Search

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. PURPOSE The phase III ADAURA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02511106 ) primary analysis demonstrated a clinically significant disease-free survival (DFS) benefit with adjuvant osimertinib versus placebo in EGFR-mutated stage IB-IIIA non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after complete tumor resection (DFS hazard ratio [HR], 0.20 [99.12% CI, 0.14 to 0.30]; P < .001). We report an updated exploratory analysis of final DFS data. METHODS Overall, 682 patients with stage IB-IIIA (American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control, seventh edition) EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion/L858R) NSCLC were randomly assigned 1:1 (stratified by stage, mutational status, and race) to receive osimertinib 80 mg once-daily or placebo for 3 years. The primary end point was DFS by investigator assessment in stage II-IIIA disease analyzed by stratified log-rank test; following early reporting of statistical significance in DFS, no further formal statistical testing was planned. Secondary end points included DFS in stage IB-IIIA, overall survival, and safety. Patterns of recurrence and CNS DFS were prespecified exploratory end points. RESULTS At data cutoff (April 11, 2022), in stage II-IIIA disease, median follow-up was 44.2 months (osimertinib) and 19.6 months (placebo); the DFS HR was 0.23 (95% CI, 0.18 to 0.30); 4-year DFS rate was 70% (osimertinib) and 29% (placebo). In the overall population, DFS HR was 0.27 (95% CI, 0.21 to 0.34); 4-year DFS rate was 73% (osimertinib) and 38% (placebo). Fewer patients treated with osimertinib had local/regional and distant recurrence versus placebo. CNS DFS HR in stage II-IIIA was 0.24 (95% CI, 0.14 to 0.42). The long-term safety profile of osimertinib was consistent with the primary analysis. CONCLUSION These updated data demonstrate prolonged DFS benefit over placebo, reduced risk of local and distant recurrence, improved CNS DFS, and a consistent safety profile, supporting the efficacy of adjuvant osimertinib in resected EGFR-mutated NSCLC.

Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionised treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC), but a proportion of patients had no clinical benefit and even experienced detrimental effects. This study aims to characterise patients experiencing hyperprogression (HPD) and early death (ED) by longitudinal liquid biopsy. Methods aNSCLC receiving ICIs were prospectively enrolled. Plasma was collected at baseline (T1) and after 3/4 weeks of treatment, according to the treatment schedule (T2). Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) was quantified and analysed by NGS. cfDNA quantification and variant allele fraction (VAF) of tumour-associated genetic alterations were evaluated for their potential impact on outcome. The genetic alteration with the highest VAF (maxVAF) at baseline was considered as a reference. Results From March 2017 to August 2019, 171 patients were enrolled. Five cases matched criteria for HPD and 31 ED were recorded; one overlapped. Quantification of cfDNA at T2 and its absolute and relative variation (T2–T1) were significantly associated with the risk of ED (P = 0.012, P = 0.005, P = 0.009). MaxVAF relative change (T2–T1/T1) was significantly associated with the risk of HPD (P = 0.02). After identifying optimal cut-off values, a two-step risk assessment model was proposed. Discussion Liquid biopsy performed early during treatment has the potential to identify patients at high risk of ED and HPD.

Adding bevacizumab to erlotinib prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC in the Japanese JO25567 trial, but limited data were available in non-Asian patients. BEVERLY is an Italian, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 investigating the addition of bevacizumab to erlotinib as first-line treatment of advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC.Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to erlotinib plus bevacizumab or erlotinib alone. Investigator-assessed PFS and blinded independent centrally reviewed PFS were coprimary end points. With 80% power in detecting a 0.60 hazard ratio and two-sided α error of 0.05, 126 events of 160 patients were needed. The trial was registered as NCT02633189 and EudraCT 2015-002235-17.From April 11, 2016, to February 27, 2019, a total of 160 patients were randomized to erlotinib plus bevacizumab (80) or erlotinib alone (80). At a median follow-up of 36.3 months, median investigator-assessed PFS was 15.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.2-18.6) with erlotinib plus bevacizumab and 9.6 months (95% CI: 8.2-10.6) with erlotinib alone (hazard ratio = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.47-0.92). Blinded independent centrally reviewed PFS analysis confirmed this result. A statistically significant interaction with treatment effect was found for smoking habit (p = 0.0323), with PFS prolongation being clinically significant only among current or previous smokers. Hypertension (grade ≥3: 24% versus 5%), skin rash (grade ≥ 3: 31% versus 14%), thromboembolic events (any grade: 11% versus 4%), and proteinuria (any grade: 23% versus 6%) were more frequent with the combination.The addition of bevacizumab to first-line erlotinib prolonged PFS in Italian patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC; toxicity was increased with the combination but without unexpected safety issues.

