The Survival and Financial Benefit of Investigator-Initiated Trials Conducted by Korean Cancer Study Group.

Purpose: The Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG) is a nationwide cancer clinical trial group dedicated to advancing investigator-initiated trials (IITs) by conducting and supporting clinical trials. This study aims to review IITs conducted by KCSG and quantitatively evaluate the survival and financial benefits of IITs for patients. Materials and Methods: We reviewed IITs conducted by KCSG from 1998 to 2023, analyzing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gains for participants. PFS and OS benefits were calculated as the difference in median survival times between the intervention and control groups, multiplied by the number of patients in the intervention group. Financial benefits were assessed based on the cost of investigational products provided. Results: From 1998 to 2023, KCSG conducted 310 IITs, with 133 completed and published. Of these, 21 were included in the survival analysis. The analysis revealed that 1,951 patients in the intervention groups gained a total of 2,558.4 months (213.2 years) of PFS and 2,501.6 months (208.5 years) of OS, with median gains of 1.31 months in PFS and 1.58 months in OS per patient. When analyzing only statistically significant results, PFS and OS gain per patients was 1.69 months and 3.02 months, respectively. Investigational drug cost analysis from 6 available IITs indicated that investigational products provided to 252 patients were valued at 10,400,077,294 won (approximately 8,046,481 US dollars), averaging about 41,270,148 won (approximately 31,930 US dollars) per patient. Conclusion: Our findings, based on analysis of published research, suggest that IITs conducted by KCSG led to survival benefits for participants and, in some studies, may have provided financial benefits by providing investment drugs.

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.).

Phase II Efficacy and Safety of 80 mg Osimertinib in Patients With Leptomeningeal Metastases Associated With Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutation-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (BLOSSOM).

PURPOSE: Leptomeningeal metastases (LMs) exhibit a high incidence in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) post-treatment with first- or second-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). This investigation evaluates the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of 80 mg once daily osimertinib in patients with LMs resistant to prior first- or second-generation EGFR TKIs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase II multicenter, open-label, single-arm study, 80 mg osimertinib was administered to patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC who had developed LMs subsequent to treatment with prior EGFR TKIs. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), assessed alongside objective response rate by the blinded independent central review (BICR) and a pharmacokinetic analysis of plasma and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) on the first day of cycles 3 and 6. RESULTS: A total of 73 patients diagnosed with LM were treated with osimertinib, including 64 patients evaluable for the LM efficacy set-T790M negative (n = 62) and T790M positive (n = 2). The median OS in the full-analysis set was 15.6 months (95% CI, 11.5 to 20.2). The objective response rate for LM was 51.6%, including a 15.6% complete response, and the disease control rate was 81.3% by BICR in the LM efficacy evaluable set. The median LM progression-free survival by BICR was 11.2 months (95% CI, 7.7 to 15.3), the duration of response was 12.6 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 17.7), and OS was 15.0 months (95% CI, 11.3 to 18.7). Pharmacokinetic analysis showed that the CSF to free plasma osimertinib ratio was 22%. Most safety profiles were grade 1 and 2. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates significant intracranial efficacy and survival benefits of 80 mg once daily osimertinib in NSCLC patients with LMs. The data support considering daily 80 mg of osimertinib as a treatment option for EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients with LMs, irrespective of T790M mutation status.

Real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with stage III NSCLC in Korea: The KINDLE study.

OBJECTIVE: KINDLE-Korea is part of a real-world KINDLE study that aimed to characterize the treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The KINDLE was an international real-world study that explores patient and disease characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes. The KINDLE-Korea included stage III NSCLC patients diagnosed between January 2013 and December 2017. RESULTS: A total of 461 patients were enrolled. The median age was 66 years (range: 24-87). Most patients were men (75.7%) with a history of smoking (74.0%), stage IIIA NSCLC (69.2%), and unresectable disease (52.9%). A total of 24.3% had activating EGFR mutation and 62.2% were positive for PDL1 expression. Broadly categorized, 44.6% of the patients received chemoradiation (CRT)-based therapy, 35.1% underwent surgery, and 20.3% received palliative therapies as initial treatment. The most commonly adopted approaches for patients with stage IIIA and IIIB disease were surgery and CRT, respectively. The median PFS was 15.2 months and OS was 66.7 months. Age >65 years, adenocarcinoma histology, and surgery as the initial treatment were significantly associated with longer OS. CONCLUSION: This study revealed the heterogeneity of treatment patterns and survival outcomes in patients with stage III NSCLC before durvalumab consolidation came into clinical practice. There is an unmet need for patients who are not eligible for surgery as an initial therapy. Novel therapeutic approaches are highly warranted to improve clinical outcomes.

