Search

Small molecule mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) inhibitors, such as crizotinib, capmatinib, and tepotinib, are treatment options for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in adult patients whose tumors have a mutation that leads to MET exon 14 skipping. In clinical trials, these MET inhibitors were associated with a high incidence of peripheral edema, although this was generally mild-to-moderate in severity. There is limited information about the mechanism involved in MET inhibitor-induced peripheral edema. Perturbation of hepatocyte growth factor (HGF)/MET signaling may disrupt the permeability balance in the vascular endothelium and thus promote edema development. Another potential mechanism is through effects on renal function, although this is unlikely to be the primary mechanism. Because edema is common in cancer patients and may not necessarily be caused by the cancer treatment, or other conditions that have similar symptoms to peripheral edema, a thorough assessment is required to ascertain the underlying cause. Before starting MET-inhibitor therapy, patients should be educated about the possibility of developing peripheral edema. Patient limb volume should be measured before initiating treatment, to aid assessment if symptoms develop. Since the exact mechanism of MET inhibitor-induced edema is unknown, management is empiric, with common approaches including compression stockings, specific exercises, massage, limb elevation, and/or diuretic treatment. Although not usually required, discontinuation of MET inhibitor treatment generally resolves peripheral edema. Early diagnosis and management, as well as patient information and education, are vital to decrease the clinical burden associated with edema, and to reinforce capmatinib treatment adherence.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy is an emerging type of treatment for lung cancer (LC). However, hyperprogressive disease (HPD) has been observed in patients treated with ICIs that lacks a prognostic prediction model. There is an urgent need for a simple and easily implementable predictive model to predict the occurrence of HPD. This study aimed to establish a novel scoring system based on a nomogram for the occurrence of HPD. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 1473 patients with stage III–IV LC or inoperable stage I–II LC (1147 in training set, and 326 in testing set), who had undergone ICI therapy at the Shanghai Chest Hospital between January 2017 and March 2022. Available computed tomography (CT) data from the previous treatment, before ICI administration, and at least 2 months after the first the course of ICI administration is collected to confirm HPD. Data from these patients’ common blood laboratory test results before ICI administration were analyzed by the univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis, then used to develop nomogram predictive model, and made validation in testing set. RESULTS: A total of 1,055 patients were included in this study (844 in the training set, and 211 in the testing set). In the training set, 93 were HPD and 751were non-HPD. Multivariate logistic regression analyses demonstrated that lactate dehydrogenase [LDH, P

Criteria for discontinuation of nivolumab

Purpose: Lung cancers harboring common EGFR mutations respond to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), whereas exon 20 insertions (Ins20) are resistant to them. However, little is known about mutations in exon 18.Experimental Design: Mutational status of lung cancers between 2001 and 2015 was reviewed. Three representative mutations in exon 18, G719A, E709K, and exon 18 deletion (Del18: delE709_T710insD) were retrovirally introduced into Ba/F3 and NIH/3T3 cells. The 90% inhibitory concentrations (IC90s) of first-generation (1G; gefitinib and erlotinib), second-generation (2G; afatinib, dacomitinib, and neratinib), and third-generation TKIs (3G; AZD9291 and CO1686) were determined.Results: Among 1,402 EGFR mutations, Del19, L858R, and Ins20 were detected in 40%, 47%, and 4%, respectively. Exon 18 mutations, including G719X, E709X, and Del18, were present in 3.2%. Transfected Ba/F3 cells grew in the absence of IL3, and NIH/3T3 cells formed foci with marked pile-up, indicating their oncogenic abilities. IC90s of 1G and 3G TKIs in G719A, E709K, and Del18 were much higher than those in Del19 (by >11–50-fold), whereas IC90s of afatinib were only 3- to 7-fold greater than those for Del19. Notably, cells transfected with G719A and E709K exhibited higher sensitivity to neratinib (by 5–25-fold) than those expressing Del19. Patients with lung cancers harboring G719X exhibited higher response rate to afatinib or neratinib (∼80%) than to 1G TKIs (35%–56%) by compilation of data in the literature.Conclusions: Lung cancers harboring exon 18 mutations should not be overlooked in clinical practice. These cases can be best treated with afatinib or neratinib, although the currently available in vitro diagnostic kits cannot detect all exon 18 mutations. Clin Cancer Res; 21(23); 5305–13. ©2015 AACR.

