Search

Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou,1 Xiuning Le,2 Misako Nagasaka,1 Thanyanan Reungwetwattana,3 Myung-Ju Ahn,4 Darren WT Lim,5 Edgardo S Santos,6 Elaine Shum,7 Sally CM Lau,7 Jii Bum Lee,8 Antonio Calles,9 Fengying Wu,10 Gilberto Lopes,11 Virote Sriuranpong,12 Junko Tanizaki,13 Hidehito Horinouchi,14 Marina C Garassino,15 Sanjay Popat,16 Benjamin Besse,17 Rafael Rosell,18 Ross A Soo19 1University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USA; 2University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; 3Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand; 4Department of Hematology and Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 5Duke-NUS School of medicine, National Cancer Center Singapore, Republic of Singapore; 6Charles E. Schmidt College of Medicine, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, 33431, USA; 7NYU Langone Perlmutter Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; 8Yonsei Cancer Center Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 9Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Early Drug Development and Phase I Unit, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, 28007, Spain; 10Shanghai Chest hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China; 11Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Miami and the Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, 33136, USA; 12Chulalongkorn University, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand; 13Department of Medicine, Kindai University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan; 14Department of Thoracic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan; 15Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology-Hematology, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA; 16Royal Marsden Hospital, London, Imperial College, London, UK; 17Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France; Paris-Saclay University, Orsay, France; 18Department of Hematology-Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, National University Hospital Singapore, Republic of Singapore; 19IOR, Quirón-Dexeus University Institute; ICO, Catalan Institute of Oncology; IGTP, Germans Trias i Pujol Research Institute, Barcelona, SpainCorrespondence: Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou, University of California School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, 200 South Manchester Avenue, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868, USA, Tel +1 714-456-5153, Fax +1 714-456-2242, Email Siou@hs.uci.eduAbstract: The year 2024 is the 20th anniversary of the discovery of activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Since then, tremendous advances have been made in the treatment of NSCLC based on this discovery. Some of these studies have led to seismic changes in the concept of oncology research and spurred treatment advances beyond NSCLC, leading to a current true era of precision oncology for all solid tumors. We now routinely molecularly profile all tumor types and even plasma samples of patients with NSCLC for multiple actionable driver mutations, independent of patient clinical characteristics nor is profiling limited to the advanced incurable stage. We are increasingly monitoring treatment responses and detecting resistance to targeted therapy by using plasma genotyping. Furthermore, we are now profiling early-stage NSCLC for appropriate adjuvant targeted treatment leading to an eventual potential “cure” in early-stage EGFR+ NSCLC which have societal implication on implementing lung cancer screening in never-smokers as most EGFR+ NSCLC patients are never-smokers. All these advances were unfathomable in 2004 when the five papers that described “discoveries” of activating EGFR mutations (del19, L858R, exon 20 insertions, and “uncommon” mutations) were published. To commemorate this 20th anniversary, we assembled a global panel of thoracic medical oncology experts to select the top 20 papers (publications or congress presentation) from the 20 years since this seminal discovery with December 31, 2023 as the cutoff date for inclusion of papers to be voted on. Papers ranked 21 to 30 were considered “honorable mention” and also annotated. Our objective is that these 30 papers with their annotations about their impact and even all the ranked papers will serve as “syllabus” for the education of future thoracic oncology trainees. Finally, we mentioned potential practice-changing clinical trials to be reported. One of them, LAURA was published online on June 2, 2024 was not included in the list of papers to be voted on but will surely be highly ranked if this consensus survery is performed again on the 25th anniversay of the discovery EGFR mutations (i.e. top 25 papers on the 25 years since the discovery of activating EGFR mutations).Keywords: EGFR mutations, expert panel, top 20 papers, 20th anniversary, NSCLC

Jii Bum Lee,1 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou2,3 1Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 2Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, California, USA; 3Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USACorrespondence: Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, 200 South Manchester Ave, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868, USA, Tel +1714-456-5153, Fax +1 714-456-2242, Email ignatiusou@gmail.comAbstract: Treatment strategies for post-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is an ongoing challenge. Previously, the IMPRESS trial comparing platinum doublet chemotherapy with or without EGFR-TKI did not demonstrate any progression-free survival (PFS) benefit. The retrospective subgroup analysis of IMpower150 indicated that the quad regimen (carboplatin, paclitaxel, bevacizumab, atezolizumab) improved PFS and overall survival (OS) in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC who progressed on first-generation EGFR-TKIs. Given the retrospective nature of the analysis, the IMpower150 regimen is not approved in the US for post-EGFR-TKI treatment. Currently, osimertinib or other third-generation (3G) EGFR-TKIs is the first-line standard of care for advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC. MARIPOSA-2 provided the first randomized trial post-osimertinib in EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients with another quad regimen (platinum, pemetrexed, lazertinib, amivantamab). The IMpower150 and MARIPOSA-2 quad regimens differ in the principle of whether to continue or even “double-down” on EGFR inhibition. Recently, three prospective randomized trials conducted in Asia offered promising results, showing that a quad regimen of doublet platinum chemotherapy plus anti-angiogenesis agent and ICI may be as efficacious as MARIPOSA-2 with a lower rate of toxicities and accounting for the PFS difference if 1L chemotherapy plus osimertinib instead of osimertinib monotherapy. In particular, the median PFS achieved by the quad regimens of ATTLAS and IMpower151 is 8.5 months. However, only 8.2% and 17.9% of the EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients who received the quad regimens progressed on 3G EGFR-TKI, respectively. Here, we discuss how the results of IMpower151 and ATTLAS may rejuvenate interest in a non-EGFR containing quad regimen as a potential post-osimertinib monotherapy treatment. Randomized trials comparing the results of these studies, including the quad regimen of MARIPOSA-2 versus the quad regimen of IMpower151/Impower150/ATTLAS in post-osimertinib (or other 3G EGFR-TKI) progression, are urgently needed.Keywords: atezolizumab, bevacizumab, chemotherapy, EGFR-mutant, NSCLC, FLAURA-2

Alexandria TM Lee,1 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou2 1Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, 92868, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, 92868, USACorrespondence: Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, 200 South Manchester, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868-3298, USA, Email siou@hs.uci.edu; ignatiusou@gmail.comAbstract: Selpercatinib, a potent and highly selective RET kinase inhibitor with significant CNS activity, has recently gained US approval for the treatment of NSCLC harboring RET fusions (RET+) based on a large-scale single-arm study. The LIBRETTO-431 trial was the global pivotal registration phase 3 trial comparing selpercatinib to platinum-based chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab as the first-line treatment of patients with advanced RET+ NSCLC. Never-smokers constituted 67.4% of the RET+ NSCLC patients enrolled. KIF5B-RET made up the vast majority (77%) of the RET+ fusion variant with known fusion partner. The results of this study demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) benefit as well as impressive intracranial disease response in participants treated with selpercatinib as compared to those treated with chemotherapy, with a HR [hazard ratio] of 0.46 (95% CI 0.33– 0.70; P < 0.001) for the intention-to-treat (ITT)-pembrolizumab group and HR of 0.46 (95% CI 0.31– 0.70, P < 0.001) for the overall ITT-group of patients. The addition of pembrolizumab to platinum/pemetrexed chemotherapy resulted in numerically identical PFS (11.2 months). These results point to selpercatinib’s superiority to traditional chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of NSCLC harboring RET fusions and add to literature on the salience of targeted precision oncology and lack of efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor in NSCLC patients with never-smoker predominant actionable driver mutations. RET+ NSCLC should be added to the list of molecular subtypes (EGFR+, ALK+, ROS1+) of NSCLC to be excluded in chemoimmunotherapy trial.Keywords: LIBRETTO-431, selpercatinib, RET fusion positive NSCLC, pralsetinib, immunotherapy in never-smokers, relative dose intensity

