. Traditional explanatory trials, focused on establishing intervention efficacy in ideal settings, often lack generalizability and may not reflect real-world patient care scenarios. Furthermore, increasing complexity in cancer clinical trial design has led to challenges such as protocol deviations, slow enrollment leading to lengthened durations of trial, and escalating costs. By contrast, pragmatic trials aim to assess intervention effectiveness in more representative patient populations under routine clinical conditions. Here, we review the principles, methodologies, challenges, and advantages of incorporating pragmatic features (PFs) into cancer clinical trials. We illustrate the application of pragmatic trial designs in oncology and discuss the QUASAR collaborative, TAPUR study, and the ongoing PRAGMATICA-LUNG trial. Although not all oncology trials may be amenable to adopting fully pragmatic designs, integration of PFs when feasible will enhance trial generalizability and real-world applicability. Project Pragmatica and similar initiatives advocate for the integration of real-world practice with clinical trials, fostering a nuanced approach to oncology research that balances efficacy and effectiveness assessments, ultimately with a goal of improving patient outcomes.

Therapeutic targeting of RAS-mutated cancers is difficult, whereas prevention or interception (treatment before or in the presence of preinvasive lesions) preclinically has proven easier. In the A/J mouse lung model, where different carcinogens induce tumors with different KRAS mutations, glucocorticoids and retinoid X receptor (RXR) agonists are effective agents in prevention and interception studies, irrespective of specific KRAS mutations. In rat azoxymethane-induced colon tumors (45% KRAS mutations), cyclooxygenase 1/2 inhibitors and difluoromethylornithine are effective in preventing or intercepting KRAS-mutated or wild-type tumors. In two KRAS-mutant pancreatic models multiple COX 1/2 inhibitors are effective. Furthermore, combining a COX and an EGFR inhibitor prevented the development of virtually all pancreatic tumors in transgenic mice. In the N-nitroso-N-methylurea-induced estrogen receptor-positive rat breast model (50% HRAS mutations) various selective estrogen receptor modulators, aromatase inhibitors, EGFR inhibitors, and RXR agonists are profoundly effective in prevention and interception of tumors with wild-type or mutant HRAS, while the farnesyltransferase inhibitor tipifarnib preferentially inhibits HRAS-mutant breast tumors. Thus, many agents not known to specifically inhibit the RAS pathway, are effective in an organ specific manner in preventing or intercepting RAS-mutated tumors. Finally, we discuss an alternative prevention and interception approach, employing vaccines to target KRAS., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Efficacy of MEK inhibitors in KRAS+ NSCLC may differ based on specific KRAS mutations and comutations. Our hypothesis was that docetaxel and trametinib would improve activity in KRAS+ NSCLC and specifically in KRAS G12C NSCLC., Patients and Methods: S1507 is a single-arm phase II study assessing the response rate (RR) with docetaxel plus trametinib in recurrent KRAS+ NSCLC and secondarily in the G12C subset. The accrual goal was 45 eligible patients, with at least 25 with G12C mutation. The design was two-stage design to rule out a 17% RR, within the overall population at the one-sided 3% level and within the G12C subset at the 5% level., Results: Between July 18, 2016, and March 15, 2018, 60 patients were enrolled with 53 eligible and 18 eligible in the G12C cohort. The RR was 34% [95% confidence interval (CI), 22-48] overall and 28% (95% CI, 10-53) in G12C. Median PFS and OS were 4.1 and 3.3 months and 10.9 and 8.8 months, overall and in the subset, respectively. Common toxicities were fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, rash, anemia, mucositis, and neutropenia. Among 26 patients with known status for TP53 (10+ve) and STK11 (5+ve), OS (HR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.16-7.01), and RR (0% vs. 56%, P = 0.004) were worse in patients with TP53 mutated versus wild-type cancers., Conclusions: RRs were significantly improved in the overall population. Contrary to preclinical studies, the combination showed no improvement in efficacy in G12C patients. Comutations may influence therapeutic efficacy of KRAS directed therapies and are worthy of further evaluation. See related commentary by Cantor and Aggarwal, p. 3563., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Lung Cancer Master Protocol (Lung-MAP), a public-private partnership, established infrastructure for conducting a biomarker-driven master protocol in molecularly targeted therapies. We compared characteristics of patients enrolled in Lung-MAP with those of patients in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) trials to examine if master protocols improve trial access., Methods: We examined patients enrolled in Lung-MAP (2014-2020) according to sociodemographic characteristics. Proportions for characteristics were compared with those for a set of advanced NSCLC trials (2001-2020) and the US advanced NSCLC population using SEER registry data (2014-2018). Characteristics of patients enrolled in Lung-MAP treatment substudies were examined in subgroup analysis. Two-sided tests of proportions at an alpha of .01 were used for all comparisons., Results: A total of 3,556 patients enrolled in Lung-MAP were compared with 2,215 patients enrolled in other NSCLC studies. Patients enrolled in Lung-MAP were more likely to be 65 years and older (57.2% v 46.3%; P < .0001), from rural areas (17.3% v 14.4%; P = .004), and from socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods (42.2% v 36.7%, P < .0001), but less likely to be female (38.6% v 47.2%; P < .0001), Asian (2.8% v 5.1%; P < .0001), or Hispanic (2.4% v 3.8%; P = .003). Among patients younger than 65 years, Lung-MAP enrolled more patients using Medicaid/no insurance (27.6% v 17.8%; P < .0001). Compared with the US advanced NSCLC population, Lung-MAP under represented patients 65 years and older (57.2% v 69.8%; P < .0001), females (38.6% v 46.0%; P < .0001), and racial or ethnic minorities (14.8% v 21.5%; P < .0001)., Conclusion: Master protocols may improve access to trials using novel therapeutics for older patients and socioeconomically vulnerable patients compared with conventional trials, but specific patient exclusion criteria influenced demographic composition. Further research examining participation barriers for under represented racial or ethnic minorities in precision medicine clinical trials is warranted.

There are major hurdles to the use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and any other agents with significant toxicities (which means practically the preponderance of potential effective agents) in the context of prevention/anti-progression (interception) studies. We will discuss epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors as examples, both in a primary prevention setting, where agent(s) are administered to individuals with no cancer but who might be considered at higher risk due to a variety of factors, and in anti-progression/interception studies, where agent(s) are administered to persons with known preinvasive lesions (e.g., colon adenomas, lung nodules, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), or pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) lesions in the pancreas) in an attempt to reverse or inhibit progression of these lesions. Multiple potential hurdles will be examined, including: a) toxicity of agents, b) the likely range of subtypes of cancers affected by a given treatment (e.g., EGFR inhibitors against EGFR mutant lung adenocarcinomas), c) the availability of practical endpoints besides the blocking of cancer formation or pharmacokinetics related to the agents administered in a primary prevention study, and d) the interpretation of the regression or blockage of new preinvasive lesions in the anti-progression study. Such an anti-progression approach may help address some of the factors commented on regarding primary prevention (toxicity, potential target organ cancer subtypes) but still leaves major questions regarding interpretation of modulation of preinvasive endpoints when it may not be clear how frequently they progress to clinical cancer. Additionally, we address whether certain recent preclinical findings might be able to reduce the toxicities associated with these agents and perhaps even increase their potential efficacy. Antibodies and TKIs other than the EGFR inhibitors are not discussed because few if any had been tested as monotherapies in humans, making their efficacy harder to predict, and because a number have relatively rare but quite striking toxicities. Furthermore, most of the practical hurdles raised regarding the EGFR inhibitors are relevant to the other TKIs. Finally, we briefly discuss whether early detection employing blood or serum samples may allow identification of high-risk groups more amenable to agents with greater toxicity., Competing Interests: KHD has received research funding to the institution from Roche/Genentech, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Amgen, Merck, Molecular Templates, Io Therapeutics. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Dragnev, Dragnev and Lubet.)

The neoadjuvant use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is being increasingly adopted, but questions about the most appropriate applications remain. Although patients with resectable NSCLC are often treated with surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy or targeted therapies +/- radiotherapy, they still have a high risk of recurrence and death. In recent years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) (anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and anti-CTLA-4) have provided a new and effective therapeutic strategy for the treatment of advanced NSCLC. Therefore, it is possible that ICIs for early-stage NSCLC may follow the pattern established in metastatic disease. Currently, there are several ongoing trials to determine the efficacy in the neoadjuvant setting for patients with local or regional disease. To date, only nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy has been approved by the U.S. FDA in the preoperative setting, but data continue to evolve rapidly, and treatment guidelines need to be determined. In this article, we review the current preclinical and clinical evidence on neoadjuvant ICIs alone and combination in the treatment of early-stage NSCLC.

