Real-world clinical efficacy of bevacizumab biosimilar in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Background: Bevacizumab is extensively used in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Numerous clinical trials have proven the clinical efficacies of bevacizumab biosimilars (BB). Objective: Our study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between bevacizumab reference product (RP) and BB among advanced NSCLC patients in a real-world setting. Design: We retrospectively analyzed stage IV metastatic NSCLC patients who were treated with bevacizumab as part of a combination therapy. Patients were categorized into chemotherapy (CT) and epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) groups. We compared the patients' characteristics, treatment efficacy, and adverse events between RP and BB in the two treatment groups. Methods: From January 2020 to July 2022, a total of 171 patients who underwent combination therapy with bevacizumab were screened. Seventy-nine of these patients met the study's inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the final analysis. We utilized the Kaplan-Meier method to estimate progression-free survival (PFS) and the log-rank test to compare PFS between groups. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify predictors of PFS. Results: Within the CT cohort, 34 patients were treated with RP in combination with platinum and pemetrexed, and 25 patients received a combination regimen with BB. The median PFS was 6.9 months in the RP group and 8.9 months in the BB group (p = 0.255). Within the EGFR-TKI cohort, 20 patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC received first-line treatment with EGFR-TKI plus bevacizumab. Of these patients, 9 were treated with a combination regimen that included RP, and 11 patients received EGFR-TKI in combination with BB. The median PFS was 18.4 months for the RP group and 13.6 months for the BB group (p = 0.363). Conclusion: In our advanced NSCLC patients, we found no difference in clinical outcomes when receiving treatment with RP or BB. Given a combination regimen, BB was as effective as RP together with either CT or EGFR-TKIs.

Taiwan Nationwide Study of First-Line ALK-TKI Therapy in ALK-Positive Lung Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The clinical outcomes of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) advanced lung adenocarcinoma vary according to real-world data. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to investigate the treatment discontinuation (TTD) and overall survival (OS) of patients with ALK+ advanced lung adenocarcinoma treated with first-line ALK-TKIs in Taiwan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated all advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients registered in the National Taiwan Cancer Registry from 2017 to 2020 who had ALK rearrangement and received ALK-TKI treatment, using data from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). The TKI treatment sequences were classified into first generation (G1: crizotinib), second generation (G2: ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib), and third generation (G3: lorlatinib). RESULTS: A total of 587 patients were analyzed, with a median age of 60.0 years, 91 (15.5%) aged ≥ 74 years, 293 (49.9%) female, 397 (67.6%) never smoked, and 534 (91.0%) with stage IV disease. Patients who received next-generation ALK-TKIs during the treatment course had longer median time to ALK-TKI TTD and OS. The TTD of the G1, G1+2, G1+2+3, G2, and G2+3 groups was 7.5 (5.4-11.1), 40.6 (29.4-not calculated (NC)), 50.3 (41.3-NC), 34.3 (29.2-43.0), and 36.3 (22.4-NC) months, respectively (p < 0.001). The median OS of the patients in the G1, G1+2, G1+2+3, G2, and G2+3 groups was 10.6 (7.5-14.6), not reached (NR) (NC-NC), NR (NC-NC), 43.0 (36.3-NC), and NR (30.3-NC) months, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared with treatment with crizotinib alone, the multivariate analysis revealed that treatment with next-generation TKIs was independently associated with longer TTD (G1+2 (hazard ratio (HR), 0.24; 95% CI 0.17-0.33; p < 0.001), G1+2+3 or G1+3 (HR, 0.17; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.10-0.28; p < 0.001), G2 (HR, 0.26; 95% CI 0.19-0.36; p < 0.001), and G2+3 (HR, 0.25; 95% CI 0.14-0.44; p < 0.001)) and median OS (G12 (HR, 0.24; 95% CI 0.17-0.35; p < 0.001), G1+2+3 or G1+3 (HR, 0.09; 95% CI 0.04-0.21; p < 0.001), G2 (HR, 0.22; 95% CI 0.15-0.31; p < 0.001), and G2+3 (HR, 0.20; 95% CI 0.10-0.42; p < 0.001)). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with ALK+ NSCLC, treatments including next-generation ALK-TKIs were independently associated with longer survival outcomes.

Registry of Genetic Alterations of Taiwan Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer by Comprehensive Next-Generation Sequencing: A Real-World Cohort Study-Taiwan Cooperative Oncology Group T1521.