Kaplan-Meier curves for overall survival (A) and progressionfree survival (B) for all patients according tumor type (epithelioid and non-epithelioid subtypes)

Supplementary Figure 1. Western blot analyses for phospho-HER2.

Supplementary Table 1. Individual data on the clinical response of lung cancers harboring E709K/A or G719A/S to gefitinib or erlotinib.

Legend for supplementary figure 1.

Supplementary Table 2 from LATS2 Is a Tumor Suppressor Gene of Malignant Mesothelioma

Supplementary Figure 2 from LATS2 Is a Tumor Suppressor Gene of Malignant Mesothelioma

Supplementary Figure 3 from LATS2 Is a Tumor Suppressor Gene of Malignant Mesothelioma

Supplementary Figure 1 from LATS2 Is a Tumor Suppressor Gene of Malignant Mesothelioma

Supplementary Materials and Methods from LATS2 Is a Tumor Suppressor Gene of Malignant Mesothelioma

Supplementary Table 1 from LATS2 Is a Tumor Suppressor Gene of Malignant Mesothelioma

Supplementary Figure Legends 1-3 from LATS2 Is a Tumor Suppressor Gene of Malignant Mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a fatal thoracic malignancy, the epigenetics of which are poorly defined. We performed high-throughput methylation analysis covering 6,157 CpG islands in 20 MPMs and 20 lung adenocarcinomas. Newly identified genes were further analyzed in 50 MPMs and 56 adenocarcinomas via quantitative methylation-specific PCR. Targets of histone H3 lysine 27 trimethylation (H3K27me3) and genetic alterations were also assessed in MPM cells by chromatin immunoprecipitation arrays and comparative genomic hybridization arrays. An average of 387 genes (6.3%) and 544 genes (8.8%) were hypermethylated in MPM and adenocarcinoma, respectively. Hierarchical cluster analysis showed that the two malignancies have characteristic DNA methylation patterns, likely a result of different pathologic processes. In MPM, a separate subset of genes was silenced by H3K27me3 and could be reactivated by treatment with a histone deacetylase inhibitor alone. Integrated analysis of these epigenetic and genetic alterations revealed that only 11% of heterozygously deleted genes were affected by DNA methylation and/or H3K27me3 in MPMs. Among the DNA hypermethylated genes, three (TMEM30B, KAZALD1, and MAPK13) were specifically methylated only in MPM and could serve as potential diagnostic markers. Interestingly, a subset of MPM cases (4 cases, 20%) had very low levels of DNA methylation and substantially longer survival, suggesting that the epigenetic alterations are one mechanism affecting progression of this disease. Our findings show a characteristic epigenetic profile of MPM and uncover multiple distinct epigenetic abnormalities that lead to the silencing of tumor suppressor genes in MPM and could serve as diagnostic or prognostic targets. [Cancer Res 2009;69(23):9073–82]

Supplementary Figures 1-3, Tables 1-5 from Epigenetic Profiles Distinguish Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma from Lung Adenocarcinoma

This prespecified subanalysis of the global, randomized controlled phase III KEYNOTE‐024 study of pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy in previously untreated metastatic non‐small‐cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK alterations and a programmed death ligand 1 (PD‐L1) tumor proportion score of 50% or higher evaluated clinical outcomes among patients enrolled in Japan. Treatment consisted of pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks (35 cycles) or platinum‐based chemotherapy (four to six cycles). The primary end‐point was progression‐free survival; secondary end‐points included overall survival and safety. Of 305 patients randomized in KEYNOTE‐024 overall, 40 patients were enrolled in Japan (all received treatment: pembrolizumab, n = 21; chemotherapy, n = 19). Median progression‐free survival was 41.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2‐42.5) months with pembrolizumab and 4.1 (95% CI, 2.8‐8.3) months with chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.27 [95% CI, 0.11‐0.65]; one‐sided, nominal P = .001). Median overall survival was not reached (NR) (95% CI, 22.9‒NR) and 21.5 (95% CI, 5.2‐35.0) months, respectively (HR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.17‐0.91]; one‐sided, nominal P = .012). Treatment‐related adverse events occurred in 21/21 (100%) pembrolizumab‐treated and 18/19 (95%) chemotherapy‐treated patients; eight patients (38%) and nine patients (47%), respectively, had grade 3‐5 events. Immune‐mediated adverse events and infusion reactions occurred in 11 pembrolizumab‐treated patients (52%) and four chemotherapy‐treated patients (21%), respectively; four patients (19%) and one patient (5%), respectively, had grade 3‐5 events. Consistent with results from KEYNOTE‐024 overall, first‐line pembrolizumab improved progression‐free survival and overall survival vs chemotherapy with manageable safety among Japanese patients with metastatic non‐small‐cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK alterations and a PD‐L1 tumor proportion score of 50% or higher. The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02142738., This prespecified subanalysis of the global, randomized controlled phase III KEYNOTE‐024 study of pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy in previously untreated metastatic non‐small‐cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK alterations and a PD‐L1 tumor proportion score of 50% or higher evaluated clinical outcomes among patients enrolled in Japan. Consistent with results from KEYNOTE‐024 overall, first‐line pembrolizumab improved progression‐free survival and overall survival vs chemotherapy with manageable safety among 40 Japanese patients in the study.