Background: Immunotherapy combinations including ipilimumab and nivolumab are now the standard of care for untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Biomarkers of response are lacking to predict patients who will have a favorable or unfavorable response to immunotherapy. This study aimed to use the OmniSeq transcriptome-based platform to develop biomarkers of response to immunotherapy., Methods: Two cohorts of patients were retrospectively collected. These included an investigational cohort of patients with mRCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy from five institutions, and a subsequent validation cohort of patients with mRCC treated with combination ipilimumab and nivolumab from two institutions (Duke Cancer Institute and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Center). Tissue-based RNA sequencing was performed using the OmniSeq Immune Report Card on banked specimens to identify gene signatures and immune checkpoints associated with differential clinical outcomes. A 5-gene expression panel was developed based on the investigational cohort and was subsequently evaluated in the validation cohort. Clinical outcomes including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were extracted by retrospective chart review. Objective response rate (ORR) was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) V.1.1., Results: The initial investigation cohort identified 86 patients with mRCC who received nivolumab (80%, 69/86), ipilimumab/nivolumab (14%, 12/86), or pembrolizumab (6%, 5/86). A gene expression score was created using the top five genes found in responders versus non-responders (FOXP3, CCR4, KLRK1, ITK, TIGIT). The ORR in patients with high gene expression (GE high ) on the 5-gene panel was 29% (14/48), compared with low gene expression (GE low ) 3% (1/38, χ 2 p=0.001). The validation cohort was comprised of 62 patients who received ipilimumab/nivolumab. There was no difference between GE high and GE low in terms of ORR (44% vs 38.5%), PFS (HR 1.5, 95% CI 0.58 to 3.89), or OS (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.83). Similarly, no differences in ORR, PFS or OS were observed when patients were stratified by tumor mutational burden (high=top 20%), PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1) expression by immunohistochemistry or RNA expression, or CTLA-4 (cytotoxic T-lymphocytes-associated protein 4) RNA expression. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score was prognostic for OS but not PFS., Conclusion: A 5-gene panel that was associated with improved ORR in a predominantly nivolumab monotherapy population of patients with mRCC was not predictive for radiographic response, PFS, or OS among patients with mRCC treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LCB declares the following relationships: Consulting with Seattle Genetics. JZ declares the following relationships: Consulting with Tempus. KD declares the following relationship: Consulting with Tyra BioSciences. EK declares that she has no conflicts of interest that might be relevant to the contents of this manuscript. CK declares that he has no conflicts of interest that might be relevant to the contents of this manuscript. YHL is/was an employee at OmniSeq. SP is/was an employee at OmniSeq. MKL declares that he has no conflicts of interest that might be relevant to the contents of this manuscript. JT declares that she has no conflicts of interest that might be relevant to the contents of this manuscript. KHD declares that he has no conflicts of interest that might be relevant to the contents of this manuscript. LJT declares that she has no conflicts of interest that might be relevant to the contents of this manuscript. FD declares that he has received research grants (to the institution) from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Genentech/Roche, Taiho, Exelixis, Trishula, Leap Therapeutics, has received a speaker honorarium from Amgen, Eisai, Ipsen, Exelixis, Sirtex, Deciphera, Ipsen, Natera, and has received a consultancy honorarium from Natera, QED, Eisai, Exelixis, Genentech/Roche. RTG declares the following relationships: Bayer Pharma AG—consultant & speakers bureau, Invivo—consultant, Bard—consultant, DxTx Medical—consultant, Quibim—consultant, Bracco Diagnostics—consultant. SM declares the following relationships: AstraZeneca—consultant; Takeda Pharmaceuticals—speaker, honorarium. DJG declares the following relationships: Acerta Pharmaceuticals—research; American Association for Cancer Research—senior editor; Astellas—consultant, research, advisory board; AstraZeneca—consultant, advisory board; Axess Oncology—independent contractor; Bayer H/C Pharmaceuticals—research, consultant, speaker, honorarium, travel accommodations; SC, BMS—consultant, research, steering committee; Calithera—research; Capio Biosciences—scientific advisory board; EMD Serono—honorarium; Exelixis—research, consultant, speaker, honorarium, travel accommodations; Flatiron—consultant; Ipsen—honorarium; Janssen Pharmaceuticals—research, consultant, Independent Data Monitoring Committee; Leidos Biomedical Research—consultant; Merck Sharp & Dohme—consultant; Michael J Hennessey Associates—honorarium, consultant; Millennium Medical Publishing, Clinical Advances in Hematology & Oncology—co-editor-in-chief; Modra Pharmaceuticals B.V.—advisory board; Myovant Sciences—consultant; Nektar Therapeutics—steering committee; Novartis—research; Physician Education Resource LLC—consultant; Pfizer—research, consultant, steering committee, honorarium; Sanofi—research, consultant, speaker, honorarium, travel accommodations; UroGPO—honorarium; UroToday—honorarium, travel accommodations; Vizuri Health Sciences, LLC—consultant; NCI—steering committee. YHL is/was an employee at OmniSeq. STG is/was an employee at OmniSeq. MKN is/was an employee at OmniSeq. SG declares the following relationships: Aveo—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; Bayer—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; BMS—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; Corvus—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; Eisai—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; EMD Serono—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; Exelixis—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; Merck—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; Pfizer—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; QED Therapeutics—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; Sanofi/Genzyme—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; Seattle Genetics—advisory board, personal, advisor/consultant; Agensys—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Aravive—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Aveo—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Bayer—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; BMS—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Calithera—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Corvus—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Eisai—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Exelixis—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Gilead—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Merck—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Novartis—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Pfizer—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Seattle Genetics—local PI, institutional, no financial interest; Surface Oncology—local PI, institutional, no financial interest. MZ declares the following relationships: Consulting or advisory roles for: Exelixis, Pfizer, Aveo, EMD Serono, Janssen, Blue Earth; Institutional research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Exelixis. CM is/was an employee at OmniSeq. MCO declares the following relationships: Consulting or advisory roles for Eisai, Exelixis, Pfizer, Aveo, Merck, and Bristol Myers Squibb; speakers bureaus for Bristol Myers Squibb and Exelixis; institutional research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Merck, AstraZeneca, Astellas; reimbursement for travel and accommodations expenses from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Exelixis. TZ declares the following relationships: Research funding (to Duke University) from Pfizer, Janssen, Acerta, AbbVie, Novartis, Merrimack, OmniSeq, PGDx, Merck, Mirati, Astellas, and Genentech; Speaking with Genomic Health and Sanofi Aventis; Consulting/Advisory board with AstraZeneca, Bayer, Pfizer, Janssen, Merck, Amgen, MJH Associates, BMS, Dendreon, Calithera, QED therapeutics, Aveo Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, SeaGen, Sanofi-Aventis, Pharmacyclics, Aptitude Health, PeerView, Clinical Care Options. Stock ownership/employment (spouse) from Capio Biosciences, Archimmune Therapeutics and Nanorobotics., (© 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.)

Purpose: Resistance to immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represents a major unmet need. Combining ICI with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)/VEGF receptor inhibition has yielded promising results in multiple tumor types., Methods: In this randomized phase II Lung-MAP nonmatch substudy (S1800A), patients ineligible for a biomarker-matched substudy with NSCLC previously treated with ICI and platinum-based chemotherapy and progressive disease at least 84 days after initiation of ICI were randomly assigned to receive ramucirumab plus pembrolizumab (RP) or investigator's choice standard of care (SOC: docetaxel/ramucirumab, docetaxel, gemcitabine, and pemetrexed). With a goal of 130 eligible patients, the primary objective was to compare overall survival (OS) using a one-sided 10% level using the better of a standard log-rank (SLR) and weighted log-rank (WLR; G[rho = 0, gamma = 1]) test. Secondary end points included objective response, duration of response, investigator-assessed progression-free survival, and toxicity., Results: Of 166 patients enrolled, 136 were eligible (69 RP; 67 SOC). OS was significantly improved with RP (hazard ratio [80% CI]: 0.69 [0.51 to 0.92]; SLR one-sided P = .05; WLR one-sided P = .15). The median (80% CI) OS was 14.5 (13.9 to 16.1) months for RP and 11.6 (9.9 to 13.0) months for SOC. OS benefit for RP was seen in most subgroups. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival (hazard ratio [80% CI]: 0.86 [0.66 to 1.14]; one-sided SLR, P = .25 and .14 for WLR) and response rates (22% RP v 28% SOC, one-sided P = .19) were similar between arms. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 42% of patients in the RP group and 60% on SOC., Conclusion: This randomized phase II trial demonstrated significantly improved OS with RP compared with SOC in patients with advanced NSCLC previously treated with ICI and chemotherapy. The safety was consistent with known toxicities of both drugs. These data warrant further evaluation.