Bonanno L. et al. Supplementary Figures

Purpose:In the phase III ADAURA trial, adjuvant treatment with osimertinib versus placebo, with/without prior adjuvant chemotherapy, resulted in a statistically significant and clinically meaningful disease-free survival benefit in completely resected stage IB–IIIA EGFR-mutated (EGFRm) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes from ADAURA.Patients and Methods:Patients randomized 1:1 received oral osimertinib 80 mg or placebo for 3 years or until recurrence/discontinuation. HRQoL (secondary endpoint) was measured using the Short Form-36 (SF-36) health survey at baseline, 12, and 24 weeks, then every 24 weeks until recurrence or treatment completion/discontinuation. Exploratory analyses of SF-36 score changes from baseline until week 96 and time to deterioration (TTD) were performed in the overall population (stage IB–IIIA; N = 682). Clinically meaningful changes were defined using the SF-36 manual.Results:Baseline physical/mental component summary (PCS/MCS) scores were comparable between osimertinib and placebo (range, 46–47) and maintained to Week 96, with no clinically meaningful differences between arms; difference in adjusted least squares (LS) mean [95% confidence intervals (CI), −1.18 (−2.02 to −0.34) and −1.34 (−2.40 to −0.28), for PCS and MCS, respectively. There were no differences between arms for TTD of PCS and MCS; HR, 1.17 (95% CI, 0.82–1.67) and HR, 0.98 (95% CI, 0.70–1.39), respectively.Conclusions:HRQoL was maintained with adjuvant osimertinib in patients with stage IB–IIIA EGFRm NSCLC, who were disease-free after complete resection, with no clinically meaningful differences versus placebo, further supporting adjuvant osimertinib as a new treatment in this setting.See related commentary by Patil and Bunn, p. 2204

Bonanno L. et al. Supplementary Tables

Supplementary Figure from Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes in Patients with Resected Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor–Mutated Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Who Received Adjuvant Osimertinib in the Phase III ADAURA Trial

Supplementary Table from Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes in Patients with Resected Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor–Mutated Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Who Received Adjuvant Osimertinib in the Phase III ADAURA Trial

Purpose:MET-deregulated NSCLC represents an urgent clinical need because of unfavorable prognosis and lack of specific therapies. Although recent studies have suggested a potential role for crizotinib in patients harboring MET amplification or exon 14 mutations, no conclusive data are currently available. This study aimed at investigating activity of crizotinib in patients harboring MET or ROS1 alterations.Patients and Methods:Patients with pretreated advanced NSCLC and evidence of ROS1 rearrangements (cohort A) or MET deregulation (amplification, ratio MET/CEP7 >2.2 or MET exon 14 mutations, cohort B) were treated with crizotinib 250 mg twice daily orally. The coprimary endpoint was objective response rate in the two cohorts.Results:From December 2014 to March 2017, 505 patients were screened and a total of 52 patients (26 patients per cohort) were enrolled onto the study. At data cutoff of September 2017, in cohort A, objective response rate was 65%, and median progression-free survival and overall survival were 22.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 15.2–30.3] and not reached, respectively. In cohort B, objective response rate was 27%, median progression-free survival was 4.4 months (95% CI 3.0–5.8), and overall survival was 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.2–6.5). No difference in any clinical endpoint was observed between MET-amplified and exon 14–mutated patients. No response was observed among the 5 patients with cooccurrence of a second gene alteration. No unexpected toxicity was observed in both cohorts.Conclusions:Crizotinib induces response in a fraction of MET-deregulated NSCLC. Additional studies and innovative therapies are urgently needed.

Purpose: LKB1 is a key sensor of metabolic stress, including hypoxia and glucose deprivation, two features of the tumor microenvironment exacerbated by antiangiogenic therapy. We investigated the role of LKB1 as a potential predictive marker of sensitivity to bevacizumab in advanced non–small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC).Experimental design: We retrospectively analyzed LKB1 expression by IHC in 98 samples from 125 patients with aNSCLC, including 59 patients treated with chemotherapy and 39 treated with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. IHC intensity was recoded in two classes (negative/weak vs. moderate/intense) and correlated with outcome according to treatment arm. Patient-derived tumor xenografts (PDXs) were used to investigate mechanisms involved in preclinical models.Results: In the whole study population (125), median OS and PFS were 11.7 [95% confidence interval (CI), 9.1–15.3] and 6.7 (95% CI, 5.7–7.2) months, respectively. Differential impact of the marker on outcome of the 98 patients was highlighted according to the treatment. Patients with negative/weak LKB1 status did not have a statistically significant benefit from bevacizumab added to chemotherapy (HR for patients treated with bevacizumab: 0.89; 95% CI, 0.51–1.56; P = 0.6803), whereas patients expressing moderate/intense LKB1 and receiving bevacizumab had significant lower risk of death compared with those not receiving bevacizumab (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.10–0.64; P = 0.0035). Loss of LKB1 was associated with reduced AMPK activation in PDXs and increased tumor necrosis following bevacizumab administration, highlighting impaired control of the metabolic stress caused by this antiangiogenic drug.Conclusions: Our data hint at a possible predictive impact of LKB1 expression in patients with aNSCLC treated with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Clin Cancer Res; 23(13); 3316–24. ©2017 AACR.

