Search

Mobocertinib, an oral epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor targeting EGFR gene mutations, including exon 20 insertions (EGFRex20ins), in non-small cell lung cancer, was evaluated in a phase I/II dose-escalation/expansion trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02716116). Dose escalation identified 160 mg/d as the recommended phase 2 dose and maximum tolerated dose. Among 136 patients treated with 160 mg/d, the most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAE; >25%) were diarrhea (83%), nausea (43%), rash (33%), and vomiting (26%), with diarrhea (21%) the only grade ≥3 TRAE >5%. Among 28 EGFRex20ins patients treated at 160 mg/d, the investigator-assessed confirmed response rate was 43% (12/28; 95% confidence interval, 24%-63%) with median duration of response of 14 months (5.0-not reached) and median progression-free survival of 7.3 months (4.4-15.6). Mobocertinib demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with diverse EGFRex20ins variants with a safety profile consistent with other EGFR inhibitors. SIGNIFICANCE: No oral EGFR-targeted therapies are currently approved for patients with EGFRex20ins NSCLC. Mobocertinib demonstrated antitumor activity with manageable toxicity in patients with advanced EGFRex20ins NSCLC in this study, supporting additional development of mobocertinib in this patient population.See related commentary by Pacheco, p. 1617.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1601.

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, formal frameworks to collect data about affected patients were lacking. The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) was formed to collect granular data on patients with cancer and COVID-19 at scale and as rapidly as possible. CCC19 has grown from five initial institutions to 125 institutions with >400 collaborators. More than 5,000 cases with complete baseline data have been accrued. Future directions include increased electronic health record integration for direct data ingestion, expansion to additional domestic and international sites, more intentional patient involvement, and granular analyses of still-unanswered questions related to cancer subtypes and treatments.

Introduction: Mesenchymal epidermal transition and vascular endothelial growth factor pathways are important in mediating non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumorigenesis and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) resistance. We hypothesized that treatment with cabozantinib plus erlotinib in EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC following progression on EGFR TKI therapy may allow tumors to overcome this resistance or restore sensitivity to therapy regardless of T790M status. Methods: Patients with advanced NSCLC, known EGFR mutation and progressive disease on an EGFR TKI immediately prior to enrollment without intervening therapy were enrolled. Patients received erlotinib 150 mg and cabozantinib 40 mg daily. The primary endpoint was evaluation of efficacy by objective response rate. Secondary endpoints included assessment of progression free survival (PFS), overall survival, change in tumor growth rate, safety and toxicity, and the evaluation of specific EGFR mutations and MET amplification in pre-treatment tissue and plasma. Results: Thirty-seven patients were enrolled at 4 centers. Four patients had partial response (10.8%) and 21 had stable disease (59.5%). A greater than 30% increase in tumor doubling time was observed in 79% of assessable patients (27/34). Median PFS was 3.6 months for all patients. Diarrhea (32%) was the most common grade 3 adverse event; 3 patients had asymptomatic grade 4 elevation of amylase and lipase. Conclusions: Combination erlotinib and cabozantinib demonstrates activity in a highly pretreated population of patients with EGFR mutation and progression on EGFR TKI. Further elucidation of beneficial patient subsets is warranted. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT01866410.

IntroductionFirst-line epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with EGFR-activating mutations improves outcomes compared with chemotherapy, but resistance develops in most patients. Compensatory signaling through type 1 insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF-1R) may contribute to resistance; dual blockade of IGF-1R and EGFR may improve outcomes.Patients and methodsWe performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II study of linsitinib, a dual IGF-1R and insulin receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, plus erlotinib versus placebo plus erlotinib in chemotherapy-naive patients with EGFR-mutation positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients received linsitinib 150 mg twice daily or placebo plus erlotinib 150 mg once daily on continuous 21-day cycles. The primary end point was progression-free survival.ResultsAfter randomization of 88 patients (44 each arm), the trial was unblinded early owing to inferiority in the linsitinib arm. The median progression-free survival for the linsitinib versus the placebo group was 8.4 months versus 12.4 months (hazard ratio, 1.37; P = .29). Overall response rate (47.7% vs. 75.0%; P = .02) and disease control rate (77.3% vs. 95.5%; P = .03) were also inferior. Whereas most adverse events were ≤ grade 2, linsitinib plus erlotinib was associated with increased adverse events that led to decreased erlotinib exposure (median days, 228 vs. 305). No drug-drug interaction was suggested by pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic results.ConclusionAdding linsitinib to erlotinib resulted in inferior outcomes compared with erlotinib alone. Further understanding of the signaling pathways and a biomarker that can predict efficacy is needed prior to further clinical development of IGF-1R inhibitors in lung cancer.