Background: Despite progress in developing learning health systems (LHS) and associated metrics of success, a gap remains in identifying measures to guide the implementation and assessment of the impact of an oncology LHS. Our aim was to identify a balanced set of measures to guide a person-centered oncology LHS., Methods: A modified Delphi process and clinical value compass framework were used to prioritize measures for tracking LHS performance. A multidisciplinary group of 77 stakeholders, including people with cancer and family members, participated in 3 rounds of online voting followed by 50-minute discussions. Participants rated metrics on perceived importance to the LHS and discussed priorities., Results: Voting was completed by 94% of participants and prioritized 22 measures within 8 domains. Patient and caregiver factors included clinical health (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, survival by cancer type and stage), functional health and quality of life (Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] Global-10, Distress Thermometer, Modified Caregiver Strain Index), experience of care (advance care planning, collaboRATE, PROMIS Self-Efficacy Scale, access to care, experience of care, end-of-life quality measures), and cost and resource use (avoidance and delay in accessing care and medications, financial hardship, total cost of care). Contextual factors included team well-being (Well-being Index; voluntary staff turnover); learning culture (Improvement Readiness, compliance with Commission on Cancer quality of care measures); scholarly engagement and productivity (institutional commitment and support for research, academic productivity index); and diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (screening and follow-up for social determinants of health, inclusivity of staff and patients)., Conclusions: The person-centered LHS value compass provides a balanced set of measures that oncology practices can use to monitor and evaluate improvement across multiple domains., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: This study assessed the checkpoint kinase 1 inhibitor prexasertib in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC)., Patients and Methods: This was a parallel-cohort phase II study of 105 mg/m 2 prexasertib once every 14 days for patients who progressed after no more than two prior therapies and had platinum-sensitive (Cohort 1) or platinum-resistant/platinum-refractory (Cohort 2) disease. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and pharmacokinetics. Exploratory endpoints included biomarker identification and assessment of an alternative regimen (Cohort 3: 40 mg/m 2 days 1-3, 14-day cycle)., Results: In Cohort 1 (n = 58), ORR was 5.2%; DCR, 31%; median PFS, 1.41 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-1.64); and median OS, 5.42 months (95% CI, 3.75-8.51). In Cohort 2 (n = 60), ORR was 0%; DCR, 20%; median PFS, 1.36 months (95% CI, 1.25-1.45); and median OS, 3.15 months (95% CI, 2.27-5.52). The most frequent all-grade, related, treatment-emergent adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (Cohort 1, 69.6%; Cohort 2, 73.3%), decreased platelet count (Cohort 1, 51.8%; Cohort 2, 50.0%), decreased white blood cell count (Cohort 1, 28.6%; Cohort 2, 40.0%), and anemia (Cohort 1, 39.3%; Cohort 2, 28.3%). Eleven patients (19.6%) in Cohort 1 and one patient (1.7%) in Cohort 2 experienced grade ≥3 febrile neutropenia. Prexasertib pharmacokinetics were consistent with prior studies. Cohort 3 outcomes were similar to those of Cohorts 1 and 2. No actionable biomarkers were identified., Conclusion: Prexasertib did not demonstrate activity to warrant future development as monotherapy in ED-SCLC., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression (CIM) and its sequalae cause significant side effects and harm to quality of life. Trilaciclib is an intravenous CDK4/6 inhibitor that is administered prior to chemotherapy to protect hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells from chemotherapy-induced damage (myeloprotection)., Patients and Methods: Data from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (NCT02499770, NCT03041311, and NCT02514447) were pooled to evaluate the effects of trilaciclib administered prior to standard-of-care chemotherapy (first-line etoposide plus carboplatin [E/P], first-line E/P plus atezolizumab, and second-/third-line topotecan) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). The primary endpoints were duration of severe neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count < 0.5 × 10 9 cells/L) in cycle 1 and occurrence of severe neutropenia. Additional prespecified endpoints further assessed the effect of trilaciclib on myeloprotection, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), antitumor efficacy, and safety., Results: Of 242 randomized patients, 123 received trilaciclib and 119 received placebo. Compared with placebo, administration of trilaciclib prior to chemotherapy resulted in significant decreases in most measures of multilineage CIM. The reduction in hematologic toxicity translated into the reduced need for supportive care interventions and hospitalizations due to CIM or sepsis and improvements in HRQoL domains related to the protected cell lineages, including fatigue, physical wellbeing, and functional wellbeing. Antitumor efficacy was similar for patients receiving trilaciclib or placebo., Conclusion: Administering trilaciclib prior to chemotherapy resulted in clinically meaningful reductions in CIM and its consequences and improved patient HRQoL, with no impact on the antitumor efficacy of three individual chemotherapy regimens used in the first- or second-/third-line treatment of ES-SCLC., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The sequence of chemotherapy and pembrolizumab may affect antitumor immune response and efficacy of immunotherapy., Methods: This multicenter, randomized, phase 2 trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of two sequences of chemotherapy and pembrolizumab in patients with stage 4 NSCLC. Both arms were considered investigational, and the study used a "pick a winner" design. The primary end point was objective response rate by independent radiologic review after eight cycles (24 wk). Patients were randomized 1:1 to arm A (chemotherapy for four cycles followed by pembrolizumab for four cycles) or arm B (pembrolizumab for four cycles followed by chemotherapy for four cycles). Patients in both arms without disease progression after the initial eight cycles continued pembrolizumab until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or a maximum of 2 years., Results: From March 2016 to July 2018, a total of 90 eligible patients were randomized (43 patients to arm A and 47 patients to arm B). The objective response rate at 24 weeks in arms A and B was 39.5 % (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 24.9%-54.1 %) and 40.4 % (95 % CI: 26.4%-54.5 %), respectively ( p  = 0.93). The progression-free survival in arms A and B was as follows: hazard ratio of B versus A equals to 1.06, 95 % CI: 0.68-1.66, p value equals to 0.84, and median progression-free survival of 5.8 months and 4 months, respectively. The overall survival was as follows: hazard ratio of B versus A equals to 1.04, 95 % CI: 0.63-1.74, p value equals to 0.85, and median overall survival of 15.5 months and 14 months, respectively., Conclusions: Additional evaluation of either sequence in a phase 3 trial is not warranted., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Introduction: JUNIPER compared the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib, a selective cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, with erlotinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring a Kirsten rat sarcoma ( KRAS ) mutation., Methods: JUNIPER was a Phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial of abemaciclib versus erlotinib in patients with stage IV NSCLC and a detectable mutation in codons 12 or 13 of the KRAS oncogene, who progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy and 1 additional therapy (could include immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy). Randomized patients (3:2) received either 200 mg abemaciclib twice daily or 150 mg erlotinib once daily with best supportive care until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety., Results: Between December 2014 and April 2017, 453 patients were randomly assigned to receive abemaciclib (N = 270) or erlotinib (N = 183). Median OS was 7.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.5, 8.8) with abemaciclib and 7.8 months (95% CI: 6.4, 9.5) with erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.968 [95% CI: 0.768, 1.219]; p = .77). Median PFS was 3.6 months (95% CI: 2.8, 3.8) with abemaciclib and 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.9, 2.0) with erlotinib (HR = 0.583 [95% CI: 0.470, 0.723]; p <.000001). ORR was 8.9% and 2.7% (p = .010), and the disease control rate was 54.4% and 31.7% (p <.001) with abemaciclib and erlotinib, respectively. Safety results reflected the known safety profiles of abemaciclib and erlotinib., Conclusions: In this study, the primary endpoint of OS was not met; PFS and ORR were improved with manageable toxicity in the abemaciclib arm. The increases in response rates and PFS support further investigation of abemaciclib in other NSCLC subpopulations or in combination with other agents., Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02152631., (Copyright © 2020 Goldman, Mazieres, Barlesi, Dragnev, Koczywas, Göskel, Cortot, Girard, Wesseler, Bischoff, Nadal, Park, Lu, Taus, Cobo, Estrem, Wijayawardana, Turner, Oakley, Hurt, Chiang, Hossain, John and Paz-Ares.)