Faustine X Luo,1,2 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou1,2 1Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, 92868, USA; 2University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, 92868, USACorrespondence: Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, 200 South Manchester Ave, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868, USA, Tel +1 949-800-9670, Email ignatiusou@gmail.comAbstract: Afatinib, a second-generation covalent EGFR TKI, has been approved for the treatment of the three “uncommon” EGFR mutations (G719X, S768I, and L861Q) based on one pooled retrospective analysis of three prospective trials (LUX-Lung 2, 3 and 6). The confirmed overall response rate, as assessed by independent radiology review, was 66% (95% confidence interval: 47– 81). Among the 21 responders, the proportion of patients with response duration of ≥ 12 months was 52% and the proportion with response durations of ≥ 18 months was 33%. Of note, all patients received afatinib at 40 or 50 mg once daily which is higher than the approved dose of 40 mg once daily and the usual 30 mg once daily starting dose by most thoracic oncologists. Given the approval of afatinib for “uncommon” EGFR mutations was based on the limited number of patients analyzed, the retrospective nature of the analysis, lack of randomized phase 2 or 3 trial, there remains uncertainty as to whether afatinib, chemotherapy or other next-generation EGFR TKIs is the optimal treatment. This uncertainty also hinders the development of future treatment of these “uncommon” mutations because of the uncertainty that afatinib is the optimal treatment and hence should be the standard of care control arm in future randomized trials. Finally, the ACHILLES/TORG1834 provided us with the first randomized trial result that afatinib achieved superior progression-free survival over platinum-based chemotherapy (10.6 months vs 5.7 months, HR = 0.42; 95% CI: 0.256– 0.694; P = 0.0007). However, ACHILLES should mostly be considered as phase 2 trial given the limited number (N = 109) of patients enrolled. Furthermore, the PFS benefit seemed to be with the 40 mg daily dose (HR = 0.128; 95% CI: 0.050– 0.327) and not with the 30 mg daily dose (HR = 0.704; 95% CI: 0.352– 1.406). Further investigation of the 30 once daily dosing for the treatment of uncommon EGFR mutations is needed.Keywords: afatinib, uncommon EGFR mutations, G719X, S768I, L861Q, ACHILLES, relative dose intensity

Alexandria TM Lee,1 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou1,2 1University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USACorrespondence: Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, 200 South Manchester Ave, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868, USA, Tel +1 714-456-5153, Email Ignatiusou@gmail.comAbstract: Despite the development and approval of seven anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) spanning over three “generations” since the discovery of ALK fusion positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), there remains intrinsic and acquired resistances to these approved TKIs. Currently, a fourth-generation (4G) ALK TKI, NVL-655, is being developed to attack some of the unmet needs such as compound resistance mutations in cis. However, EML4-ALK variant 3 and TP53 mutations are intrinsic genomic alterations that negatively modulate efficacy of ALK TKIs. Potentially, in the shifting landscape where lorlatinib should be the first-line ALK TKI of choice based on the CROWN trial, the central β-sheet &num;6 (Cβ 6) mutation ALK L1256F will be the potential acquired resistance mutation to lorlatinib which may be resistant to current ALK TKIs. Here we opine on what additional capacities a putative fifth-generation (5G) ALK TKI will need to possess if it can be achieved in one single molecule. We propose randomized trial schemas targeting some of the intrinsic resistance mechanisms that will lead to approval of a prototypic fifth-generation (5G) ALK TKI and actually be beneficial to ALK+ NSCLC patients rather than just design a positive pivotal superiority trial for the sole purpose of drug approval.Keywords: EML4-ALK variant 3a/b, TP53 mutation, ALK TKIs, fifth generation ALK TKI, ALK+ NSCLC, circulating tumor DNA, next-generation sequencing, Cβ 6 mutation

Misako Nagasaka,1– 3 Saihong Ignatius Ou1,2 1University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USA; 3Division of Neurology, Department of Internal Medicine, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, JapanCorrespondence: Saihong Ignatius Ou, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology Oncology, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, 200 South Manchester Avenue, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868-3298, USA, Tel +1-714-456-5153, Fax +1-714-456-2242, Email siou@hs.uci.eduAbstract: One of the most recent advancements in NSCLC was the approval of immunotherapy in the adjuvant setting. Both atezolizumab and pembrolizumab have been approved for the use in early stage NSCLC patients post resection. As it broadens the options for our patients, multiple approvals in the same setting are generally welcomed. However, there were important differences in the two studies that led to the approvals and the data could be confusing. Here we review IMpower010, the study that led to the first approval of atezolizumab in the adjuvant setting with comparison to the Keynote-091 study evaluating pembrolizumab in the adjuvant setting, gaining the most recent FDA approval for adjuvant use in early stage NSCLC.Keywords: post operative therapy, checkpoint inhibitors, atezolizumab, IMpower010, biomarker

Alexandria TM Lee,1 Saihong Ignatius Ou1,2 1Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USACorrespondence: Saihong Ignatius Ou, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, 200 South Manchester, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868, USA, Tel +1 714-456-5153, Email siou@hs.uci.eduAbstract: Alectinib, a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has demonstrated superior progression-free survival over crizotinib with both 300 mg twice daily (J-ALEX) or 600 mg twice daily (ALEX, ALESIA) dosing in three pivotal clinical trials. Given the similar median PFS achieved in the J-ALEX trial and the Asian subgroup of the ALEX trial, there remains debate about the optimal alectinib dose for Asians. The third pivotal alectinib trial, ALESIA, which was conducted exclusively in Asia to support the registration of alectinib in China, utilized 600 mg alectinib twice daily. The mature PFS was not reached at the initial publication of ALESIA. At ESMO Asia 2022, the 5-year update of ALESIA was presented with an impressive mature investigator-assessed PFS of 41.6 months (95% CI 33.1– 58.9), which is numerically longer than the mature PFS of 34.1 months achieved by alectinib at 300 mg twice daily in the J-ALEX trial. Based on these results, as well as retrospective pharmacokinetic and responses and PFS data, Alectinib at 600 mg twice daily is the optimal dose for Asians. This has been based on the ALESIA trial and on the retrospective pharmacokinetic and responses and PFS data and has set the benchmark for ALK TKI as the first-line treatment for advanced ALK+ NSCLC in Asia. Importantly, lorlatinib, another next generation ALK TKI, also achieved an impressive hazard ratio with a still immature PFS in all patients, including Asian patients, in a recent subgroup analysis after a median follow-up time of 36.7 months. We await the final mature PFS of lorlatinib overall and for Asian patients in the CROWN trial to see if lorlatinib will set a new standard.Keywords: ALESIA, CROWN, alectinib, lorlatinib, brigatinib, pharmacokinetics, dose response, ALK fusion, NSCLC

Alexandria TM Lee,1 Saihong Ignatius Ou1,2 1University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USACorrespondence: Saihong Ignatius Ou, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, 200 South Manchester, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868, USA, Email siou@hs.uci.eduAbstract: The competing roles of various next-generation ALK TKIs in the first and second line treatment setting of advanced ALK+ NSCLC were based on many phase 3 clinical trials in both the first-line and crizotinib-refractory settings. The approval of all next-generation ALK TKIs was first in the crizotinib-refractory setting, based on a large-scale Phase 2 trial, and was then followed by at least one global randomized phase 3 trial comparing to platinum-based chemotherapy (ASCEND-4) or to crizotinib (ALEX, ALTA-1L, eXalt3, CROWN). In addition, three randomized phase 3 trials in the crizotinib-refractory setting were also conducted by next-generation ALK TKIs that were developed earlier before the superiority of next-generation ALK TKIs was demonstrated in order to secure the approval of these ALK TKIs in the crizotinib-refractory setting. These three crizotinib-refractory randomized trials were: ASCEND-5 (ceritinib), ALUR (alectinib), and ALTA-3 (brigatinib). The outcome of the ATLA-3 trial was recently presented closing out the chapter where next-generation ALK TKIs were investigated in the crizotinib-refractory setting as they have replaced crizotinib as the standard of care first-line treatment of advanced ALK+ NSCLC. This editorial summarizes the results of next-generation ALK TKIs in randomized crizotinib-refractory trials and provides a perspective on how natural history of ALK+ NSCLC may potentially be altered with sequential treatment. ALTA-3 compared brigatinib to alectinib, showing that both achieved near identical blinded independent review committee (BIRC)-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) (19.2– 19.3 months). Importantly, 4.8% of brigatinib-treated patients developed interstitial lung disease (ILD) while no alectinib-treated patients developed ILD. Dose reduction and discontinuation due to treatment-related adverse events were 21% and 5%, respectively, for brigatinib-treated patients compared to 11% and 2%, respectively, for alectinib-treated patients. Upon analysis of these findings, we speculate that brigatinib may have a diminishing role in the treatment of advanced ALK+ NSCLC.Keywords: ALTA-3, ALUR, ASCEND-5, brigatinib, alectinib, ceritinib, crizotinib, advanced ALK+ NSCLC

