Search

In the KEYNOTE-158 study (NCT02628067), pembrolizumab showed a high objective response rate and durable clinical benefit for patients with previously treated, unresectable/metastatic microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair‒deficient (dMMR) non-colorectal solid tumours. We present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) results from the MSI-H/dMMR population (cohort K).Eligible patients had previously treated MSI-H/dMMR advanced non-colorectal solid tumours, measurable disease per RECIST v1.1, and ECOG performance status ≤1. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W for 35 cycles (2 years). The EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and EQ-5D-3L were administered at baseline, at regular intervals throughout treatment, and 30 days after treatment discontinuation. Prespecified analyses (exploratory endpoints) included the magnitude of change from baseline to post-baseline timepoints in all patients and by the best overall response for QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QoL, QLQ-C30 functional/symptom scales/items, and EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale (VAS) score.At data cutoff (October 5, 2020), 351 patients were enrolled, of whom 311 and 315 completed baseline QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires, respectively. QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL scores improved from baseline to week 9 (mean [95% CI] change, 3.07 [0.19-5.94]), then remained stable or improved by week 111, with greater improvements observed in patients with a best response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) (10.85 [6.36-15.35]). Patients with CR/PR showed improvements in physical (5.58 [1.91-9.25]), role (9.88 [3.80-15.97]), emotional (5.62 [1.56-9.68]), and social (8.33 [2.70-13.97]) functioning, and stable cognitive functioning (1.74 [-1.45 to 4.94]).Pembrolizumab generally improved or preserved HRQoL in patients with previously treated MSI-H/dMMR advanced non-colorectal solid tumours.

Purpose:Primary analysis of VISION showed tepotinib had durable clinical activity in patients with MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We present updated outcomes for clinically relevant subgroups.Patients and Methods:This phase II, open-label, multi-cohort study of 500 mg (450 mg active moiety) tepotinib in patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC assessed efficacy and safety in predefined subgroups according to age, prior therapies (chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors), and brain metastases. An ad hoc retrospective analysis using Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Brain Metastases (RANO-BM) criteria assessed intracranial activity.Results:152 patients were evaluable for efficacy (median age: 73.1). Overall, objective response rate (ORR) was 44.7% [95% confidence interval (CI): 36.7–53.0]. Patients aged n = 84) and ≥75 (n = 68) had ORRs of 48.8% (95% CI: 37.7–60.0) and 39.7% (95% CI: 28.0–52.3), respectively. Treatment-naïve (n = 69) versus previously treated (n = 83) patients showed consistent efficacy [ORR (95% CI): 44.9% (32.9–57.4) vs. 44.6% (33.7–55.9); median duration of response (95% CI): 10.8 (6.9–not estimable) vs. 11.1 (9.5–18.5) months]. Of 15 patients analyzed by RANO-BM (12 received prior radiotherapy), 13 achieved intracranial disease control; 5 of 7 patients with measurable brain metastases had partial intracranial responses. Of 255 patients evaluable for safety, 64 (25.1%) experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAE), leading to discontinuation in 27 patients (10.6%). Rates of adverse events (AE) were broadly consistent irrespective of prior therapies.Conclusions:Tepotinib showed meaningful activity across subgroups by age, prior therapies, and brain metastases, with a manageable safety profile and few treatment discontinuations.See related commentary by Rosner and Spira, p. 1055

Supplementary Data from Tepotinib Efficacy and Safety in Patients with MET Exon 14 Skipping NSCLC: Outcomes in Patient Subgroups from the VISION Study with Relevance for Clinical Practice

ImportanceAdvanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with no driver mutations are typically treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy, either in the form of monotherapy or concurrently with chemotherapy, while treatment modality selection is based mainly on programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression levels in the tumor. However, PD-L1 assays are only moderately predictive of therapeutic benefit.ObjectiveTo develop a novel decision-making tool for physicians treating NSCLC patients on whether to administer immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy.Design, setting, and participantsThis multicenter observational study includes patients from an ongoing clinical trial (PROPHETIC;NCT04056247). Patients were recruited from 13 different centers (total n=425; 58 patients were excluded) from June 2016 and June 2021. Plasma samples were obtained prior to treatment initiation, and deep proteomic profiling was conducted. PROphet® computational model for predicting clinical benefit (CB) probability at 12 months was developed based on the plasma proteomic profile. The model performance was validated in a blinded manner. Following validation, training and prediction was performed over the entire cohort using cross-validation methodology. The patients were divided into four groups based on their PD-L1 expression level combined with their CB probability, and the survival outcome was examined for each group. The data were analyzed from July to October 2022.Main outcome and measuresClinical benefit from ICI-based treatment, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsThe model displayed strong predictive capability with an AUC of 0.78 (p-value = 5.00e-05), outperforming a PD-L1-based predictive model (AUC = 0.62; p-value 2.76e-01), and exhibited a significant difference in OS and PFS between patients with low and high CB probabilities. When combining CB probability with PD-L1 expression levels, four patient subgroups were identified; (i) patients with PD-L1≥50% and a negative PROphet result who significantly benefit from ICI-chemotherapy combination therapy compared to ICI monotherapy; (ii) patients with PD-L1≥50% and a positive PROphet result who benefit similarly from either treatment modalities; (iii) patients with PD-L1Conclusions and relevanceThe PROphet® model displayed good performance for prediction of CB at 12 months based on a plasma sample obtained prior to treatment. Our findings further demonstrate a potential clinical utility for informing treatment decisions for NSCLC patients treated with ICIs by adding resolution to the PD-L1 biomarker currently used to guide treatment selection, thereby enabling to select the most suitable treatment modality for each patient.

PURPOSE We report the first 5-year follow-up of any first-line phase III immunotherapy trial for non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). KEYNOTE-024 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02142738 ) is an open-label, randomized controlled trial of pembrolizumab compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated NSCLC with a programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score of at least 50% and no sensitizing EGFR or ALK alterations. Previous analyses showed pembrolizumab significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). METHODS Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab (200 mg once every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles) or platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients in the chemotherapy group with progressive disease could cross over to pembrolizumab. The primary end point was progression-free survival; OS was a secondary end point. RESULTS Three hundred five patients were randomly assigned: 154 to pembrolizumab and 151 to chemotherapy. Median (range) time from randomization to data cutoff (June 1, 2020) was 59.9 (55.1-68.4) months. Among patients initially assigned to chemotherapy, 99 received subsequent anti–PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy, representing a 66.0% effective crossover rate. Median OS was 26.3 months (95% CI, 18.3 to 40.4) for pembrolizumab and 13.4 months (9.4-18.3) for chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.81). Kaplan-Meier estimates of the 5-year OS rate were 31.9% for the pembrolizumab group and 16.3% for the chemotherapy group. Thirty-nine patients received 35 cycles (ie, approximately 2 years) of pembrolizumab, 82.1% of whom were still alive at data cutoff (approximately 5 years). Toxicity did not increase with longer treatment exposure. CONCLUSION Pembrolizumab provides a durable, clinically meaningful long-term OS benefit versus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for metastatic NSCLC with PD-L1 tumor proportion score of at least 50%.

Background: 1L pembro + platinum-based chemo has shown clinical activity in metastatic NSCLC regardless of tissue tumor mutational burden (tTMB) status. bTMB assessed using circulating tumor DNA in plasma may be a surrogate for tTMB. The single-arm, phase 2 KEYNOTE-782 study (NCT03664024) evaluated the correlation of bTMB with efficacy of 1L pembro + chemo in nonsquamous NSCLC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) had histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC with measurable disease per RECIST v1.1 and were not eligible for EGFR-, BRAF-, ROS1-, or ALK-directed therapy. Pts were not previously treated for advanced or metastatic disease, had an ECOG PS of 0 or 1, and had an evaluable biopsy sample for biomarker analysis. All pts received intravenous pembro 200 mg Q3W + platinum chemo doublet Q3W (pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 + 4 cycles of carboplatin AUC 5 mg/mL/min or cisplatin 75 mg/m2). The primary objective was to evaluate the association of baseline bTMB with ORR per RECIST v1.1 by investigator assessment. Secondary objectives were to determine safety and the association of baseline bTMB with PFS per RECIST v1.1 by investigator assessment and OS. A study-specific next-generation sequencing-based assay using a 1.9 Mb/654-gene cancer panel, which includes specific lung cancer-associated gene targets, was used to measure bTMB (continuous scale) in cell-free DNA extracted from baseline plasma samples. Paired white blood cell DNA sequencing was also performed to eliminate potential clonal hematopoiesis-derived somatic mutations. Database cutoff: November 5, 2021. Results: 117 pts were enrolled; median age was 64.0 years (range, 37-85), and the majority were male (60.7%), had an ECOG PS of 1 (69.2%), and no brain metastases at baseline (92.3%). Median time from first dose to data cutoff was 19.3 months (range, 1.0-35.5). ORR was 40.2% (95% CI, 31.2-49.6; 6 CRs, 41 PRs), median PFS was 7.2 months (95% CI, 5.6-9.8), and median OS was 18.1 months (95% CI, 13.5-25.6). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 113 pts (96.6%) and grade 3-5 TRAEs occurred in 56 (47.9%). Eight pts (6.8%) died due to a TRAE (febrile neutropenia and pneumonitis [n = 2 each], and septic shock, pulmonary sepsis, general physical health deterioration, and neutropenia [n = 1 each]). bTMB data were available for 101 pts. The area under the receiver operating curve for bTMB as a continuous variable to discriminate response was 0.47 (95% CI, 0.36-0.59). The posterior probabilities for a positive association of bTMB with PFS and OS were 16.8% and 7.8%, respectively. Conclusions: Baseline bTMB showed no evidence of an association with ORR, PFS, or OS in pts with nonsquamous NSCLC treated with 1L pembro + chemo. These findings indicate no clinical utility of bTMB in this patient population and treatment setting. No new safety signals were observed. Citation Format: Jair Bar, Emilio Esteban, Delvys Rodríguez-Abreu, Santiago Ponce Aix, Zsuzsanna Szalai, Enriqueta Felip, Maya Gottfried, Mariano Provencio Pulla, Andrew Robinson, Andrea Fülöp, Suman B. Rao, D. Ross Camidge, Giovanna Speranza, Steven M. Townson, Julie Kobie, Mark Ayers, Elisha J. Dettman, Robert McDaniel, Byoungsok Jung, David Burkhardt, Ruth Mauntz, Tibor Csőszi. Response to first-line (1L) pembrolizumab (pembro) + chemotherapy (chemo) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) by blood tumor mutational burden (bTMB): the phase 2 KEYNOTE-782 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT216.