CONTACT-01: A Randomized Phase III Trial of Atezolizumab + Cabozantinib Versus Docetaxel for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After a Checkpoint Inhibitor and Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Although checkpoint inhibitors have improved first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a therapeutic need remains for patients whose disease does not respond or who experience disease progression after anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy. CONTACT-01 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04471428) evaluated atezolizumab plus cabozantinib versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic NSCLC who developed disease progression after concurrent or sequential treatment with anti-PD-L1/PD-1 and platinum-containing chemotherapy. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, phase III trial randomly assigned patients 1:1 to atezolizumab 1,200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks (q3w) plus cabozantinib 40 mg orally once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One hundred eighty-six patients were assigned atezolizumab plus cabozantinib, and 180 docetaxel. Minimum OS follow-up was 10.9 months. Median OS was 10.7 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 12.3) with atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 10.5 months (95% CI, 8.6 to 13.0) with docetaxel (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.16]; P = .3668). Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 5.6) and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.1 to 4.4), respectively (stratified HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92]). Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71 (38.4%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 73 (39.5%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 5 AEs occurred in 14 (7.6%) and 10 (6.0%) patients in the atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and docetaxel arms, respectively (treatment-related in four [2.2%] and one [0.6%], respectively). CONCLUSION: Atezolizumab plus cabozantinib after disease progression following anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy and platinum-containing chemotherapy for metastatic NSCLC did not improve OS compared with docetaxel. Safety was consistent with known profiles of these agents.

Lazertinib as a frontline treatment in patients with EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Long-term follow-up results from LASER201.

OBJECTIVE: This analysis of the first-line cohort of LASER201 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of lazertinib 240 mg as a frontline therapy for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: A total of 43 patients, with EGFR mutation-positive (Exon19Del, n = 24; L858R, n = 18; G719X, n = 1) locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC who had not previously received EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR TKI) therapy, received once-daily lazertinib 240 mg. EGFR mutation status was confirmed by local or central testing. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary efficacy endpoints included duration of response (DoR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), tumor shrinkage, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: At the primary data cut-off (DCO; January 8, 2021), the ORR was 70 % (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 56.0-83.5), DCR was 86 % (95 % CI: 75.7-96.4) and the median DoR was 23.5 (95 % CI: 12.5-not reached) months. The median PFS was 24.6 (95 % CI: 12.2-30.2) months. At the final DCO (March 30, 2023), the median OS was not estimable and the median follow-up duration for OS was 55.2 [95 % CI: 22.8-55.7] months. OS rates at 36 months and 54 months were 66 % (95 % CI: 47.5-79.3 %) and 55 % (95 % CI: 36.6-70.7 %), respectively. The most commonly reported TEAEs were rash (54 %), diarrhea (47 %), pruritus (35 %), and paresthesia (35 %). No drug-related rash or pruritus TEAEs of grade 3 or higher were reported. Diarrhea and paresthesia of grade 3 or higher were reported in 3 (7 %) and 1 (2 %) patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrated long-term clinical benefit with lazertinib 240 mg in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC who had not previously received EGFR TKIs. The safety profile for lazertinib was tolerable and consistent with that previously reported.

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.

Biomarker-directed targeted therapy plus durvalumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase 2 umbrella trial.

For patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors without currently targetable molecular alterations, standard-of-care treatment is immunotherapy with anti-PD-(L)1 checkpoint inhibitors, alone or with platinum-doublet therapy. However, not all patients derive durable benefit and resistance to immune checkpoint blockade is common. Understanding mechanisms of resistance-which can include defects in DNA damage response and repair pathways, alterations or functional mutations in STK11/LKB1, alterations in antigen-presentation pathways, and immunosuppressive cellular subsets within the tumor microenvironment-and developing effective therapies to overcome them, remains an unmet need. Here the phase 2 umbrella HUDSON study evaluated rational combination regimens for advanced NSCLC following failure of anti-PD-(L)1-containing immunotherapy and platinum-doublet therapy. A total of 268 patients received durvalumab (anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody)-ceralasertib (ATR kinase inhibitor), durvalumab-olaparib (PARP inhibitor), durvalumab-danvatirsen (STAT3 antisense oligonucleotide) or durvalumab-oleclumab (anti-CD73 monoclonal antibody). Greatest clinical benefit was observed with durvalumab-ceralasertib; objective response rate (primary outcome) was 13.9% (11/79) versus 2.6% (5/189) with other regimens, pooled, median progression-free survival (secondary outcome) was 5.8 (80% confidence interval 4.6-7.4) versus 2.7 (1.8-2.8) months, and median overall survival (secondary outcome) was 17.4 (14.1-20.3) versus 9.4 (7.5-10.6) months. Benefit with durvalumab-ceralasertib was consistent across known immunotherapy-refractory subgroups. In ATM-altered patients hypothesized to harbor vulnerability to ATR inhibition, objective response rate was 26.1% (6/23) and median progression-free survival/median overall survival were 8.4/22.8 months. Durvalumab-ceralasertib safety/tolerability profile was manageable. Biomarker analyses suggested that anti-PD-L1/ATR inhibition induced immune changes that reinvigorated antitumor immunity. Durvalumab-ceralasertib is under further investigation in immunotherapy-refractory NSCLC.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03334617.

Contribution of Enhanced Locoregional Control to Improved Overall Survival with Consolidative Durvalumab after Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Insights from Real-World Data.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the real-world clinical outcomes of consolidative durvalumab in patients with unresectable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) and to explore the role of radiotherapy in the era of immunotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study assessed 171 patients with unresectable LA-NSCLC who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) with or without consolidative durvalumab at Asan Medical Center between May 2018 and May 2021. Primary outcomes included freedom from locoregional failure (FFLRF), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Durvalumab following CCRT demonstrated a prolonged median PFS of 20.9 months (p=0.048) and a 3-year FFLRF rate of 57.3% (p=0.008), compared to 13.7 months and 38.8%, respectively, with CCRT alone. Furthermore, the incidence of in-field recurrence was significantly greater in the CCRT-alone group compared to the durvalumab group (26.8% vs. 12.4%, p=0.027). While median OS was not reached with durvalumab, it was 35.4 months in patients receiving CCRT alone (p=0.010). Patients positive for programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression showed notably better outcomes, including FFLRF, DMFS, PFS, and OS. Adherence to PACIFIC trial eligibility criteria identified 100 patients (58.5%) as ineligible. The use of durvalumab demonstrated better survival regardless of eligibility criteria. CONCLUSION: The use of durvalumab consolidation following CCRT significantly enhanced locoregional control and OS in patients with unresectable LA-NSCLC, especially in those with PD-L1-positive tumors, thereby validating the role of durvalumab in standard care.

Comparison of Clinicopathogenomic Features and Treatment Outcomes of EGFR and HER2 Exon 20 Insertion Mutations in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Single-Institution Experience.