Danielle Brazel,1 Saihong Ignatius Ou1,2 1University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Orange, CA, 92868, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, 92868, USACorrespondence: Saihong Ignatius Ou, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, 200 South Manchester, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868, USA, Tel +1 714-456-5153, Fax +1 714-345-2242, Email siou@hs.uci.eduAbstract: Cemiplimab is one of seven immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) approved for the first-line (1L) treatment of advanced NSCLC in the US based on EMPOWER-Lung 1 and -Lung 3 trials. In addition to exclusion of NSCLC patients harboring EGFR mutations and ALK fusion from 1L treatment with ICIs, exclusion of ROS1 fusion is an additional unique exclusion the use of criterion for cemiplimab in the US FDA indication based on the design of the EMPOWER lung trials. We review the effectiveness of ICIs in never-smoker predominant NSCLC with driver mutations (EGFR, ALK, ROS1, RET, HER2) and question whether exclusion of ROS1 fusion would put cemiplimab at a competitive disadvantage given the requirement for insurance to prove ROS1 fusion negativity. We further discuss whether the US FDA as a regulatory authority has the right and responsibility to harmonize the use of ICIs in these actionable driver mutations to standardize community practice for the benefit of patients and to advance the development of next-generation treatment for these driver mutations.Keywords: cemiplimab, immunotherapy, actionable driver mutation, ROS1 fusion

Danielle Brazel,1 Jennifer Kim,1 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou1,2 1University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Orange, CA, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USACorrespondence: Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Hematology-Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, 200 South Manchester Avenue, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868-3298, USA, Tel +1 714-456-5153, Fax +1 714-456-2242, Email siou@hs.uci.eduAbstract: Per the US FDA sotorasib approval summary, KRAS G12C mutation is found in approximately 14% of adenocarcinoma of the lung, primarily in patients with a history of smoking. Until recently, targeted therapies against KRAS G12C have been largely unsuccessful due to the small protein size of KRAS and thus lack of binding pockets in KRAS and rapid hydrolysis of GTP to GDP by KRAS enzymes from abundance of GTP in the cytoplasm. Sotorasib, a first-in-class covalent KRAS G12C inhibitor that binds to the switch pocket II in the KRAS G12C-GDP “off” state, received US FDA accelerated approval on May 21, 2021 in the US, based on a Phase II dose expansion cohort of CodeBreaK 100 trial. Sotorasib at 960 mg once daily achieved an ORR of 36% (95% CI: 28%, 45%), with a median response duration of 10 months (range 1.3+, 11.1) in 124 KRAS G12C+ NSCLC. At the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2022 annual meeting, sotorasib achieved a statistically significant improved PFS over docetaxel (HR = 0.66; 95% CI: 0. 51– 0.86; P = 0.002). The modest magnitude of PFS improvement of 1.1 months (from 4.5 months to 5.6 months) and the ORR of 28% led to a vigorous debate on whether sotorasib was indeed a true breakthrough. In this pros and cons debate, we argue thatsotorasib has achieved a true breakthrough.Keywords: non-small-cell lung cancer, KRAS G12C mutations, sotorasib, adagrasib, docetaxel, CodeBreaK

Danielle Brazel,1 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou,1,2 Misako Nagasaka1– 3 1Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USA; 3St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Kawasaki, JapanCorrespondence: Misako Nagasaka, Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, 101 the City Drive, Orange, CA, USA, Email nagasakm@hs.uci.eduAbstract: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is characterized by rapid progression and poor prognosis. Although the phase II CITYSCAPE-02 trial found objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients improved when tiragolumab was added to atezolizumab and chemotherapy, the phase III SKYSCRAPER-02 failed to find PFS or OS benefit in patients with SCLC. Atezolizumab was the first immunotherapy to show survival benefit in extensive SCLC based on the phase III IMpower133 study. Given that immunotherapy has become the standard of care for SCLC patients, further research is needed into ways to augment the immune system to better treat these patients.Keywords: tiragolumab, TIGIT, immunotherapy, small cell lung cancer

Shannon S Zhang,1 Sai-hong Ignatius Ou1,2 1University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USACorrespondence: Sai-hong Ignatius Ou, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, 200 South Manchester Ave, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868, USA, Email siou@hs.uci.eduAbstract: Osimertinib, a third-generation (3G) epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) is now considered the standard of care for the first-line (1L) treatment of advanced EGFR+ NSCLC due to statistically significant improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with first-generation (1G) treatment from the FLAURA trial. Recently two other 3G EGFR TKIs (aumolertinib and furmonertinib) have been approved in China for treatment of EGFR T790M+ NSCLC. Randomized Phase 3 trials of these two 3G EGFR TKIs have also demonstrated PFS over gefitinib respectively. Among these two Chinese home-grown, 3G EGFR TKIs, furmonertinib seems to most closely resemble osimertinib in terms of dosing regimen, efficacy and adverse events profile. In this article, we reviewed the clinical activity and adverse events of furmonertinib at 80 mg daily (approved dose), potential usage of 160 mg daily for CNS metastasis in EGFR+ NSCLC, and usage of 160 mg or 240 mg daily in EGFR exon20 insertion positive (EGFRex20ins+) NSCLC patients.Keywords: furmonertinib, Alflutinib, third generation EGFR TKI, non-small cell lung cancer, EGFR T790M mutation, exon 20 insertions, uncommon EGFR mutations

Shannon S Zhang,1 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou1,2 1University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USACorrespondence: Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, 200 South Manchester Ave, Suite 400, Orange, CA, 92868, USA Email siou@hs.uci.eduAbstract: Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is considered the standard of care for resected stage IB (tumor ≥ 4m)–IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The ADAURA trial is a randomized placebo-controlled Phase III trial that demonstrated statistically significant improved disease-free survival (DFS) with the use of 3-years of adjuvant osimertinib in resected stage IB–IIIA NSCLC harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) del 19 or L858R mutations. Subgroup analysis revealed that the DFS improvement with adjuvant osimertinib is independent of adjuvant chemotherapy in the primary analysis. A recent follow-up report suggested that adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy provided no additional 2-year DFS improvement on top of adjuvant osimertinib regardless of stage (IB, II, or IIIA) and minimal numerical DFS benefit in stage II or IIIA resected EGFR+ NSCLC for those patients who did not receive adjuvant osimertinib. Here, we argue that if clinicians adopt the use of 3 years of adjuvant osimertinib in resected early-stage EGFR+ NSCLC, there is no role for adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. The use of adjuvant chemotherapy was balanced between the osimertinib and the placebo arms by stage even though adjuvant chemotherapy was not one of the three stratification factors (del 19 vs L858R; Stage IA vs II vs III; Asians versus non-Asian) in ADAURA. There may be a potential role of adjuvant cisplatin/vinorelbine in a small subgroup of EGFR+ NSCLC patients whose tumor harbors retinoblastoma (RB) gene alterations but requires further investigation.Keywords: ADAURA, osimertinib, EGFR mutation, resected NSCLC, adjuvant, platinum-based chemotherapy, cisplatin; disease-free survival

Misako Nagasaka,1– 3 Sai-hong Ignatius Ou1,2 1University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Orange, CA, USA; 2Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Orange, CA, USA; 3St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Kawasaki, JapanCorrespondence: Misako Nagasaka, Associate Clinical Professor, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, 101 the City Drive South, Building 200, Room 410, ZOT 4061, Orange, CA, 92868, USA, Email nagasakm@hs.uci.eduAbstract: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have become the preferred first line therapy for those patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. Given superior progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) when compared to earlier generations, third generation EGFR TKIs have become the first choice therapy in many parts of the world. Even though multiple strategies are in development to target both “on-target” and “off-target” resistance, the continuation of EGFR TKIs at the time of progression remains a controversial topic. This commentary focuses on both the ”classic” clinical trials of IMpower150 and IMPRESS and compares them to the recently reported ORIENT-31 and ongoing MARIPOSA-2 to discuss the future therapeutic strategies in the setting of progression post-third generation EGFR TKIs.Keywords: sintilimab, ORIENT-31, EGFR+ NSCLC, bevacizumab biosimilar, EGFR TKI, third-generation EGFR TKI, T790M