Background: Combination treatment with chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has demonstrated meaningful clinical benefit to patients. However, chemotherapy-induced damage to the immune system can potentially diminish the efficacy of chemotherapy/ICI combinations. Trilaciclib, a highly potent, selective and reversible cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor in development to preserve hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells and immune system function during chemotherapy, has demonstrated proof of concept in recent clinical trials. Furthermore, CDK4/6 inhibition has been shown to augment T-cell activation and antitumor immunity in preclinical settings. Therefore, addition of trilaciclib has the potential to further enhance the efficacy of chemotherapy and ICI combinations., Methods: In murine syngeneic tumor models, a schedule of 3 weekly doses of trilaciclib was combined with chemotherapy/ICI regimens to assess the effect of transient CDK4/6 inhibition on antitumor response and intratumor T-cell proliferation and function. Peripheral T-cell status was also analyzed in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) treated with chemotherapy with or without trilaciclib to gain insights into the effect of transient exposure of trilaciclib on T-cell activation., Results: Preclinically, the addition of trilaciclib to chemotherapy/ICI regimens enhanced antitumor response and overall survival compared with chemotherapy and ICI combinations alone. This effect is associated with the modulation of the proliferation and composition of T-cell subsets in the tumor microenvironment and increased effector function. Transient exposure of trilaciclib in patients with SCLC during chemotherapy treatment both preserved and increased peripheral lymphocyte counts and enhanced T-cell activation, suggesting that trilaciclib not only preserved but also enhanced immune system function., Conclusions: Transient CDK4/6 inhibition by trilaciclib was sufficient to enhance and prolong the duration of the antitumor response by chemotherapy/ICI combinations, suggesting a role for the transient cell cycle arrest of tumor immune infiltrates in remodeling the tumor microenvironment. These results provide a rationale for combining trilaciclib with chemotherapy/ICI regimens to improve antitumor efficacy in patients with cancer., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AYL, PJR, ZY and JCS were employees of G1 Therapeutics at the time of the study. AYL is an employee of Locus Biosciences. PJR and JCS are employees of Arc Therapeutics. ZY is an employee of Everest Clinical Research. JAS and RKM are employees of G1 Therapeutics. JAR was an employee of Adaptive Biotechnologies at the time of the study. JH is an employee of and has a financial interest in Adaptive Biotechnologies. JMW has received honorarium from G1 Therapeutics. JMW, KHD and TKO received research funding from G1 Therapeutics (to their institution)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: There are limited data and conflicting guideline recommendations regarding the role of neuroimaging in the pretreatment evaluation of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: We performed a retrospective, pragmatic cohort study of patients with NSCLC diagnosed between January 1 and December 31, 2015. Eligible patients were identified from an institutional tumor registry. We collected all records of pretreatment neuroimaging within 12 weeks of diagnosis, including CT head (CT) and MRI brain (MRI). We abstracted the indication for neuroimaging, presence of central neurologic symptoms and cancer stage (with and without neuroimaging findings) from the tumor registry and the electronic health record., Results: We identified 216 evaluable patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC. 157 of 216 patients (72.7%) underwent neuroimaging as part of initial staging, and 41 (26%) were found to have brain metastases. Of 43 patients with central neurologic symptoms at the time of neuroimaging, 28 (67%) had brain metastasis. In patients without central neurologic symptoms, brain metastases were discovered in 0 of 33 patients with clinical stage I or II, 4 of 36 (11%) with clinical stage III and 9 of 45 (20%) with clinical stage IV disease., Conclusions: In patients with early stage NSCLC (i.e. clinical stage I and II) without central neurologic symptoms, brain metastases are unlikely. The continued use of neuroimaging in the pretreatment evaluation of clinical stage I patients without central neurologic symptoms is not needed., (© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Matching of actionable tumor mutations with targeted therapy increases response rates and prolongs survival in lung cancer patients. Drug development and trials targeting genetic alterations are expanding rapidly. We describe the role of a Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) in the design of molecularly informed treatment strategies in our lung cancer patient population. Tumor DNA was sequenced using a 50-gene targeted next-generation sequencing panel. Cases were evaluated by a multidisciplinary MTB who suggested a course of treatment based on each patient's molecular findings. During a three-year period, 21 lung cancer patients were presented at the MTB. All patients lacked common activating EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangements. One patient had Stage IIIb disease; all others were Stage IV; 18 patients had received ≥1 prior line of therapy (range 0-5). Suggestions for treatment with a targeted therapy were made for 19/21 (90.5%) patients, and four patients (21%) underwent treatment with a targeted agent, two as part of a clinical trial. Identified barriers to treatment with targeted therapy included: ineligibility for clinical trials (n ​= ​2), lack of interest in study/distance to travel (n ​= ​2), lack of disease progression (n ​= ​2), poor performance status (n ​= ​5), decision to treat next with immunotherapy (n ​= ​3), and unknown (n ​= ​1). For the majority of lung cancer patients, the MTB provided recommendations based on tumor genetic profiles. Identified barriers to treatment suggest that presentation to the MTB at earlier stages of disease may increase the number of patients eligible for treatment with a genetically informed targeted agent., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (© 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Few germline mutations are known to affect lung cancer risk. We performed analyses of rare variants from 39,146 individuals of European ancestry and investigated gene expression levels in 7,773 samples. We find a large-effect association with an ATM L2307F (rs56009889) mutation in adenocarcinoma for discovery (adjusted Odds Ratio = 8.82, P = 1.18 × 10 -15 ) and replication (adjusted OR = 2.93, P = 2.22 × 10 -3 ) that is more pronounced in females (adjusted OR = 6.81 and 3.19 and for discovery and replication). We observe an excess loss of heterozygosity in lung tumors among ATM L2307F allele carriers. L2307F is more frequent (4%) among Ashkenazi Jewish populations. We also observe an association in discovery (adjusted OR = 2.61, P = 7.98 × 10 -22 ) and replication datasets (adjusted OR = 1.55, P = 0.06) with a loss-of-function mutation, Q4X (rs150665432) of an uncharacterized gene, KIAA0930. Our findings implicate germline genetic variants in ATM with lung cancer susceptibility and suggest KIAA0930 as a novel candidate gene for lung cancer risk.