PURPOSE: Exon 20 insertion mutations (E20ins) in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients has become more important with emergence of novel agents targeting E20ins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Advanced/Metastatic NSCLC patients with E20ins were included. EGFR E20ins was identified by two methods, next-generation sequencing (NGS) or real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), while HER2 E20ins was done by NGS only. RESULTS: Between December 2013 and July 2021, E20ins were identified in 107 patients at Asan Medical Center; 67 EGFR E20ins and 40 HER2 E20ins. Out of 32 patients with EGFR E20ins who had tested both PCR and NGS, 17 were identified only through NGS and the other 15 through both tests, giving a discordance rate of 53.1%. There was no clinically significant difference in clinicopathologic features between EGFR and HER2 E20ins; both were observed more frequently in adenocarcinoma, female and never-smokers. Brain metastases were evident at diagnosis in 31.8% of EGFR E20ins and 27.5% of HER2 E20ins, respectively. Platinum-based doublets demonstrated objective response rates (ORR) of 13.3% with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 4.2 months for EGFR E20ins and 35.3% with 4.7 months for HER2 E20ins, respectively. In contrast, novel EGFR E20ins-targeted agents exhibited an ORR of 46.2% with a median PFS of 5.4 months, while HER2-targeted agents showed an ORR of 50% with that of 7.0 months. CONCLUSION: Identification of EGFR and HER2 E20ins is more important as their targeted therapies improved outcomes. Upfront NGS test as a comprehensive molecular approach is strongly warranted.

Repotrectinib in ROS1 Fusion-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The early-generation ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that are approved for the treatment of ROS1 fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have antitumor activity, but resistance develops in tumors, and intracranial activity is suboptimal. Repotrectinib is a next-generation ROS1 TKI with preclinical activity against ROS1 fusion-positive cancers, including those with resistance mutations such as ROS1 G2032R. METHODS: In this registrational phase 1-2 trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of repotrectinib in patients with advanced solid tumors, including ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC. The primary efficacy end point in the phase 2 trial was confirmed objective response; efficacy analyses included patients from phase 1 and phase 2. Duration of response, progression-free survival, and safety were secondary end points in phase 2. RESULTS: On the basis of results from the phase 1 trial, the recommended phase 2 dose of repotrectinib was 160 mg daily for 14 days, followed by 160 mg twice daily. Response occurred in 56 of the 71 patients (79%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 68 to 88) with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC who had not previously received a ROS1 TKI; the median duration of response was 34.1 months (95% CI, 25.6 to could not be estimated), and median progression-free survival was 35.7 months (95% CI, 27.4 to could not be estimated). Response occurred in 21 of the 56 patients (38%; 95% CI, 25 to 52) with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received one ROS1 TKI and had never received chemotherapy; the median duration of response was 14.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to could not be estimated), and median progression-free survival was 9.0 months (95% CI, 6.8 to 19.6). Ten of the 17 patients (59%; 95% CI, 33 to 82) with the ROS1 G2032R mutation had a response. A total of 426 patients received the phase 2 dose; the most common treatment-related adverse events were dizziness (in 58% of the patients), dysgeusia (in 50%), and paresthesia (in 30%), and 3% discontinued repotrectinib owing to treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Repotrectinib had durable clinical activity in patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC, regardless of whether they had previously received a ROS1 TKI. Adverse events were mainly of low grade and compatible with long-term administration. (Funded by Turning Point Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Bristol Myers Squibb; TRIDENT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03093116.).

Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy in Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutated Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Disease Progression on Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: Final Results of CheckMate 722.

PURPOSE: The phase III CheckMate 722 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02864251) evaluated nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after disease progression on EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). METHODS: Patients with disease progression after first- or second-generation EGFR TKI therapy (without EGFR T790M mutation) or osimertinib (with/without T790M mutation) were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab (360 mg once every 3 weeks) plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy (once every 3 weeks) or platinum-doublet chemotherapy alone (once every 3 weeks) for four cycles. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included 9- and 12-month PFS rates, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and duration of response (DOR). RESULTS: Overall, 294 patients were randomly assigned. At final analysis (median follow-up, 38.1 months), PFS was not significantly improved with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy (median, 5.6 v 5.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.56 to 1.00]; P = .0528), with 9- and 12-month PFS rates of 25.9% versus 19.8%, and 21.2% versus 15.9%, respectively. Post hoc PFS subgroup analyses showed a trend favoring nivolumab plus chemotherapy in patients with tumors harboring sensitizing EGFR mutations (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.97]), one line of previous EGFR TKI (0.72 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.97]), or both (0.64 [95% CI, 0.47 to 0.88]). Median OS was 19.4 months with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus 15.9 months with chemotherapy, while ORR was 31.3% versus 26.7%, and median DOR was 6.7 versus 5.6 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 44.7% and 29.4% of patients treated with nivolumab plus chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone, respectively. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab plus chemotherapy did not significantly improve PFS versus chemotherapy in patients with EGFR-mutated metastatic NSCLC previously treated with EGFR TKIs. No new safety signals were identified.