Fenbendazole is a benzimidazole anthelmintic agent, with a broad antiparasitic range in animals such as dogs and pigs. The agent is also reported to exert antitumor effects and inhibit microtubule-associated tubulin polymerization, but its safety and tolerability profile in humans remains unclear. An 80-year-old female patient with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was started on pembrolizumab monotherapy. The patient experienced severe liver injury 9 months later. An interview with her and her family revealed that she had been taking fenbendazole for a month, solely based on social media reports suggesting its effectiveness against cancer. After discontinuation of the self-administration of fenbendazole, the patient’s liver dysfunction spontaneously resolved. The antitumor inhibitory effects of fenbendazole have been reported; however, she did not experience tumor shrinkage. This is the first case report of a patient with advanced NSCLC who self-administered the anthelmintic, fenbendazole. Twitter and Facebook are online social media platforms which have been constructively used to exchange information among cancer patients. However, sources of medical information on these platforms are often unproven, and it is difficult for nonmedical professionals to accurately select and filter complex medical information. Physicians should enquire patients about self-administration of orally ingested products, including dietary supplements, herbs, or bioactive compounds, in cases of unexpected adverse reactions.

Background Preliminary data suggest that combining savolitinib, a potent and highly selective MET-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), with osimertinib, a third-generation, irreversible, oral epidermal growth factor receptor-TKI (EGFR-TKI), may overcome MET-based resistance to EGFR-TKIs. Objective To investigate the safety and tolerability of savolitinib in Japanese patients with advanced solid malignancies. Patients and Methods In Part C of the phase Ib, multi-arm, open-label, multicenter TATTON study, two cohorts of Japanese adult patients were evaluated across six study centers in Japan. Patients with advanced solid malignancies received oral savolitinib monotherapy 400 mg once daily (qd), escalating to 600 mg; patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm) non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) who progressed on prior EGFR-TKI received oral osimertinib 80 mg+savolitinib 300/400/600 mg qd combination therapy. Primary endpoints: safety/tolerability of savolitinib±osimertinib, and maximum tolerated dose(s) (MTD) definition. Results Seventeen patients received monotherapy; 12 received combination. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs): with monotherapy, 400 mg, none reported; 600 mg, n = 3/9 evaluable patients (33%) reported DLTs (grade 3 and 4 alanine aminotransferase and aspartate transaminase increased, and grade 4 drug-induced liver injury). With combination: 400 mg, 1/6 (17%) reported DLTs (grade 2 fatigue, nausea, and myalgia); 300 mg, none reported; 600 mg, 3/4 (75%) reported DLTs (grade 2 pyrexia, grade 3 skin reaction, and anaphylactic shock). Grade ≥3 adverse events were reported in 41% of patients receiving monotherapy and 33% receiving combination. TATTON is no longer recruiting patients. Conclusions The MTD of savolitinib was 400 mg qd in both cohorts. Data demonstrate an acceptable safety profile for savolitinib alone, or with osimertinib. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02143466; 21 May 2014. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11523-021-00806-5., Plain Language Summary For patients with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive (EGFRm) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors, like osimertinib, are the standard treatment. However, for most patients, these treatments eventually stop working, as tumors develop resistance to them. Early studies suggest that combining osimertinib with savolitinib can overcome this resistance. We report Part C of the four-part TATTON study, in which two groups of Japanese adult patients received treatment. One group received savolitinib 400 mg once daily, then 600 mg. The other group received osimertinib 80 mg with savolitinib 300/400/600 mg once daily. The main objective of the study was to determine the maximum dose of savolitinib that patients could receive (maximum tolerated dose) and to monitor the safety of the combination. Overall, 17 patients received savolitinib alone and 12 received the combination. The maximum tolerated dose of savolitinib was found to be 400 mg once daily in both groups of patients. The data demonstrated that savolitinib had acceptable safety outcomes either alone, or in combination with osimertinib. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11523-021-00806-5.