Introduction: Activating mutations in the tyrosine kinase domain of the epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR ) gene in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients predicts response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). The Idylla™ system (Biocartis, Mechelen, Belgium) is a fully integrated, cartridge-based platform that provides automated sample processing and real-time PCR-based mutation detection in a single-use cartridge. This study evaluated the Idylla™ EGFR Mutation Assay cartridges against next-generation sequencing (NGS) using formalin fixed, paraffin embedded (FFPE) lung cancer tissue samples., Methods: Thirty-four FFPE lung adenocarcinoma tissue samples were tested on the Idylla™ system. 21 had at least one mutation in EGFR and 13 had no EGFR mutation as determined by NGS analysis using the Ion AmpliSeq 50-gene Cancer Hotspot Panel v2 (Thermo Fisher Scientific). One 10 ​μm FFPE tissue section was used for each Idylla™ test and all cases met the Idylla™ minimum tumor content requirement (≥10%)., Results: Idylla™ results were in complete agreement with those obtained by NGS for EGFR mutations targeted by the Idylla™. NGS identified two additional EGFR mutations that are not targeted by the Idylla™ in two samples (E709V and V774M). No EGFR mutations were detected by the Idylla™ in samples determined by NGS as having wild-type EGFR ., Conclusion: The fully automated Idylla™ system offers rapid and reliable testing for clinically actionable mutations in EGFR directly from FFPE tissue sections. Its simplicity and ease of use compared to other available molecular techniques make it suitable for routine clinical use in a variety of settings., Competing Interests: M. Rabie Al-Turkmani – received travel funds from Biocartis to present study findings at a national meeting. MAS, SJD, DCG, CCB, KS, KHD – no conflicts of interest to report. Gregory J. Tsongalis – Biocartis supported this study by providing cartridges., (© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Chemotherapy-induced damage of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPC) causes multi-lineage myelosuppression. Trilaciclib is an intravenous CDK4/6 inhibitor in development to proactively preserve HSPC and immune system function during chemotherapy (myelopreservation). Preclinically, trilaciclib transiently maintains HSPC in G1 arrest and protects them from chemotherapy damage, leading to faster hematopoietic recovery and enhanced antitumor immunity., Patients and Methods: This was a phase Ib (open-label, dose-finding) and phase II (randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled) study of the safety, efficacy and PK of trilaciclib in combination with etoposide/carboplatin (E/P) therapy for treatment-naive extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer patients. Patients received trilaciclib or placebo before E/P on days 1-3 of each cycle. Select end points were prespecified to assess the effect of trilaciclib on myelosuppression and antitumor efficacy., Results: A total of 122 patients were enrolled, with 19 patients in part 1 and 75 patients in part 2 receiving study drug. Improvements were seen with trilaciclib in neutrophil, RBC (red blood cell) and lymphocyte measures. Safety on trilaciclib+E/P was improved with fewer ≥G3 adverse events (AEs) in trilaciclib (50%) versus placebo (83.8%), primarily due to less hematological toxicity. No trilaciclib-related ≥G3 AEs occurred. Antitumor efficacy assessment for trilaciclib versus placebo, respectively, showed: ORR (66.7% versus 56.8%, P = 0.3831); median PFS [6.2 versus 5.0 m; hazard ratio (HR) 0.71; P = 0.1695]; and OS (10.9 versus 10.6 m; HR 0.87; P = 0.6107)., Conclusion: Trilaciclib demonstrated an improvement in the patient's tolerability of chemotherapy as shown by myelopreservation across multiple hematopoietic lineages resulting in fewer supportive care interventions and dose reductions, improved safety profile, and no detriment to antitumor efficacy. These data demonstrate strong proof-of-concept for trilaciclib's myelopreservation benefits., Clinical Trail Number: NCT02499770., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Importance: Chemotherapy is a mainstay treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. However, little is known about the comparative risk of hospitalization associated with commonly used chemotherapy regimens., Objective: To evaluate the real-world association of specific lung cancer chemotherapy regimens with measures of acute hospital care (primary objective) and survival (secondary objective)., Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective, propensity-matched, cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked data for cancer diagnoses between 2008 and 2013, with follow-up through 2014. Patients were Medicare beneficiaries 66 years of age or older receiving initial chemotherapy for treatment of stage IV, nonsquamous, non-small cell lung cancer. Analyses were performed between September 2017 and April 2018., Exposures: Receipt of chemotherapy with carboplatin-pemetrexed or carboplatin-paclitaxel, with or without concurrent bevacizumab., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was risk of hospitalization within 30 days of chemotherapy initiation. Secondary measures included cumulative 90-day hospitalizations, 90-day mean hospital-free survival time, and overall survival., Results: Of the 3310 eligible patients, 1823 received carboplatin-pemetrexed, and 1487 received carboplatin-paclitaxel. The median age at diagnosis was 73 years (interquartile range, 69-77 years), 1784 patients (53.9%) were men, and 2909 patients (87.9%) were non-Hispanic white. In total, 2182 patients were included in the propensity-matched analysis. The 30-day hospitalization risk was 20.7% (95% CI, 18.3%-23.1%) among patients receiving carboplatin-pemetrexed vs 26.0% (95% CI, 23.4%-28.6%) among patients receiving carboplatin-paclitaxel (5.3% difference; P = .003). The 90-day cumulative hospitalizations did not differ significantly between the 2 treatment groups; however, the 90-day mean hospital-free survival time was improved for patients receiving carboplatin-pemetrexed (68.4 days [95% CI, 66.5-70.4 days] vs 63.6 days [95% CI, 61.6-65.7 days]; P = .001). The median survival time was 9.0 months (95% CI, 8.4-9.5 months) with carboplatin-pemetrexed therapy vs 7.6 months (95% CI, 7.0-8.4 months) with carboplatin-paclitaxel therapy (P = .005). Stratified analyses showed no association of bevacizumab use with hospitalization risk or survival when combined with either chemotherapy regimen., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings from this study suggest that patients receiving carboplatin-pemetrexed compared with those receiving carboplatin-paclitaxel have a lower 30-day hospitalization risk, a greater 90-day hospital-free survival, and improved overall survival. Information about hospitalization risk may provide valuable context for evaluating real-world cancer treatment outcomes.

Background: Rexinoids demonstrate anti-proliferative differentiation-inducing activity in multiple cancer types, including NSCLC. Prior studies have shown promising results when combining rexinoids with chemotherapy. This phase I/II study evaluates the tolerability and activity of a rexinoid, bexarotene, combined with weekly paclitaxel and monthly carboplatin., Methods: Patients with confirmed advanced stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and adequate organ function were enrolled. They were scheduled to receive carboplatin (AUC =6) and 3 doses of weekly paclitaxel (100 mg/m 2 ) every 4 weeks. Oral bexarotene was administered daily at two doses: 300 and 400 mg/m 2 /day., Results: Thirty-three patients were enrolled. Fourteen received 300 mg/m 2 /day and 19 received 400 mg/m 2 /day of bexarotene. Hematologic toxicity included grade 3 neutropenia in 7 patients. Hyperlipidemia was a major non-hematologic toxicity which was medically managed. The recommended phase II dose of bexarotene was 400 mg/m 2 /day. Response rate was 35%. Median overall survival (OS) for all patients was 8.3 months with 1-year survival of 43%. Median OS for the 300 mg/m 2 dose of bexarotene was 6.6 versus 9.8 months for the 400 mg/m 2 dose (HR, 0.73; Log rank P=0.37). Patients who experienced hypertriglyceridemia had a median OS of 9.8 months compared to 4.9 months for those who did not (HR, 0.69; Log rank P=0.33)., Conclusions: The 43% 1-year survival for patients receiving bexarotene with weekly paclitaxel and monthly carboplatin is encouraging. With the availability of new classes of agents for lung cancer, further evaluation of this regimen in unselected patients is not warranted. Our study confirms prior subgroup analyses showing a significant correlation between bexarotene-induced hypertriglyceridemia and survival. Further research is needed to identify molecular biomarkers to identify this subset of patients and to explore rexinoids in other combinations, especially with immunotherapy., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: KH Dragnev and JR Rigas received funding from Ligand Pharmaceuticals for the conduct of this study. Ligand Pharmaceuticals had no role in the data collection, analysis, interpretation or composition of the manuscript. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Objective: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of early palliative care interventions in advanced cancer have positively impacted patient survival, yet the mechanisms remain unknown. This secondary analysis of 2 RCTs assessed whether an early palliative care intervention moderates the relationship between depressive symptoms and survival., Method: The relationships among mood, survival, and early palliative care intervention were studied among 529 advanced cancer patients who participated in 2 RCTs. The first (N = 322) compared intervention versus usual care. The second (N = 207) compared early versus delayed intervention (12 weeks after enrollment). The interventions included an in-person consultation, weekly nurse coach-facilitated phone sessions, and monthly follow-up. Mood was measured using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D) scale. Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to examine the effects of baseline CES-D scores, the intervention, and their interaction on mortality risk while controlling for demographic variables, cancer site, and illness severity., Results: The combined sample was 56% male (M = 64.7 years). Higher baseline CES-D scores were significantly associated with greater mortality risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.042, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.017, 1.067], p = .001). However, participants with higher CES-D scores who received the intervention had a lower mortality risk (HR = .963, CI [0.933, 0.993], p = .018) even when controlling for demographics, cancer site, and illness-related variables., Conclusion: This study is the first to demonstrate that patients with advanced cancer who also have depressive symptoms benefit the most from early palliative care. Future research should be devoted to exploring the mechanisms responsible for these relationships. (PsycINFO Database Record, ((c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).)

