Search

Introduction: TP53 and KEAP1 are frequently mutated in NSCLC, but their prognostic value is ambiguous, particularly in localized stage tumors. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included a total of 6297 patients with NSCLC who were diagnosed between November 1998 and February 2020. The primary end point was overall survival. Patients were diagnosed in a central pathology laboratory as part of the Network Genomic Medicine collaboration, encompassing more than 300 lung cancer-treating oncology centers in Germany. All patients underwent molecular testing, including targeted next-generation panel sequencing and in situ hybridization. Results: A total of 6297 patients with NSCLC were analyzed. In 1518 surgically treated patients (Union for International Cancer Control [UICC] I-IIIA), truncating TP53 mutations and KEAP1 mutations were independent negative prognostic markers in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR](TP53truncating) = 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-1.91, p = 0.015; HRKEAP1mut = 1.68, 95% CI:1.24-2.26, p = 0.001). Consistently, these mutations were associated with shorter disease-free survival. In 4779 patients with advanced-stage (UICC IIIB-IV) tumors, TP53 mutations did not predict outcome in univariable analysis. In contrast, KEAP1 mutations remained a negative prognostic factor (HRKEAP1mut = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.23-1.61, p < 0.001) in patients with advanced-stage tumors. Furthermore, those with KEAP1-mutant tumors with co-occurring TP53 missense mutations had longer overall survival than those with KEAP1-mutant tumors with wild-type or truncating TP53 mutations. Conclusions: This study found that TP53 and KEAP1 mutations were prognostic for localized and advanced-stage NSCLC. The increased relative hazard of harboring TP53 or KEAP1 mutations was comparable to an increase in one UICC stage. Our data suggest that molecular stratification on the basis of TP53 and KEAP1 mutation status should be implemented for localized and advanced-stage NSCL

Background Selpercatinib is a first-in-class, highly selective RET kinase inhibitor with CNS activity that has shown efficacy in RET fission-positive lung and thyroid cancers. RET fusions occur rarely in other tumour types. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of selpercatinib in a diverse group of patients with RET fusion-positive non-lung or thyroid advanced solid tumours (ie, a tumour-agnostic population). Methods LIBRETTO-001 is an ongoing phase 1/2, single-group, open-label, basket trial of selpercatinib in patients aged 18 years and older (or >= 12 years, where permitted by regulatory authorities) with RET-altered cancers. The trial is being conducted at 89 sites in 16 countries; the tumour-agnostic population was enrolled at 30 sites (outpatient and inpatient medical facilities) across eight countries. A prespecified interim analysis of LIBRETTO-001 was planned to investigate the efficacy and safety of selpercatinib in a tumour-agnostic population of patients with RET fusionpositive advanced solid tumours; the data cutoff date was Sept 24, 2021. Eligible patients had disease progression on or after previous systemic therapies or no satisfactory therapeutic options and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Selpercatinib was orally administered in a continuous 28-day cycle. Patients enrolled in the phase 1 dose-escalation portion received between 20 mg once daily or 20-240 mg twice daily; the phase 2 recommended dose was 160 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate as determined by the independent review committee. The efficacy-evaluable tumour-agnostic population was defined as patients with RET fusion-positive cancer, other than non-small-cell lung cancer and thyroid cancer, who had at least 6 months of follow-up from the first study dose at the time of data cutoff (all responders at the time of data cutoff were followed up for at least 6 months from the onset of response unless they progressed