Introduction: Treatment modality selection for metastatic NSCLC patients (immunotherapy alone vs. combination of immunotherapy with chemotherapy) relies mainly on determining the programmed cell death 1 (PD-L1) expression levels in the tumor. However, available assays are only moderately predictive. Here we set to develop PROphet®, a plasma proteomics-based predictive model for informing treatment decisions for NSCLC patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy. Methods: Pre-ICI plasma samples were collected in 12 centers in a clinical trial (NCT04056247) from 367 advanced-stage NSCLC patients. Clinical benefit (CB) was assessed at 12 months based on the occurrence of progression-free survival (PFS) until this time point. Deep proteomic profiling of the plasma samples was performed using aptamer-based technology. A novel machine learning model was developed to determine the CB probability for each patient, and the performance was successfully evaluated on an independent validation set, followed by training and prediction over the entire cohort using cross-validation. The resulting PROphet® score (positive or negative) was determined by setting the median CB rate probability as a threshold. The patients were divided into four subgroups based on their PD-L1 expression level combined with their PROphet® score prediction, and the overall survival (OS) was examined for each subgroup. Results: The PROphet® computational model was evaluated in a blinded manner on a subset of 85 patients and displayed strong predictive capability with area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) plot of 0.78 (p-value = 5.00e-05), outperforming a PD-L1-based predictive model (AUC = 0.62; p-value 2.76e-01). When combining PROphet® score with PD-L1 expression levels, four different outcome patterns were identified: (i) Patients with PD-L1 ≥50% and PROphet® negative score, who displayed significantly longer OS when treated with ICI-chemotherapy combination therapy compared to ICI monotherapy and may consider combination therapy. (ii) Patients with PD-L1 ≥50% and PROphet® positive score, who benefit similarly from either treatment modalities, and may consider monotherapy to avoid the potential toxicity of the combination therapy. (iii) Patients with PD-L1 Conclusions: Altogether, the PROphet® model, when combined with PD-L1 test, stratifies the patients into four subgroups, providing additional resolution to the PD-L1 biomarker currently used to guide treatment selection. Furthermore, the model accurately predicts CB at 12 months based on proteomic analysis of a pre-treatment plasma sample. Citation Format: Michal Harel, Petros Christopoulos, Coren Lahav, Itamar Sela, Nili Dahan, Niels Reinmuth, Ina Koch, Alona Zer, Mor Moskovitz, Adva Levy-Barda, Michal Lotem, Hovav Nechushtan, Rivka Katzenelson, Abed Agbarya, Mahmoud Abu-Amna, Maya Gottfried, Ido Wolf, Ella Tepper, Yanyan Lou, Raya Leibowitz, Adam P. Dicker, David Gandara, David P. Carbone. A pretreatment blood-based proteomic biomarker for enhanced decision-making in non-small cell lung cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 2159.

Background: First-line durvalumab plus etoposide with either cisplatin or carboplatin (platinum–etoposide) showed a significant improvement in overall survival versus platinum–etoposide alone in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in the CASPIAN study. Here we report updated results, including the primary analysis for overall survival with durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum–etoposide versus platinum–etoposide alone. Methods: CASPIAN is an ongoing, open-label, sponsor-blind, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial at 209 cancer treatment centres in 23 countries worldwide. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older (20 years in Japan) and had treatment-naive, histologically or cytologically documented ES-SCLC, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) in blocks of six, stratified by planned platinum, using an interactive voice-response or web-response system to receive intravenous durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum–etoposide, durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide, or platinum–etoposide alone. In all groups, patients received etoposide 80–100 mg/m2 on days 1–3 of each cycle with investigator's choice of either carboplatin area under the curve 5–6 mg/mL/min or cisplatin 75–80 mg/m2 on day 1 of each cycle. Patients in the platinum–etoposide group received up to six cycles of platinum–etoposide every 3 weeks and optional prophylactic cranial irradiation (investigator's discretion). Patients in the immunotherapy groups received four cycles of platinum–etoposide plus durvalumab 1500 mg with or without tremelimumab 75 mg every 3 weeks followed by maintenance durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks. The two primary endpoints were overall survival for durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide versus platinum–etoposide and for durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum–etoposide versus platinum–etoposide in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043872. Findings: Between March 27, 2017, and May 29, 2018, 972 patients were screened and 805 were randomly assigned (268 to durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum–etoposide, 268 to durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide, and 269 to platinum–etoposide). As of Jan 27, 2020, the median follow-up was 25·1 months (IQR 22·3–27·9). Durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum–etoposide was not associated with a significant improvement in overall survival versus platinum–etoposide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·82 [95% CI 0·68–1·00]; p=0·045); median overall survival was 10·4 months (95% CI 9·6–12·0) versus 10·5 months (9·3–11·2). Durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide showed sustained improvement in overall survival versus platinum–etoposide (HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·62–0·91]; nominal p=0·0032); median overall survival was 12·9 months (95% CI 11·3–14·7) versus 10·5 months (9·3–11·2). The most common any-cause grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (85 [32%] of 266 patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum–etoposide group, 64 [24%] of 265 patients in the durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide group, and 88 [33%] of 266 patients in the platinum–etoposide group) and anaemia (34 [13%], 24 [9%], and 48 [18%]). Any-cause serious adverse events were reported in 121 (45%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum–etoposide group, 85 (32%) in the durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide group, and 97 (36%) in the platinum–etoposide group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 12 (5%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum–etoposide group (death, febrile neutropenia, and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each]; enterocolitis, general physical health deterioration and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, pneumonia, pneumonitis and hepatitis, respiratory failure, and sudden death [n=1 each]), six (2%) patients in the durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide group (cardiac arrest, dehydration, hepatotoxicity, interstitial lung disease, pancytopenia, and sepsis [n=1 each]), and two (1%) in the platinum–etoposide group (pancytopenia and thrombocytopenia [n=1 each]). Interpretation: First-line durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide showed sustained overall survival improvement versus platinum–etoposide but the addition of tremelimumab to durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide did not significantly improve outcomes versus platinum–etoposide. These results support the use of durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide as a new standard of care for the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC. Funding: AstraZeneca.