PURPOSE: Tissue-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis is highly recommended for patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated a specific patient population with NSCLC that required tissue-based NGS analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled 500 patients with advanced/metastatic (1) epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations or anaplastic large-cell lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement-positive NSCLC who had failed at minimum one line of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy, (2) EGFR-/ALK-negative nonsquamous, and (3) non- or light-smoker patients with squamous NSCLC who were treatment-naïve or had failed at maximum two lines of systemic treatment. These patients were divided into five cohorts. Comprehensive tissue-based NGS testing (ACTOnco+) was conducted. RESULTS: Cohort 1: EGFR TKI-pretreated EGFR-mutated population (50.0%, n = 250), cohort 2: ALK inhibitor-pretreated ALK-positive population (1.6%, n = 8), cohort 3: treatment-naïve EGFR-/ALK-negative population (28.2%, n = 141), cohort 4: pretreated EGFR-/ALK-negative population (16.8%, n = 84), and cohort 5: squamous cell carcinoma (3.4%, n = 17). In cohort 1, 11.2% (28/250) of the patients had MET amplification, 32.4% (81/250) had been treated with osimertinib, and EGFR C797S was detected in 6.2% (5/81) of these patients. In cohort 2, resistance ALK mutation was detected in 37.5% (3/8) of the patients. In cohorts 3 and 4, targetable genetic alterations, including EGFR mutation (13.3%), ERBB2 mutation (9.3%), MET exon 14 skipping (5.3%), KRAS G12C mutation (4.4%), ROS1 fusion (2.7%), RET fusion (1.8%), and BRAF V600E mutation (1.3%), were detected. In cohort 5, MET exon 14 skipping was detected in 29.4% (5/17) of the patients. CONCLUSION: This multicenter registration study investigated tissue-based NGS for a specific patient population with NSCLC in Taiwan.

Benefits of NGS in Advanced Lung Adenocarcinoma Vary by Populations and Timing of Examination.

Despite the widespread application of next-generation sequencing (NGS) in advanced lung adenocarcinoma, its impact on survival and the optimal timing for the examination remain uncertain. This cohort study included advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients who underwent NGS testing. We categorized patients into four groups: Group 1: treatment-naïve, upfront NGS; Group 2: Treatment-naïve, exclusionary EGFR/ALK/ROS1; Group 3: post-treatment, no known EGFR/ALK/ROS1; Group 4: known driver mutation and post-TKI treatment. A total of 424 patients were included. There were 128, 126, 90, and 80 patients in Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. In Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, targetable mutations were identified in 76.6%, 49.2%, 41.1%, and 33.3% of the patients, respectively (p < 0.001). Mutation-targeted treatments were applied in 68.0%, 15.1%, 27.8%, and 22.5% of the patients, respectively (p < 0.001). In the overall population, patients receiving mutation-targeted treatments exhibited significantly longer overall survival (OS) (aHR 0.54 [95% CI 0.37-0.79], p = 0.001). The most profound benefit was seen in the Group 1 patients (not reached vs. 40.4 months, p = 0.028). The median OS of patients with mutation-targeted treatments was also significantly longer among Group 2 patients. The median post-NGS survival of patients receiving mutation-targeted treatments was numerically longer in Group 3 and Group 4 patients. In conclusion, mutation-targeted therapy is associated with a favorable outcome. However, the opportunities of NGS-directed treatment and the survival benefits of mutation-targeted treatment were various among different populations.

Amivantamab plus Lazertinib in Previously Untreated EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC.

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.).