BACKGROUND Sotorasib showed anticancer activity in patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated advanced solid tumors in a phase 1 study, and particularly promising anticancer activity was observed in a subgroup of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS In a single-group, phase 2 trial, we investigated the activity of sotorasib, administered orally at a dose of 960 mg once daily, in patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC previously treated with standard therapies. The primary end point was objective response (complete or partial response) according to independent central review. Key secondary end points included duration of response, disease control (defined as complete response, partial response, or stable disease), progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Exploratory biomarkers were evaluated for their association with response to sotorasib therapy. RESULTS Among the 126 enrolled patients, the majority (81.0%) had previously received both platinum-based chemotherapy and inhibitors of programmed death 1 (PD-1) or programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1). According to central review, 124 patients had measurable disease at baseline and were evaluated for response. An objective response was observed in 46 patients (37.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 28.6 to 46.2), including in 4 (3.2%) who had a complete response and in 42 (33.9%) who had a partial response. The median duration of response was 11.1 months (95% CI, 6.9 to could not be evaluated). Disease control occurred in 100 patients (80.6%; 95% CI, 72.6 to 87.2). The median progression-free survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.1 to 8.2), and the median overall survival was 12.5 months (95% CI, 10.0 to could not be evaluated). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 88 of 126 patients (69.8%), including grade 3 events in 25 patients (19.8%) and a grade 4 event in 1 (0.8%). Responses were observed in subgroups defined according to PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden, and co-occur

The discovery of oncogenic driver mutations rendering non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) targetable by small molecule inhibitors, and the development of immunotherapies, have revolutionised NSCLC treatment. Today, instead of non-selective chemotherapies, all patients with advanced NSCLC eligible for treatment (and increasing numbers with earlier, less extensive disease) require fast and comprehensive screening of biomarkers for first-line patient selection for targeted therapy, chemotherapy, or immunotherapy (with or without chemotherapy). To avoid unnecessary re-biopsies, biomarker screening before first-line treatment should also include markers that are actionable from second-line onwards; PD-L1 expression testing is also mandatory before initiating treatment. Population differences exist in the frequency of oncogenic driver mutations: EGFR mutations are more frequent in Asia than Europe, whereas the converse is true for KRAS mutations. In addition to approved first-line therapies, a number of emerging therapies are being investigated in clinical trials. Guidelines for biomarker testing vary by country, with the number of actionable targets and the requirement for extensive molecular screening strategies expected to increase. To meet diagnostic demands, rapid screening technologies for single driver mutations have been implemented. Improvements in DNA-and RNA-based next-generation sequencing technologies enable analysis of a group of genes in one assay; however, turnaround times remain relatively long. Consequently, rapid screening technologies are being implemented alongside next-generation sequencing. Further challenges in the evolving landscape of biomarker testing in NSCLC are actionable primary and secondary resistance mechanisms to targeted therapies. Therefore, comprehensive testing on re-biopsies, collected at the time of disease progression, in combination with testing of circulating tumour DNA may provide important information to guide second-or third-l

The arrival of precision oncology is challenging the evidence standards under which technologies are evaluated for regulatory approval as well as for health technology assessment (HTA) purposes. Several key concepts are discussed to highlight the source of the challenges in evaluating these products, particularly those impacting the HTA of histology-independent therapies. These include the basket trial design, high uncertainty in (potentially substantial) benefits for histology-independent therapies, and the inability to identify and quantify benefits of standard of care in daily practice when the biomarker is not currently used in practice. There is little precedent for a technology with the unique mixture of challenges for HTA of histology-independent therapies and they will be evaluated using standard HTA, as there currently is no evidence suggesting the standard HTA framework is not appropriate. A number of questions proposed to help guide HTA bodies when assessing the appropriateness of local processes to optimally evaluate histology-independent therapies. Pragmatic solutions are further proposed to decrease uncertainty in the benefits of histology independent therapies as well as fill gaps in comparative evidence. The proposed solutions ensure a consistent and streamlined approach to evaluation across histology-independent products, although with varying strengths and limitations. Alongside these solutions, sponsors should engage early with HTA bodies/payers and regulatory agencies through parallel/joint scientific advice to facilitate the integration of both regulatory and HTA perspectives into one clinical development programme, potentially reconciling evidence requirements.