Detection of somatic mutations in non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs), especially adenocarcinomas, is important for directing patient care when targeted therapy is available. Here, we present our experience with genotyping NSCLC using the Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine (PGM) and the AmpliSeq Cancer Hotspot Panel v2. We tested 453 NSCLC samples from 407 individual patients using the 50 gene AmpliSeq Cancer Hotspot Panel v2 from May 2013 to July 2015. Using 10 ng of DNA, up to 11 samples were simultaneously sequenced on the Ion Torrent PGM (316 and 318 chips). We identified variants with the Ion Torrent Variant Caller Plugin, and Golden Helix's SVS software was used for annotation and prediction of the significance of the variants. Three hundred ninety-eight samples were successfully sequenced (12.1% failure rate). In all, 633 variants in 41 genes were detected with a median of 2 (range of 0 to 7) variants per sample. Mutations detected in BRAF, EGFR, ERBB2, KRAS, NRAS, and PIK3CA were considered potentially actionable and were identified in 237 samples, most commonly in KRAS (37.9%), EGFR (11.1%), BRAF (4.8%), and PIK3CA (4.3%). In our patient population, all mutations in EGFR, KRAS, and BRAF were mutually exclusive. The Ion Torrent Ampliseq technology can be utilized on small biopsy and cytology specimens, requires very little input DNA, and can be applied in clinical laboratories for genotyping of NSCLC. This targeted next-generation sequencing approach allows for detection of common and also rare mutations that are clinically actionable in multiple patients simultaneously., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Context: Little is known about whether early palliative care (EPC) support for family caregivers (CGs) impacts depressive symptoms and grief after care recipients die., Objectives: To assess after-death CG depressive symptom and grief scores for early compared to delayed group CGs., Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial (10/2010-9/2013) of an EPC telehealth intervention for CGs (n = 123) initiated at the time of care recipients' advanced cancer diagnosis (early group) or 12 weeks later (delayed group) in a rural comprehensive cancer center, affiliated clinics, and a Veterans Administration medical center. The ENABLE [Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends] CG intervention consisted of three weekly sessions, monthly follow-up, and a bereavement call. CGs completed the Center for Epidemiological Study-Depression (CES-D) scale and the Prigerson Inventory of Complicated Grief-Short Form (PG13) 8-12 weeks after care recipients' deaths. Crude and covariate-adjusted between-group differences were estimated and tested using general linear models., Results: For care recipients who died (n = 70), 44 CGs (early: n = 19; delayed: n = 25) completed after-death questionnaires. Mean depressive symptom scores (CES-D) for the early group was 14.6 (SD = 10.7) and for the delayed group was 17.6 (SD = 11.8). Mean complicated grief scores (PG13) for the early group was 22.7 (SD = 4.9) and for the delayed group was 24.9 (SD = 6.9). Adjusted between-group differences were not statistically significant (CES-D: d = 0.07, P = 0.88; PG13: d = -0.21, P = 0.51)., Conclusion: CGs' depressive symptom and complicated grief scores 8-12 weeks after care recipients' deaths were not statistically different based on the timing of EPC support. The impact of timing of CG EPC interventions on CGs bereavement outcomes requires further investigation., Competing Interests: All authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2016 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Accurate identification of somatic mutations in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor tissue is required for enrollment into clinical trials for many novel targeted therapeutics, including trials requiring EGFR mutation status in non-small-cell lung carcinomas. Central clinical trial laboratories contracted to perform this analysis typically rely on US Food and Drug Administration-approved targeted assays to identify these mutations. We present two cases in which central laboratories inaccurately reported EGFR mutation status because of improper identification and isolation of tumor material and failure to accurately report assay limitations, resulting in enrollment denial. Such cases highlight the need for increased awareness by clinical trials of the limitation of these US Food and Drug Administration-approved assays and the necessity for a mechanism to reevaluate discordant results by alternative laboratory-developed procedures, including clinical next-generation sequencing., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Investigative Pathology and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although genetic profiling of tumors is a potentially powerful tool to predict drug sensitivity and resistance, its routine use has been limited because clinicians are often unfamiliar with interpretation and incorporation of the information into practice. We established a Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) to interpret individual patients' tumor genetic profiles and provide treatment recommendations., Patients and Methods: DNA from tumor specimens was sequenced in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified laboratory to identify coding mutations in a 50-gene panel (n = 34) or a 255-gene panel (n = 1). Cases were evaluated by a multidisciplinary MTB that included pathologists, oncologists, hematologists, basic scientists, and genetic counselors., Results: During the first year, 35 cases were evaluated by the MTB, with 32 presented for recommendations on targeted therapies, and 3 referred for potential germline mutations. In 56.3% of cases, MTB recommended treatment with a targeted agent based on evaluation of tumor genetic profile and treatment history. Four patients (12.5%) were subsequently treated with a MTB-recommended targeted therapy; 3 of the 4 patients remain on therapy, 2 of whom experienced clinical benefit lasting >10 months., Conclusion: For the majority of cases evaluated, the MTB was able to provide treatment recommendations based on targetable genetic alterations. The most common reasons that MTB-recommended therapy was not administered stemmed from patient preferences and genetic profiling at either very early or very late stages of disease; lack of drug access was rarely encountered. Increasing awareness of molecular profiling and targeted therapies by both clinicians and patients will improve acceptance and adherence to treatments that could significantly improve outcomes., Implications for Practice: Case evaluation by a multidisciplinary Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) is critical to benefit from individualized genetic data and maximize clinical impact. MTB recommendations shaped treatment options for the majority of cases evaluated. In the few patients treated with MTB-recommended therapy, disease outcomes were positive and support genetically informed treatment., (©AlphaMed Press.)