PDF file - 280KB, Supplementary Table S1. Primers for TP53 genotyping. Supplementary Table S2. Cell lines used as controls for TP53, KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA genotyping. Supplementary Table S3. Amplification conditions for TP53 genotyping. Supplementary Table S4. Primers for k-RAS, BRAF and PIK3CA genotyping. Supplementary Table S5. Amplification conditions for KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA genotyping. Supplementary Table S6: Additional clinical and biological characteristics of the patients in the training and validation cohorts, according to EGFR status. Supplementary Table S7: Characteristics of the patients in the training cohort, classified according to EGFR and TP53 status. Supplementary Table S8: List of observed TP53 mutations (training and validation cohorts). Supplementary Table S9: Univariate Cox regression analysis of selected factors for overall survival in the EGFR-wt and EGFR-mut populations of the training cohort. Supplementary Table S10: Results of multivariate analysis of selected factors for overall survival in the EGFR-wt and EGFR-mut groups of the training cohort. Supplementary Table S11: GOF activities in cell line models of some nondisruptive TP53 mutations found in this study. Supplementary Figure S1: Structure of the TP53 protein representing the location of the mutations found in the training cohort. Supplementary Figure S2: Types of TP53 mutations in the training and validation cohorts. Supplementary Figure S3: Distribution of KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA mutations in the training cohort. Supplementary Figure S4. Kaplan-Meier plots of overall and progression-free survival of the 318 patients in the training cohort, according to EGFR mutational status. Supplementary Figure S5. Kaplan-Meier plots of overall survival of the 125 EGFR-wt patients in the training cohort, according to G12C mutations in K-RAS. Supplementary Figure S6: Kaplan-Meier plots of overall and progression-free survival of the 318 patients in the training cohort, according to TP53 status. Supplementary Figure S7. Kaplan-Meier plots of overall survival of the 110 EGFR-wt patients in the training cohort not carrying G12C mutations in K-RAS. Supplementary Figure S8: Kaplan-Meier plots of progression-free survival of the 318 patients in the training cohort, according to TP53 mutational status. Supplementary Figure S9: Kaplan-Meier plots of progression-free survival in the training cohort, according to EGFR and TP53 mutational status. Supplementary Figure S10: Kaplan-Meier plots of progression-free survival in the training cohort, according to type of treatment.

Supplementary information of the manuscript Table S1. Outcome to prior therapy in cohort A and cohort B Table S2. Response according to molecular profile in Cohort A Table S3. Response according to molecular profile in Cohort B Tables S4. Efficacy outcome according to type of MET deregulation Table S5. Adverse events (AEs) in Cohort A and Cohort B Table S6. List of serious adverse events (SAE) as reported by investigators Table S7. List of all participating Institutions