Lazertinib versus Gefitinib as First-Line Treatment for EGFR-mutated Locally Advanced or Metastatic NSCLC: LASER301 Korean Subset.

PURPOSE: This subgroup analysis of the Korean subset of patients in the phase 3 LASER301 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of lazertinib versus gefitinib as first-line therapy for epidermal growth factor receptor mutated (EGFRm) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic EGFRm NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to lazertinib (240 mg/day) or gefitinib (250 mg/day). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: In total, 172 Korean patients were enrolled (lazertinib, n=87; gefitinib, n=85). Baseline characteristics were balanced between the treatment groups. One-third of patients had brain metastases (BM) at baseline. Median PFS was 20.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.7 to 26.1) for lazertinib and 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.2 to 12.3) for gefitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.60). This was supported by PFS analysis based on blinded independent central review. Significant PFS benefit with lazertinib was consistently observed across predefined subgroups, including patients with BM (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.53) and those with L858R mutations (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.63). Lazertinib safety data were consistent with its previously reported safety profile. Common adverse events (AEs) in both groups included rash, pruritus, and diarrhoea. Numerically fewer severe AEs and severe treatment-related AEs occurred with lazertinib than gefitinib. CONCLUSION: Consistent with results for the overall LASER301 population, this analysis showed significant PFS benefit with lazertinib versus gefitinib with comparable safety in Korean patients with untreated EGFRm NSCLC, supporting lazertinib as a new potential treatment option for this patient population.

Phase III, Randomized Study of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Chemotherapy in Patients With EGFR- or ALK-Mutated Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (ATTLAS, KCSG-LU19-04).

PURPOSE: In the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a driver mutation, the role of anti-PD-(L)1 antibody after tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) remains unclear. This randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase III study evaluates the efficacy of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin (ABCP ) in EGFR- or ALK-mutated NSCLC that progressed before TKI therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared the clinical efficacy of ABCP followed by maintenance therapy with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab with pemetrexed plus carboplatin or cisplatin (PC) followed by pemetrexed maintenance. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A total of 228 patients with activating EGFR mutation (n = 215) or ALK translocation (n = 13) were enrolled from 16 sites in the Republic of Korea and randomly assigned at 2:1 ratio to either ABCP (n = 154) or PC arm (n = 74). The median follow-up duration was 26.1 months (95% CI, 24.7 to 28.2). Objective response rates (69.5% v 41.9%, P < .001) and median PFS (8.48 v 5.62 months, hazard ratio [HR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.45 to 0.86]; P = .004) were significantly better in the ABCP than PC arm. PFS benefit increased as PD-L1 expression increased, with an HR of 0.47, 0.41, and 0.24 for PD-L1 ≥1%, ≥10%, and ≥50%, respectively. Overall survival was similar between ABCP and PC arm (20.63 v 20.27 months, HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.46]; P = .975). The safety profile of the ABCP arm was comparable with that previously reported, with no additional safety signals, but higher rates of treatment-related adverse events were observed compared with the PC arm. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this study is the first randomized phase III study to demonstrate the clinical benefit of anti-PD-L1 antibody in combination with bevacizumab and chemotherapy in patients with EGFR- or ALK-mutated NSCLC who have progressed on relevant targeted therapy.