Purpose: To determine the effect of early versus delayed initiation of a palliative care intervention for family caregivers (CGs) of patients with advanced cancer., Patients and Methods: Between October 2010 and March 2013, CGs of patients with advanced cancer were randomly assigned to receive three structured weekly telephone coaching sessions, monthly follow-up, and a bereavement call either early after enrollment or 3 months later. CGs of patients with advanced cancer were recruited from a National Cancer Institute cancer center, a Veterans Administration Medical Center, and two community outreach clinics. Outcomes were quality of life (QOL), depression, and burden (objective, stress, and demand)., Results: A total of 122 CGs (early, n = 61; delayed, n = 61) of 207 patients participated; average age was 60 years, and most were female (78.7%) and white (92.6%). Between-group differences in depression scores from enrollment to 3 months (before delayed group started intervention) favored the early group (mean difference, -3.4; SE, 1.5; d = -.32; P = .02). There were no differences in QOL (mean difference, -2; SE, 2.3; d = -.13; P = .39) or burden (objective: mean difference, 0.3; SE, .7; d = .09; P = .64; stress: mean difference, -.5; SE, .5; d = -.2; P = .29; demand: mean difference, 0; SE, .7; d = -.01; P = .97). In decedents' CGs, a terminal decline analysis indicated between-group differences favoring the early group for depression (mean difference, -3.8; SE, 1.5; d = -.39; P = .02) and stress burden (mean difference, -1.1; SE, .4; d = -.44; P = .01) but not for QOL (mean difference, -4.9; SE, 2.6; d = -.3; P = .07), objective burden (mean difference, -.6; SE, .6; d = -.18; P = .27), or demand burden (mean difference, -.7; SE, .6; d = -.23; P = .22)., Conclusion: Early-group CGs had lower depression scores at 3 months and lower depression and stress burden in the terminal decline analysis. Palliative care for CGs should be initiated as early as possible to maximize benefits., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Randomized controlled trials have supported integrated oncology and palliative care (PC); however, optimal timing has not been evaluated. We investigated the effect of early versus delayed PC on quality of life (QOL), symptom impact, mood, 1-year survival, and resource use., Patients and Methods: Between October 2010 and March 2013, 207 patients with advanced cancer at a National Cancer Institute cancer center, a Veterans Affairs Medical Center, and community outreach clinics were randomly assigned to receive an in-person PC consultation, structured PC telehealth nurse coaching sessions (once per week for six sessions), and monthly follow-up either early after enrollment or 3 months later. Outcomes were QOL, symptom impact, mood, 1-year survival, and resource use (hospital/intensive care unit days, emergency room visits, chemotherapy in last 14 days, and death location)., Results: Overall patient-reported outcomes were not statistically significant after enrollment (QOL, P = .34; symptom impact, P = .09; mood, P = .33) or before death (QOL, P = .73; symptom impact, P = .30; mood, P = .82). Kaplan-Meier 1-year survival rates were 63% in the early group and 48% in the delayed group (difference, 15%; P = .038). Relative rates of early to delayed decedents' resource use were similar for hospital days (0.73; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.27; P = .26), intensive care unit days (0.68; 95% CI, 0.23 to 2.02; P = .49), emergency room visits (0.73; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.19; P = .21), chemotherapy in last 14 days (1.57; 95% CI, 0.37 to 6.7; P = .27), and home death (27 [54%] v 28 [47%]; P = .60)., Conclusion: Early-entry participants' patient-reported outcomes and resource use were not statistically different; however, their survival 1-year after enrollment was improved compared with those who began 3 months later. Understanding the complex mechanisms whereby PC may improve survival remains an important research priority., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Activation of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) pathway has been implicated in tumorigenesis in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the most common type of lung cancer. As a result, EGFR has become a key focus for the development of personalized therapy, with several molecular biomarkers having been investigated as potential predictors of response with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in NSCLC (e.g., EGFR expression, EGFR gene copy gain, and EGFR mutations). Of these, activating mutations in EGFR have thus far given the most consistent results based on the available evidence from preclinical studies and clinical trials. In an attempt to identify patients who are most likely to benefit from treatment with EGFR TKIs, EGFR mutation testing is being increasingly utilized in clinical practice. Currently in the United States, no EGFR TKI or accompanying mutational test is approved for the identification and first-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC. However, the first-generation EGFR TKIs, erlotinib and gefitinib, as well as investigational ErbB family TKIs and EGFR mutation testing methods are being evaluated in this setting. This review will discuss EGFR mutation testing as a biomarker of response to EGFR TKIs and the evolution of EGFR mutational analysis in NSCLC. Completed and ongoing clinical trials evaluating currently available or investigational EGFR TKIs as first-line therapy in molecularly and clinically selected patients with NSCLC, with a focus on trials in patients whose tumors have EGFR mutations, will also be reviewed., (Copyright © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACi; vorinostat) responses were studied in murine and human lung cancer cell lines and genetically engineered mouse lung cancer models. Findings were compared with a window of opportunity trial in aerodigestive tract cancers. In human (HOP62, H522, and H23) and murine transgenic (ED-1, ED-2, LKR-13, and 393P, driven, respectively, by cyclin E, degradation-resistant cyclin E, KRAS, or KRAS/p53) lung cancer cell lines, vorinostat reduced growth, cyclin D1, and cyclin E levels, but induced p27, histone acetylation, and apoptosis. Other biomarkers also changed. Findings from transgenic murine lung cancer models were integrated with those from a window of opportunity trial that measured vorinostat pharmacodynamic responses in pre- versus posttreatment tumor biopsies. Vorinostat repressed cyclin D1 and cyclin E expression in murine transgenic lung cancers and significantly reduced lung cancers in syngeneic mice. Vorinostat also reduced cyclin D1 and cyclin E expression, but increased p27 levels in post- versus pretreatment human lung cancer biopsies. Notably, necrotic and inflammatory responses appeared in posttreatment biopsies. These depended on intratumoral HDACi levels. Therefore, HDACi treatments of murine genetically engineered lung cancer models exert similar responses (growth inhibition and changes in gene expression) as observed in lung cancer cell lines. Moreover, enhanced pharmacodynamic responses occurred in the window of opportunity trial, providing additional markers of response that can be evaluated in subsequent HDACi trials. Thus, combining murine and human HDACi trials is a strategy to translate preclinical HDACi treatment outcomes into the clinic. This study uncovered clinically tractable mechanisms to engage in future HDACi trials.

Purpose: This dose-escalation study was performed to determine the recommended phase II dose of oral capecitabine to be delivered concurrently with thoracic radiation therapy and weekly docetaxel in patients with locally advanced esophageal carcinoma., Methods: Patients with operable stage II or III esophageal carcinoma were staged by endoscopic ultrasonography and computed tomography. Two cycles of docetaxel (80 mg/m) and carboplatin (target area under the concentration-time curve: 6 mg/ml × min) were delivered over 6 weeks. This was followed by concurrent weekly docetaxel (15 mg/m), thoracic radiotherapy (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions), and increasing doses of capecitabine (500-3500 mg) given before each fraction of radiotherapy. After restaging, responding patients continued to esophagectomy within 4 to 8 weeks of completing chemoradiotherapy., Results: Forty-four patients were enrolled, and 40 were assessable for the dose-ranging component of concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Endoscopic ultrasonography stages at enrollment were T3N1 (29 patients), T3N0 (4 patients), T2N1 (6 patients), and T4N0 (one patient). The maximum tolerated dose of capecitabine was 3500 mg. Thirty-six patients had surgery; 83% had R0 resection, and 17% had pathological complete response. Median overall survival was 23.5 months, with 34 and 27% alive at 3 and 5 years., Conclusion: The recommended phase II dose of capecitabine is 3500 mg when given concurrently with 50.4 Gy of thoracic radiotherapy in 28 fractions and weekly docetaxel. This trimodality therapy for operable locally advanced esophageal carcinoma was very well tolerated and remarkably active. This regimen holds promise for the treatment of esophageal carcinoma and warrants further investigation.

Hedgehog (HH) pathway Smoothened (Smo) inhibitors are active against Gorlin syndrome-associated basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and medulloblastoma where Patched (Ptch) mutations occur. We interrogated 705 epithelial cancer cell lines for growth response to the Smo inhibitor cyclopamine and for expressed HH pathway-regulated species in a linked genetic database. Ptch and Smo mutations that respectively conferred Smo inhibitor response or resistance were undetected. Previous studies revealed HH pathway activation in lung cancers. Therefore, findings were validated using lung cancer cell lines, transgenic and transplantable murine lung cancer models, and human normal-malignant lung tissue arrays in addition to testing other Smo inhibitors. Cyclopamine sensitivity most significantly correlated with high cyclin E (P=0.000009) and low insulin-like growth factor binding protein 6 (IGFBP6) (P=0.000004) levels. Gli family members were associated with response. Cyclopamine resistance occurred with high GILZ (P=0.002) expression. Newer Smo inhibitors exhibited a pattern of sensitivity similar to cyclopamine. Gain of cyclin E or loss of IGFBP6 in lung cancer cells significantly increased Smo inhibitor response. Cyclin E-driven transgenic lung cancers expressed a gene profile implicating HH pathway activation. Cyclopamine treatment significantly reduced proliferation of murine and human lung cancers. Smo inhibition reduced lung cancer formation in a syngeneic mouse model. In human normal-malignant lung tissue arrays cyclin E, IGFBP6, Gli1 and GILZ were each differentially expressed. Together, these findings indicate that Smo inhibitors should be considered in cancers beyond those with activating HH pathway mutations. This includes tumors that express genes indicating basal HH pathway activation.

Background: ABT-751 is a novel antimitotic agent that exerted cytotoxic effects in preclinical studies. Carboplatin has efficacy in treating advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in combination with other drugs., Methods: Lung cancer cell lines were treated with ABT-751 and/or carboplatin to investigate their impact on cell growth. A phase I study with an expansion cohort was conducted in previously treated NSCLC patients. The primary objective was the maximum tolerated dose (MTD); secondary objectives were objective response rates, median survival, time to tumor progression, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and pharmacodynamic evaluation of buccal swabs., Results: Combining ABT-751 with carboplatin significantly reduced growth and induced apoptosis of lung cancer cell lines. Twenty advanced NSCLC patients were enrolled. MTD was ABT-751 125 mg orally twice daily for 7 days with carboplatin AUC 6. DLTs included fatigue, ileus, neutropenia and pneumonitis. Two patients had confirmed partial responses. Median overall survival was 11.7 months (95% CI 5.9-27.0). Time to tumor progression was 2.8 months (95% CI 2.0-2.7). Four of 6 patients showed decreased cyclin D1 protein in posttreatment versus pretreatment buccal swabs., Conclusion: Combining ABT-751 with carboplatin suppressed growth of lung cancer cell lines and had modest clinical antitumor activity in advanced NSCLC previously treated predominantly with carboplatin. Further studies of this combination are not recommended while investigations of biomarkers in different patient populations, alternative schedules and combinations may be pursued., (Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Introduction: Inflammatory pathways may be an important contributor to morbidity and mortality associated with lung cancer. The oncogene-associated inflammatory microenvironment leads to production of inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6. IL-6 is associated with poor prognosis and correlates with debilitating lung-cancer-related symptoms such as fatigue, thromboembolism, cachexia and anemia. IL-6 has been implicated in resistance of lung cancer to EGF inhibitors. A mAb therapy targeting IL-6 may be an effective treatment for the inflammatory microenvironment in lung cancer., Areas Covered: An understanding of the inflammatory pathways involved in lung cancer, including the central role of IL-6, and how inflammation affects the course and treatment of lung cancer. The mAb ALD518, which targets IL-6, and its investigational development and use in advanced NSCLC. Preclinical and Phase I and II studies of ALD518 with a focus on NSCLC. How ALD518 could be used in NSCLC in the future., Expert Opinion: IL-6-mediated inflammation may contribute to NSCLC-related morbidity and mortality. In preclinical and Phase I and II trials ALD518 targeting IL-6 appears well tolerated and ameliorates NSCLC-related anemia and cachexia. Other clinical outcomes need further study, and may include effects on overall survival, hypercoagulability associated with lung cancer and decreased resistance to EGF-pathway inhibitors.