Real-world osimertinib pretreatment experience in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor T790M mutation-positive locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Osimertinib has demonstrated efficacy in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) T790M-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in clinical trials. However, real-world data on its effectiveness remain scarce. Taiwanese patients with T790M-positive locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC and progressive disease following treatment with at least one EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) were enrolled from the osimertinib early access program. Of the 419 patients (mean age, 63 years; female, 67%), 53% were heavily pretreated (≥ third-line [3L]), making osimertinib a fourth-line (4L) intervention. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.95-11.41); the 18-month PFS rate was 26.5%. The median overall survival (OS) was 19.0 months (95% CI: 16.30-20.95); the 24-month OS rate was 40.9%. The objective response rate was 32.46%, and the disease control rate was 86.38%. The median time to treatment discontinuation of osimertinib monotherapy was 11.9 months (95% CI: 10.49-13.11). Subgroup analyses of median PFS and OS in the chemotherapy combination group vs. the osimertinib monotherapy group yielded no difference. Central nervous system (CNS) metastasis, number of prior lines of therapy, and types of initial EGFR-TKIs did not significantly impact outcomes. The median PFS values were 9.0 (95% CI: 5.18-11.34) and 10.9 (95% CI: 9.18-11.90) months with and without CNS metastasis, respectively, and 10.8 (95% CI: 8.59-12.69), 13.6 (95% CI: 10.89-16.3), and 9.2 (95% CI: 7.8-10.62) months for second-line (2L), 3L, and ≥4L therapy, respectively. In patients who received osimertinib as 2L therapy, the median PFS values in response to prior afatinib, erlotinib and gefitinib treatment were 11.2 (95% CI: 4.85-4.79), 10.5 (95% CI: 8.59-20.26) and 8.7 (95% CI: 7.21-16.79) months, respectively. Overall, real-world data from Taiwan support the clinical benefits of osimertinib in EGFR T790M -positive NSCLC.

Durvalumab in combination with chemoradiotherapy for patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: Results from the phase 1 CLOVER study.

INTRODUCTION: For patients with unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), current standard of care is concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) followed by consolidation durvalumab. However, earlier initiation of durvalumab simultaneously with cCRT may increase antitumor activity relative to initiation after cCRT. The phase 1 CLOVER study (NCT03509012) evaluated durvalumab combined with cCRT in patients with advanced solid tumors; we report findings from the NSCLC cohort. METHODS: CLOVER comprised a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) assessment part, followed by an expansion part. In the NSCLC cohort, patients with previously untreated, unresectable, stage III NSCLC were enrolled in three treatment arms: durvalumab every 4 weeks (Q4W) + cisplatin + etoposide + radiotherapy (Arm 1); durvalumab Q4W + carboplatin + paclitaxel + radiotherapy (Arm 2); or durvalumab Q4W + carboplatin or cisplatin + pemetrexed + radiotherapy (non-squamous histology only; Arm 3). Patients received durvalumab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients were enrolled: 21, 22, and 21 in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively. One patient in Arm 1 had DLT (grade 3 aspartate aminotransferase increase and grade 4 alanine aminotransferase increase); no DLTs were observed in Arms 2 or 3. Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 76.6 % of patients overall; the most common were neutropenia (51.6 %), leukopenia (20.3 %), and anemia (17.2 %). In a post-hoc analysis, 7.8 % of patients had grade 3 pneumonitis/radiation pneumonitis (grouped term) events. Overall, the objective response rate was 60.9 % (95 % confidence interval [CI], 47.9-72.9); median duration of response was 15.8 months (95 % CI, 9.0-not estimable [NE]). Median progression-free survival was 13.4 months (95 % CI, 8.8-20.1) and median overall survival was not reached (95 % CI, 21.9-NE). CONCLUSION: Durvalumab in combination with cCRT was well tolerated, with a manageable safety profile and showed encouraging antitumor activity in patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC.

Real-world evidence of lorlatinib therapy in Taiwanese patients with advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib is a brain-penetrant, third-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor indicated for ALK-positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In a global phase II study, patients who experience disease progression despite prior treatment with ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) was assessed. Herein, we report real-world clinical outcomes of lorlatinib-treated patients with ALK-positive advanced NSCLC who were heavily pretreated and progressed on first- and second-generation ALK-TKIs, in a Taiwanese population under the lorlatinib expanded access program (EAP). METHODS: This multicenter observational study examined the effectiveness and safety of ALK-positive advanced NSCLC patients that progressed from previous second-generation ALK-TKI therapy and received lorlatinib treatment subsequently. Patients who received lorlatinib treatment under EAP between Jul 2017 and Sep 2019 were eligible. Patients were followed for at least one year from the first lorlatinib treatment until study completion. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were eligible for safety analysis (male: 46.0 %; median age: 52.8 [27.5-78.3] years; brain metastases: 81.0 %). Fifty-four patients with more than one-month lorlatinib treatment were included in the effectiveness analysis. Prior to lorlatinib treatment, 10 patients (18.5 %) received one ALK-TKI, 27 (50.0 %) received two ALK-TKIs, and 17 (31.5 %) received three or more ALK-TKIs. The overall median rwPFS was 9.2 months (95 % confidence interval: 5.3-21.1). The best overall response rate (n = 51) was 13.7 %, with a disease control rate of 80.4 %. CONCLUSION: Lorlatinib exhibits substantial activity and tolerability when used clinically in a later-line setting in a Taiwanese population with ALK-positive advanced NSCLC.