Introduction: Adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended in patients with resected stages II to IIIA (and select IB) NSCLC; however, recurrence rates are high. In the phase 3 ADAURA study (NCT02511106), osimertinib was found to have a clinically meaningful improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with resected stages IB to IIIA EGFR-mutated (EGFRm) NSCLC. Here, we report prespecified and exploratory analyses of adjuvant chemotherapy use and outcomes from ADAURA. Methods: Patients with resected stages IB to IIIA EGFRm NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to receive osimertinib or placebo for 3 years. Adjuvant chemotherapy before randomization was not mandatory, per physician and patient choice. DFS in the overall population (IB-IIIA), with and without adjuvant chemotherapy, was a prespecified analysis. Exploratory analyses included the following: adjuvant chemotherapy use by patient age, disease stage, and geographic location; DFS by adjuvant chemotherapy use and disease stage. Results: Overall, 410 of 682 patients (60%) received adjuvant chemotherapy (osimertinib, n = 203; placebo, n = 207) for a median duration of 4.0 cycles. Adjuvant chemotherapy use was more frequent in patients: aged less than 70 years (338 of 509; 66%) versus more than or equal to 70 years (72 of 173; 42%); with stages II to IIIA (352 of 466; 76%) versus stage IB (57 of 216; 26%); and enrolled in Asia (268 of 414; 65%) versus outside of Asia (142 of 268; 53%). A DFS benefit favoring osimertinib versus placebo was observed in patients with (DFS hazard ratio = 0.16, 95% confidence interval: 0.10-0.26) and without adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.23, 95% confidence interval: 0.13-0.40), regardless of disease stage. Conclusions: These findings support adjuvant osimertinib as an effective treatment for patients with stages IB to IIIA EGFRm NSCLC after resection, with or without previous adjuvant chemotherapy. (C) 2021 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Background Team debriefing is an important teamwork development intervention for improving team outputs in healthcare. Debriefing is a key component of experiential team training teamwork development interventions such as simulation-based training. Improving the quality of debriefing of healthcare teams, therefore, has multiple benefits. We investigated whether the quality of student-led debriefing improved using a shortened guide. Methods Senior medical students, nurse anesthesia students, and senior undergraduate nursing students participated in student operating room team training at a health sciences center in the southeastern United States. Student teams participated in a dual-scenario simulation-based training session with immediate after-action debriefings after each scenario. In 2018, student teams conducted the second debriefing using as a guide the teamwork assessment scale, an 11-item, 3-subscale, 6-point Likert-type instrument. In 2019, they used a shortened, revised, 5-item version of the teamwork assessment scale, the quick teamwork assessment scale. Trained observers rated the quality of the student-led debriefings using the Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing, an 8-item, 5-point instrument. The Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the teamwork assessment scale-guided and the quick teamwork assessment scale-guided mean item debriefing scores. Results Two observers rated 3 student-led team debriefings using the teamwork assessment scales as a guide in 2018, and 6 such debriefings happened using the quick teamwork assessment scale as a guide in 2019. For each debriefing, observer scores were averaged for each Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing item; these mean scores were then averaged with other mean scores for each year. The use of the quick teamwork assessment scale resulted in a statistically significant higher mean score for the Analysis Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing item compared with the use of the teamwork assessment scale (4.92 [standard deviation 0.20] versus 3.83 [standard deviation 0.76], P = .023). Conclusion The use of a shortened teamwork assessment instrument as a debriefing guide for student teams in student operating room team training was more effective in analysis of actions than the original, longer tool. Next steps include determining the efficacy of the quick teamwork assessment scale in an actual clinical setting.

Background: About 30% of new non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases are diagnosed at a locally advanced stage, which includes a highly heterogeneous group of patients with a wide spectrum of treatment options. The management of stage III NSCLC involves a multidisciplinary team, adequate staging, and a careful patient selection for surgery or radiation therapy integrated with systemic treatment. Methods: This is a single-center observational retrospective and prospective study including a consecutive series of stage III NSCLC patients who were referred to the Veneto Institute of Oncology and University Hospital of Padova (Italy) between 2012 and 2021. We described clinico-pathological characteristics, therapeutic pathways, and treatment responses in terms of radiological response in the entire study population and in terms of pathological response in patients who underwent surgery after induction therapy. Furthermore, we analysed survival outcomes in terms of relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 301 patients were included. The majority of patients received surgical multimodality treatment (n = 223, 74.1%), while the remaining patients (n = 78, 25.9%) underwent definitive CRT followed or not by durvalumab as consolidation therapy. At data cut-off, 188 patients (62.5%) relapsed and the median RFS (mRFS) of the entire population was 18.2 months (95% CI: 15.83–20.57). At the time of analyses 140 patients (46.5%) were alive and the median OS (mOS) was 44.7 months (95% CI: 38.4–51.0). A statistically significant difference both in mRFS (p = 0.002) and in mOS (p < 0.001) was observed according to the therapeutic pathway in the entire population, and selecting patients treated after 2018, a significant difference in mRFS (p = 0.006) and mOS (p < 0.001) was observed according to treatment modality. Furthermore, considering only patients diagnosed with stage IIIB-C (N = 131, 43.5%), there were significant differences both in mRFS (p = 0.047) and in mOS (p = 0.022) as per the treatment algorithm. The mRFS of the unresectable population was 16.3 months (95% CI: 11.48–21.12), with a significant difference among subgroups (p = 0.030) in favour of patients who underwent the PACIFIC-regimen; while the mOS was 46.5 months (95% CI: 26.46–66.65), with a significant difference between two subgroups (p = 0.003) in favour of consolidation immunotherapy. Conclusions: Our work provides insights into the management and the survival outcomes of stage III NSCLC over about 10 years. We found that the choice of radical treatment impacts on outcome, thus suggesting the importance of appropriate staging at diagnosis, patient selection, and of the multidisciplinary approach in the decision-making process. Our results confirmed that the PACIFIC trial and the following introduction of durvalumab as consolidation treatment may be considered as a turning point for several improvements in the diagnostic-therapeutic pathway of stage III NSCLC patients.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib is standard-of-care therapy for previously untreated epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The efficacy and safety of osimertinib as adjuvant therapy are unknown. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with completely resected EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC in a 1:1 ratio to receive either osimertinib (80 mg once daily) or placebo for 3 years. The primary end point was disease-free survival among patients with stage II to IIIA disease (according to investigator assessment). The secondary end points included disease-free survival in the overall population of patients with stage IB to IIIA disease, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 682 patients underwent randomization (339 to the osimertinib group and 343 to the placebo group). At 24 months, 90% of the patients with stage II to IIIA disease in the osimertinib group (95% confidence interval [CI], 84 to 93) and 44% of thosein the placebo group (95% CI, 37 to 51) were alive and disease-free (overall hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.17; 99.06% CI, 0.11 to 0.26; P