Background Combination of pertuzumab, trastuzumab and chemotherapy is standard of care for first-line treatment of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive metastatic breast cancer. Most randomized studies used combination of taxanes and anti HER2 targeted treatment as 1st line treatment. The combination of vinorelbine, trastuzumab and pertuzumab has shown anti-tumor activity in a phase 2 trial. No trials have compared outcomes between vinorelbine to taxane in combination with pertuzumab and trastuzumab. Methods We retrospectively evaluated all patients with metastatic HER-2 positive breast cancer treated in two institutions between 3/2013 and 3/2018. Patients' clinical data were obtained from electronic medical records. We identified patients who were treated with vinorelbine (oral or intravenous) or a-taxane (docetaxel or paclitaxel) in combination with trastuzumab and pertuzumab as a first-line treatment. We compared progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity profiles between the two groups. Results The study included 120 patients (73 in the taxane and 47 in the vinorelbine group). There were several between-group differences: 65% of the taxane group patients were metastatic at diagnosis compared to 40% in the vinorelbine group (p=0.008), 18% of the taxane group received trastuzumab in the adjuvant setting vs. 45% in the vinorelbine group (p=0.003). More patients in the taxane group were asymptomatic (43.4% vs 23.4%, p=0.04). PFS was significantly longer in the taxane group compared to the vinorelbine group (35.4 months vs 13.9 months, p=0.0005). OS was also longer in the taxane group, but difference did not reach statistical significance (48.8 months vs 34.5 months, p=0.13). In the subgroup of patients with recurrent disease (excluding patients with de-novo metastatic disease), there was no difference for OS (32.6 vs 33.1 months for taxane and vinorelbine, respectively). Toxicity profiles differed between the groups, with more patients in the taxane group experiencing diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy and asthenia, and more patients in the vinorelbine group experiencing neutropenia. Discontinuation of chemotherapy due to toxicity was more common in the taxane group compared to the vinorelbime group. (38% vs. 17%, p=0.015). Conclusions In this retrospective analysis, first-line treatment with taxane combined with trastuzumab and pertuzumab for HER-2 positive metastatic breast cancer resulted in improved outcomes compared with the combination of vinorelbine, trastuzumab and pertuzumab. The vinorelbine arm revealed a favorable toxicity profile. Patients with recurrent disease (excluding de-novo metastatic disease) had similar outcomes with either chemotherapy. A randomized study is warranted. Citation Format: Daniel Jack Reinhorn, Irina Kuchuk, Judit Prus, Michal Sarfaty, Hadar Goldvaser, Ofer Rotem, Daniel Hendler, Dalia Zoref, Victoria Neiman, Tzipora Shohat, Olga Ulitsky, Shlomit Yust-Katz, Bella Nisenbaum, Maya Gottfried, Rinat Yerushalmi. Taxane versus vinorelbine in combination with pertuzumab and trastuzumab for first-line treatment of patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer - A retrospective two-center study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-18-33.

Mutació del MET; Capmatinib Mutación del MET; Capmatinib MET mutation; Capmatinib Background Dysregulation of receptor tyrosine kinase MET by various mechanisms occurs in 3%–4% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and is associated with unfavorable prognosis. While MET is a validated drug target in lung cancer, the best biomarker strategy for the enrichment of a susceptible patient population still remains to be defined. Towards this end we analyze here primary data from a phase I dose expansion study of the MET inhibitor capmatinib in patients with advanced MET-dysregulated NSCLC. Patients and methods Eligible patients [≥18 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≤2] with MET-dysregulated advanced NSCLC, defined as either (i) MET status by immunohistochemistry (MET IHC) 2+ or 3+ or H-score ≥150, or MET/centromere ratio ≥2.0 or gene copy number (GCN) ≥5, or (ii) epidermal growth factor receptor wild-type (EGFRwt) and centrally assessed MET IHC 3+, received capmatinib at the recommended dose of 400 mg (tablets) or 600 mg (capsules) b.i.d. The primary objective was to determine safety and tolerability; the key secondary objective was to explore antitumor activity. The exploratory end point was the correlation of clinical activity with different biomarker formats. Results Of 55 patients with advanced MET-dysregulated NSCLC, 40/55 (73%) had received two or more prior systemic therapies. All patients discontinued treatment, primarily due to disease progression (69.1%). The median treatment duration was 10.4 weeks. The overall response rate per RECIST was 20% (95% confidence interval, 10.4–33.0). In patients with MET GCN ≥6 (n = 15), the overall response rate by both the investigator and central assessments was 47%. The median progression-free survival per investigator for patients with MET GCN ≥6 was 9.3 months (95% confidence interval, 3.8–11.9). Tumor responses were observed in all four patients with METex14. The most common toxicities were nausea (42%), peripheral edema (33%), and vomiting (31%). Conclusions MET GCN ≥6 and/or METex14 are suited to predict clinical activity of capmatinib in patients with NSCLC (NCT01324479). This study was funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Background: Most patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) have extensive-stage disease at presentation, and prognosis remains poor. Recently, immunotherapy has demonstrated clinical activity in extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). The CASPIAN trial assessed durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, in combination with etoposide plus either cisplatin or carboplatin (platinum–etoposide) in treatment-naive patients with ES-SCLC. Methods: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial was done at 209 sites across 23 countries. Eligible patients were adults with untreated ES-SCLC, with WHO performance status 0 or 1 and measurable disease as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (in a 1:1:1 ratio) to durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide; durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum–etoposide; or platinum–etoposide alone. All drugs were administered intravenously. Platinum–etoposide consisted of etoposide 80–100 mg/m2 on days 1–3 of each cycle with investigator's choice of either carboplatin area under the curve 5–6 mg/mL per min or cisplatin 75–80 mg/m2 (administered on day 1 of each cycle). Patients received up to four cycles of platinum–etoposide plus durvalumab 1500 mg with or without tremelimumab 75 mg every 3 weeks followed by maintenance durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks in the immunotherapy groups and up to six cycles of platinum–etoposide every 3 weeks plus prophylactic cranial irradiation (investigator's discretion) in the platinum–etoposide group. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. We report results for the durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide group versus the platinum–etoposide group from a planned interim analysis. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned study treatment. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043872, and is ongoing. Findings: Patients were enrolled between March 27, 2017, and May 29, 2018. 268 patients were allocated to the durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide group and 269 to the platinum–etoposide group. Durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide was associated with a significant improvement in overall survival, with a hazard ratio of 0·73 (95% CI 0·59–0·91; p=0·0047]); median overall survival was 13·0 months (95% CI 11·5–14·8) in the durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide group versus 10·3 months (9·3–11·2) in the platinum–etoposide group, with 34% (26·9–41·0) versus 25% (18·4–31·6) of patients alive at 18 months. Any-cause adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 163 (62%) of 265 treated patients in the durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide group and 166 (62%) of 266 in the platinum–etoposide group; adverse events leading to death occurred in 13 (5%) and 15 (6%) patients. Interpretation: First-line durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide significantly improved overall survival in patients with ES-SCLC versus a clinically relevant control group. Safety findings were consistent with the known safety profiles of all drugs received. Funding: AstraZeneca.

The increased susceptibility of cancer patients to coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infections and complications calls for special precautions while treating cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemics. Thus, oncology departments have had to implement a wide array of prevention measures.To address issues associated with cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic and to assess the implementation of measures aimed at containment of COVID-19 diffusion while allowing continuation of quality cancer care.A national survey among oncology departments in Israel was conducted between 12 April 2020 and 14 April 2020. Eighteen heads of hospital-based oncology departments completed a self-report questionnaire regarding their institute's preparedness for treatment of cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.In this national survey, prevention measures against COVID-19 spread were taken prior to patients' arrival and at arrival or while staying in the departments. Most participants (78-89%) reported using a quick triage of patients and caregivers prior to their entrance to the oncology units, limiting the entrance of caregivers, and reducing unnecessary visits to the clinic. Switching to oral therapies rather than intravenous ones when possible was considered by 82% and shortage in personal protective equipment was reported by five (28%) heads of oncology departments. Some differences between large and small/medium sized medical centers were observed regarding issues related to COVID-19 containment measures and changes in treatment.Oncology departments in Israel were able to prepare and adapt their services to guidelines and requirements related to the COVID-19 pandemic with little harm to their treatment capacity.

BackgroundAfatinib is approved for first-line treatment of patients with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive (EGFRm+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we report findings from a combined analysis of three phase IIIb studies of afatinib in EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-naïve patients.MethodsEGFR-TKI-naïve patients withEGFRm+ NSCLC received afatinib 40 mg/day. Dose reductions were permitted for adverse events (AEs). Efficacy endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), time to symptomatic progression (TTSP), and tumor response. Subgroup analyses were performed by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), presence of brain metastasis, age and common/uncommonEGFRmutations (plus other factors).Results1108 patients were treated. Median age was 61 years (range, 25–89); 19.2% had baseline brain metastases, 4.4% had ECOG PS ≥2, and 17.9% had tumors harboring uncommon mutations. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were reported in 97.2%, most commonly diarrhea and rash. 41.6% had AEs leading to dose reduction. Median PFS was 13.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 12.0–13.8]; median TTSP was 14.8 months (95% CI: 13.9–16.1). Objective response rate (ORR) was 55.0%. Age, presence of baseline brain metastases, major (G719X, L861Q, S768I) or compound uncommon mutations had little/no effect on PFS, TTSP, or ORR, while outcomes were poorer in patients with ECOG PS 2 or exon 20 insertion/T790M mutations.ConclusionsAfatinib was tolerable with no new safety signals. Afatinib demonstrated encouraging efficacy in a broad patient population, including those with brain metastases or uncommonEGFRmutations.