Viola W Zhu, 1,* Misako Nagasaka, 2, 3,* Takafumi Kubota, 4 Kunil Raval, 5 Natasha Robinette, 6 Octavio Armas, 7 Wajd Al-Holou, 8 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou 1 1Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine, Orange, CA, USA; 2Department of Oncology, Karmanos Cancer Institute/Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA; 3Department of Advanced Medical Innovations, St. Marianna University Graduate School of Medicine, Kawasaki, Japan; 4Department of Neurology, Sapporo Nishimaruyama Hospital, Sapporo, Japan; 5Department of Pathology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA; 6Department of Oncology, Imaging Division, Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA; 7Department of Pathology, Sharp Grossmont Hospital, La Mesa, CA, USA; 8Department of Neurosurgery, Karmanos Cancer Institute/Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Sai-Hong Ignatius OuChao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California Irvine, 200 Manchester Dr, Suite 410, Orange, CA 92868, USATel +1714-456-8104Fax +1714-456-2242Email siou@uci.eduAbstract: Central nervous system (CNS) metastasis carries a significant morbidity and mortality in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Next-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are highly CNS-penetrant and have demonstrated remarkable intracranial activity across clinical studies, and yet radiation remains the mainstay of treatment modality against CNS metastasis. We have previously reported alectinib can induce CNS radiation necrosis even after a remote history of radiation (7 years post-radiation). Lorlatinib is another potent next-generation ALK TKI that can overcome many ALK resistance mutations and has been shown to have excellent activity in patients with baseline CNS metastasis. Here we report two ALK-rearranged NSCLC patients who developed radiation necrosis shortly after initiating lorlatinib following progression on the sequential treatment of crizotinib, alectinib, and brigatinib. In both cases, radiation necrosis is evidenced by serial MRI images and histological examination of the resected CNS metastasis that had previously been radiated. Our cases highlight the importance of recognizing CNS radiation necrosis that may mimic disease progression in ALK-rearranged NSCLC treated with and potentially precipated by next-generation ALK TKIs.Keywords: CNS, radiation necrosis, lorlatinib, ALK-rearranged NSCLC, alectinib

Viola W Zhu,1 Alexa B Schrock,2 Siraj M Ali,2 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou1 1Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA; 2Clinical Development, Foundation Medicine, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA Abstract: Exploring resistance mechanisms in patients with EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) upon disease progression on EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has been an area of great interest as it may lead to effective next-line treatment strategies. Here we report a case of emergent MET amplification detected in a tumor sample from a patient with NSCLC harboring EGFR L858R mutation after disease progression on erlotinib. The patient subsequently had a sustained partial response to a combination of full-dose osimertinib and crizotinib with excellent tolerance but eventually had central nervous system (CNS) progression. Comprehensive genomic profiling performed on the resected brain sample continued to demonstrate MET amplification as an acquired resistance mechanism. A review of literature shows several groups have utilized similar combination regimens (erlotinib or osimertinib + crizotinib or cabozantinib), albeit with various dosing to target MET alterations in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC. As more actionable resistance mechanisms are identified, we envision combination TKI therapy will be readily adopted in clinical practice. Our case report adds to a growing body of evidence that combination osimertinib and crizotinib should be recommended to EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients with emergent MET amplification as acquired resistance. More importantly, as crizotinib has limited brain penetration, developing next-generation MET inhibitors with better CNS activity is urgently needed. Keywords: resistance, TKI, erlotinib, cabozantinib, CGP, gefitinib

Viola W Zhu,1 Alexa B Schrock,2 Thangavijayan Bosemani,3 Bryan S Benn,4 Siraj M Ali,2 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou1 1Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA; 2Clinical Development, Foundation Medicine, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA; 3Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA; 4Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA Abstract: ALK-rearranged lung cancer defines a distinctive molecular cohort of patients whose outcomes are significantly improved by the availability of ALK inhibitors. Thus, it is imperative for clinicians to screen appropriate patients for this driver mutation with a molecular testing platform capable of capturing all ALK fusions. Here, we report a novel VKORC1L1-ALK fusion and an ALK T1151K resistance mutation detected in a lung cancer patient who had been on crizotinib for over 8 years. Alectinib induced a dramatic response in this patient demonstrating its clinical activity against T1151K. This case illustrates the importance of performing repeat biopsy to explore mechanism(s) of resistance when patients experience disease progression on an ALK inhibitor. The approach has a direct therapeutic impact particularly when an ALK resistance mutation is identified. Keywords: VKORC1L1, T1151, fusion, resistance, crizotinib, lorlatinib

Samuel J Klempner,1,2 Pareen Mehta,3 Alexa B Schrock,4 Siraj M Ali,4 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou5 1The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 2Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 3Department of Radiology, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 4Clinical Development, Foundation Medicine, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA; 5Department of Medicine-Hematology/Oncology, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA Abstract: Acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) is a universal event and limits clinical efficacy. The third-generation EGFR inhibitor osimertinib is active in EGFR-mutant/T790M positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Mechanisms of acquired resistance are emerging, and here we describe a cis-oriented solvent-front EGFR G796S mutation as the resistance mechanism observed in a progression biopsy and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from a patient with initial response followed by progression on osimertinib. This is one of the earliest reports of a sole solvent-front tertiary EGFR mutation as a resistance mechanism to osimertinib. Our case suggests a monoclonal resistance mechanism. We review the importance of the solvent-front residues across TKIs and describe known osimertinib resistance mechanisms. We observe that nearly all clinical osimertinib-resistant tertiary EGFR mutations are oriented in cis with EGFR T790M. This case highlights the importance of mutations affecting EGFR kinase domains and supports the feasibility of broad panel ctDNA assays for detection of novel acquired resistance and tumor heterogeneity in routine clinical care. Keywords: EGFR G796, lung cancer, ctDNA, resistance, osimertinib, T790M

BackgroundAnti-PD1/PD-L1 directed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are widely used to treat patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The activity of ICI across NSCLC harboring oncogenic alterations is poorly characterized. The aim of our study was to address the efficacy of ICI in the context of oncogenic addiction.Patients and methodsWe conducted a retrospective study for patients receiving ICI monotherapy for advanced NSCLC with at least one oncogenic driver alteration. Anonymized data were evaluated for clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes for ICI therapy: best response (RECIST 1.1), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) from ICI initiation. The primary end point was PFS under ICI. Secondary end points were best response (RECIST 1.1) and OS from ICI initiation.ResultsWe studied 551 patients treated in 24 centers from 10 countries. The molecular alterations involved KRAS (n = 271), EGFR (n = 125), BRAF (n = 43), MET (n = 36), HER2 (n = 29), ALK (n = 23), RET (n = 16), ROS1 (n = 7), and multiple drivers (n = 1). Median age was 60 years, gender ratio was 1 : 1, never/former/current smokers were 28%/51%/21%, respectively, and the majority of tumors were adenocarcinoma. The objective response rate by driver alteration was: KRAS = 26%, BRAF = 24%, ROS1 = 17%, MET = 16%, EGFR = 12%, HER2 = 7%, RET = 6%, and ALK = 0%. In the entire cohort, median PFS was 2.8 months, OS 13.3 months, and the best response rate 19%. In a subgroup analysis, median PFS (in months) was 2.1 for EGFR, 3.2 for KRAS, 2.5 for ALK, 3.1 for BRAF, 2.5 for HER2, 2.1 for RET, and 3.4 for MET. In certain subgroups, PFS was positively associated with PD-L1 expression (KRAS, EGFR) and with smoking status (BRAF, HER2).Conclusions: ICI induced regression in some tumors with actionable driver alterations, but clinical activity was lower compared with the KRAS group and the lack of response in the ALK group was notable. Patients with actionable tumor alterations should receive targeted therapies and chemotherapy before considering immunotherapy as a single agent.