Primary tumor consolidative therapy improves the outcomes of patients with advanced EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma treated with first-line osimertinib.

Background: Patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant lung adenocarcinoma (LAD) inevitably experience drug resistance following treatment with EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Objectives: We aimed to analyze the effect of primary tumor consolidative therapy (PTCT) on patients treated with first-line osimertinib. Design and methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients with advanced stage III or stage IV LAD with EGFR-sensitizing mutations (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation) with disease control after first-line osimertinib. A curative dose of primary tumor radiotherapy or primary tumor resection was classified as PTCT. We compared the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with and without PTCT. Results: This study included 106 patients with a median age of 61.0 years, and of those, 42% were male and 73.6% were never-smokers. Exon 19 deletion was observed in 67.9%, 30.2% had a programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score <1%, 33.0% had brain metastasis, and 40.6% had oligometastasis. In all, 53 (50%) patients underwent PTCT. Patients who underwent PTCT demonstrated significantly better PFS [30.3 (95% confidence interval (CI), 24.1-36.4) versus 18.2 (95% CI, 16.1-20.2) months; p = 0.005] and OS [not reached versus 36.7 (95% CI, 32.5-40.9) months; p = 0.005] than patients who did not. A multivariate analysis showed that PTCT was an independent factor associated with better PFS [hazard ratio (HR), 0.22; 95% CI, 0.10-0.49; p < 0.001] and OS [HR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.01-0.82; p = 0.032]. The PFS benefits of PTCT were consistent across subgroups, and the HR tended to be lower in patients aged <65 years, males, smokers, stage IVB disease, L858R, PD-L1 expression ⩾1%, non-oligometastasis, and brain metastasis. Conclusion: Of the patients with advanced EGFR-mutant LAD, those who underwent PTCT had a significantly better survival outcome than those who did not. The survival benefits were consistent across different subgroups.

Low-dose CT screening among never-smokers with or without a family history of lung cancer in Taiwan: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In Taiwan, lung cancers occur predominantly in never-smokers, of whom nearly 60% have stage IV disease at diagnosis. We aimed to assess the efficacy of low-dose CT (LDCT) screening among never-smokers, who had other risk factors for lung cancer. METHODS: The Taiwan Lung Cancer Screening in Never-Smoker Trial (TALENT) was a nationwide, multicentre, prospective cohort study done at 17 tertiary medical centres in Taiwan. Eligible individuals had negative chest radiography, were aged 55-75 years, had never smoked or had smoked fewer than 10 pack-years and stopped smoking for more than 15 years (self-report), and had one of the following risk factors: a family history of lung cancer; passive smoke exposure; a history of pulmonary tuberculosis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disorders; a cooking index of 110 or higher; or cooking without using ventilation. Eligible participants underwent LDCT at baseline, then annually for 2 years, and then every 2 years up to 6 years thereafter, with follow-up assessments at each LDCT scan (ie, total follow-up of 8 years). A positive scan was defined as a solid or part-solid nodule larger than 6 mm in mean diameter or a pure ground-glass nodule larger than 5 mm in mean diameter. Lung cancer was diagnosed through invasive procedures, such as image-guided aspiration or biopsy or surgery. Here, we report the results of 1-year follow-up after LDCT screening at baseline. The primary outcome was lung cancer detection rate. The p value for detection rates was estimated by the χ2 test. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to assess the association between lung cancer incidence and each risk factor. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of LDCT screening were also assessed. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02611570, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2015, and July 31, 2019, 12 011 participants (8868 females) were enrolled, of whom 6009 had a family history of lung cancer. Among 12 011 LDCT scans done at baseline, 2094 (17·4%) were positive. Lung cancer was diagnosed in 318 (2·6%) of 12 011 participants (257 [2·1%] participants had invasive lung cancer and 61 [0·5%] had adenocarcinomas in situ). 317 of 318 participants had adenocarcinoma and 246 (77·4%) of 318 had stage I disease. The prevalence of invasive lung cancer was higher among participants with a family history of lung cancer (161 [2·7%] of 6009 participants) than in those without (96 [1·6%] of 6002 participants). In participants with a family history of lung cancer, the detection rate of invasive lung cancer increased significantly with age, whereas the detection rate of adenocarcinoma in situ remained stable. In multivariable analysis, female sex, a family history of lung cancer, and age older than 60 years were associated with an increased risk of lung cancer and invasive lung cancer; passive smoke exposure, cumulative exposure to cooking, cooking without ventilation, and a previous history of chronic lung diseases were not associated with lung cancer, even after stratification by family history of lung cancer. In participants with a family history of lung cancer, the higher the number of first-degree relatives affected, the higher the risk of lung cancer; participants whose mother or sibling had lung cancer were also at an increased risk. A positive LDCT scan had 92·1% sensitivity, 84·6% specificity, a PPV of 14·0%, and a NPV of 99·7% for lung cancer diagnosis. INTERPRETATION: TALENT had a high invasive lung cancer detection rate at 1 year after baseline LDCT scan. Overdiagnosis could have occurred, especially in participants diagnosed with adenocarcinoma in situ. In individuals who do not smoke, our findings suggest that a family history of lung cancer among first-degree relatives significantly increases the risk of lung cancer as well as the rate of invasive lung cancer with increasing age. Further research on risk factors for lung cancer in this population is needed, particularly for those without a family history of lung cancer. FUNDING: Ministry of Health and Welfare of Taiwan.