Objectives ALK inhibitors (ALKi) are the standard-of-care treatment for metastatic ALK-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the first- and second-line setting. We conducted a real-world multi-institutional analysis, aiming to compare the efficacy of third-line ALKi versus chemotherapy in these patients. Methods Consecutive ALK-positive metastatic NSCLC patients treated with at least one ALKi were identified in the working databases of 7 Israeli oncology centers (the full cohort). Demographic and clinical data were collected. Patients receiving any systemic treatment beyond 2 ALKi comprised the third-line cohort, whether a third ALKi (group A) or chemotherapy (group B). Groups A and B were compared in terms of overall survival (OS) and time-to-next-treatment line (TNT). Results At a median follow-up of 41 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 32-55), 80 (47.1%) have died. Median OS (mOS) in the full cohort (n = 170) was 52 months (95% CI: 32-65). Number of ALKi (hazard ratio [HR] 0.765; 95% CI: 0.61-0.95; P = .024) and age (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.04, P = .009) significantly associated with OS in the full cohort. The third-line cohort included 40 patients, of which 27 were treated with third ALKi (group A) and 13 treated with chemotherapy (group B). mOS from third-line initiation was 27 months in group A (95% CI: 13-NR) and 13 months for group B (95% CI: 3-NR); the difference was not significant (NS; P = .12). Chemotherapy as first line (HR 0.17, 95% CI: 0.05-0.52, P = .002) and a higher number of ALKi (HR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.20-0.86, P = .011) associated significantly with longer OS of the third-line cohort. TNT was 10 months for group A (95% CI: 5-19) and 3 months for group B (95% CI: 0-NR); the difference was NS (P = .079). Conclusion We report mature real-world data of more than 4-year mOS in ALK-positive patients. The number of ALKi given was associated with a better outcome. OS and TNT demonstrated a statistically nonsignificant trend for a better outcome in patients receiving a third-line ALKi.

e21132 Background: To date, predicting response to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients is based on assessing PD-L1 levels in tumor biopsies. However, such assays are only moderately predictive. In addition, the assays require a tumor biopsy and do not aid in identifying patient-specific resistance mechanisms beyond PD-L1. To overcome these issues, we developed a novel computational approach for predicting response to ICB based on pre-treatment proteomic measurements in liquid biopsies. Methods: Plasma samples were collected from 184 NSCLC patients prior to treatment, along with comprehensive clinical data, as part of an ongoing multi-center clinical trial (PROPHETIC; NCT04056247). Overall response rate (ORR) was assessed 3- and 6-months following treatment initiation. A deep proteomic profiling of each plasma sample was performed, measuring the expression levels of approximately 7000 proteins. A novel proprietary machine learning approach was developed on a subset of samples (training set; n = 110) and then was tested on a blind independent validation set (n = 74). Results: A computational model was developed on the proteomic data by identifying patient-specific Resistance Associated Proteins (RAPs). Focusing on differentially expressed proteins between responders and non-responders, a protein was defined as a RAP in a given patient based on its expression level in the patient relative to the expression distribution of the RAP in responders and non-responders. The probability of response to ICB treatment was determined based on the patient’s RAP profile together with 4 clinical parameters. The RAP-based machine learning model successfully stratified between patients with prolonged and limited benefit with a hazard ratio (HR) of 4.5 (confidence interval 2.07-9.77; p-value < 0.0001) and 2.27 (confidence interval 1.7-4.03; p-value = 0.004) for overall survival and progression free survival, respectively. Each patient displayed a resistance map comprised of a unique combination of RAPs, suggesting a new approach for personalized medicine based on patient-specific pathway blockade. For example, a patient with KDR and IL-6 defined as RAPs may benefit from a clinical trial that targets any of these RAPS in combination with ICB. Last, an exploration into the biological functions of the identified RAPs revealed specific biological processes in each response group, including splicing, complement system, coagulation and signaling. Conclusions: We have developed a novel computational approach based on proteomic profiling of liquid biopsies for predicting response to ICB treatment in NSCLC patients. Our approach also sheds light on patient-specific resistance mechanisms, potentially enabling personalized treatment options and patient monitoring over time.

The fatality of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and the role of the cancer microenvironment in its resistance to therapy are long recognized. Accumulating data allocate a significant role for mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in the malignant environment. Previously, we have demonstrated that MSCs from NSCLC metastatic bone marrow (BM) niche deleteriously affected NSCLC cells. Here, we have decided to examine the effect of MSCs from the primary niche of the lung (healthy or adjacent to tumor) on NSCLC phenotype. We cultured NSCLC cell lines with healthy/NSCLC lung-MSCs conditioned media (secretome) and showed elevation in cells' MAPKs and translation initiation signals, proliferation, viability, death, and migration. We also established enhanced autophagy and epithelial to mesenchymal transition processes. Moreover, we observed that MSCs from tumor adjacent sites (pathological niche) exhibited a more profound effect than MSCs from healthy lung tissue. Our findings underscore the capacity of the lung-MSCs to modulate NSCLC phenotype. Interestingly, both tumor adjacent (pathological) and distant lung-MSCs (healthy) promoted the NSCLC's TI, proliferation, migration, and epithelial to mesenchymal transition, yet the pathological MSCs displayed a greater affect. In conclusion, by comparing the effects of normal lung-MSCs, NSCLC adjacent MSCs, and BM-MSCs, we have established that the primary and metastatic niches display opposite and critical effects that promote the cancerous systemic state. Specifically, the primary site MSCs promote the expansion of the malignant clone and its dispersion, whereas the metastatic site MSCs facilitates the cells re-seeding. We suggest that sabotaging the cross-talk between MSCs and NSCLC affords effective means to inhibit lung cancer progression and will require different targeting strategies in accordance with niche/disease stage.

The combination of a taxane with trastuzumab and pertuzumab is standard of care for first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer. The combination of vinorelbine with trastuzumab and pertuzumab showed anti-tumor activity in a phase 2 trial. The databases of two tertiary medical centers were retrospectively searched for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who underwent first-line treatment in 2013–2019 with a taxane or vinorelbine in combination with trastuzumab and pertuzumab. Groups were compared for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity profile. The study included 87 patients in the taxane group and 65 in the vinorelbine group. Overall median PFS was significantly longer in the taxane group [HR 0.56 (0.36–0.88), P = 0.01], but on multivariate analysis the difference was not statistically significant [HR 0.68 (0.4–1.1, P = 0.11)]. PFS was comparable in both groups of patients with recurrent disease [HR 0.94 (0.5–1.79), P = 0.85]. However, in patients with de novo metastatic disease, the difference in favor of the taxane group was pronounced [HR 0.4 (0.2–0.78), P = 0.007] and maintained significance on multivariate analysis [HR 0.46 (0.2–0.97, P = 0.04)]. There was no statistical significant difference in OS in the whole cohort [HR 0.69 (0.39–1.23)] or the subgroups. Patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer had similar survival with first-line treatment of taxane or vinorelbine combined with trastuzumab and pertuzumab. When the analysis was adjusted for prognostic factors, there was no PFS benefit for taxanes except in the subgroup with de novo disease.

The combination of a taxane with trastuzumab and pertuzumab is standard of care for first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer. The combination of vinorelbine with trastuzumab and pertuzumab showed anti-tumor activity in a phase 2 trial.The databases of two tertiary medical centers were retrospectively searched for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who underwent first-line treatment in 2013-2019 with a taxane or vinorelbine in combination with trastuzumab and pertuzumab. Groups were compared for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity profile.The study included 87 patients in the taxane group and 65 in the vinorelbine group. Overall median PFS was significantly longer in the taxane group [HR 0.56 (0.36-0.88), P = 0.01], but on multivariate analysis the difference was not statistically significant [HR 0.68 (0.4-1.1, P = 0.11)]. PFS was comparable in both groups of patients with recurrent disease [HR 0.94 (0.5-1.79), P = 0.85]. However, in patients with de novo metastatic disease, the difference in favor of the taxane group was pronounced [HR 0.4 (0.2-0.78), P = 0.007] and maintained significance on multivariate analysis [HR 0.46 (0.2-0.97, P = 0.04)]. There was no statistical significant difference in OS in the whole cohort [HR 0.69 (0.39-1.23)] or the subgroups.Patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer had similar survival with first-line treatment of taxane or vinorelbine combined with trastuzumab and pertuzumab. When the analysis was adjusted for prognostic factors, there was no PFS benefit for taxanes except in the subgroup with de novo disease.