Background: The role of MET alterations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is increasing and several targeted agents are under evaluation. MET exon 14 skipping mutations and MET amplifications are associated with potential sensitivity to MET inhibition, though resistance mechanisms are emerging. In MET addicted cells, MET inhibition leads to activation of proviral integration site for Moloney murine leukemia virus-1 (PIM1). PIM1 and proto-oncogene tyrosine-protein kinase Src (SRC) can regulate the expression of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs), potentially inducing resistance to MET inhibition through cross-activation. Methods: We evaluated the activity of class I-II MET inhibitors, the SRC inhibitor dasatinib, and panPIM inhibitors in four MET addicted cell lines. We assessed the effect of the dual MET/PIM and MET/ SRC inhibition on cell viability and at the protein level. We evaluated RNA expression profiles of the cell lines. Advanced NSCLCs were also screened for MET alterations. Results: All cell lines were sensitive to class I-II MET inhibitors. All cell lines were resistant to single PIM and SRC inhibition. Dual MET/PIM inhibition was synergistic or additive in MET amplified cell lines and dual MET/SRC inhibition was highly synergistic in all MET addicted cell lines. The addition of an SRC inhibitor partially prevents the RTKs cross-activation. MET alterations were found in 9 out of 97 evaluable samples (9.3%); median overall survival in MET altered patients was 5 months (95% CI, 3 m-NA). Conclusions: We identified a potential role of PIM inhibition in MET amplified tumors and of SRC inhibition in MET addicted tumors. Potential applications of this new treatment strategy warrant further evaluation.

Lurbinectedin is a synthetic marine-derived anticancer agent that acts as a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription. Lurbinectedin monotherapy (3·2 mg/mIn this phase 3, open-label, randomised study, adult patients aged 18 years or older with SCLC who relapsed after platinum-based chemotherapy were recruited from 135 hospitals across North America, South America, Europe, and the Middle East. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by dynamic allocation to intravenous lurbinectedin 2·0 mg/mBetween Aug 30, 2016, and Aug 20, 2018, 613 patients were randomly assigned to lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin (n=307) or control (topotecan, n=127; CAV, n=179) and comprised the intention-to-treat population; safety endpoints were assessed in patients who had received any partial or complete study treatment infusions (lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin, n=303; control, n=289). After a median follow-up of 24·1 months (95% CI 21·7-26·3), 303 patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group and 289 patients in the control group had discontinued study treatment; progressive disease was the most common reason for discontinuation (213 [70%] patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group vs 152 [53%] in the control group). Median overall survival was 8·6 months (95% CI 7·1-9·4) in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group versus 7·6 months (6·6-8·2) in the control group (stratified log-rank p=0·90; hazard ratio 0·97 [95% CI 0·82-1·15], p=0·70). 12 patients died because of treatment-related adverse events: two (1%) of 303 in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group and ten (3%) of 289 in the control group. 296 (98%) of 303 patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group had treatment-emergent adverse events compared with 284 (98%) of 289 patients in the control group; treatment-related adverse events occurred in 268 (88%) patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group and 266 (92%) patients in the control group. Grade 3 or worse haematological adverse events were less frequent in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group than the control group (anaemia, 57 [19%] of 302 patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group vs 110 [38%] of 288 in the control group; neutropenia, 112 [37%] vs 200 [69%]; thrombocytopenia, 42 [14%] vs 90 [31%]). The frequency of treatment-related adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation was lower in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group than in the control group (26 [9%] of 303 patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group vs 47 [16%] of 289 in the control group).Combination therapy with lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin did not improve overall survival versus control in patients with relapsed SCLC. However, lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin showed a favourable haematological safety profile compared with control.PharmaMar.

Data on tumor immune-milieu after chemo-radiation (CT-RT) are scarce. Noninvasive tools are needed to improve the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), especially in the locally advanced (LA) setting.We collected a series of superior-sulcus (SS)- patients with NSCLC referred to our Institute (2015-2019), eligible for a preoperative CT-RT. We characterized tumor-infiltrating immune cells (TIICs), determined PD-L1-TPS and the residual viable tumor cells (RVTC). Radiological and metabolic responses were reviewed. We calculated pre-surgery neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR).Eight patients were included. Radiological responses were 6 disease stabilities (SD) and 2 partial responses (PR). Metabolic responses were 4 SD and 4 PR. CD68+-TIICs were correlated with metabolic response and lower RVTC. CD68+-TIICs were associated with higher PLR. Higher PLR values seemed linked with lower RVTC.These preliminary results could be useful for consolidation treatment selection for patients with LA-NSCLC without evaluable baseline PD-L1 and higher PLR values.