The introduction of targeted treatments and more recently immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) to the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has dramatically changed the prognosis of selected patients. For patients with oncogene-addicted metastatic NSCLC harbouring an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) or v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homologue B1 (BRAF) mutation or an anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) or ROS proto-oncogene 1, receptor tyrosine kinase (ROS1) gene alteration (translocation, fusion, amplification) mutation-specific tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) are already first-line standard treatment, while targeted treatment for other driver mutations affecting MET, RET, human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) 2, tropomyosin receptor kinases (TRK) 1-3 and others are currently under investigation. The role of ICI in these patient subgroups is currently under debate. This article summarises a round-table discussion organised by ESMO Open in Vienna in July 2018. It reviews current clinical data on ICI treatment in patients with metastatic oncogene-addicted NSCLC and discusses molecular diagnostic assessment, potential biomarkers and radiological methods for response evaluation of ICI treatment. The round-table panel concluded ICI should only be considered in patients with oncogene-addicted NSCLC after exhaustion of effective targeted therapies and in some cases possibly after all other therapies including chemotherapies. More clinical trials on combination therapies and biomarkers for ICI therapy based on the specific differing characteristics of oncogene-addicted NSCLC need to be conducted.

Pulmonary large-cell neuroendocrine carcinomas (LCNECs) have similarities with other lung cancers, but their precise relationship has remained unclear. Here we perform a comprehensive genomic (n = 60) and transcriptomic (n = 69) analysis of 75 LCNECs and identify two molecular subgroups: type I LCNECs with bi-allelic TP53 and STK11/KEAP1 alterations (37%), and type II LCNECs enriched for bi-allelic inactivation of TP53 and RB1 (42%). Despite sharing genomic alterations with adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas, no transcriptional relationship was found; instead LCNECs form distinct transcriptional subgroups with closest similarity to SCLC. While type I LCNECs and SCLCs exhibit a neuroendocrine profile with ASCL1(high)/DLL3(high)/NOTCHlow, type II LCNECs bear TP53 and RB1 alterations and differ from most SCLC tumors with reduced neuroendocrine markers, a pattern of ASCL1l(ow)/DLL3(low)/NOTCHhigh, and an upregulation of immune-related pathways. In conclusion, LCNECs comprise two molecularly defined subgroups, and distinguishing them from SCLC may allow stratified targeted treatment of high-grade neuroendocrine lung tumors.

Introduction: In ret proto-oncogene (RET)-rearranged lung cancers, data on the frequency of brain metastases and, in particular, the outcomes of multikinase inhibitor therapy in patients with intracranial disease are not well characterized. Methods: A global, multi-institutional registry (cohort A, n = 114) and a bi-institutional data set (cohort B, n = 71) of RET-rearranged lung cancer patients were analyzed. Patients were eligible if they had stage IV lung cancers harboring a RET rearrangement by local testing. The incidence of brain metastases and outcomes with multikinase inhibitor therapy were determined. Results: The frequency of brain metastases at the time of diagnosis of stage IV disease was 25% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18%-32%) in all patients from both cohorts. The lifetime prevalence of brain metastasis in stage IV disease was 46% (95% CI: 34%-58%) in patients for whom longitudinal data was available. The cumulative incidence of brain metastases was significantly different (p = 0.0039) between RET-, ROS1-, and ALK receptor tyrosine kinase (ALK)-rearranged lung cancers, with RET intermediate between the other two groups. Although intracranial response data was not available in cohort A, the median progression-free survival of multikinase inhibitor therapy (cabozantinib, vandetanib, or sunitinib) in patients with brain metastases was 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.3-2.9 months, n = 10). In cohort B, an intracranial response was observed in 2 of 11 patients (18%) treated with cabozantinib, vandetanib (+/- everolimus), ponatinib, or alectinib; the median overall progression-free survival (intracranial and extracranial) was 3.9 months (95% CI: 2.0-4.9 months). Conclusions: Brain metastases occur frequently in RET-rearranged lung cancers, and outcomes with multikinase inhibitor therapy in general are suboptimal. Novel RET-directed targeted therapy strategies are needed. (C) 2018 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. Al