BackgroundAtezolizumab is a humanised antiprogrammed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody that inhibits PD-L1 and programmed death-1 (PD-1) and PD-L1 and B7-1 interactions, reinvigorating anticancer immunity. We assessed its efficacy and safety versus docetaxel in previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.MethodsWe did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial (OAK) in 194 academic or community oncology centres in 31 countries. We enrolled patients who had squamous or non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, were 18 years or older, had measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients had received one to two previous cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens (one or more platinum based combination therapies) for stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients with a history of autoimmune disease and those who had received previous treatments with docetaxel, CD137 agonists, anti-CTLA4, or therapies targeting the PD-L1 and PD-1 pathway were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenously receive either atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks by permuted block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive voice or web response system. Coprimary endpoints were overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1-expression population TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 (≥1% PD-L1 on tumour cells or tumour-infiltrating immune cells). The primary efficacy analysis was done in the first 850 of 1225 enrolled patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02008227.FindingsBetween March 11, 2014, and April 29, 2015, 1225 patients were recruited. In the primary population, 425 patients were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab and 425 patients were assigned to receive docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly longer with atezolizumab in the ITT and PD-L1-expression populations. In the ITT population, overall survival was improved with atezolizumab compared with docetaxel (median overall survival was 13·8 months [95% CI 11·8-15·7] vs 9·6 months [8·6-11·2]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·62-0·87], p=0·0003). Overall survival in the TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 population was improved with atezolizumab (n=241) compared with docetaxel (n=222; median overall survival was 15·7 months [95% CI 12·6-18·0] with atezolizumab vs 10·3 months [8·8-12·0] with docetaxel; HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·58-0·93]; p=0·0102). Patients in the PD-L1 low or undetectable subgroup (TC0 and IC0) also had improved survival with atezolizumab (median overall survival 12·6 months vs 8·9 months; HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·59-0·96]). Overall survival improvement was similar in patients with squamous (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·54-0·98]; n=112 in the atezolizumab group and n=110 in the docetaxel group) or non-squamous (0·73 [0·60-0·89]; n=313 and n=315) histology. Fewer patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events with atezolizumab (90 [15%] of 609 patients) versus docetaxel (247 [43%] of 578 patients). One treatment-related death from a respiratory tract infection was reported in the docetaxel group.InterpretationTo our knowledge, OAK is the first randomised phase 3 study to report results of a PD-L1-targeted therapy, with atezolizumab treatment resulting in a clinically relevant improvement of overall survival versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer, regardless of PD-L1 expression or histology, with a favourable safety profile.FundingF. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech, Inc.

PurposeDevelopment of new therapies for previously treated small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a major unmet need. Here, we describe a randomized, phase II trial of weekly topotecan with or without ziv-aflibercept (VEGF-trap) in this clinical setting.Patients and methodsPatients with previously treated SCLC (one line of platinum-based chemotherapy), performance status of 0 to 1, adequate organ function, treated brain metastases, and no recent vascular events or bleeding diatheses were eligible. Eligible patients were stratified as platinum-sensitive or platinum-refractory and randomly assigned to receive weekly topotecan 4 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) with or without ziv-aflibercept 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days. Progression-free survival (PFS) at 3 months was the primary end point.ResultsIn 189 randomly assigned patients, treatment arms were well balanced with regard to clinical characteristics. The 3-month PFS was significantly improved with the addition of ziv-aflibercept in patients who had platinum-refractory disease (27% v 10%; P = .02) but not in patients with platinum-sensitive disease (24% v 15%; P = .22). Although response rate was low, disease control rate was higher with combination therapy than with topotecan alone in patients who had platinum-sensitive disease (37% v 18%; P = .05) and in those who had platinum-refractory disease (25% v 15%; P = .14). Overall survival (OS) was not significantly improved in either strata. Grades 3 to 5 toxicities were more common with the addition of ziv-aflibercept.ConclusionZiv-aflibercept improved the 3-month PFS in patients who had platinum-refractory SCLC, but its addition increased toxicity. OS was similar with combined ziv-aflibercept and topotecan compared with topotecan in both strata.