Purpose: In the phase III ADAURA trial, adjuvant treatment with osimertinib versus placebo, with/without prior adjuvant chemotherapy, resulted in a statistically significant and clinically meaningful disease-free survival benefit in completely resected stage IB–IIIA EGFR-mutated (EGFRm) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes from ADAURA. Patients and Methods: Patients randomized 1:1 received oral osimertinib 80 mg or placebo for 3 years or until recurrence/discontinuation. HRQoL (secondary endpoint) was measured using the Short Form-36 (SF-36) health survey at baseline, 12, and 24 weeks, then every 24 weeks until recurrence or treatment completion/discontinuation. Exploratory analyses of SF-36 score changes from baseline until week 96 and time to deterioration (TTD) were performed in the overall population (stage IB–IIIA; N = 682). Clinically meaningful changes were defined using the SF-36 manual. Results: Baseline physical/mental component summary (PCS/MCS) scores were comparable between osimertinib and placebo (range, 46–47) and maintained to Week 96, with no clinically meaningful differences between arms; difference in adjusted least squares (LS) mean [95% confidence intervals (CI), −1.18 (−2.02 to −0.34) and −1.34 (−2.40 to −0.28), for PCS and MCS, respectively. There were no differences between arms for TTD of PCS and MCS; HR, 1.17 (95% CI, 0.82–1.67) and HR, 0.98 (95% CI, 0.70–1.39), respectively. Conclusions: HRQoL was maintained with adjuvant osimertinib in patients with stage IB–IIIA EGFRm NSCLC, who were disease-free after complete resection, with no clinically meaningful differences versus placebo, further supporting adjuvant osimertinib as a new treatment in this setting. See related commentary by Patil and Bunn, p. 2204

About 30% of new non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases are diagnosed at a locally advanced stage, which includes a highly heterogeneous group of patients with a wide spectrum of treatment options. The management of stage III NSCLC involves a multidisciplinary team, adequate staging, and a careful patient selection for surgery or radiation therapy integrated with systemic treatment.This is a single-center observational retrospective and prospective study including a consecutive series of stage III NSCLC patients who were referred to the Veneto Institute of Oncology and University Hospital of Padova (Italy) between 2012 and 2021. We described clinico-pathological characteristics, therapeutic pathways, and treatment responses in terms of radiological response in the entire study population and in terms of pathological response in patients who underwent surgery after induction therapy. Furthermore, we analysed survival outcomes in terms of relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).A total of 301 patients were included. The majority of patients received surgical multimodality treatment (Our work provides insights into the management and the survival outcomes of stage III NSCLC over about 10 years. We found that the choice of radical treatment impacts on outcome, thus suggesting the importance of appropriate staging at diagnosis, patient selection, and of the multidisciplinary approach in the decision-making process. Our results confirmed that the PACIFIC trial and the following introduction of durvalumab as consolidation treatment may be considered as a turning point for several improvements in the diagnostic-therapeutic pathway of stage III NSCLC patients.

The selective RET-inhibitor pralsetinib has shown therapeutic activity in early clinical trials in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring rearranged during transfection (RET) gene fusions. To date, the real-world efficacy of pralsetinib in this population is unknown.A retrospective efficacy and safety analysis was performed on data from patients with RET-fusion positive NSCLC enrolled in the pralsetinib Italian expanded access program between July 2019 and October 2021.Overall, 62 patients with RET-fusion positive NSCLC received pralsetinib at 20 Italian centers. Next-generation sequencing was used to detect RET alterations in 44 patients (73 %). The most frequent gene fusion partner was KIF5B (75 % of 45 evaluable). Median age was 62 years (range, 36-90), most patients were female (57 %) and never smokers (53 %). Brain metastases were known in 18 patients (29.5 %) at the time of pralsetinib treatment. 13 patients were treatment naïve (unfit for chemotherapy), 48 were pretreated (median number of previous lines: 1, range, 1-4). The objective response rate (ORR) was 66 % [95 % confidence interval (CI), 53-81] in the evaluable population (n = 59). The disease control rate (DCR) was 79 %. After a median follow-up of 10.1 months, the median progression free survival was 8.9 months (95 %CI, 4.7-NA). In patients with measurable brain metastases (n = 6) intracranial ORR was 83 %, intracranial DCR was 100 %. Overall, 83.6 % of patients experienced any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), 39 % grade 3 or greater (G ≥ 3). The most common G ≥ 3 TRAEs were neutropenia (9.8 %), dry mouth/oral mucositis (8.2 %), and thrombocytopenia (6.6 %). Seven patients (12 %) discontinued pralsetinib due to TRAEs, twenty-six had at least one dose level modification due to TRAEs. Two treatment-related deaths were observed (1 sepsis, 1 typhlitis).In the real-world setting, pralsetinib confirmed durable systemic activity and intracranial response in RET-fusion positive NSCLC. Toxicity profile was consistent with previous reports.