Objectives The purposes of this study are to clarify the details of the ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) resistance mechanism in rebiopsy cases and to predict novel resistance gene alterations using molecular dynamics simulation. Methods A total of 21 patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who underwent a rebiopsy after ALK TKI failure were included in this analysis. ALK fluorescence in situ hybridization and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction were performed with paired initial and rebiopsy tumor specimens. Results Nine patients had no known ALK resistance mechanisms. Four had ALK amplification. L1196M, I1171N, and G1269A, mutations that are known to indicate resistance to ALK TKIs, were detected in one patient each. Small cell carcinoma and sarcomatoid transition were found in one case each. L1196Q, P1094H, and exon 24 76-base pair insertion were detected after the second-generation ALK TKIs. Conclusions The combination of a genetic analysis and a computational simulation model may make a prediction of resistance mechanisms for overcoming ALK TKI resistance, and the construction of a genomic and simulation fused database is important for the development of personalized medicine in this field.

Introduction This phase 2 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of brigatinib in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC refractory to alectinib or other ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Methods This single-arm, multicenter, open-label study in Japanese patients consisted of a safety lead-in followed by an expansion stage in patients refractory to ALK TKI or those naive for ALK TKI. Patients received brigatinib 180 mg once daily with 7-day lead-in at 90 mg once daily. Primary end point was independent review committee (IRC)–assessed confirmed objective response rate per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Results We report the results of the lead-in and expansion in the patients refractory to ALK TKI. Of 72 patients enrolled, 47 had alectinib as most recent ALK TKI (with or without previous crizotinib). At analysis cutoff, 14 of the 47 remained on brigatinib (median follow-up: 12.4 mo). In the alectinib-refractory population, IRC-assessed confirmed objective response rate was 34% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 21%–49%) with median duration of response of 11.8 months (95% CI: 5.5–16.4). Disease control rate was 79% (95% CI: 64%–89%). Median IRC-assessed progression-free survival was 7.3 months (95% CI: 3.7–9.3). Two of eight patients with measurable brain lesions at baseline had confirmed intracranial partial response. Brigatinib has been found to have antitumor activity in patients with G1202R, I1171N, V1180L, and L1196M secondary mutations. The safety profile in Japanese patients was consistent with that in previous reports in broader populations. Conclusions Brigatinib has been found to have clinically meaningful efficacy in Japanese patients with ALK+ NSCLC refractory to alectinib (with or without previous crizotinib).

MET mutations leading to exon 14 skipping (METΔex14) are strong molecular drivers for non–small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Capmatinib is a highly potent, selective oral MET inhibitor that showed clinically meaningful efficacy and a manageable safety profile in a global phase II study (GEOMETRY mono‐1, NCT02414139) in patients with advanced METΔex14‐mutated/MET‐amplified NSCLC. We report results of preplanned analyses of 45 Japanese patients according to MET status (METΔex14‐mutated or MET‐amplified) and line of therapy (first‐ [1L] or second‐/third‐line [2/3L]). The starting dose was 400 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) assessed by a blinded independent review committee. A key secondary endpoint was duration of response (DOR). Among METΔex14‐mutated patients, in the 1L group, one patient achieved partial response (DOR of 4.24 months) and the other had stable disease. In the 2/3L group, the ORR was 36.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.9%‐69.2%), median DOR was not evaluable, and progression‐free survival was 4.70 months. One patient (2/3L group) showed partial resolution of brain lesions per independent neuroradiologist review. In MET‐amplified patients with a MET gene copy number of ≥10, the ORR was 100% (2/2 patients) in the 1L group and 45.5% (5/11 patients) in the 2/3L group, with DOR of 8.2 and 8.3 months, respectively. Common treatment‐related adverse events among the 45 Japanese patients were blood creatinine increased (53.3%), nausea (35.6%), and oedema peripheral (31.1%); most were grade 1/2 severity. In conclusion, capmatinib was effective and well tolerated by Japanese patients with METΔex14/MET‐amplified NSCLC, consistent with the overall population., We describe results for Japanese patients enrolled in a global phase II study (GEOMETRY mono‐1, NCT02414139), which investigated the efficacy and safety of capmatinib in patients with advanced non–small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring MET exon 14 skipping mutations (METΔex14). Capmatinib was effective and well tolerated by Japanese patients. The results are consistent with those observed in the overall population enrolled in GEOMETRY mono‐1.