Introduction Rovalpituzumab tesirine (Rova-T) is an antibody-drug conjugate targeting DLL3, an atypical Notch ligand expressed in SCLC tumors. We evaluated the efficacy of Rova-T versus placebo as maintenance therapy in patients with extensive-stage–SCLC after platinum-based chemotherapy. Methods MERU was a phase 3 randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. Patients without disease progression after four cycles of platinum-based, front-line chemotherapy were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive 0.3 mg/kg Rova-T or placebo (every 6 wk, omitted every third cycle). Primary efficacy end points were progression-free survival (PFS) evaluated by the Central Radiographic Assessment Committee and overall survival (OS) in patients with DLL3-high tumors. Results Median age of all randomized patients (N = 748) was 64 years; 78% had TNM stage IV disease. At futility analysis of the subset with DLL3-high tumors, the hazard ratio for OS was 1.07 (95% confidence interval: 0.84–1.36) favoring the placebo arm, with median OS of 8.5 and 9.8 months in the Rova-T and placebo arms, respectively; futility criteria were met. Rova-T significantly improved PFS versus placebo by investigator assessment (4.0 versus 1.4 mo, hazard ratio = 0.48, p < 0.001). Any-grade adverse events (≥20%) in the Rova-T arm were pleural effusion (27%), decreased appetite (27%), peripheral edema (26%), photosensitivity reaction (25%), fatigue (25%), nausea (22%), and dyspnea (21%). Conclusions Because of the lack of survival benefit in the Rova-T arm, the study did not meet its primary end point and was terminated early. As a result, the Central Radiographic Assessment Committee evaluation of PFS was not performed. The frequency of grade greater than or equal to 3 and drug-related toxicities were higher with Rova-T versus placebo. Rova-T was associated with unique toxicities, such as pleural and pericardial effusions, photosensitivity reaction, and peripheral edema, which should be carefully considered in the population with extensive-stage–SCLC.

Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer-related death.To identify changing patterns of lung cancer and its histologic subtypes among different population groups in Israel over a 25 year period.Primary lung cancers, all types and all stages, diagnosed during 1990-2014 were recorded in the Israel National Cancer Registry database. Demographic information was retrieved from the National Population Register. Age-standardized rates for the different subgroups were calculated for each year. Joinpoint software was used to analyze trends in incidence.We identified 42,672 lung cancer cases. The most common histology was adenocarcinoma (34%), followed by squamous cell carcinoma (19%), large cell/not-otherwise-specified (19%), other histologies (15%), and small cell lung cancer (11%). The adenocarcinoma incidence rose from 25.7% to 48.2% during the examined period. Large cell/not-otherwise-specified incidence peaked around 2005-2006 and declined after. Lung cancer incidence increased significantly for the population overall and specifically in Arab females, followed by Jewish females and by Arab males. Adenocarcinoma and small cell lung cancer increased in Jewish females and in Arab males. A younger age of diagnosis was seen in Arab compared to Jewish patients.Jewish females and Arab males and females living in Israel demonstrated a constant increase in lung cancer incidence, mostly in adenocarcinoma and small cell lung cancer incidence. In addition, a younger age of diagnosis in Arabs was noted. Smoking reduction interventions and screening should be implemented in those populations.

110 Background: Single agent selinexor, an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE), showed activity against heavily pretreated CRC with RAS mutations (mut) or wildtype (wt) in 2 clinical studies. In preclinical studies, selinexor showed superior potency in KRAS mut over wt with improved activity in combination with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. A phase 1b study (NCT02419495) showed the safety and antitumor activity of combined selinexor and a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor. This phase 1/2 open-label study is evaluating selinexor with pembrolizumab in patients with microsatellite instability (MSI)-stable CRC. Methods: The study enrolled patients with advanced/metastatic CRC who progressed after prior chemotherapy (1-3 lines for RAS wt, 1-2 for RAS mut) and are ineligible for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. Patients received weekly oral selinexor 80 mg and pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks. Antitumor activity, safety and tolerability were assessed. Results: Thirty-four patients, median age 57.5 years, male 59%, RAS mut 53%, median prior lines 2, are enrolled. At data cutoff (1-SEP-21) median treatment duration was 57 days (range: 1-246) and 25 patients were evaluable for response. Best response was stable disease in 8/13 patients with RAS mut CRC (62%) and in 3/12 patients with RAS wt CRC (25%). Median overall survival (months) has not been reached for the overall population (95% CI: 6.3, NE), for RAS mut (95% CI: 7.6, NE), and for the RAS wt (95% CI: 6.1, NE). Median progression-free survival is 3.0 and 1.4 months for patients with CRC with RAS mut and wt, respectively (p=0.04; HR: 0.43 [959% CI: 0.18, 1.01]). Thirty patients (88%) discontinued therapy, mostly due to progressive disease (44%). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (total; Grade ≥3) were nausea (77%; 3%), vomiting (41%; 0%), fatigue (41%; 12%), decreased appetite (35%; 0%), diarrhea (32%; 0%). Nine patients (26%) had serious treatment-emergent adverse events. Conclusions: Combined selinexor with pembrolizumab demonstrated higher disease control rates and prolonged overall survival in patients with chemotherapy-refractory advanced/metastatic CRC with RAS mut vs RAS wt tumors. These patients would not have been eligible for anti-PD-1 mAb therapy because their tumors were not MSI-high, suggesting that the combination may be active in RAS mut CRC. Therapy was well tolerated with no unanticipated adverse events. Further investigation of this combined treatment is warranted, particularly in patients with CRC with RAS mut. Clinical trial information: NCT04256707.

Objectives Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that afatinib is a suitable treatment option for patients with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive (EGFRm +) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, such studies often exclude patients treated in routine clinical practice. We report interim results from a Phase 3b, open-label, multicenter, single-arm, exploratory trial, in which afatinib was investigated in a real-world setting. Materials and methods Patients with EGFRm + tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-naive NSCLC received afatinib 40 mg orally, once-daily, until disease progression, or voluntary withdrawal. Primary objective was safety. Results Overall, 479 patients received afatinib: median age 65 years, 8 % of patients had an ECOG performance status ≥ 2, 17 % had brain metastases, and 13 % had tumors containing uncommon mutations only. All but one patient (99.8 %) had an adverse event (AE). Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs; any/grade ≥ 3) occurred in 97 %/44 % of patients; most common were diarrhea (87 %/16 %) and rash (51 %/11 %). AEs leading to afatinib dose-reduction were reported in 258 patients (54 %), and 37 patients (8 %) discontinued treatment due to a TRAE. Objective response rate was 45.5 %, median duration of response was 14.1 months (95 % CI: 12.2–16.4). Overall median time to symptomatic progression and progression-free survival were 14.9 months (95 % CI: 13.8–17.6) and 13.4 months (95 % CI: 11.8–14.5), respectively, in the overall population and 19.3 months (95 % CI: 15.6–21.8) and 15.9 months (95 % CI: 13.9–19.1) in patients with EGFR exon 19 deletions. Conclusions Afatinib administration in routine clinical practice was well tolerated with no new safety signals and demonstrated promising efficacy in patients with EGFRm + NSCLC. TRAEs were generally manageable with tolerability-guided dose reductions. Overall, these data independently support findings from randomized controlled trials of afatinib in EGFRm + NSCLC.

PURPOSE Pembrolizumab monotherapy has shown antitumor activity in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). The randomized, double-blind, phase III KEYNOTE-604 study compared pembrolizumab plus etoposide and platinum (EP) with placebo plus EP for patients with previously untreated extensive-stage (ES) SCLC. METHODS Eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks or saline placebo for up to 35 cycles plus 4 cycles of EP. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS; RECIST version 1.1, blinded central review) and overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. Objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response were secondary end points. Prespecified efficacy boundaries were one-sided P = .0048 for PFS and .0128 for OS. RESULTS Of the 453 participants, 228 were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab plus EP and 225 to placebo plus EP. Pembrolizumab plus EP significantly improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.91; P = .0023). Twelve-month PFS estimates were 13.6% with pembrolizumab plus EP and 3.1% with placebo plus EP. Although pembrolizumab plus EP prolonged OS, the significance threshold was not met (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.98; P = .0164). Twenty-four-month OS estimates were 22.5% and 11.2%, respectively. ORR was 70.6% in the pembrolizumab plus EP group and 61.8% in the placebo plus EP group; the estimated proportion of responders remaining in response at 12 months was 19.3% and 3.3%, respectively. In the pembrolizumab plus EP and placebo plus EP groups, respectively, any-cause adverse events were grade 3-4 in 76.7% and 74.9%, grade 5 in 6.3% and 5.4%, and led to discontinuation of any drug in 14.8% and 6.3%. CONCLUSION Pembrolizumab plus EP significantly improved PFS compared with placebo plus EP as first-line therapy for patients with ES-SCLC. No unexpected toxicities were seen with pembrolizumab plus EP. These data support the benefit of pembrolizumab in ES-SCLC.

The introduction of licensed front-line immunotherapies has heralded a new era for the treatment of non-oncogene-addicted, advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Yet as with all evolutions in clinical management, changes in practice can outpace the availability of the clinical evidence needed to inform subsequent therapeutic decision making. At the time of writing, there is limited available evidence on the optimum therapeutic options after progression on immunotherapy. Further research is needed to define mechanisms of immunotherapy resistance in patients with advanced NSCLC, and to understand the implications for subsequent treatment response. Pending the availability of robust clinical data and proven therapeutic options to underpin an optimized therapeutic pathway after progression on immunotherapy, attention must turn to the potential utility of currently licensed agents and any available supporting clinical data in this setting. Within this context we review the mechanistic arguments and supporting evidence for the use of anti-angiogenic agents as a means of targeting immunosuppression within the tumor microenvironment. We consider whether VEGF inhibition may help to normalize the tumor vasculature and to address immunosuppression - reinstating, and potentially enhancing, the effect of subsequent therapies. We also highlight evidence needs and signpost ongoing trials that should enable current clinical opinion in this area to be replaced by robust, evidence-based guidance.