Background Liquid biopsy has the potential to monitor biological effects of treatment. KRAS represents the most commonly mutated oncogene in Caucasian non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of this study was to explore association of dynamic plasma KRAS genotyping with outcome in advanced NSCLC patients. Methods Advanced NSCLC patients were prospectively enrolled. Plasma samples were collected at baseline (T1), after 3 or 4 weeks, according to treatment schedule (T2) and at first radiological restaging (T3). Patients carrying KRAS mutation in tissue were analysed in plasma with droplet digital PCR. Semi-quantitative index of fractional abundance of mutated allele (MAFA) was used. Results KRAS-mutated cohort included 58 patients, and overall 73 treatments (N = 39 chemotherapy and N = 34 immune checkpoint inhibitors) were followed with longitudinal liquid biopsy. Sensitivity of KRAS detection in plasma at baseline was 48.3% (95% confidence interval (CI): 35.0–61.8). KRAS mutation at T2 was associated with increased probability of experiencing progressive disease as best radiological response (adjusted odds ratio: 7.3; 95% CI: 2.1–25.0, p = 0.0016). Increased MAFA (T1–T2) predicted shorter progression-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 2.1; 95% CI: 1.2–3.8, p = 0.0142) and overall survival (adjusted HR: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.2–8.4, p = 0.0168). Conclusions Longitudinal analysis of plasma KRAS mutations correlated with outcome: its early assessment during treatment has great potentialities for monitoring treatment outcome in NSCLC patients.

During the last decades, genetic characterization of tumors has gained an increasing role in the development of new systemic treatments and one of the most commonly recognized needs in modern oncology is to use molecular characterization to tailor therapy. In many malignancies, but especially in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), therapeutic algorithms are shaped based on genetic characterization and identification of driver alterations, which can be targeted with highly specific drugs (1). The current paradigm in precision oncology is that the more accurate we are in defining the disease, the best treatment we can administer to the patient in terms of efficacy, duration of clinical benefit and survival. This common ground is slowly but firmly pushing techniques for broad genetic characterization into daily practice of NSCLC. Next generation sequencing (NGS) allows screening of a large number of genetic alterations simultaneously and advanced stage disease is the first setting in which such analyses are currently applied.

Background Osimertinib became the standard treatment for patients with untreated EGFR-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) following results reported in the phase III randomized FLAURA trial. Because of strict exclusion criteria, patient populations included in pivotal trials are only partially representative of real-world patients. Methods We designed an observational, prospective, multicenter study enrolling patients with EGFR-mutant aNSCLC receiving first-line osimertinib to evaluate effectiveness, safety, and progression patterns in the real-world. Results At data cutoff, 126 White patients from nine oncology centers were included. At diagnosis, 16 patients (12.7%) had a performance status (PS) ≥2 and 38 (30.2%) had brain metastases. Overall response rate (ORR) was 73%, disease control rate (DCR) 96.0%. After a median follow-up of 12.3 months, median time to treatment discontinuation (mTTD) was 25.3 months, median progression-free-survival (mPFS) was 18.9 months and median overall survival (mOS) was not reached (NR). One hundred and ten patients (87%) experienced adverse events (AEs), 42 (33%) of grade 3–4, with venous thromboembolism (VTE) as the most common (n = 10, 7.9%). No difference in rates of VTE was reported according to age, PS, comorbidity, and tumor load. We observed longer mTTD in patients without symptoms (NR vs. 18.8 months) and with fewer than three metastatic sites at diagnosis (NR vs. 21.4 months). Patients without brain metastases experienced longer mPFS (NR vs. 13.3 months). No difference in survival outcome was observed according to age, comorbidity, and type of EGFR mutation. Isolated progression and progression in fewer than three sites were associated with longer time to treatment discontinuation (TTD). Conclusion Osimertinib confirmed effectiveness and safety in the real world, although thromboembolism was more frequent than previously reported.