Background: Prior studies highlighted cyclin D1 as a key biomarker of response to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors. This study builds on prior work by examining the roles of cyclin D1, cyclin D3, and cyclin E in mediating erlotinib sensitivity or resistance., Methods: Expression plasmids for G1 cyclins were independently transfected into NIH 3T3 cells and effects on erlotinib sensitivity were examined. The expression profiles of G1 cyclins were compared in erlotinib-sensitive and erlotinib-resistant lung cancer cell lines. A549 and H358 cells were treated with erlotinib and changes in cyclin protein expression were assessed. Cyclin D3 immunohistochemical staining was measured in biopsy tissues obtained from patients before and after treatment with erlotinib. Erlotinib-sensitive lung cancer cells were transfected with cyclin D3 and changes in erlotinib sensitivity were examined., Results: Individual transfection of cyclin D1, cyclin D3, and cyclin E expression plasmids each significantly reduced erlotinib sensitivity in NIH-3T3 cells. The erlotinib-resistant A549 cell line expressed high basal levels of cyclin D3 mRNA and protein. Comparison of tumor biopsies obtained from patients before and after treatment with erlotinib indicated an increase in the percentage of cancer cells expressing cyclin D3 following treatment with erlotinib (P=.02). Transfection of cyclin D3 into an erlotinib-sensitive lung cancer cell line inhibited erlotinib-induced signaling changes and reduced the growth-suppressive effects of erlotinib., Conclusions: High expression of cyclin D3 confers resistance to erlotinib in vitro and in vivo. Cyclin D3 immunohistochemical staining warrants investigation as a biomarker for predicting erlotinib resistance., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The rexinoid bexarotene represses cyclin D1 by causing its proteasomal degradation. The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) erlotinib represses cyclin D1 via different mechanisms. We conducted a preclinical study and 2 clinical/translational trials (a window-of-opportunity and phase II) of bexarotene plus erlotinib. The combination repressed growth and cyclin D1 expression in cyclin-E- and KRAS/p53-driven transgenic lung cancer cells. The window-of-opportunity trial in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients (10 evaluable), including cases with KRAS mutations, repressed cyclin D1 (in tumor biopsies and buccal swabs) and induced necrosis and inflammatory responses. The phase II trial in heavily pretreated, advanced NSCLC patients (40 evaluable; a median of two prior relapses per patient (range, 0-5); 21% with prior EGFR-inhibitor therapy) produced three major clinical responses in patients with prolonged progression-free survival (583-, 665-, and 1,460-plus days). Median overall survival was 22 weeks. Hypertriglyceridemia was associated with an increased median overall survival (P = 0.001). Early PET (positron emission tomographic) response did not reliably predict clinical response. The combination was generally well tolerated, with toxicities similar to those of the single agents. In conclusion, bexarotene plus erlotinib was active in KRAS-driven lung cancer cells, was biologically active in early-stage mutant KRAS NSCLC, and was clinically active in advanced, chemotherapy-refractory mutant KRAS tumors in this study and previous trials. Additional lung cancer therapy or prevention trials with this oral regimen are warranted.

Importance of the Field: Current therapeutic options for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) yield relatively modest improvements in survival leading to an ongoing search for new active treatment agents. In the past decade, pemetrexed has had an increasingly established role in the treatment of advanced NSCLC in both first- and second-line settings., Areas Covered in This Review: Currently available published data on mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy of pemetrexed in the treatment of advanced NSCLC are described. Peer-reviewed publications on the development of pemetrexed and its clinical use in NSCLC were reviewed (1995 - 2009)., What the Reader Will Gain: Pemetrexed is a multitargeted antifolate cytotoxic agent. Key Phase II and Phase III trials are described that have shown pemetrexed's efficacy in both the first- and second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. The efficacy of pemetrexed seems to vary between squamous and nonsquamous histologies. Possible reasons for this are explored. Additionally, the potential role of pemetrexed in maintenance therapy is discussed., Take Home Message: Pemetrexed is an effective treatment for advanced NSCLC, with an overall favorable toxicity profile. There is growing evidence that, in patients treated with pemetrexed, nonsquamous tumors have improved outcomes compared to squamous cell tumors. Pemetrexed may also have a role in maintenance therapy for NSCLC.

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) regulate gene expression. It has been suggested that obtaining miRNA expression profiles can improve classification, diagnostic, and prognostic information in oncology. Here, we sought to comprehensively identify the miRNAs that are overexpressed in lung cancer by conducting miRNA microarray expression profiling on normal lung versus adjacent lung cancers from transgenic mice. We found that miR-136, miR-376a, and miR-31 were each prominently overexpressed in murine lung cancers. Real-time RT-PCR and in situ hybridization (ISH) assays confirmed these miRNA expression profiles in paired normal-malignant lung tissues from mice and humans. Engineered knockdown of miR-31, but not other highlighted miRNAs, substantially repressed lung cancer cell growth and tumorigenicity in a dose-dependent manner. Using a bioinformatics approach, we identified miR-31 target mRNAs and independently confirmed them as direct targets in human and mouse lung cancer cell lines. These targets included the tumor-suppressive genes large tumor suppressor 2 (LATS2) and PP2A regulatory subunit B alpha isoform (PPP2R2A), and expression of each was augmented by miR-31 knockdown. Their engineered repression antagonized miR-31-mediated growth inhibition. Notably, miR-31 and these target mRNAs were inversely expressed in mouse and human lung cancers, underscoring their biologic relevance. The clinical relevance of miR-31 expression was further independently and comprehensively validated using an array containing normal and malignant human lung tissues. Together, these findings revealed that miR-31 acts as an oncogenic miRNA (oncomir) in lung cancer by targeting specific tumor suppressors for repression.

Background/aims: A single-institution phase I trial to determine the feasibility of using filgrastim or pegfilgrastim to increase the dose intensity of biweekly docetaxel and gemcitabine., Methods: Patients with metastatic solid tumors received gemcitabine 3,000 mg/m(2) and increasing doses of docetaxel (55 mg/m(2) in 10 mg/m(2) increments) every 14 days with filgrastim or pegfilgrastim., Results: 35 patients enrolled, median 2 prior therapies, 158 cycles of therapy. There was 1 dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) (sepsis) at docetaxel 55 mg/m(2), 1 DLT (sepsis/diarrhea) at docetaxel 65 mg/m(2), and no DLT at docetaxel 75 mg/m(2). At docetaxel 85 mg/m(2), 2/4 patients had DLT (fatigue/dyspnea, diarrhea). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of docetaxel was 75 mg/m(2). 1/12 patients treated at MTD experienced DLT (sepsis/dyspnea). The initial 25 patients received filgrastim (average 7 doses/cycle), the last 10 received pegfilgrastim., Conclusions: The MTD for docetaxel was 75 mg/m(2) with gemcitabine 3,000 mg/m(2) given every 14 days with filgrastim or pegfilgrastim. This regimen was well tolerated with signs of clinical activity. We found no significant differences in toxicities or effectiveness between daily filgrastim and pegfilgrastim given 13 days before the next chemotherapy. The use of granulocyte growth factors allowed increased dose intensity of docetaxel and gemcitabine. This regimen warrants further study in chemotherapy-naïve patients and patients with earlier stages., ((c) 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.)