PURPOSE Genomes of tumors that are deficient in DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) have high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) and harbor hundreds to thousands of somatic mutations that encode potential neoantigens. Such tumors are therefore likely to be immunogenic, triggering upregulation of immune checkpoint proteins. Pembrolizumab, an anti‒programmed death-1 monoclonal antibody, has antitumor activity against MSI-H/dMMR cancer. We report data from the phase II KEYNOTE-158 study of pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated, advanced noncolorectal MSI-H/dMMR cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed MSI-H/dMMR advanced noncolorectal cancer who experienced failure with prior therapy received pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks for 2 years or until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient withdrawal. Radiologic imaging was performed every 9 weeks for the first year of therapy and every 12 weeks thereafter. The primary end point was objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, as assessed by independent central radiologic review. RESULTS Among 233 enrolled patients, 27 tumor types were represented, with endometrial, gastric, cholangiocarcinoma, and pancreatic cancers being the most common. Median follow up was 13.4 months. Objective response rate was 34.3% (95% CI, 28.3% to 40.8%). Median progression-free survival was 4.1 months (95% CI, 2.4 to 4.9 months) and median overall survival was 23.5 months (95% CI, 13.5 months to not reached). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 151 patients (64.8%). Thirty-four patients (14.6%) had grade 3 to 5 treatment-related adverse events. Grade 5 pneumonia occurred in one patient; there were no other treatment-related fatal adverse events. CONCLUSION Our study demonstrates the clinical benefit of anti–programmed death-1 therapy with pembrolizumab among patients with previously treated unresectable or metastatic MSI-H/dMMR noncolorectal cancer. Toxicity was consistent with previous experience of pembrolizumab monotherapy.

Summary Background In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-024 trial, treatment with pembrolizumab conferred longer progression-free survival than did platinum-based therapy in patients with treatment-naive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumour proportion score of 50% or greater (PD-L1-positive). Here we report the prespecified exploratory endpoint of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Methods In this multicentre, international, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients with treatment-naive, stage IV NSCLC in 102 sites in 16 countries. Eligible patients had measurable disease (per RECIST version 1.1) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system and integrated web response system to receive either pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks (35 cycles) or investigator-choice platinum-doublet chemotherapy (4–6 cycles or until documented disease progression or unacceptable toxicity). Randomisation was stratified according to geography, ECOG performance status, and histology. PROs were assessed at day 1 of cycles 1–3, every 9 weeks thereafter, at the treatment discontinuation visit, and at the 30-day safety assessment visit using the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 items (QLQ-C30), the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire Lung Cancer 13 items (QLQ-LC13), and the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire. The key exploratory PRO endpoints (analysed for all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment and completed at least one PRO instrument at at least one timepoint) were baseline-to-week-15 change in the QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/quality-of-life (QOL) score and time to deterioration of the composite of cough, chest pain, and dyspnoea in the QLQ-LC13. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02142738, and is ongoing but no longer enrolling patients. Findings Between Sept 19, 2014, and Oct 29, 2015, 305 patients were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab (n=154) or chemotherapy (n=151). Three patients in each group did not complete any PRO instruments at any timepoints, and so 299 patients were included in the full analysis set. Of these patients, one in each group did not complete any PRO instruments before week 15, and so were not included in analyses of change from baseline to week 15. PRO compliance was greater than 90% at baseline and approximately 80% at week 15 for both groups. Least-squares mean baseline-to-week-15 change in QLQ-C30 GHS/QOL score was 6·9 (95% CI 3·3 to 10·6) for pembrolizumab and −0·9 (−4·8 to 3·0) for chemotherapy, for a difference of 7·8 (2·9 to 12·8; two-sided nominal p=0·0020). Fewer pembrolizumab-treated patients had deterioration in the QLQ-LC13 composite endpoint than did chemotherapy-treated patients (46 [31%] of 151 patients vs 58 [39%] of 148 patients). Time to deterioration was longer with pembrolizumab than with chemotherapy (median not reached [95% CI 8·5 to not reached] vs 5·0 months [3·6 to not reached]; hazard ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·44–0·97; two-sided nominal p=0·029). Interpretation Pembrolizumab improves or maintains health-related QOL compared with that for chemotherapy, and might represent a new first-line standard of care for PD-L1-expressing, advanced NSCLC. Funding Merck & Co.

2565 Background: Approval of pembrolizumab for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic MSI-H/dMMR solid tumors that have progressed on prior therapy was supported by data from KEYNOTE-158 (NCT02628067). At the data cutoff of Dec 6, 2018, the ORR was 34.3% among 233 patients (pts) with MSI-H/dMMR solid tumors enrolled in all cohorts of KEYNOTE-158, 77.6% had duration of response (DOR) ≥24 mo, median PFS was 4.1 mo, and median OS was 23.5 mo. We present results from 351 pts enrolled in KEYNOTE-158 cohort K at the data cutoff of Oct 5, 2020. Methods: Cohort K of this phase 2, open-label study enrolled adults with any previously treated advanced noncolorectal MSI-H solid tumor, measurable disease per RECIST v1.1, and ECOG PS of 0–1. MSI-H/dMMR status was assessed locally from a tumor tissue sample and defined as ≥1 of 4 MMR proteins absent by immunohistochemistry or as ≥2 allelic loci size shifts of 5 microsatellite markers by PCR. Pts received pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W for up to 35 cycles or until PD, unacceptable toxicity, investigator decision, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was ORR per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints were DOR and PFS per RECIST v1.1 by BICR, OS, and safety. Efficacy was assessed in all pts who received ≥1 dose of treatment with ≥6 mo follow-up; safety was assessed in all treated pts. Results: 351 pts were enrolled in KEYNOTE-158 cohort K across multiple tumor types, including endometrial (22.5%), gastric (14.5%), small intestine (7.4%), ovarian (7.1%), cholangiocarcinoma (6.3%), and pancreatic (6.3%). 41.0% had 1 prior line of therapy; 55.6% had ≥2 prior lines. Median time from first dose to database cutoff (Oct 5, 2020) was 37.5 (range, 0.2–55.6) mo; 16.0% were continuing treatment. The ORR among the 321 eligble pts was 30.8% (CR, 27; PR, 72); median DOR was 47.5 mo (Table). Treatment-related AEs occurred in 64.7% of pts (grade 3–5, 12.0%), led to discontinuation in 6.6%, and led to death in 3 pts (myocarditis, pneumonia, and Guillain-Barre syndrome). Immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions occurred in 20.2% of pts (grade 3–4, 4.3%) and led to death in 2 pts with no other contributing factors (myocarditis [AE start, day 26; death, day 33] and Guillain-Barre syndrome [AE start, day 22; death, day 41]). Conclusions: Pembrolizumab demonstrated a high ORR (30.8%), durable clinical benefit, and a manageable safety profile in this heavily pretreated advanced MSI-H/dMMR noncolorectal pan-tumor population. Clinical trial information: NCT02628067. [Table: see text]

e21110 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy represents one of the most promising cancer treatments to date. However, despite unprecedented rates of durable response, only a small proportion of patients benefits from this approach. Major efforts are therefore required to characterize treatment resistance mechanisms, as well as to identify reliable biomarkers for response. We have previously shown that in response to various types of cancer therapy, including ICIs, the host may induce pro-tumorigenic processes that can promote therapy resistance. Here we examined systemic host-response proteomic profiles in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, aiming to discover biomarkers for response to ICI therapy and to unravel underlying resistance mechanisms. Methods: As part of our ongoing PROPHETIC clinical trial (NCT04056247), plasma samples were obtained at baseline (T0) and early-on treatment (T1; following the first treatment) from 120 NSCLC patients receiving ICI therapy. Proteomic profiling of the plasma samples was performed using proximity-extension assay (PEA) technology; validation was carried out for a fraction of the samples using ELISA-based arrays. To identify a proteomic signature that predicts clinical outcome, machine learning algorithms were applied following a random separation of the cohort into a discovery set and a validation set. Results: A proteomic signature predictive of response to treatment was identified and validated. Bioinformatic analysis identified potential mechanisms of resistance based on differentially expressed proteins associated with pro-tumorigenic biological processes. Statistical analysis of the clinical data identified multiple novel differential clinical parameters between responders and non-responders, either at baseline or by comparing T0 to T1, which may suggest host-mediated effects. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the potential clinical utility of analyzing the host response to ICI therapy, in particular for the discovery of novel predictive biomarkers for NSCLC patient stratification. Clinical trial information: NCT04056247.