7558 Background: Platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy in randomized trials has failed to provide a survival benefit in stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Using data from California Cancer Registry (CCR), we explored factors that have detrimental effect on survival in stage I NSCLC to identify a subset of patients at high risk for relapse and subsequent mortality. Methods: 19,702 stage I NSCLC cases in the CCR from 1989 to 2003 were identified and subgrouped into stage IA & IB disease. Patient demographic factors, tumor characteristics and treatment delivered were examined. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were calculated to estimate survival rates. Cox proportional hazards ratios were used to identify independent prognostic factors for survival. Results: Advanced age at diagnosis, male sex, low socioeconomic status (SES), non-surgical treatment & poorly-differentiated histologic grade (stage IA: hazard ratio [HR] = 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08–1.19 & stage IB: HR = 1.11; 95% CI: 1.07–1.16) were factors identified with increased mortality risk on multivariate analysis. Non-upper lobe tumor location (RML/RLL/LLL) and tumor size ≥ 4 cm (vs < 4 cm; HR = 1.22; 95% CI: 1.15–1.30) were additional factors with increased mortality risk among stage IB patients. Conversely, bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC)(vs adenocarcinoma: stage IA: HR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.72–0.91 & stage IB: HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.77–0.98) & Asian ethnicity (vs Caucasian: stage IA: HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.70–0.94 & stage IB: HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.72–0.90) were associated with decreased mortality risk in stage I NSCLC. Lobectomy had the lowest HRs for death among all surgical techniques for both stage IA & IB NSCLC in the Cox proportional hazards model. Conclusions: Poorly-differentiated stage IA & IB NSCLC and stage IB NSCLC located in non-upper lobes or tumor size ≥ 4 cm carried an increased mortality risk on adjusted analysis. No significant financial relationships to disclose. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background Quantitative measurement of Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase (G6PD) enzyme activity is critical to decide on appropriate treatment and provision of radical cure regimens for vivax malaria. Biosensors are point-of-care semi-quantitative analysers that measure G6PD enzyme activity. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the operational aspects of biosensor deployment in the hands of village malaria workers (VMWs) in Cambodia over a year. Methods Following initial orientation and training at Kravanh Referral Hospital, each VMW (n = 28) and laboratory technician (n = 5) was provided a biosensor (STANDARD SD Biosensor, Republic of Korea) with supplies for routine use. Over the next 12 months VMWs convened every month for refresher training, to collect supplies, and to recalibrate and test their biosensors. A quantitative self-administered questionnaire was used to assess the skills necessary to use the biosensor after the initial training. Subsequently, VMWs were visited at their location of work for field observation and evaluation using an observer-administered questionnaire. All quantitative questionnaire-based data were analysed descriptively. Semi-structured interviews (SSIs) were conducted among all participants to explore their experience and practicalities of using the biosensor in the field. SSIs were transcribed and translated into English and underwent thematic analysis. Results A total of 33 participants completed the training and subsequently used the biosensor in the community. Quantitative assessments demonstrated progressive improvement in skills using the biosensor. VMWs expressed confidence and enthusiasm to use biosensors in their routine work. Providing G6PD testing at the point of first contact avoids a multitude of barriers patients have to overcome when travelling to health centres for G6PD testing and radical cure. Deploying biosensors in routine work of VMWs was also considered an opportunity to expand and strengthen the role of VMWs as health care providers in the community. VMWs reported practical concerns related to the use of biosensor such as difficulty in using two pipettes, difficulty in extracting the code chip from the machine, and the narrow base of buffer tube. Conclusions VMWs considered the biosensor a practical and beneficial tool in their routine work. Providing VMWs with biosensors can be considered when followed by appropriate training and regular supervision. Providing community management of vivax malaria at the point of first contact could be key for elimination.

Vivax malaria can relapse after an initial infection due to dormant liver stages of the parasite. Radical cure can prevent relapses but requires the measurement of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase enzyme (G6PD) activity to identify G6PD-deficient patients at risk of drug-induced haemolysis. In the absence of reliable G6PD testing, vivax patients are denied radical curative treatment in many places, including rural Cambodia. A novel Biosensor, ‘G6PD Standard’ (SD Biosensor, Republic of Korea; Biosensor), can measure G6PD activity at the point of care. The objectives of this study were to compare the G6PD activity readings using Biosensors by village malaria workers (VMWs) and hospital-based laboratory technicians (LTs), and to compare the G6PD deficiency categorization recommended by the Biosensor manufacturer with categories derived from a locally estimated adjusted male median (AMM) in Kravanh district, Cambodia. Participants were enrolled between 2021 and 2022 in western Cambodia. Each of the 28 VMWs and 5 LTs received a Biosensor and standardized training on its use. The G6PD activities of febrile patients identified in the community were measured by VMWs; in a subset, a second reading was done by LTs. All participants were tested for malaria by rapid diagnostic test (RDT). The adjusted male median (AMM) was calculated from all RDT-negative participants and defined as 100% G6PD activity. VMWs measured activities in 1344 participants. Of that total, 1327 (98.7%) readings were included in the analysis, and 68 of these had a positive RDT result. We calculated 100% activity as 6.4 U/gHb (interquartile range: 4.5 to 7.8); 9.9% (124/1259) of RDT-negative participants had G6PD activities below 30%, 15.2% (191/1259) had activities between 30% and 70%, and 75.0% (944/1259) had activities greater than 70%. Repeat measurements among 114 participants showed a significant correlation of G6PD readings (rs = 0.784, p < 0.001) between VMWs and LTs. Based on the manufacturer’s recommendations, 285 participants (21.5%) had less than 30% activity; however, based on the AMM, 132 participants (10.0%) had less than 30% activity. The G6PD measurements by VMWs and LTs were similar. With the provisions of training, supervision, and monitoring, VMWs could play an important role in the management of vivax malaria, which is critical for the rapid elimination of malaria regionally. Definitions of deficiency based on the manufacturer’s recommendations and the population-specific AMM differed significantly, which may warrant revision of these recommendations.

Four new coordination polymers, [Zn(TPTA)0.5(BIBP)] (1), [Mn(TPTA)0.5(BIBP)0.5(DMF)] (2), [Zn1.5(TPTA)]·DMF·H2O (3), and [Cd1.5(TPTA)]·DMF·2H2O (4) (H4TPTA = 5,5′-(pyridine-2,5-diyl)diisophthalic acid, BIBP = 4,4′-bis(imidazol-1-yl)biphenyl), have been synthesized under solvothermal conditions and fully characterized. Single-crystal X-ray diffraction analysis revealed that complex 1 is a three-dimensional (3D) 3-fold interpenetrating architecture with (4·64·8)2(42·62·82) topology. Complex 2 possesses a 3D 2-fold interpenetrating framework based on binuclear Mn2 units with (412·63) topology. Both complexes 3 and 4 exhibit trinuclear 3D non-interpenetrating (4,8)-connected networks with (46)2(412·612·84) topology. The fluorescence properties of 1, 3 and 4 have been also measured. Importantly, gas adsorption studies for 1–4 show highly selective adsorption of CO2 over CH4. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Amivantamab-lazertinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus osimertinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant advanced non-small-cell lung cancer [NSCLC; hazard ratio (HR) 0.70; P < 0.001], including those with a history of brain metastases (HR 0.69). Patients with TP53 co-mutations, detectable circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), baseline liver metastases, and those without ctDNA clearance on treatment have poor prognoses. We evaluated outcomes in these high-risk subgroups., Patients and Methods: This analysis included patients with treatment-naive, EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC randomized to amivantamab-lazertinib (n = 429) or osimertinib (n = 429) in MARIPOSA. Pathogenic alterations were identified by next-generation sequencing (NGS) of baseline blood ctDNA with Guardant360 CDx. Ex19del and L858R ctDNA in blood was analyzed at baseline and cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1) with Biodesix droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR)., Results: Baseline ctDNA for NGS of pathogenic alterations was available for 636 patients (amivantamab-lazertinib, n = 320; osimertinib, n = 316). Amivantamab-lazertinib improved median PFS (mPFS) versus osimertinib for patients with TP53 co-mutations {18.2 versus 12.9 months; HR 0.65 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.87]; P = 0.003} and for patients with wild-type TP53 [22.1 versus 19.9 months; HR 0.75 (95% CI 0.52-1.07)]. In patients with EGFR-mutant, ddPCR-detectable baseline ctDNA, amivantamab-lazertinib significantly prolonged mPFS versus osimertinib [20.3 versus 14.8 months; HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.53-0.86); P = 0.002]. Amivantamab-lazertinib significantly improved mPFS versus osimertinib in patients without ctDNA clearance at C3D1 [16.5 versus 9.1 months; HR 0.49 (95% CI 0.27-0.87); P = 0.015] and with clearance [24.0 versus 16.5 months; HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.48-0.87); P = 0.004]. Amivantamab-lazertinib significantly prolonged mPFS versus osimertinib among randomized patients with [18.2 versus 11.0 months; HR 0.58 (95% CI 0.37-0.91); P = 0.017] and without baseline liver metastases [24.0 versus 18.3 months; HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.60-0.91); P = 0.004]., Conclusions: Amivantamab-lazertinib effectively overcomes the effect of high-risk features and represents a promising new standard of care for patients with EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: S-HIO has received consulting fees from Pfizer, Lilly, Janssen, Daiichi Sankyo, BMS, AnHeart Therapeutics, J Inst Bio, Bayer, Merus, BluePrint Medicines, Takeda, and Roche; honoraria for lectures or presentations from Pfizer, Janssen, and Caris Life Science; institutional clinical research funding from Daiichi Sankyo, Roche, Nuvalent, Pfizer, Mirati Therapeutics, Revolution Medicines, and ERACAS; continuing medical education funding from OncLive, HMP Education, and Dava Oncology; and payment from Elevation Oncology and stock options from AnHeart Therapeutics for scientific advisory board membership; and has stock ownership in MBrace Therapeutics, BlossomHill Therapeutics, Nuvalent, Turning Point Therapeutics, Elevation Oncology, and Lilly. JBL declares no competing interests.

The ALINA trial 1 demonstrated that 2 years of adjuvant alectinib achieved statistically significantly improved 2-year overall and central nervous system (CNS) disease-free survival over platinum-doublet chemotherapy in resected early-stage (IB ≥ 4 cm to IIIA) ALK+ non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Identifying early-stage ALK+ NSCLC patients (60% were never-smokers in the ALINA trial) may require low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening in never-smokers., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests M.N. is on the advisory board for AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Takeda, Novartis, EMD Serono, Janssen, Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Company, Bayer, Regeneron, BMS, and Genentech; is a consultant for Caris Life Sciences (virtual tumor board); is a speaker for Blueprint Medicines, Janssen, Mirati, and Takeda; received travel support from AnHeart Therapeutics; and owns stock/stock options from MBrace Therapeutics. S.-H.I.O. has received honoraria as an advisory board member for JNJ/Jassen, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, BMS, AnHeart Therapeutics; is a speaker for Pfizer, DAVA Oncology LLP, and OncLive; and own stocks in MBrace Therapeutics, BlossomHill Therapeutics, and Nuvalent., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Amivantamab plus lazertinib (amivantamab-lazertinib) has shown clinically meaningful and durable antitumor activity in patients with previously untreated or osimertinib-pretreated EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor)-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: In a phase 3, international, randomized trial, we assigned, in a 2:2:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated EGFR -mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R), locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC to receive amivantamab-lazertinib (in an open-label fashion), osimertinib (in a blinded fashion), or lazertinib (in a blinded fashion, to assess the contribution of treatment components). The primary end point was progression-free survival in the amivantamab-lazertinib group as compared with the osimertinib group, as assessed by blinded independent central review., Results: Overall, 1074 patients underwent randomization (429 to amivantamab-lazertinib, 429 to osimertinib, and 216 to lazertinib). The median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the amivantamab-lazertinib group than in the osimertinib group (23.7 vs. 16.6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.85; P<0.001). An objective response was observed in 86% of the patients (95% CI, 83 to 89) in the amivantamab-lazertinib group and in 85% of those (95% CI, 81 to 88) in the osimertinib group; among patients with a confirmed response (336 in the amivantamab-lazertinib group and 314 in the osimertinib group), the median response duration was 25.8 months (95% CI, 20.1 to could not be estimated) and 16.8 months (95% CI, 14.8 to 18.5), respectively. In a planned interim overall survival analysis of amivantamab-lazertinib as compared with osimertinib, the hazard ratio for death was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.05). Predominant adverse events were EGFR -related toxic effects. The incidence of discontinuation of all agents due to treatment-related adverse events was 10% with amivantamab-lazertinib and 3% with osimertinib., Conclusions: Amivantamab-lazertinib showed superior efficacy to osimertinib as first-line treatment in EGFR -mutated advanced NSCLC. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MARIPOSA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04487080.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: We previously demonstrated in a meta-analysis there was no difference in risk ratio (RR) of lung cancer detected by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening among female never-smokers (NS) and male ever-smokers (ES) in Asia. LDCT screening significantly decreased lung cancer death among Asian NS compared to Asian ES (RR =0.27, P<0.001)., Methods: We investigated if race, age at diagnosis, and histology further differentiate lung cancer diagnosed by LDCT among in NS and ES using the 14 studies from our previous meta-analysis., Results: Twelve publications reported relevant data utilized in this study. From five Asian and one international studies, Asian ES had similar risk of lung cancer diagnosed at baseline screening as Asian NS [RR =0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74-1.24] but among non-Asian ES had a 4.56 times significantly higher risk than non-Asian NS (RR =4.56; 95% CI: 2.85-7.28). The baseline incidence of lung cancer in never-smoker (LCINS) was approximately 2.3 times higher among Asian NS than non-Asian NS (0.62% vs. 0.27%, P=0.001). Asian ES had about half the baseline incidence of lung cancer diagnosed as non-Asian ES (0.65% vs. 1.26%). LCINS was diagnosed at 1.98 years younger than ES (95% CI: -3.38 to -0.58) (four studies) and exhibited a higher proportion of adenocarcinoma (ADC) (96.58% vs. 70.37%)., Conclusions: Among normal-risk individuals, LCINS had a significantly higher likelihood of being diagnosed among Asians than non-Asians, predominantly manifesting as ADC and diagnosed approximately 2 years younger than ES suggesting that the age limit to initiate lung cancer screening in NS may be set lower compared to LDCT lung cancer screening among ES., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tlcr.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tlcr-23-816/coif). S.H.I.O. serves as an Associate Editor-in-Chief of Translational Lung Cancer Research from August 2023 to July 2025. N.T. got payment or honoraria for lectures or presentations from AstraZeneca, Roche, and Thoracic Society of Thailand under Royal Patronage (TST) in the past 36 months; got support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca, Roche, TST, IASLC, and I-ELCAP in the past 36 months. M.N. received consulting fees from Pfizer, Lilly, Novartis, Jassen, Daiichi Sankyo, BMS, AnHeart Therapeutics, J Inst Bio and BluePrint Medicines within the past 36 months; got payment or honoraria for lectures or presentations from Pfizer, Janssen, Dava Oncology LLP, EMD Sereno, OncLive, Takeda, Caris Life Science and Mirati within the past 36 months; got support for attending meetings from AnHeart Therapeutics within the past 36 months; and has stock ownership in MBrace Therapeutics within the past 36 months. E.S. received research grant from Delfi Diganostics within the last 36 months; received consulting fees from Astra Zeneca, Boerhinger Ingelheim, Janssen, and Genentech within the last 36 months; and received lecture fees from OncLive within the past 36 months. S.H.I.O. received consulting fees from Pfizer, Lilly, Jassen, Daiichi Sankyo, BMS, AnHeart Therapeutics, J Inst Bio, and Bayer within the past 36 months; got payment or honoraria for lectures or presentations from Pfizer, Janssen, Dava Oncology LLP, Caris Life Science and OncLive within the past 36 months; has received payment for scientific advisory board from Elevation Oncology within the past 36 months; and has stock ownership in MBrace Therapeutics, BlossomHill Therapeutics, Nuvalent, Lilly, Turning Point Therapeutics, and Elevation Oncology within the past 36 months. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2024 Translational Lung Cancer Research. All rights reserved.)

Selpercatinib, a potent and highly selective RET kinase inhibitor with significant CNS activity, has recently gained US approval for the treatment of NSCLC harboring RET fusions ( RET +) based on a large-scale single-arm study. The LIBRETTO-431 trial was the global pivotal registration phase 3 trial comparing selpercatinib to platinum-based chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab as the first-line treatment of patients with advanced RET + NSCLC. Never-smokers constituted 67.4% of the RET + NSCLC patients enrolled. KIF5B-RET made up the vast majority (77%) of the RET + fusion variant with known fusion partner. The results of this study demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) benefit as well as impressive intracranial disease response in participants treated with selpercatinib as compared to those treated with chemotherapy, with a HR [hazard ratio] of 0.46 (95% CI 0.33-0.70; P < 0.001) for the intention-to-treat (ITT)-pembrolizumab group and HR of 0.46 (95% CI 0.31-0.70, P < 0.001) for the overall ITT-group of patients. The addition of pembrolizumab to platinum/pemetrexed chemotherapy resulted in numerically identical PFS (11.2 months). These results point to selpercatinib's superiority to traditional chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of NSCLC harboring RET fusions and add to literature on the salience of targeted precision oncology and lack of efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor in NSCLC patients with never-smoker predominant actionable driver mutations. RET + NSCLC should be added to the list of molecular subtypes ( EGFR +, ALK +, ROS1 +) of NSCLC to be excluded in chemoimmunotherapy trial., Competing Interests: Dr Sai-Hong Ou reports grants and personal fees from Pfizer, JNJ/Janssen, Daiichi Sankyo, DAVA oncology LLP, OncLive; personal fees from Bayer, BMS; grants from Mirati and Revolution Medicine; stock ownership from Nuvalent, MBrace Therapeutics, BlossomHill Therapeutics, Turning Point Therapeutics; grants, personal fees, and stock ownership from Elevation Oncology, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2024 Lee and Ou.)