Lay abstract Osimertinib is an oral drug that inhibits the growth of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors with a specific mutation in

The objective of this review is to evaluate the effectiveness of intravenous administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) within three hours of birth in mothers with a diagnosis of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH).Postpartum hemorrhage, that is, blood loss exceeding 500 mL for vaginal births or 1000 mL for cesarean sections within 24 hours of delivery, is the leading cause of maternal deaths worldwide. The World Health Organization recommends intravenous TXA as an adjuvant therapy for the treatment of PPH, in addition to standard recommended treatments, within three hours of birth. This review will determine whether TXA administration to patients experiencing PPH leads to a reduction in blood loss, the requirement for transfusion of packed red blood cells and the need for emergency hysterectomies, in both developed and developing nations.This review will consider studies that include women under 40 with a diagnosis of postpartum hemorrhage. Studies that evaluate intravenous administration of TXA within three hours of birth as adjuvant treatment of postpartum hemorrhage will be considered. The comparator will be groups that have not received TXA as part of the treatment for postpartum hemorrhage, with or without placebo.MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science and ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health will be searched for eligible studies. The search for unpublished studies will include: ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (PQDT), ClinicalTrials.gov and New York Academy of Medicine Grey Literature Report. Retrieval of full-text studies, assessment of methodological quality and data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis will be performed, if possible.

IMPORTANCE: Bevacizumab treatment beyond progression has been investigated in breast and metastatic colorectal cancers. Avastin in All Lines Lung (AvaALL) is the first randomized phase 3 study of bevacizumab across multiple lines of treatment beyond progression in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of continuous bevacizumab treatment beyond first progression in NSCLC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: AvaALL was a randomized, open-label, phase 3b trial, conducted from 2011 to 2015 in 123 centers worldwide. Patients with nonsquamous NSCLC previously treated with first-line bevacizumab plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy and at least 2 cycles of bevacizumab maintenance were randomized (1:1) at first progression to receive bevacizumab plus standard of care (SOC) or SOC alone. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received bevacizumab (7.5 or 15 mg/kg intravenously every 21 days) and/or investigator’s choice of SOC. For subsequent lines, patients treated with bevacizumab received SOC with or without bevacizumab; the SOC arm received SOC only. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival from first to second (PFS2) and third progression (PFS3), time to second (TTP2) and third progression (TTP3), and safety. RESULTS: Between June 2011 and January 2015, 485 patients (median age, 63.0 years [range, 26-84 years]; 293 [60.4%] male) were randomized. Median OS was not significantly longer with bevacizumab plus SOC vs SOC alone: 11.9 (90% CI, 10.2-13.7) vs 10.2 (90% CI, 8.6-11.9) months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 90% CI, 0.71-1.00; P = .104). Median PFS2 was numerically longer with bevacizumab plus SOC vs SOC alone: 5.5 (90% CI, 4.2-5.7) vs 4.0 (90% CI, 3.4-4.3) months (HR, 0.83; 90% CI, 0.70-0.98; P = .06). Median PFS3 appeared longer with bevacizumab plus SOC vs SOC alone: 4.0 (90% CI, 2.9-4.5) vs 2.6 (90% CI, 2.3-2.9) months (HR, 0.63; 90% CI, 0.49-0.83), as did TTP2 and TTP3. Grade 3/4 adverse events were more frequent with bevacizumab plus SOC (186 [76.5%]) vs SOC alone (140 [60.3%]). No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The primary end point was not met; however, OS was underpowered according to initial statistical assumptions. Continued therapy beyond first progression led to improved PFS3 (but not PFS2), TTP2, and TTP3. Although a result with P = .06 for PFS2 would conventionally be considered significant at a specified 2-sided α of .10, in the absence of adjustments for multiplicity, this result could be a chance finding. No new safety signals were identified with bevacizumab treatment beyond progression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrialsregister.eu Identifier: 2010-022645-14; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01351415

Background Molecular characterization of non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), defined predictive and druggable mutations that greatly modified patient prognoses. The most frequent driver mutations detected in NSCLC are epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations, accounting for approximately 90% of exon 19 deletions and exon 21 point mutations. The other EGFR mutations are classified as uncommon or nonclassical and include exon 18 point mutations, exon 20 insertions, and combined mutations, which present different sensitivity to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) targeting. Patients and Methods We collected data from EGFR TKI-naive patients with metastatic NSCLC, harboring EGFR exon 18 mutations and EGFR combined mutations treated with first- or second-generation EGFR TKIs. Efficacy end points were evaluated considering the activity of EGFR TKIs in exon 18 versus double-mutation EGFR groups. Results Eighty-eight patients harboring uncommon EGFR mutations were evaluated in our analysis, and subdivided into 2 group: complex mutations (cohort A = 46 patients) and double mutations in exon 18 (cohort B = 42 patients). The results showed a median progression-free survival of 8.3 versus 12.3 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; P = .06) and a median overall survival of 17.0 versus 31.0 months (HR, 0.62, P = .04) favoring the EGFR combination group. Within the combination group, no detrimental effect was associated with exon 20 mutations. Conclusion Our study confirmed that EGFR exon 18 and combination mutations might be considered potentially sensitive uncommon mutations, with a similar survival compared with the well known common EGFR mutations. Comparative analysis showed that patients with complex mutations achieved longer survival compared with the exon 18 group, without correlation with the presence of exon 20 mutations.