e15579 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide and is heterogenous in its molecular features. Checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) are approved for only about 5% of unresectable or metastatic CRC with MSI-high (MSI-H)/deficient MMR (dMMR); however, they do not benefit the majority of advanced CRC patients. Selinexor is a first-in-class, oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound with demonstrated activity in cancers with RAS mutations which are found in ̃50% of CRC. This study aims to evaluate the combination of selinexor with pembrolizumab, an anti-PD-L1 CPI, in chemotherapy refractory CRC. Methods: This phase 1/2, open-label study enrolled patients with advanced/metastatic CRC with progression after prior chemotherapy (1-3 lines for KRAS wild-type (wt), 1-2 for KRAS mutant (mut)), initially into a selinexor monotherapy period to evaluate bioavailability/bioequivalence of a new selinexor formulation, followed by a combination therapy where patients were treated with selinexor 80 mg PO QW and pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks. Patients were assessed for anti-tumor activity, safety, and tolerability of the combination therapy. Results: Enrollment in this study has been completed, and 29 patients have received at least 1 dose of combination therapy: median age was 56 years, 19 (65.5%) male, and 15 (51.7%) have RAS mutations. Median number of lines of prior antineoplastic therapies was 2. Median duration of combination treatment is 39 days (range: 1-246 days). Seventeen patients (58.6%) discontinued therapy mostly due to progressive disease, and 18 patients are evaluable for response. Best response was stable disease in 7 patients (6 of them (85.7%) had RAS mut CRC), and progressive disease in 11 patients (8 of them (72.7%) had RAS wt CRC. Median progression free survival (PFS) is 120 days for patients with RAS mut CRC and 41 days for those with RAS wt CRC. Notably, none of the RAS mut had MSI-H/dMMR CRC while one RAS wt with SD had MSI-H/dMMR CRC. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (total; ≥Grade 3) were nausea (72.4%; 0%), vomiting (41.4%; 0%), decreased appetite (34.5%; 0%), and fatigue (34.5%; 10.3%). Seven patients (24.1%) had at least 1 treatment-emergent serious adverse event. Conclusions: Selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab has demonstrated disease control in patients with chemotherapy refractory advanced/metastatic CRC. Greater anti-tumor activity was observed in patients with RAS mutations despite absence of MSI-H/dMMR. The therapy was well tolerated with no unanticipated adverse events observed. These results warrant further investigation of selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab in CRC, particularly in CRC with RAS mutations. Clinical trial information: NCT04256707.

The imaging response to radium-223 therapy is at present poorly described. We aimed to describe the imaging response to radium-223 treatment. We retrospectively evaluated the computed tomography (CT) and bone scintigraphy response of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) patients treated with radium-223, in eight centers in three countries. A total of 130 patients were included, the majority (n=84, 65%) received radium-223 post docetaxel. Thirty-four of 99 patients with available data (34%) received concomitant abiraterone or enzalutamide. A total of 54% (n=70) patients completed the planned six injections of radium-223. In patients with available data, a transient increase in bone metastases-related pain was observed in 27% (n=33/124) and an improvement of bone metastases-related pain on treatment with radium-223 was noted in 49% of patients (n=61/124). At 3 and 6 months of treatment with radium-223, bone imaging showed stable disease in 74% (n=84/113) and 94% of patients (n=93/99) with available data, respectively. An increase in the number of bone lesions was documented at 3 months compared with baseline in 26% (n=29/113) and at 6 months compared with 3 months in 6% of patients (n=6/99), respectively. Radiological extraskeletal disease progression occurred in 46% of patients (n=57/124) with available CT data at 3 and/or 6 months. Progression of bone metastases during radium-223 therapy is uncommon. A bone flare (pain and/or radiological) may be noted during the first 3 months, and should not be confused with progression. Imaging by CT scan should be considered after three and six doses of radium-223 to rule out extraskeletal disease progression.

BackgroundPembrolizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody against programmed death 1 (PD-1) that has antitumor activity in advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with increased activity in tumors that express programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1). MethodsIn this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 305 patients who had previously untreated advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 expression on at least 50% of tumor cells and no sensitizing mutation of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene or translocation of the anaplastic lymphoma kinase gene to receive either pembrolizumab (at a fixed dose of 200 mg every 3 weeks) or the investigator’s choice of platinum-based chemotherapy. Crossover from the chemotherapy group to the pembrolizumab group was permitted in the event of disease progression. The primary end point, progression-free survival, was assessed by means of blinded, independent, central radiologic review. Secondary end points were overall survival, objective response rate, and safety. ResultsMedi...