Introduction: Exon 20 insertions (ex20ins) mutations of the EGFR gene account for 1% to 2% of all non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). Targeted therapies have been developed to treat this cancer type but have not been studied in head-to-head trials. Our objective was to use a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) to assess the efficacy of mobocertinib and amivantamab in patients with NSCLC EGFR ex20ins mutations who were previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy., Materials and Methods: An unanchored MAIC was conducted to estimate the treatment effects of mobocertinib and amivantamab using individual-level data from the mobocertinib phase I/II single-arm trial (NCT02716116) and published data from the amivantamab single-arm CHRYSALIS trial (NCT02609776). Confirmed overall response rate (cORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and duration of response (DoR) were assessed., Results: Both trials were comparable in terms of study population, study design, and outcome definitions and included 114 patients who received mobocertinib and 114 patients who received amivantamab. After MAIC weighting, all reported baseline characteristics were balanced between mobocertinib and amivantamab. The weighted odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] comparing mobocertinib to amivantamab was 0.56 (0.30-1.04) for independent review committee (IRC)-assessed cORR and 0.98 (0.53-1.82) for investigator (INV)-assessed cORR. The weighted hazard ratio (HR) comparing mobocertinib to amivantamab was 0.74 (0.51-1.07) for IRC-assessed PFS, 0.92 (0.57-1.48) for OS, and 0.59 (0.30-1.18) for INV-assessed DoR., Conclusion: MAIC analysis showed that mobocertinib and amivantamab had similar efficacy in patients with NSCLC harboring EGFR ex20ins mutations whose disease progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. These findings may benefit patients by supporting future treatment options., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Lorlatinib is a brain-penetrant, third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) indicated for the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In clinical trials, lorlatinib has shown durable efficacy and a manageable safety profile in treatment-naive patients and in those who have experienced progression while receiving first- and/or second-generation ALK TKIs. Lorlatinib has a distinct safety profile from other ALK TKIs, including hyperlipidemia and central nervous system effects. Clinical trial data showed that most adverse events (AEs) can be managed effectively or reversed with dose modifications (such as dose interruptions or reductions) or with concomitant medications without compromising clinical efficacy or quality of life for patients. A pragmatic approach to managing AEs related to lorlatinib is required. We present patient-focused recommendations for the evaluation and management of select AEs associated with lorlatinib developed by clinicians and nurses with extensive lorlatinib expertise in routine clinical practice. The recommendations follow the general framework of "prepare, monitor, manage, reassess" to streamline AE management and assist in practical, actionable, and personalized patient care., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Geoffrey Liu reports grant support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Amgen, EMD Serono and Takeda; and participation on an advisory board for AstraZeneca, EMD Serono, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, BMS, Bayer, Novartis, Amgen, and Takeda. Julien Mazieres reports institutional grant support from AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, and Roche; and advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. Jan Stratmann reports personal fees from Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, BMS, Oncopeptides, Amgen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Takeda, Lilly, MSD/Merck, Sanofi, Pfizer, outside of the submitted work and institutional grants from AstraZeneca outside of the submitted work. Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou reports institutional grant for clinical research from Mirati, J&J/Janssen, Pfizer, Revolution Medicine, Nuvalent, Merck, and BMS; speaker honorarium from Pfizer and J&J/Janssen; advisory honorarium from Pfizer, J&J/Janssen, AnHeart Therapeutics, Lilly, BeiGene, and DAVA Oncology; stock ownership in Turning Point Therapeutics and Elevation Oncology; and ownership (<5%) in MBrace Therapeutics and BlossomHill Therapeutics. Tony Mok reports institutional grants from AstraZeneca, BMS, G1 Therapeutics, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, and Xcovery; consulting fees from AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Adagene, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, Bayer, BeiGene, Berry Oncology, Boehringer Ingelheim, Blueprint, BMS, Bridge Biotherapeutics, Covidien, C4 Therapeutics, Cirina, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Curio Science, D3 Bio, Da Volterra, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Elevation Oncology, G1 Therapeutics, geneDecode, Gilead Sciences, Gritstone Oncology, Guardant Health, Hengrui Therapeutics, HutchMed, Ignyta, Incyte, Inivata, IQVIA, Janssen, Lilly, Lunit USA, Loxo Oncology, Lucence Health, Medscape/WebMD, Merck, MSD, Mirati, MiRXES, MoreHealth, Novartis, Omega Therapeutics, OrigiMed, OSE Immunotherapeutics, PeerVoice, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Puma Biotechnology, Qiming Development, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Simcere of America, Synergy Research, Takeda, Tigermed, Vertex, Virtus, and Yuhan; honoraria from ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Daz Group, Fishawack Facilitate, InMed, Janssen, Jiahui Holdings, LiangYiHui Healthcare, Lilly, Lucence Health, MD Health Brazil, Medscape, Merck Pharmaceuticals HK, MSD, MiRXES, Novartis, OrigiMed, Permanyer, PeerVoice, Physicians’ Education Resource, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Research to Practice, Roche Pharmaceuticals/Diagnostics/Foundation One, Sanofi-Aventis, Shanghai BeBirds Translation & Consulting, Taiho, Takeda, and Touch Independent Medical Education; travel support from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, MiRXES, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche; institutional travel support from BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche; participation on advisory boards for AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Berry Oncology, Blueprint, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bowtie Life Insurance, BMS, C4 Therapeutics, Covidien, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Curio Science, D3 Bio, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Fishawack Facilitate, G1 Therapeutics, geneDecode, Gilead Sciences, Gritstone Oncology, Guardant Health, Hengrui Therapeutics, HutchMed, Ignyta, Incyte, Inivata, IQVIA, Janssen, Lakeshore Biotech, Lilly, Loxo Oncology, Lunit, Merck, MSD, Mirati, MiRXES, Novartis, OrigiMed, Pfizer, Puma Biotechnology, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi-Aventis, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Simcere of America, Takeda, Vertex, Virtus, and Yuhan; leadership or fiduciary role at AstraZeneca, HutchMed, Lunit, ACT Genomics-Sanomics Group, and Aurora Tele-Oncology; and stock ownership in AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, Biolidics, HutchMed, and ACT Genomics-Sanomics Group. Mary Grizzard reports no conflicts of interest. Yasushi Goto reports grant support for the clinical trial group from AstraZeneca and Pfizer; institutional grant support from AbbVie, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Kyorin Pharmaceutical, Novartis, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, and Preferred Networks; honoraria from BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Taiho, and Thermo Fisher; participation on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Guardant Health, Illumina, MSD, Novartis, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, and Taiho; and leadership or fiduciary role at Cancer Net Japan and Japanese Association of Medical Technologists. Enriqueta Felip reports institutional funding from Merck and Fundación Merck Salud; consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Peptomyc, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda; honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medical Trends, Medscape, Merck, MSD, PeerVoice, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, and Touch Oncology; and independent board membership for Grifols. Benjamin J. Solomon reports royalties for contribution to a section from UpToDate; consulting fees for participation on advisory boards from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Takeda, and Roche/Genentech; honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Pfizer, Takeda, and Roche/Genentech; and leadership or fiduciary role as a board member of Thoracic Oncology Group of Australia and Cancer Council of Victoria. Todd M. Bauer reports consulting fees from Bayer, Pfizer, and Lilly; honoraria from Bayer, BMS, Guardant Health, Pfizer, and Lilly; travel support from Pfizer; participation on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Illumina, and Pfizer; and institutional support for participation on an advisory board for Blueprint., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Despite ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC accounting for approximately 1% to 2% of NSCLC, there is a long list of ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) being developed in addition to three approved ROS1 TKIs, crizotinib, entrectinib and repotrectinib. Here, we categorized ROS1 TKIs by their structures (cyclic versus noncyclic) and inhibitory abilities (active against solvent front mutation G2032R or central β-sheet #6 [Cβ6] mutation L2086F) and summarized their reported clinical activity in order to provide a dashboard on how to use these ROS1 TKIs in various clinical situations. In addition, the less known Cβ6 mutation ROS1 L2086F confer resistances to next-generation ROS1 TKIs (repotrectinib, taletrectinib, and potentially NVL-520) that can be overcome by cabozantinib as documented in published patient reports and potentially by certain L-shaped type I ROS1 TKIs including ceritinib and gilteritinib, which is approved as a FLT3 inhibitor for relapsed refractory FLT3+ acute myeloid leukemia but have published preclinical activites against ROS1 (and ALK). Future clinical trials should investigate cabozantinib and gilteritinib to repurpose them as ROS1 TKIs that can target ROS1 L2086F Cβ6 mutation., (Copyright © 2023 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Despite the development and approval of seven anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) spanning over three "generations" since the discovery of ALK fusion positive ( ALK+ ) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), there remains intrinsic and acquired resistances to these approved TKIs. Currently, a fourth-generation (4G) ALK TKI, NVL-655, is being developed to attack some of the unmet needs such as compound resistance mutations in cis . However, EML4-ALK variant 3 and TP53 mutations are intrinsic genomic alterations that negatively modulate efficacy of ALK TKIs. Potentially, in the shifting landscape where lorlatinib should be the first-line ALK TKI of choice based on the CROWN trial, the central β-sheet #6 (Cβ6) mutation ALK L1256F will be the potential acquired resistance mutation to lorlatinib which may be resistant to current ALK TKIs. Here we opine on what additional capacities a putative fifth-generation (5G) ALK TKI will need to possess if it can be achieved in one single molecule. We propose randomized trial schemas targeting some of the intrinsic resistance mechanisms that will lead to approval of a prototypic fifth-generation (5G) ALK TKI and actually be beneficial to ALK+ NSCLC patients rather than just design a positive pivotal superiority trial for the sole purpose of drug approval., Competing Interests: Dr Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou reports honoraria from AnHeart Therapeutics, BMS, Claris Life Science, Pfizer, JNJ/Janssen, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, OncLive, and DAVA Oncology LLP; has received research funding to his institution from BluePrint Medicines, Daiichi Sankyo, ERASCA Theper- atucis, Janssen/JNJ, Merus, Mirati Thepereutics, Merck, Nuvalent, Pfizer, Roche, Revolution Medicine, Sanofi, and Takeda; is a scientific advisory board member of AnHeart Therapeutics and Elevation Oncology; having stock ownership in Turning Point Therapeutics, Elevation Oncology, MBrace Therapeutics, BlossomHill Therapeutics, Lilly, Nuvalent, and Theseus Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. Dr. Lee reports no conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2024 Lee and Ou.)