Introduction The phase 2 POPLAR and phase 3 OAK studies of the anti–programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunotherapy atezolizumab in patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC revealed significant improvements in survival versus docetaxel (p = 0.04 and 0.0003, respectively). Longer follow-up permits evaluation of continued benefit of atezolizumab. This study reports the final overall survival (OS) and safety findings from both trials. Methods POPLAR randomized 287 patients (atezolizumab, 144; docetaxel, 143) and OAK randomized 1225 patients (atezolizumab, 613; docetaxel, 612). The patients received atezolizumab (1200 mg fixed dose) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2) every 3 weeks. Efficacy and safety outcomes were evaluated. Results A longer OS was observed in patients receiving atezolizumab versus docetaxel in POPLAR (median OS = 12.6 mo versus 9.7 mo; hazard ratio = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58–1.00) and OAK (median OS = 13.3 versus 9.8 mo; hazard ratio = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.68–0.89). The 4-year OS rates in POPLAR were 14.8% (8.7–20.8) and 8.1% (3.2–13.0) and those in OAK were 15.5% (12.4–18.7) and 8.7% (6.2–11.3) for atezolizumab and docetaxel, respectively. Atezolizumab had improved OS benefit compared with docetaxel across all PD-L1 expression and histology groups. Most 4-year survivors in the docetaxel arms received subsequent immunotherapy (POPLAR, 50%; OAK, 65%). Of the 4-year survivors, most had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 and nonsquamous histological classification and approximately half were responders (POPLAR: atezolizumab, seven of 15; docetaxel, three of four; OAK: atezolizumab, 24 of 43; docetaxel, 11 of 26). Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 27% and 16% of atezolizumab 4-year survivors in POPLAR and OAK, respectively. Conclusions Long-term follow-up suggests a consistent survival benefit with atezolizumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated NSCLC regardless of PD-L1 expression, histology, or subsequent immunotherapy. Atezolizumab had no new safety signals, and the safety profile was similar to that in previous studies.