Background First-line afatinib significantly improved median progression-free survival (PFS) in pts with EGFRm+ NSCLC vs chemotherapy (CT) in LUX-Lung (LL) 3/6 (HR [95% CI]: 0.58 [0.43, 0.78]/0.28 [0.20, 0.39]), and vs gefitinib in LL7 (0.73 [0.57, 0.95]). We conducted a phase IIIb study of afatinib in a broader patient population, similar to real-world practice, of treatment-naive or CT pre-treated pts with EGFRm+ NSCLC. Here we present an interim analysis. Methods EGFR TKI-naive pts with locally advanced/metastatic EGFRm+ NSCLC and ECOG PS 0–2 received afatinib 40 mg/day; dose reduction was permitted (min. 20 mg/day). Primary endpoint: adverse events (AEs; descriptive fashion). Efficacy was assessed and post-hoc subgroup analysis conducted. Results 479 pts were included (data cut-off: 30/04/18): Caucasian/Asian: 97%/2%; female: 66%; 1st/2nd/≥3rd-line therapy: 78%/17%/5%; ECOG PS 0 or 1/2: 92%/8%; brain metastases: 17%; common/uncommon [C/U] mutations: 87%/13%. Median time on afatinib: 359 days. Objective response rate: 46%. Disease control rate: 86%. Median time to symptomatic progression (TTSP) and PFS were 14.9 (95% CI: 13.8, 17.6) and 13.4 (11.8, 14.5); subgroup analysis is in the table. Most common grade ≥3 afatinib-related AEs were diarrhea (16%) and rash (11%). AEs led to dose reduction in 258 (54%) pts (most frequently diarrhea 25%, rash 11%) and to afatinib discontinuation in 105 (22%) pts (malignant neoplasm progression 3%, diarrhea 3% [rash 0.8%]). Afatinib-related serious AEs occurred in 39 (8%) pts.Table482PTableTTSP, mosPFS, mosBaseline characteristic (n)Median95% CIMedian95% CILine of tx1 (374)15.614.1, 18.513.812.6, 15.22 (81)14.711.3, 20.613.28.3, 17.7≥3 (24)8.13.7, 14.46.63.2, 12.6MutationsaDel 19b (232)19.315.6, 21.815.913.9, 19.1L858Rb (162)14.512.7, 17.913.111.5, 15.2Uc (84)7.45.7, 9.06.04.2, 8.1ECOG PS, inc. mutations0–1 (442)a15.814.4, 18.813.812.8, 15.2Cb (364)18.215.5, 19.815.213.8, 17.7U (77)7.45.7, 9.76.64.6, 8.22 (36)8.95.7, 13.26.22.5, 11.6Cb (30)8.95.7, 13.97.73.9, 13.2U (6)7.00.9, 13.01.40.4, 6.0Brain metsaNo (395)15.814.1, 18.813.912.7, 15.5Yes (83)13.79.7, 17.210.18.2, 13.9aMissing n = 1.bDel 19/L858R only.cIncludes, n (%): ex 20 ins: 37 (44). Conclusions This analysis indicates a predictable and manageable safety profile for afatinib, consistent with the pivotal LL trials, and encouraging efficacy findings in this broad patient population. As expected, TTSP/PFS were longer for pts with ECOG PS 0/1 vs 2, and for pts with Del 19 or L858R mutations, vs those with uncommon mutations, which may be due to the high prevalence (44%) of pts with exon 20 insertions included in this study. Clinical trial identification NCT01853826. Editorial acknowledgement Christina Jennings of GeoMed, an Ashfield company, part of UDG Healthcare plc. Legal entity responsible for the study Boehringer Ingelheim. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim. Disclosure F. De Marinis: Honoraria (self): Roche; Honoraria (self): AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy: Takeda; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boehringer Ingelheim. M. Hochmair: Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Boehringer Ingelheim; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Merck Sharp & Dohme; Advisory / Consultancy: Novartis; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: AstraZeneca; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Bristol-Myers Squibb; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Pfizer. M.R. Migliorino: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: B.I.; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: ROCHE; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: MSD; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: PFIZER. G.Z. Mukhametshina: Advisory / Consultancy: Association of oncologists of Russian Federation; Full / Part-time employment: State Autonomous Healthcare Institution «Republican Clinical Oncology Dispensary of the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Tatarstan». M. Schumacher: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: BMS; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: MSD; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Roche; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Pfizer; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: AstraZeneca. S. Novello: Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: BI; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: MSD; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: BMS; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: AbbVie; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Celgene; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Eli Lilly; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Pfizer; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Takeda. R. Dziadziuszko: Honoraria (self): Pfizer; Honoraria (self): Boehringer Ingelheim; Honoraria (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Roche; Honoraria (self): MSD; Honoraria (self): Bristol-Myers Squibb. W. Tang: Full / Part-time employment: Boehringer Ingelheim. L. Clementi: Full / Part-time employment: Boehringer Ingelheim Italia SpA. A. Cseh: Full / Part-time employment: Boehringer Ingelheim. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background In the registrational trials, afatinib (afa) was active against NSCLC tumors harboring common and uncommon EGFR mutations, including G719X, L861Q and S768I,1 and is approved in this setting. Here, we assess 1st-line afa in pts with uncommon EGFR mutations treated in a ‘real-world’ setting in the largest analysis of its kind to date. Methods Retrospective pooled analysis of three ‘real-world’ studies: an expanded-access program in Korea (1200.193); an Asian phase IIIB trial (1200.66); a global phase IIIB trial (mainly Europe; 1200.55). Pts had EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm+) NSCLC, were EGFR TKI-naive, and received afa 40 mg/day. Dose reduction was permitted (minimum 20 mg/day). Endpoints included time to symptomatic progression (TTSP), investigator-assessed PFS and ORR. Results Overall, 1108 pts were treated with afa: median age, 61 yrs; female, 58%; ECOG PS of 0/1/2, 26%/70%/4%; asymptomatic brain metastases, 19%; 1st-line afatinib, 69%. 198 (18%) had tumors harboring at least one uncommon mutation (exon 20 insertions [Ins20]: n = 70; T790M: n = 20; G719X: n = 41; L861Q: n = 47; S768I: n = 20; other: n = 25. Of note, 35% of pts had Ins20 mutations, a heterogeneous group generally resistant to EGFR TKIs). Median TTSP, PFS and ORR were 8.3 mos (95% CI 7.2–11.0), 7.4 mos (95% CI 6.0–9.0) and 37% respectively. Median duration of response was 10.2 mos (95% CI 8.4–12.9). In those pts with uncommon mutations and brain metastases, median TTSP and PFS were 7.6 mos (95% CI 4.6–10.1) and 7.4 mos (95% CI 4.6–9.1). Clinical activity in pts with uncommon mutations was greatest against tumors harboring G719X, L861Q or S768I. Some pts with Ins20 or T790M mutations appeared to benefit from treatment. Survival data in specific mutation subgroups will be presented. Table . 503P EGFR mutation type Common Uncommon Del19 L858R T790M Ins20 T790M + Ins 20 G719X, L861Q, S768I and Other n 531 378 15 65 5 113 Median TTSP, mos (95% CI) 17.2 (15.5, 19.3) 14.5 (13.1, 16.5) 8.2 (2.7, 13.4) 5.9 (3.8, 8.2) 1.5 (0.1, 13.0) 11.0 (9.0, 16.4) Median PFS, mos (95% CI) 14.5 (13.8, 15.9) 12.6 (11.1, 13.8) 7.1 (2.0, 9.0) 5.6 (3.9, 7.4) 1.5 (0.1, 9.1) 9.2 (7.3, 12.1) ORR, % 64 52 20 23 20 49 Median DOR, mos (95% CI) 14.1 (12.6, 16.2) 12.5 (11.1, 14.9) 12.5 (1.1, 12.5) 10.1 (3.7, 21.2) 8.3 (NE, NE) 10.2 (8.3, 15.5) Conclusions In this ‘real-world’ analysis, nearly 20% of pts with EGFRm+ NSCLC harbored uncommon EGFR mutations. Afa was active in a broad range of these pts, including some with Ins20 mutations. 1. Yang, JC. et al. Lancet Oncol 2015;16:830–8. Clinical trial identification NCT01931306; NCT01953913; NCT01853826. Editorial acknowledgement Lynn Pritchard of GeoMed, an Ashfield company, part of UDG Healthcare plc. Legal entity responsible for the study Boehringer Ingelheim. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim. Disclosure F. De Marinis: Honoraria (self): Roche; Honoraria (self): AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy: Takeda; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boehringer Ingelheim. V. Lee: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Pfizer; Honoraria (self): Eli Lilly; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Roche; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Merck Sharp & Dohme. L. Clementi: Full / Part-time employment: Boehringer Ingelheim. W. Tang: Full / Part-time employment: Boehringer Ingelheim. D.C-L. Huang: Full / Part-time employment: Boehringer Ingelheim. A. Cseh: Full / Part-time employment: Boehringer Ingelheim. K. Park: Advisory / Consultancy: AMGEN; Advisory / Consultancy: Astellas; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self): AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy: BluePrint; Advisory / Consultancy: BMS; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Boehringer Ingelheim; Advisory / Consultancy: Eli Lilly; Advisory / Consultancy: Hanmi; Advisory / Consultancy: KHK; Advisory / Consultancy: Loxo; Advisory / Consultancy: Merch KGaA; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (self): MSD; Advisory / Consultancy: ONO; Advisory / Consultancy: Roche. C. Zhou: Honoraria (self): BI; Honoraria (self): Roche; Honoraria (self): Sanofi; Honoraria (self): Hengrui; Honoraria (self): Qilu; Honoraria (self): MSD. Y-L. Wu: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self): Roche; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Boehringer Ingelheim; Honoraria (self): Pfizer; Honoraria (self): Eli Lilly; Honoraria (self): MDS; Honoraria (self): BMS. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Introduction Pembrolizumab has shown clinical benefit in patients with previously treated recurrent or metastatic SCLC in the phase 1b multicohort study KEYNOTE-028 ( NCT02054806 ) and the phase 2 multicohort study KEYNOTE-158 ( NCT02628067 ). We present a pooled analysis of patients from KEYNOTE-028 and KEYNOTE-158 who had received two or more lines of previous therapy for SCLC. Methods Eligible patients were aged 18 years and above, had histologically or cytologically confirmed incurable recurrent or metastatic SCLC, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 and below, and had received two or more lines of previous therapy. Patients in KEYNOTE-028 were required to have a programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)–positive tumor. Patients received pembrolizumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks in KEYNOTE-028 or 200 mg every 3 weeks in KEYNOTE-158) for up to 2 years. The primary end point was objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, which is presented here per independent review. Results Eighty-three patients who had received two or more lines of previous therapy (KEYNOTE-028, n = 19; KEYNOTE-158, n = 64) were included. Median follow-up duration was 7.7 (range, 0.5–48.7) months. Objective response rate was 19.3% (95% confidence interval: 11.4–29.4); two patients had complete response (one with a PD-L1–positive tumor), and 14 patients had partial response (13 with PD-L1–positive tumors). The median duration of response was not reached (range, 4.1‒35.8+ mo; plus sign indicates ongoing response); 61% of responders had responses lasting 18 months or longer. Fifty-one patients (61.4%) experienced any-grade treatment-related adverse events; eight patients (9.6%) had grade 3 or higher events. Conclusions Pembrolizumab exhibited durable antitumor activity in a subset of patients with recurrent or metastatic SCLC who had undergone two or more previous lines of therapy, regardless of PD-L1 expression. Pembrolizumab was well tolerated.

Purpose In the randomized, open-label, phase III KEYNOTE-024 study, pembrolizumab significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a programmed death ligand 1 tumor proportion score of 50% or greater and without EGFR/ALK aberrations. We report an updated OS and tolerability analysis, including analyses adjusting for potential bias introduced by crossover from chemotherapy to pembrolizumab. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks (for up to 2 years) or investigator’s choice of platinum-based chemotherapy (four to six cycles). Patients assigned to chemotherapy could cross over to pembrolizumab upon meeting eligibility criteria. The primary end point was progression-free survival; OS was an important key secondary end point. Crossover adjustment analysis was done using the following three methods: simplified two-stage method, rank-preserving structural failure time, and inverse probability of censoring weighting. Results Three hundred five patients were randomly assigned (pembrolizumab, n = 154; chemotherapy, n = 151). At data cutoff (July 10, 2017; median follow-up, 25.2 months), 73 patients in the pembrolizumab arm and 96 in the chemotherapy arm had died. Median OS was 30.0 months (95% CI, 18.3 months to not reached) with pembrolizumab and 14.2 months (95% CI, 9.8 to 19.0 months) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.86). Eighty-two patients assigned to chemotherapy crossed over on study to receive pembrolizumab. When adjusted for crossover using the two-stage method, the hazard ratio for OS for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy was 0.49 (95% CI, 0.34 to 0.69); results using rank-preserving structural failure time and inverse probability of censoring weighting were similar. Treatment-related grade 3 to 5 adverse events were less frequent with pembrolizumab compared with chemotherapy (31.2% v 53.3%, respectively). Conclusion With prolonged follow-up, first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy continues to demonstrate an OS benefit over chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated, advanced NSCLC without EGFR/ALK aberrations, despite crossover from the control arm to pembrolizumab as subsequent therapy.