Background and Objective: Lorlatinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer. This study assessed the effect of steady-state lorlatinib on the metabolic enzymes cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2B6, CYP2C9, and uridine 5'-diphospho-glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) and the P-glycoprotein (P-gp) transporter., Methods: Thirty-two patients received a single oral dose of a probe drug on Day - 2 to determine the pharmacokinetics of the probe drug alone. Starting on Day 1, patients received 100 mg oral lorlatinib daily. On Day 15, a single oral dose of the probe drug was administered concurrently with lorlatinib. Pharmacokinetic parameters for these probe substrates were assessed., Results: Plasma exposures of all probe substrates were reduced by lorlatinib compared with the probe alone. The greatest reduction in area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC ∞ ) and maximum (peak) plasma drug concentration (C max ) (67% and 63% decrease, respectively) was observed with the P-gp probe substrate fexofenadine. Lorlatinib coadministration also decreased the AUC ∞ and C max of bupropion (CYP2B6 probe substrate) by 25% and 27%, tolbutamide (CYP2C9 probe substrate) by 43% and 15%, and acetaminophen (UGT probe substrate) by 45% and 28%, respectively., Conclusions: Lorlatinib is a net moderate inducer of P-gp and a weak inducer of CYP2B6, CYP2C9, and UGT after steady state is achieved with daily dosing. Medications that are P-gp substrates with a narrow therapeutic window should be avoided in patients taking lorlatinib; no dose modifications are needed with substrates of CYP2B6, CYP2C9, or UGT., Clinicaltrials: gov: NCT01970865., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: While crizotinib and entrectinib have been approved to treat ROS1 fusion-positive ( ROS1+ ) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), unmet needs remain. These unmet needs include treatment options for patients with resistance mutations and efficacious options even in the presence of brain metastasis while simultaneously avoiding unwanted neurological side effects., Areas Covered: Taletrectinib was designed to: improve efficacy; overcome resistance to first-generation ROS1 inhibitors; and address central nervous system penetration while conferring fewer neurological adverse events. All of these features are demonstrated and supported by data from the phase I and the regional phase II TRUST-I clinical trial. Here, we describe the preclinical and clinical characteristics of taletrectinib and evaluate the data from phase I and II studies and review the rationale and design of TRUST-II, a global phase II study of taletrectinib, which is enrolling patients in North America, Europe, and Asia., Expert Opinion: Taltrectinib has the potential to improve PFS based on its greater potency against ROS1+ tumors and high CNS penetration. By selectively inhibiting ROS1 wild-type and its resistant mutations over TRKB , taltrectinib has a better safety profile with minimal CNS-related AEs compared to other ROS1+ inhibitors.

KRAS G12C mutation is prevalent in ~4% of colorectal cancer (CRC) and is associated with poor prognosis. Divarasib, a KRAS G12C inhibitor, has shown modest activity as a single agent in KRAS G12C-positive CRC at 400 mg. Epidermal growth factor receptor has been recognized as a major upstream activator of RAS-MAPK signaling, a proposed key mechanism of resistance to KRAS G12C inhibition in CRC. Here, we report on divarasib plus cetuximab (epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor) in patients with KRAS G12C-positive CRC (n = 29) from arm C of an ongoing phase 1b trial. The primary objective was to evaluate safety. Secondary objectives included preliminary antitumor activity. The safety profile of this combination was consistent with those of single-agent divarasib and cetuximab. Treatment-related adverse events led to divarasib dose reductions in four patients (13.8%); there were no treatment withdrawals. The objective response rate was 62.5% (95% confidence interval: 40.6%, 81.2%) in KRAS G12C inhibitor-naive patients (n = 24). The median duration of response was 6.9 months. The median progression-free survival was 8.1 months (95% confidence interval: 5.5, 12.3). As an exploratory objective, we observed a decline in KRAS G12C variant allele frequency associated with response and identified acquired genomic alterations at disease progression that may be associated with resistance. The manageable safety profile and encouraging antitumor activity of divarasib plus cetuximab support the further investigation of this combination in KRAS G12C-positive CRC.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04449874., (© 2023. Crown.)

Background: Osimertinib has emerged as an important tool in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) with certain activating mutations of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). However, Osimertinib may cause adverse effects, including severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). The risk of certain adverse effects may be increased in the setting of recent use of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy, although it is unclear whether recent use of ICI therapy is a risk factor for Osimertinib-induced SJS specifically., Case Presentation: We present a patient with EGFR L858R mutation-positive metastatic NSCLC who developed Osimertinib-induced SJS after recent administration of eight cycles of a pembrolizumab-containing chemotherapy regimen. Osimertinib, which was the best treatment targeting his lung cancer, was avoided due to history of SJS. Four years later, because of unresponsiveness or side effects of alternative treatments, he underwent Osimertinib challenge and tolerated it., Conclusion: This case highlights the importance of multi-disciplinary care and supports the hypothesis that the risk of SJS to Osimertinib is significantly higher in the context of recent administration of ICI therapy and, patients may tolerate Osimertinib after certain time has elapsed after the last dose of ICI., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Two ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been approved for ROS1 fusion positive (ROS1+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors. We performed a pan-tumor analysis of the incidence of ROS1 fusions to assess if more ROS1+ patients who could benefit from ROS1 TKIs could be identified., Methods: A retrospective analysis of ROS1 positive solid malignancies identified by targeted RNA sequencing and whole transcriptome sequencing of clinical tumor samples performed at Caris Life Science (Phoenix, AZ)., Results: A total of 259 ROS1+ solid malignancies were identified from approximately 175,350 tumors that underwent next-generation sequencing (12% from targeted RNA sequencing [Archer]; 88% from whole transcriptome sequencing). ROS1+ NSCLC constituted 78.8% of the ROS1+ solid malignancies, follow by glioblastoma (GBM) (6.9%), and breast cancer (2.7%). The frequency of ROS1 fusion was approximately 0.47% among NSCLC, 0.29% for GBM, 0.04% of breast cancer. The mean tumor mutation burden for all ROS1+ tumors was 4.8 mutations/megabase. The distribution of PD-L1 (22C3) expression among all ROS1+ malignancies were 0% (18.6%), 1%-49% (29.4%), and ≥ 50% (60.3%) [for NSCLC: 0% (17.8%); 1-49% (27.7%); ≥ 50% (53.9%). The most common genetic co-alterations of ROS1+ NSCLC were TP53 (29.1%), SETD2 (7.3%), ARIAD1A (6.3%), and U2AF1 (5.6%)., Conclusions: ROS1+ NSCLC tumors constituted the majority of ROS1+ solid malignancies with four major fusion partners. Given that > 20% of ROS1+ solid tumors may benefit from ROS1 TKIs treatment, comprehensive genomic profiling should be performed on all solid tumors., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)