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/aim The Archer FusionPlex platform is widely used for comprehensive fusion-gene detection in cancer tissues. This platform separately displays results for strong-evidence and weak-evidence fusion candidates (WEFCs). Distinctive fusion patterns are frequently found in the weak-evidence category and information about the patterns is clinically essential. Patients and methods We describe the type and frequency of WEFCs observed using the FusionPlex Sarcoma Panel (S Panel) and the FusionPlex ALK, RET, and ROS1 ver2 Panel (ARR Panel). Results A total of 97 specimens were examined and 620 candidates were detected and categorized as WEFCs. A median of five WEFCs were detected per sample. In the S Panel group, there were 13 WEFCs with a frequency of more than 1%. In the ARR Panel group, a total of 16 WEFCs were detected with a frequency of more than 1%. Conclusion Specific WEFCs were detected according to the panel selected.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide and in China (1). According to the statistics of the National Cancer Center of China, there were 733,300 new cases of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and approximately 610,200 related deaths in 2015 (2). For patients with early staged disease, surgery is the mainstay of treatment, and it is commonly followed by adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced resectable NSCLC. Although complete surgical resection may be curative for NSCLC, 25–70% of patients (with different proportion according to stage) eventually relapse despite complete resection (3). Platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to marginally increase the 5-year survival rate of patients by 4–8% (4-6). Even after treatment with surgery and indicated adjuvant therapies in eligible cases, approximately 20–30% of stage I, 50% of stage II, and 60% of stage IIIA patients still die within 5 years (7). In the past decade, experts have conducted a number of investigations on the perioperative management of resectable NSCLC; however, progress remains slow, and patients still have a high risk of recurrence and death. Neoadjuvant therapy is defined as any therapy delivered prior to definitive local therapy intended to increase the cure rate. It provides several theoretical benefits in managing such patients with NSCLC. In the setting of, neoadjuvant therapy given prior to radical surgery this approach can also have the goals of downstaging, improving the resection rate, and more promptly treating subclinical micro-metastases than adjuvant approaches, delivered after the definitive local therapy. In addition, the compliance with neoadjuvant therapy has been shown to be better than in the adjuvant setting, and the biological effect of the neoadjuvant therapy can be analyzed directly in the resected tumor specimens (8). A meta-analysis on patients with stage IB‒IIIA NSCLC that compared chemotherapy plus subsequent surgery vs. surgery alone showed that the 5-year survival rate was 5% higher after receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) (9). Therefore, the comprehensive NSCLC data suggest that, for resectable NSCLC, NCT improves survival compared with surgery alone but appear to show no significant survival benefit compared with adjuvant chemotherapy (10). In the last 5 years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have profoundly changed the treatment paradigm for patients with advanced NSCLC (11-15). Immunotherapy has provided hope for long-term survival benefits to a minority of patients with metastatic lung cancer. For treatment-naive patients with driver mutation-negative NSCLC, the 5-year survival rate of single agent pembrolizumab was 23.2%; for the previously treated patients with driver mutation-negative NSCLC, the 5-year survival rates of single agent pembrolizumab and nivolumab were 15.5% and 16%, respectively (16,17). Given the profound impact made by immunotherapy drugs for patients with advanced disease, significant attention has been directed in recent years toward investigating the potential role for early-stage NSCLC patients, and whether they, too, can achieve long-term benefits from the inclusion of immunotherapy into their treatment algorithms. Many phase Ib/II clinical trials have reported promising results, and a series of large-scale phase III clinical trials are underway. However, these various investigations have employed different strategies of neoadjuvant immunotherapy, in terms of the specific regimens as well as number of treatment cycles (18). To better guide Chinese thoracic surgeons in the neoadjuvant immunotherapy of NSCLC, well-known thoracic surgeons in China participated in an in-depth discussion on the hot topics and controversial issues of neoadjuvant immunotherapy and formed the Expert consensus on neoadjuvant immunotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer by incorporating the latest evidence on neoadjuvant immunotherapy.

Introduction: Nazartinib, a novel third-generation EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, previously demonstrated antitumor activity and manageable safety in patients with EGFR-mutant advanced non−small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received ≤ 3 prior lines of systemic therapy. Herein, we report phase 2 efficacy and safety of first-line nazartinib. Methods: This single-arm, open-label, global study enrolled treatment-naive adult patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC harboring EGFR-activating mutations (eg, L858R and/or ex19del). Patients with neurologically stable and controlled brain metastases were also eligible. Patients received oral nazartinib 150 mg once daily. The primary endpoint was Blinded Independent Review Committee (BIRC)-assessed overall response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Results: Forty-five patients received ≥ 1 dose of nazartinib. The median follow-up time from enrollment to data cutoff (November 1, 2019) was 30 months (range: 25–34). The BIRC-assessed ORR was 69% (95% CI, 53–82). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 18 months (95% CI, 15-not estimable [NE]). The median overall survival was NE. In patients with baseline brain metastases (n = 18), the ORR and median PFS (95% CIs) were 67% (41–87) and 17 months (11–21). Seventeen of 18 patients had brain metastases as non-target lesions; the CNS lesions were absent/normalized in 9 of 17 (53%). Only 2 of 27 patients without baseline brain metastases developed new brain metastases postbaseline. Most frequent adverse events (≥ 25%, any grade, all-causality) were diarrhea (47%), maculopapular rash (38%), pyrexia (29%), cough, and stomatitis (27% each). Conclusions: First-line nazartinib demonstrated promising efficacy, including clinically meaningful antitumor activity in the brain, and manageable safety in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02108964.