Outcome of Thromboembolic Events and Its Influence on Survival Time of Advanced NSCLC Patients Treated with Antiangiogenic Therapy.

Background: Antiangiogenetic therapy and lung cancer, per se, are associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events (TE). We aim to evaluate the pattern and outcome of TE as well as its influence on survival time of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving antiangiogenic therapy. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study, which included advanced NSCLC patients receiving antiangiogenic therapy. All TE were confirmed by objective image studies. We disclosed the presentation and risk factors of TE and evaluated its influence on outcome. Results: A total of 427 patients were included. TE occurred in 43 patients (10.1%). Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was the most common TE (n = 20). Up to 46.2% of DVT did not occur in the typical lower extremities. Two patients died of TE. Among patients with continuous use or reuse of antiangiogenetic therapy, 18.2% had recurrent TE events. At the occurrence of TE, 28 patients experienced progressive disease (TE with PD), while tumor status remained stable in another 15 patients (TE without PD). The post-TE survival of patients without and with PD were 8.9 months (95% CI 3.9-13.9) vs 2.2 months (95% CI 0.1-4.3), P = 0.012. As compared with patients without TE (31.4 months [95% CI 27.1-35.7]), TE with PD patients experienced a significantly shorter overall survival (20.1 months [95% CI 15.5-24.6]), but TE without PD patients had comparable survival time (32.7 months [95% CI 7.4-28.1]) (P = 0006). The use of hormone analogue and proteinuria predicted the events among TE with PD group (aOR 2.79 [95% CI 1.13=6.92]; P = 0.027) and TE without PD group (aOR 4.30 [95% CI 1.13-16.42]; P = 0.033), respectively. Conclusion: Owing to the different risk factors and influences on the survival time, TE with and without PD may be two different disease entities.

Polygenic Risk Score, Environmental Tobacco Smoke, and Risk of Lung Adenocarcinoma in Never-Smoking Women in Taiwan.

Importance: Estimating absolute risk of lung cancer for never-smoking individuals is important to inform lung cancer screening programs. Objectives: To integrate data on environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), a known lung cancer risk factor, with a polygenic risk score (PRS) that captures overall genetic susceptibility, to estimate the absolute risk of lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) among never-smokers in Taiwan. Design, Setting, and Participants: The analyses were conducted in never-smoking women in the Taiwan Genetic Epidemiology Study of Lung Adenocarcinoma, a case-control study. Participants were recruited between September 17, 2002, and March 30, 2011. Data analysis was performed from January 17 to July 15, 2022. Exposures: A PRS was derived using 25 genetic variants that achieved genome-wide significance (P < 5 × 10-8) in a recent genome-wide association study, and ETS was defined as never exposed, exposed at home or at work, and exposed at home and at work. Main Outcomes and Measures: The Individualized Coherent Absolute Risk Estimator software was used to estimate the lifetime absolute risk of LUAD in never-smoking women aged 40 years over a projected 40-year span among the controls by using the relative risk estimates for the PRS and ETS exposures, as well as age-specific lung cancer incidence rates for never-smokers in Taiwan. Likelihood ratio tests were conducted to assess an additive interaction between the PRS and ETS exposure. Results: Data were obtained on 1024 women with LUAD (mean [SD] age, 59.6 [11.4] years, 47.9% ever exposed to ETS at home, and 19.5% ever exposed to ETS at work) and 1024 controls (mean [SD] age, 58.9 [11.0] years, 37.0% ever exposed to ETS at home, and 14.3% ever exposed to ETS at work). The overall average lifetime 40-year absolute risk of LUAD estimated using PRS alone was 2.5% (range, 0.6%-10.3%) among women never exposed to ETS. When integrating both ETS and PRS data, the estimated absolute risk was 3.7% (range, 0.6%-14.5%) for women exposed to ETS at home or work and 5.3% (range, 1.2%-12.1%) for women exposed to ETS at home and work. A super-additive interaction between ETS and the PRS (P = 6.5 × 10-4 for interaction) was identified. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found differences in absolute risk of LUAD attributed to genetic susceptibility according to levels of ETS exposure in never-smoking women. Future studies are warranted to integrate these findings in expanded risk models for LUAD.

Impact of pathological nodal staging and tumour differentiation on survival and postoperative radiotherapy in completely resected stage IIIA Non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tumour differentiation is an important index for adjuvant therapy in many cancers; however, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is an exception. Furthermore, postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) is controversial in patients with NSCLC with N0-1 and N2 disease. We aimed to evaluate the impact of tumour-related factors on overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and distant control (DC) in patients with completely resected stage IIIA NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIA non-metastatic NSCLC who underwent complete resection and adjuvant chemotherapy were identified from the Taiwan Cancer Registry (January 2007-December 2017). Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the factors associated with PORT. Survival and relapse outcomes were compared using log-rank tests and Cox regression analysis. Sensitivity analysis was performed using propensity score-matched pairs. RESULTS: In total, 1,897 patients were included and stratified according to PORT use (PORT vs. non-PORT). After adjusting for covariates, PORT was not found to be associated with improved survival outcomes. In patients with poorly differentiated tumours and N2 disease, absolute benefits for OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.76), CSS (aHR 0.80), and DC (aHR 0.74) were observed. Multivariable hazard models of propensity score-matched pN2 disease and poorly differentiated tumour subgroups also showed significant survival benefit with PORT treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with poorly differentiated tumours and receiving PORT for pN2 disease showed a lower risk of distant recurrence and more favourable survival outcomes in stage IIIA NSCLC with R0 resection.

Whole exome sequencing and MicroRNA profiling of lung adenocarcinoma identified risk prediction features for tumors at stage I and its substages.

OBJECTIVES: About 20% of stage I lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) patients suffer a relapse after surgical resection. While finer substages have been defined and refined in the AJCC staging system, clinical investigations on the tumor molecular landscape are lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed whole exome sequencing, DNA copy number and microRNA profiling on paired tumor-normal samples from a cohort of 113 treatment-naïve stage I Taiwanese LUAD patients. We searched for molecular features associated with relapse-free survival (RFS) of stage I or its substages and validated the findings with an independent Caucasian LUAD cohort. RESULTS: We found sixteen nonsynonymous mutations harbored at EGFR, KRAS, TP53, CTNNB1 and six other genes associated with poor RFS in a dose-dependent manner via variant allele fraction (VAF). An index, maxVAF, was constructed to quantify the overall mutation load from genes other than EGFR. High maxVAF scores discriminated a small group of high-risk LUAD at stage I (median RFS: 4.5 versus 69.5 months; HR = 10.5, 95% CI = 4.22-26.12, P < 0.001). At the substage level, higher risk was found for patients with high maxVAF or high miR-31; IA (median RFS: 32.1 versus 122.8 months, P = 0.005) and IB (median RFS: 7.1 versus 26.2, P = 0.049). MicroRNAs, miR-182, miR-183 and miR-196a were found correlated with EGFR mutation and poor RFS in stage IB patients. CONCLUSION: Distinctive features of somatic gene mutation and microRNA expression of stage I LUAD are characterized to complement the survival prognosis by substaging. The findings open up more options for precision management of stage I LUAD patients.

Efficacy of Lorlatinib in Treatment-Naive Patients With ALK-Positive Advanced NSCLC in Relation to EML4::ALK Variant Type and ALK With or Without TP53 Mutations.

INTRODUCTION: Lorlatinib, a third-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor, improved outcomes compared with crizotinib in patients with previously untreated ALK-positive advanced NSCLC in the phase 3 CROWN study. Here, we investigated response correlates using plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and tumor tissue profiling. METHODS: ALK fusions and ALK with or without TP53 mutations were assessed by next-generation sequencing. End points included objective response rate (ORR), duration of response, and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review on the basis of EML4::ALK variants and ALK with or without TP53 or other mutation status. RESULTS: ALK fusions were detected in the ctDNA of 62 patients in the lorlatinib arm and 64 patients in the crizotinib arm. ORRs were numerically higher with lorlatinib versus crizotinib for EML4::ALK variant 1 (v1; 80.0% versus 50.0%) and variant 2 (v2; 85.7% versus 50.0%) but were similar between the arms for variant 3 (v3; 72.2% versus 73.9%). Median PFS in the lorlatinib arm was not reached for EML4::ALK v1 and v2 and was 33.3 months for v3; in the crizotinib arm, median PFS was 7.4 months, not reached, and 5.5 months, respectively. ORRs and PFS were improved with lorlatinib versus crizotinib regardless of TP53 mutation status and in patients harboring preexisting bypass pathway resistance alterations. In the lorlatinib arm, PFS was lower in patients who had a co-occurring TP53 mutation. Results from ctDNA analysis were similar to those observed with tumor tissue samples. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with untreated ALK-positive advanced NSCLC derived greater clinical benefits, with higher ORRs and potentially longer PFS, when treated with lorlatinib compared with crizotinib, independent of EML4::ALK variant or ALK mutations, TP53 mutations, or bypass resistance alterations.

Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screening in Relatives With a Family History of Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The role of a family history of lung cancer (LCFH) in screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) has not been prospectively investigated with long-term follow-up. METHODS: A multicenter prospective study with up to three rounds of annual LDCT screening was conducted to determine the detection rate of lung cancer (LC) in asymptomatic first- or second-degree relatives of LCFH. RESULTS: From 2007 to 2011, there were 1102 participants enrolled, including 805 and 297 from simplex and multiplex families (MFs), respectively (54.2% women and 70.0% never-smokers). The last follow-up date was May 5, 2021. The overall LC detection rate was 4.5% (50 of 1102). The detection rate in MF was 9.4% (19 of 202) and 4.4% (4 of 91) in never-smokers and in those who smoked, respectively. The corresponding rates for simplex families were 3.7% (21 of 569) and 2.7% (6 of 223), respectively. Of these, 68.0% and 22.0% of cases with stage I and IV diseases, respectively. LC diagnoses within a 3-year interval from the initial screening tend to be younger, have a higher detection rate, and have stage I disease; thereafter, more stage III-IV disease and 66.7% (16 of 24) with negative or semipositive nodules in initial computed tomography scans. Within the 6-year interval, only maternal (modified rate ratio = 4.46, 95% confidence interval: 2.32-8.56) or maternal relative history of LC (modified rate ratio = 5.41, 95% confidence interval: 2.84-10.30) increased the risk of LC. CONCLUSIONS: LCFH is a risk factor for LC and is increased with MF history, among never-smokers, younger adults, and those with maternal relatives with LC. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the mortality benefit of LDCT screening in those with LCFH.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Ramucirumab Plus Erlotinib in Taiwanese Patients with Untreated, Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutated, Stage IV Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in the RELAY Study.

BACKGROUND: In RELAY, a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial investigating the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab+erlotinib (RAM+ERL) or ERL+placebo (PBO) in patients with untreated, stage IV, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), RAM+ERL demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) versus PBO+ERL, with no new safety signals. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper was to report efficacy and tolerability findings for the Taiwanese participants of RELAY. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to RAM+ERL or ERL+PBO. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR) and tolerability. Data for the current analysis are reported descriptively. RESULTS: In RELAY, 56 Taiwanese patients were enrolled; 26 received RAM+ERL, 30 received ERL+PBO. The demographic profile of the Taiwanese subgroup was consistent with that of the overall RELAY population. Median PFS for RAM+ERL/ERL+PBO, respectively, was 22.05 months/13.40 months (unstratified hazard ratio 0.4; 95% confidence interval 0.2-0.9); ORR was 92%/60%; median DoR was 18.2 months/12.7 months. All patients experienced one or more treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs); those most commonly reported were diarrhea and dermatitis acneiform (58% each) for RAM+ERL and diarrhea (70%) and paronychia (63%) for PBO+ERL. Grade ≥  3 TEAEs were experienced by 62%/30% of RAM+ERL/PBO+ERL patients, respectively, and included dermatitis acneiform (19%/7%), hypertension (12%/7%), and pneumonia (12%/0%). CONCLUSIONS: PFS for the Taiwanese participants of RELAY receiving RAM+ERL versus ERL+PBO was consistent with that in the overall RELAY population. These results, together with no new safety signals and a manageable safety profile, may support first-line use of RAM+ERL in Taiwanese patients with untreated EGFR-mutant stage IV NSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov , NCT02411448.

The Role of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Advanced EGFR-Mutant NSCLC Patients Treated with First-Line Osimertinib.

Purpose: Although serum neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is correlated with the outcome of various cancer types, its role in treatment-naïve, advanced, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with osimertinib remains uncertain. We have the intention to use this biomarker to evaluate the outcomes in NSCLC. Patients and Methods: Advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients receiving osimertinib as the first-line treatment were included. We evaluated the prognostic role of baseline NLR and explored its association with patients' characteristics. A high NLR was defined as pretreatment serum NLR ≥ 5. Results: A total of 112 eligible patients were included. The objective response rate was 83.7%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 20.5 months (95% CI 14.5-26.5) and 47.3 months (95% CI 36.7-58.2), respectively. A high NLR predicted an inferior PFS (HR 1.90 [95% CI 1.02-3.51], P = 0.042) and OS (HR 3.85 [95% CI 1.39-10.66], P = 0.009). Patients with stage IVB disease were more likely to have a high baseline NLR than those with stage IIIB-IVA (33.9% vs 15.1%, P = 0.029). Other patients' characteristics did not correlate with the baseline NLR significantly. Patients with a high NLR had significantly more metastatic organs than those with a low NLR (2.5 ± 1.3 vs 1.8 ± 0.9, P = 0.012), particularly brain, liver, and bone metastasis. There was no significant association between NLR and intrathoracic metastasis. Conclusion: Baseline serum NLR could act as an important prognostic marker for EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients receiving first-line osimertinib. A high NLR was associated with higher metastatic burden, more extrathoracic metastases, and therefore, a worse outcome.

Asian Subgroup Analysis of the Randomized Phase 3 CROWN Study of First-Line Lorlatinib Versus Crizotinib in Advanced ALK-Positive NSCLC.

Introduction: Lorlatinib is a potent, third-generation inhibitor of ALK. In the planned interim analysis of the ongoing, phase 3, randomized, global CROWN trial (NCT03052608), lorlatinib resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced, ALK-positive NSCLC. Here, we present a subgroup analysis of Asian patients in the CROWN study. Methods: Patients received lorlatinib 100 mg once daily or crizotinib 250 mg twice daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review. Objective response rate (ORR), intracranial ORR, safety, and select biomarkers were secondary end points. Results: At data cutoff (September 20, 2021), 120 patients were included in the Asian intention-to-treat subgroup (lorlatinib n = 59; crizotinib n = 61). At 36 months, 61% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 47-72) and 25% (95% CI: 12-41) of patients in the lorlatinib and crizotinib groups, respectively, were alive without disease progression (hazard ratio for disease progression by blinded independent central review or death: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.23-0.71). ORR was 78% (95% CI: 65-88) versus 57% (95% CI: 44-70) for patients treated with lorlatinib and crizotinib, respectively. In patients with measurable, nonmeasurable, or both measurable and nonmeasurable brain metastases at baseline, intracranial ORR was 73% (95% CI: 39-94) versus 20% (95% CI: 4-48) for patients treated with lorlatinib and crizotinib, respectively. The definition of nonmeasurable brain metastases is: a brain lesion less than 10 mm in MRI scan is defined as nonmeasurable brain metastasi based on RECIST criteria (Clinical trial evaluation criteria). Hypercholesterolemia, hypertriglyceridemia, and edema were the most frequently reported adverse events with lorlatinib. Conclusions: Lorlatinib efficacy and safety in the Asian subgroup of CROWN were consistent with those in the overall population.