Purpose BRAF(V600) mutations are frequently found in several glioma subtypes, including pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma (PXA) and ganglioglioma and much less commonly in glioblastoma. We sought to determine the activity of vemurafenib, a selective inhibitor of BRAF(V600), in patients with gliomas that harbor this mutation. Patients and Methods The VE-BASKET study was an open-label, nonrandomized, multicohort study for BRAF(V600)-mutant nonmelanoma cancers. Patients with BRAF(V600)-mutant glioma received vemurafenib 960 mg twice per day continuously until disease progression, withdrawal, or intolerable adverse effects. Key end points included confirmed objective response rate by RECIST version 1.1, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Results Twenty-four patients (median age, 32 years; 18 female and six male patients) with glioma, including malignant diffuse glioma (n = 11; six glioblastoma and five anaplastic astrocytoma), PXA (n = 7), anaplastic ganglioglioma (n = 3), pilocytic astrocytoma (n = 2), and high-grade glioma, not otherwise specified (n = 1), were treated. Confirmed objective response rate was 25% (95% CI, 10% to 47%) and median progression-free survival was 5.5 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 9.6 months). In malignant diffuse glioma, best response included one partial response and five patients with stable disease, two of whom had disease stabilization that lasted more than 1 year. In PXA, best response included one complete response, two partial responses, and three patients with stable disease. Additional partial responses were observed in patients with pilocytic astrocytoma and anaplastic ganglioglioma (one each). The safety profile of vemurafenib was generally consistent with that of previously published studies. Conclusion Vemurafenib demonstrated evidence of durable antitumor activity in some patients with BRAF(V600)-mutant gliomas, although efficacy seemed to vary qualitatively by histologic subtype. Additional study is needed to determi

Even though great efforts have been made to improve chemotherapy-based treatment approaches for lung cancer, the prognosis of patients with advanced and metastasized disease remains particularly poor. In recent years, a growing number of genetic aberrations driving lung cancer have been identified. Targeted inhibition of some of these aberrations, most prominently mutated EGFR and ALK, by tyrosine kinase inhibitors has dramatically increased efficacy and tolerability of systemic lung cancer treatment in subsets of patients. However, the duration of response is limited due to the acquisition of molecular mechanisms of resistance to targeted treatment. Modern next-generation inhibitors aim to break resistance. A deep understanding of the mechanisms of treatment failure is imperative to the development of new approaches. In this review, we focus on the current status of stratified therapy in lung cancer and highlight new, potentially promising treatment approaches. (C) 2016 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg

Purpose Approximately 1% of lung adenocarcinomas are driven by oncogenic ROS1 rearrangement. Crizotinib is a potent inhibitor of both ROS1 and ALK kinase domains. Patients and Methods In the absence of a prospective clinical trial in Europe, we conducted a retrospective study in centers that tested for ROS1 rearrangement. Eligible patients had stage IV lung adenocarcinoma, had ROS1 rearrangement according to fluorescent in situ hybridization, and had received crizotinib therapy through an individual off-label use. Best response was assessed locally using RECIST (version 1.1). All other data were analyzed centrally. Results We identified 32 eligible patients. One patient was excluded because next-generation sequencing was negative for ROS1 fusion. Median age was 50.5 years, 64.5% of patients were women, and 67.7% were never-smokers. Thirty patients were evaluable for progression-free survival (PFS), and 29 patients were evaluable for best response. We observed four patients with disease progression, two patients with stable disease, and objective response in 24 patients, including five complete responses (overall response rate, 80%; disease control rate, 86.7%). Median PFS was 9.1 months, and the PFS rate at 12 months was 44%. No unexpected adverse effects were observed. Twenty-six patients received pemetrexed (either alone or in combination with platinum and either before or after crizotinib) and had a response rate of 57.7% and a median PFS of 7.2 months. Conclusion Crizotinib was highly active at treating lung cancer in patients with a ROS1 rearrangement, suggesting that patients with lung adenocarcinomas should be tested for ROS1. Prospective clinical trials with crizotinib and other ROS1 inhibitors are ongoing or planned. (C) 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology