Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors as First-line Treatment for Brain Metastases in Stage IV NSCLC Patients without Driver Mutations.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) therapy with or without chemotherapy has been established as the first-line treatment for patients with non-oncogene addicted advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). Yet some clinical settings, such as the treatment sequence in patients with brain metastases, have barely been evidenced. Although ICIs cannot directly cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB), evidence suggests that BBB damage could allow ICIs into the central nervous system, or that they can have an indirect effect on the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) and cause an anti-tumor response. Pivotal phase III trials have included a highly selected population but offer few data on these patients. Here we first review how ICIs can indirectly shape the brain metastases microenvironment through different mechanisms, and some possible causes of ICIs resistance. We also analyze the evidence reported in pivotal phase III trials and phase II trials focused on NSCLC brain metastases for first-line treatment, and the evidence for upfront or delayed local brain therapy. Finally, we discuss the best evidence-based approach to treat NSCLC patients with brain metastases and propose future research.

A real­world study of clinical characteristics, treatment sequence and outcomes of patients with non-small cell lung cancer and EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations.

OBJECTIVES: EGFR exon 20 insertion (EGFRex20ins) mutations are found in up to 4% of all patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). These patients are often insensitive to EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and have worse prognosis than patients with more common EGFR mutations. In this multicenter, retrospective, real-world study, we sought to determine whether the administration of recently approved treatments that specifically target EGFRex20ins mutations could significantly improve outcomes in this patient population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the clinical features of 41 patients diagnosed with NSCLC and EGFRex20ins mutations, their evolution, and response to treatments received across 7 hospitals in the Valencian Community, Spain, between 31st December 2012 and 31st December 2022. RESULTS: 32 patients (72%) developed metastatic disease, and 29 (71%) of them received oncological treatment. We found that administering a targeted therapy against EGFRex20ins mutations (amivantamab, mobocertinib and/or sunvozertinib) at some point during the course of treatment, significantly increased the median OS of metastatic patients from 8 months (95% CI 0-21.7) to 30 months (95% CI 11.1-48.8; Hazard ratio = 0.297, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Our findings contribute to the evolving standard of care for this specific population and highlight the clinical benefits of targeted cancer therapies.

Five-year outcomes with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with 2 cycles of chemotherapy versus 4 cycles of chemotherapy alone in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in the randomized CheckMate 9LA trial.

BACKGROUND: We report 5-year efficacy and safety outcomes from CheckMate 9LA in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) and exploratory analyses in key patient subgroups. METHODS: Adults with stage IV/recurrent NSCLC and no sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations were randomized to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy (n = 361) or chemotherapy (n = 358). Outcomes were assessed in all randomized patients and subgroups. RESULTS: With 57.3 months' minimum follow-up, patients continued to derive overall survival (OS) benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy over chemotherapy (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62-0.85; 5-year OS rates, 18% vs. 11%), regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (PD-L1 < 1%, 22% vs. 8%; PD-L1 ≥ 1%, 18% vs. 11%), histology (squamous, 18% vs. 7%; non-squamous, 19% vs. 12%), or presence of baseline brain metastases (20% vs. 6%). Five-year duration of response (DOR) rates were 19% versus 8% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy, with consistent benefit across subgroups. Patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy due to treatment-related adverse events had a 5-year OS rate of 37%. Five-year progression-free survival and DOR rates in 5-year survivors were 55% versus 38% and 59% versus 46%, respectively. No new safety signals were observed in 5-year survivors, regardless of the number of ipilimumab doses received. CONCLUSION: This 5-year update supports the long-term, durable OS benefit and improved 5-year survivorship with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy over chemotherapy in patients with mNSCLC, regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression or histology. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT03215706.

Datopotamab Deruxtecan Versus Docetaxel for Previously Treated Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Randomized, Open-Label Phase III TROPION-Lung01 Study.

PURPOSE: The randomized, open-label, global phase III TROPION-Lung01 study compared the efficacy and safety of datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) versus docetaxel in patients with pretreated advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients received Dato-DXd 6 mg/kg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks. Dual primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Objective response rate, duration of response, and safety were secondary end points. RESULTS: In total, 299 and 305 patients were randomly assigned to receive Dato-DXd or docetaxel, respectively. The median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 4.2 to 5.6) with Dato-DXd and 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 4.2) with docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.91]; P = .004). The median OS was 12.9 months (95% CI, 11.0 to 13.9) and 11.8 months (95% CI, 10.1 to 12.8), respectively (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.14]; P = .530). In the prespecified nonsquamous histology subgroup, the median PFS was 5.5 versus 3.6 months (HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.79]) and the median OS was 14.6 versus 12.3 months (HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.05]). In the squamous histology subgroup, the median PFS was 2.8 versus 3.9 months (HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.95 to 2.08]) and the median OS was 7.6 versus 9.4 months (HR, 1.32 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.92]). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 25.6% and 42.1% of patients, and any-grade adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease/pneumonitis occurred in 8.8% and 4.1% of patients, in the Dato-DXd and docetaxel groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Dato-DXd significantly improved PFS versus docetaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC, driven by patients with nonsquamous histology. OS showed a numerical benefit but did not reach statistical significance. No unexpected safety signals were observed.

Novel Combinations of Immunotherapies or DNA Damage Repair Inhibitors in Platinum-Refractory Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Phase II BALTIC Study.

PURPOSE: The phase II, multiarm, signal-searching BALTIC study (NCT02937818) assessed novel treatment combinations for platinum-refractory/resistant extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with ES-SCLC with progressive disease during or within 90 days of completing first-line platinum-based chemotherapy received one of three regimens: durvalumab plus tremelimumab followed by durvalumab monotherapy (arm A), adavosertib plus carboplatin (arm B), or ceralasertib plus olaparib (arm C). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate. Prespecified exploratory biomarker analyses were conducted in arms A and C. RESULTS: In arm A (n = 41), arm B (n = 10), and arm C (n = 21), the confirmed objective response rates were 7.3%, 0%, and 4.8%, respectively. Safety profiles in all arms were consistent with those of the individual drugs. In arm A, patients with PD-L1 expression (tumor cells or immune cells) ≥1% seemed to have a greater likelihood of achieving disease control with durvalumab plus tremelimumab than those with PD-L1 (tumor cells and immune cells) <1%, and lower baseline ctDNA and reduction in the on-treatment ctDNA level were both associated with longer overall survival. Among patients treated with ceralasertib plus olaparib in arm C, specific immune response-relevant circulating chemokines and cytokines were identified as early biomarkers of survival and pharmacodynamic biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: In BALTIC, all combination regimens demonstrated tolerable safety profiles, but antitumor activity was limited in refractory/resistant ES-SCLC. Among patients treated with durvalumab plus tremelimumab, an association of on-treatment reduction in ctDNA with longer overall survival suggests the potential use of ctDNA as a surrogate of treatment response, warranting further investigation.

Expert Consensus on the Management of Adverse Events of Lorlatinib in the Treatment of ALK+ Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

The use of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as lorlatinib, for the treatment of patients with ALK gene rearrangement (or ALK-positive) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been shown to improve the overall survival and quality of life of these patients. However, lorlatinib is not exempt from potential adverse events. Adequate monitoring and management of these adverse events are critical for increasing patient adherence to lorlatinib, thereby maximizing the benefits of treatment and minimizing the risks associated with treatment discontinuation. Considering that the adverse events of lorlatinib can affect different organs and systems, the participation of a multidisciplinary team, including cardiologists, neurologists, internal medicine specialists, and oncology pharmacists, is needed. This article presents specific and pragmatic strategies for identifying and treating the most relevant adverse events associated with lorlatinib in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC based on the clinical experience of a multidisciplinary panel of experts.

Sacituzumab Govitecan Versus Docetaxel for Previously Treated Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Randomized, Open-Label Phase III EVOKE-01 Study.

PURPOSE: The open-label, phase III EVOKE-01 study evaluated sacituzumab govitecan (SG) versus standard-of-care docetaxel in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) with progression on/after platinum-based chemotherapy, anti-PD-(L)1, and targeted treatment for actionable genomic alterations (AGAs). Primary analysis is reported. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 (stratified by histology, best response to last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen, and AGA treatment received or not) to SG (one 10 mg/kg intravenous infusion on days 1 and 8) or docetaxel (one 75 mg/m2 intravenous infusion on day 1) in 21-day cycles. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Key secondary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, patient-reported symptom assessment, and safety. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat population (SG, n = 299; docetaxel, n = 304), 55.4% had one previous line of therapy. Median follow-up was 12.7 months (range, 6.0-24.0). The primary end point was not met. There was a numerical OS improvement for SG versus docetaxel (median, 11.1 v 9.8 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.04]; one-sided P = .0534), consistent across squamous and nonsquamous histologies. Median PFS was 4.1 versus 3.9 months (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.11]). An OS benefit was observed for SG (n = 192) versus docetaxel (n = 191) in mNSCLC nonresponsive to last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen (3.5-month median OS increase; HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.97]); this was consistent across histologies. Among patients receiving SG and docetaxel, 6.8% and 14.2% discontinued because of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), respectively; 1.4% and 1.0%, respectively, had TRAEs leading to death. CONCLUSION: Although statistical significance was not met, OS numerically improved with SG versus docetaxel, which was consistent across histologies. Clinically meaningful improvement in OS was noted in mNSCLC nonresponsive to last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen. SG was better tolerated than docetaxel and consistent with its known safety profile, with no new safety signals.

The S-REAL study: Spanish real-world data on unresectable stage III NSCLC patients treated with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: The S-REAL study aimed to assess the effectiveness of durvalumab as consolidation therapy after definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in a real-world cohort of patients with locally advanced, unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) included in a Spanish early access program (EAP). METHODS: In this multicentre, observational, retrospective study we analysed data from patients treated in 39 Spanish hospitals, who started intravenous durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks) between September 2017 and December 2018. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included patient characterization and adverse events of special interest (AESI). RESULTS: A total of 244 patients were followed up for a median of 21.9 months [range 1.2-34.7]. Median duration of durvalumab was 45.5 weeks (11.4 months) [0-145]. Median PFS was 16.7 months (95% CI 12.2-25). No remarkable differences in PFS were observed between patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥ 1% or < 1% (16.7 versus 15.6 months, respectively). However, PFS was higher in patients who had received prior concurrent CRT (cCRT) versus sequential CRT (sCRT) (20.6 versus 9.4 months). AESIs leading to durvalumab discontinuation were registered in 11.1% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: These results are in line with prior published evidence and confirm the benefits of durvalumab in the treatment of LA-NSCLC patients in a real-world setting. We also observed a lower incidence of important treatment-associated toxicities, such as pneumonitis, compared with the pivotal phase III PACIFIC clinical study.

RET Fusion Testing in Patients With NSCLC: The RETING Study.

Introduction: RET inhibitors with impressive overall response rates are now available for patients with NSCLC, yet the identification of RET fusions remains a difficult challenge. Most guidelines encourage the upfront use of next-generation sequencing (NGS), or alternatively, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) or reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) when NGS is not possible or available. Taken together, the suboptimal performance of single-analyte assays to detect RET fusions, although consistent with the notion of encouraging universal NGS, is currently widening some of the clinical practice gaps in the implementation of predictive biomarkers in patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods: This situation prompted us to evaluate several RET assays in a large multicenter cohort of RET fusion-positive NSCLC (n = 38) to obtain real-world data. In addition to RNA-based NGS (the criterion standard method), all positive specimens underwent break-apart RET FISH with two different assays and were also tested by an RT-PCR assay. Results: The most common RET partners were KIF5B (78.9%), followed by CCDC6 (15.8%). The two RET NGS-positive but FISH-negative samples contained a KIF5B(15)-RET(12) fusion. The three RET fusions not identified with RT-PCR were AKAP13(35)-RET(12), KIF5B(24)-RET(9) and KIF5B(24)-RET(11). All three false-negative RT-PCR cases were FISH-positive, exhibited a typical break-apart pattern, and contained a very high number of positive tumor cells with both FISH assays. Signet ring cells, psammoma bodies, and pleomorphic features were frequently observed (in 34.2%, 39.5%, and 39.5% of tumors, respectively). Conclusions: In-depth knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of the different RET testing methodologies could help clinical and molecular tumor boards implement and maintain sensible algorithms for the rapid and effective detection of RET fusions in patients with NSCLC. The likelihood of RET false-negative results with both FISH and RT-PCR reinforces the need for upfront NGS in patients with NSCLC.

Four-year clinical update and treatment switching-adjusted outcomes with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in the CheckMate 9LA randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: In CheckMate 9LA, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression or histology. We report updated efficacy and safety in all randomized patients with a minimum 4-year follow-up and an exploratory treatment-switching adjustment analysis in all treated patients who received chemotherapy and subsequent immunotherapy. METHODS: Adults with stage IV/recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), no sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations, and ECOG performance status ≤1 were randomized 1:1 to nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks with chemotherapy (two cycles) or chemotherapy (four cycles, with optional maintenance pemetrexed for the nonsquamous population). Assessments included OS, progression-free survival, and objective response rate. Exploratory analyses included efficacy by tumor PD-L1 expression and histology and in patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy due to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and a treatment-switching adjustment analysis using inverse probability of censoring weighting. RESULTS: With a 47.9-month minimum follow-up for OS, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy continued to prolong OS over chemotherapy in all randomized patients (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.87; 4-year OS rate: 21% versus 16%), regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression (HR (95% CI): PD-L1<1%, 0.66 (0.50 to 0.86) and ≥1%, 0.74 (0.60 to 0.92)) or histology (squamous, 0.64 (0.48 to 0.84) and non-squamous, 0.80 (0.66 to 0.97)). In patients who discontinued all components of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy due to TRAEs (n=61), the 4-year OS rate was 41%. With treatment-switching adjustment for the 36% of patients receiving subsequent immunotherapy in the chemotherapy arm, the estimated HR of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy was 0.66 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.80). No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In this 4-year update, patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy continued to have long-term, durable efficacy benefit over chemotherapy regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression and/or histology. A greater estimated relative OS benefit was observed after adjustment for subsequent immunotherapy use in the chemotherapy arm. These results further support nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic/recurrent NSCLC, including those with tumor PD-L1<1% or squamous histology, populations with high unmet needs.

Tarlatamab for Patients with Previously Treated Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tarlatamab, a bispecific T-cell engager immunotherapy targeting delta-like ligand 3 and CD3, showed promising antitumor activity in a phase 1 trial in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, we evaluated the antitumor activity and safety of tarlatamab, administered intravenously every 2 weeks at a dose of 10 mg or 100 mg, in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. The primary end point was objective response (complete or partial response), as assessed by blinded independent central review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. RESULTS: Overall, 220 patients received tarlatamab; patients had previously received a median of two lines of treatment. Among patients evaluated for antitumor activity and survival, the median follow-up was 10.6 months in the 10-mg group and 10.3 months in the 100-mg group. An objective response occurred in 40% (97.5% confidence interval [CI], 29 to 52) of the patients in the 10-mg group and in 32% (97.5% CI, 21 to 44) of those in the 100-mg group. Among patients with an objective response, the duration of response was at least 6 months in 59% (40 of 68 patients). Objective responses at the time of data cutoff were ongoing in 22 of 40 patients (55%) in the 10-mg group and in 16 of 28 patients (57%) in the 100-mg group. The median progression-free survival was 4.9 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 6.7) in the 10-mg group and 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 4.4) in the 100-mg group; the estimates of overall survival at 9 months were 68% and 66% of patients, respectively. The most common adverse events were cytokine-release syndrome (in 51% of the patients in the 10-mg group and in 61% of those in the 100-mg group), decreased appetite (in 29% and 44%, respectively), and pyrexia (in 35% and 33%). Cytokine-release syndrome occurred primarily during treatment cycle 1, and events in most of the patients were grade 1 or 2 in severity. Grade 3 cytokine-release syndrome occurred less frequently in the 10-mg group (in 1% of the patients) than in the 100-mg group (in 6%). A low percentage of patients (3%) discontinued tarlatamab because of treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Tarlatamab, administered as a 10-mg dose every 2 weeks, showed antitumor activity with durable objective responses and promising survival outcomes in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. No new safety signals were identified. (Funded by Amgen; DeLLphi-301 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05060016.).

Sex Differences in the Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Neoadjuvant Therapy of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is one of the world's leading causes of morbidity and mortality. ICIs alone or combined with chemotherapy have become the standard first-line treatment of metastatic NSCLC. The impressive results obtained have stimulated our interest in applying these therapies in early disease stage treatments, as neoadjuvant immunotherapy has shown promising results. Among many of the factors that may influence responses, the role played by sex is attracting increased interest and needs to be addressed. Here, we aim to first review the state of the art regarding neoadjuvant ICIs, whether they are administered in monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy at stages IB-IIIA, particularly at stage IIIA, before analyzing whether sex may influence responses. To this end, a meta-analysis of publicly available data comparing male and female major pathological responses (MPR) and pathological complete responses (pCR) was performed. In our meta-analysis, MPR was found to be significantly higher in females than in males, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.82 (95% CI 1.13-2.93; p = 0.01), while pCR showed a trend to be more favorable in females than in males, but the OR of 1.62 was not statistically significant (95% CI 0.97-2.75; p = 0.08). Overall, our results showed that sex should be systematically considered in future clinical trials settings in order to establish the optimal treatment sequence.

Immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in lung cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with lung cancer are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe complications from COVID-19, but information on the efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in these patients is scarce. We aimed at evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The prospective, nationwide SOLID substudy, enrolled adults with lung cancer who were fully vaccinated against COVID-19. Serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels were quantitatively assessed two weeks and six months after receipt of the last dose using a chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay. Multivariate odds ratios for the association between demographic and clinical factors and seronegativity after vaccination were estimated. RESULTS: 1973 lung cancer patients were enrolled. Most patients had stage IV disease (66%) and were receiving active cancer treatment (82.7%). No significant differences were found in the probability of being seronegative for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies after full vaccination between patients who were receiving active cancer treatment and those who were not (p = 0.396). The administration of immunotherapy or oral targeted therapy and immunization with mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine were factors independently associated with increased odds of being seropositive after vaccination. From all patients, 1405 received the second dose of vaccine and high levels of antibody titers were observed in 93.6% of patients two weeks after second dose. At six months, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that performance status ≥ 2 was independently associated with a higher probability of being seronegative after full vaccination with an OR 4.15. On the other hand, received chemotherapy or oral target therapy and vaccination with mRNA-1273 were a factor independently associated with lower odds of being seronegative after full vaccination with an OR 0.52, 0.37 and 0.34, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Lung cancer patients can safely achieve a strong immune response against SARS-CoV-2 after full vaccination, regardless of the cancer treatment received. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04407143.

SEOM-GECP Clinical guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) (2022).

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly aggressive malignancy comprising approximately 15% of lung cancers. Only one-third of patients are diagnosed at limited-stage (LS). Surgical resection can be curative in early stages, followed by platinum-etoposide adjuvant therapy, although only a minority of patients with SCLC qualify for surgery. Concurrent chemo-radiotherapy is the standard of care for LS-SCLC that is not surgically resectable, followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) for patients without progression. For extensive-stage (ES)-SCLC, a combination of platinum and etoposide has historically been a mainstay of treatment. Recently, the efficacy of programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the new front-line standard of care for ES-SCLC. Emerging knowledge regarding SCLC biology, including genomic characterization and molecular subtyping, and new treatment approaches will potentially lead to advances in SCLC patient care.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone (four cycles) in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: CheckMate 9LA 2-year patient-reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In CheckMate 9LA (NCT03215706), first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy (2 cycles) significantly improved overall survival versus chemotherapy (4 cycles) in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer and no known sensitising epidermal growth factor receptor/anaplastic lymphoma kinase alterations. We present exploratory patient-reported outcomes (PROs; minimum follow-up, 2 years). METHODS: In patients (N = 719) randomised 1:1 to nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone, disease-related symptom burden and health-related quality of life were assessed using the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) and 3-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L). Treatment-phase changes in LCSS average symptom burden index (ASBI), LCSS three-item global index (3-IGI) and EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale (VAS) and utility index (UI) over time were analysed descriptively and using mixed-effect model repeated measures. Time-to-deterioration/improvement analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Treatment-phase PRO questionnaire completion rates were >80%. Mean treatment-phase changes showed no deterioration from baseline in both arms for LCSS ASBI/3-IGI and EQ-5D-3L VAS/UI; however, minimally important differences were not met. Mixed-effect model repeated measures analyses showed overall reduction in symptom burden from baseline for both arms; changes from baseline for LCSS 3-IGI and EQ-5D-3L VAS/UI were numerically improved with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy, but minimally important differences were not met. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy delayed time-to-definitive-deterioration versus chemotherapy (LCSS ASBI: hazard ratio, 0.62 [95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.87]); results were similar across PRO measures. CONCLUSIONS: At 2-year minimum follow-up, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy reduced the risk of definitive deterioration in disease-related symptom burden and health-related quality of life versus chemotherapy and maintained QoL in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT03215706.

FAMetA: a mass isotopologue-based tool for the comprehensive analysis of fatty acid metabolism.

The use of stable isotope tracers and mass spectrometry (MS) is the gold standard method for the analysis of fatty acid (FA) metabolism. Yet, current state-of-the-art tools provide limited and difficult-to-interpret information about FA biosynthetic routes. Here we present FAMetA, an R package and a web-based application (www.fameta.es) that uses 13C mass isotopologue profiles to estimate FA import, de novo lipogenesis, elongation and desaturation in a user-friendly platform. The FAMetA workflow covers the required functionalities needed for MS data analyses. To illustrate its utility, different in vitro and in vivo experimental settings are used in which FA metabolism is modified. Thanks to the comprehensive characterization of FA biosynthesis and the easy-to-interpret graphical representations compared to previous tools, FAMetA discloses unnoticed insights into how cells reprogram their FA metabolism and, when combined with FASN, SCD1 and FADS2 inhibitors, it enables the identification of new FAs by the metabolic reconstruction of their synthesis route.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, including patients with ECOG performance status 2 and other special populations: CheckMate 817.

BACKGROUND: CheckMate 817, a phase 3B study, evaluated flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, in this research, we report on first-line treatment in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0-1 (cohort A) and special populations (cohort A1: ECOG PS 2; or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases, renal impairment, hepatic impairment, or controlled HIV infection). METHODS: Cohorts A and A1 received nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 3-4 and grade 5 immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs; adverse events (AEs) deemed potentially immune-related, occurring <100 days of last dose, and treated with immune-modulating medication (except endocrine events)) and treatment-related select AEs (treatment-related AEs with potential immunological etiology requiring frequent monitoring/intervention, reported between first dose and 30 days after the last dose) in cohort A; efficacy endpoints were secondary/exploratory. In cohort A1, safety/efficacy assessment was exploratory. RESULTS: The most common grade 3-4 IMAEs were pneumonitis (5.1%), diarrhea/colitis (4.9%), and hepatitis (4.6%) in cohort A (N=391) and diarrhea/colitis (3.5%), hepatitis (3.5%), and rash (3.0%) in cohort A1 (N=198). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related select AEs were hepatic (5.9%), gastrointestinal (4.9%), and pulmonary (4.6%) events in cohort A and gastrointestinal (4.0%), skin (3.5%), and endocrine (3.0%) events in cohort A1. No grade 5 IMAEs or treatment-related select AEs occurred. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 4 (1.0%) and 3 (1.5%) patients in cohorts A and A1, respectively. Three-year overall survival (OS) rates were 33.7% and 20.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab was associated with manageable safety and durable efficacy in cohort A, consistent with data from phase 3 metastatic NSCLC studies. Special populations of cohort A1 including patients with ECOG PS 2 or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases had manageable treatment-related toxicity and clinically meaningful 3-year OS rate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02869789.

Sex differences in the diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of cancer: the rationale for an individualised approach.

BACKGROUND: Precision medicine in oncology aims to identify the most beneficial interventions based on a patient's individual features and disease. However, disparities exist when providing cancer care to patients based on an individual's sex. OBJECTIVE: To discuss how sex differences impact the epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, disease progression, and response to treatment, with a focus on data from Spain. RESULTS: Genetic and environmental factors (social or economic inequalities, power imbalances, and discrimination) that contribute to these differences adversely affect cancer patient health outcomes. Increased health professional awareness of sex differences is essential to the success of translational research and clinical oncological care. CONCLUSIONS: The Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica created a Task Force group to raise oncologists' awareness and to implement measures to address sex differences in cancer patient management in Spain. This is a necessary and fundamental step towards optimizing precision medicine that will benefit all individuals equally and equitably.