Impact of Patient Sex on Adverse Events and Unscheduled Utilization of Medical Services in Cancer Patients Undergoing Adjuvant Chemotherapy: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The female sex is reported to have a higher risk of adverse events (AEs) from cytotoxic chemotherapy. Few studies examined the sex differences in AEs and their impact on the use of medical services during adjuvant chemotherapy. This sub-study aimed to compare the incidence of any grade and grade ≥ 3 AEs, healthcare utilization, chemotherapy completion rate, and dose intensity according to sex. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a sub-study of a multicenter cohort conducted in Korea that evaluated the impact of healthcare reimbursement on AE evaluation in patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy between September 2013 and December 2016 at four hospitals in Korea. RESULTS: A total of 1,170 patients with colorectal, gastric, or non-small cell lung cancer were included in the study. Female patients were younger, had fewer comorbidities, and experienced less postoperative weight loss of > 10%. Females had significantly higher rates of any grade AEs including nausea, abdominal pain, stomatitis, vomiting, and neutropenia, and experienced more grade ≥ 3 neutropenia, nausea, and vomiting. The dose intensity of chemotherapy was significantly lower in females, and they also experienced more frequent dose reduction after the first cycle. Moreover, female patients receiving platinum-containing regimens had significantly higher rates of unscheduled outpatient visits. CONCLUSION: Our study found that females experienced a higher incidence of multiple any-grade AEs and severe neutropenia, nausea, and vomiting, across various cancer types, leading to more frequent dose reductions. Physicians should be aware of sex differences in AEs for chemotherapy decisions.

Canakinumab Versus Placebo in Combination With First-Line Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy for Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From the CANOPY-1 Trial.

PURPOSE: The addition of checkpoint inhibitors to first-line treatment has prolonged survival of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but prognosis remains poor, with new treatment options needed. Canakinumab, a human, monoclonal anti-interleukin (IL)-1ß antibody, has potential to enhance the activity of PD-L1 inhibitors and chemotherapy (CT) by inhibiting protumor inflammation. METHODS: CANOPY-1 was a phase III, randomized, double-blind study comparing canakinumab (200 mg subcutaneously once every 3 weeks) versus placebo, both combined with pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks) and platinum-based doublet CT, as first-line treatment for advanced/metastatic NSCLC without EGFR or ALK mutations. The primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included overall response rate, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 643 patients were randomly assigned to canakinumab (n = 320) or placebo (n = 323). With a median study follow-up of 6.5 months, the median PFS was 6.8 months with canakinumab versus 6.8 months with placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.09; P = .102). With a median study follow-up of 21.2 months, the median OS was 20.8 months with canakinumab versus 20.2 months with placebo (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.10; P = .123). No unexpected safety signals were observed for canakinumab combination. Infection rates were comparable between treatment and control arms. A higher frequency of neutropenia and ALT increase (grade ≤2) were reported in the treatment arm. Higher baseline C-reactive protein and IL-6 levels were associated with shorter PFS and OS. Patients treated with canakinumab had clinically meaningful delays in deterioration of lung cancer symptoms, including chest pain and coughing per LC13 and dyspnea per LC13 and C30. CONCLUSION: The addition of canakinumab to first-line pembrolizumab and CT did not prolong PFS or OS in patients with NSCLC.

Osimertinib with or without Chemotherapy in EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib is a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) that is selective for EGFR-TKI-sensitizing and EGFR T790M resistance mutations. Evidence suggests that the addition of chemotherapy may extend the benefits of EGFR-TKI therapy. METHODS: In this phase 3, international, open-label trial, we randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation) advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had not previously received treatment for advanced disease to receive osimertinib (80 mg once daily) with chemotherapy (pemetrexed [500 mg per square meter of body-surface area] plus either cisplatin [75 mg per square meter] or carboplatin [pharmacologically guided dose]) or to receive osimertinib monotherapy (80 mg once daily). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Response and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 557 patients underwent randomization. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival was significantly longer in the osimertinib-chemotherapy group than in the osimertinib group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.79; P<0.001). At 24 months, 57% (95% CI, 50 to 63) of the patients in the osimertinib-chemotherapy group and 41% (95% CI, 35 to 47) of those in the osimertinib group were alive and progression-free. Progression-free survival as assessed according to blinded independent central review was consistent with the primary analysis (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.80). An objective (complete or partial) response was observed in 83% of the patients in the osimertinib-chemotherapy group and in 76% of those in the osimertinib group; the median response duration was 24.0 months (95% CI, 20.9 to 27.8) and 15.3 months (95% CI, 12.7 to 19.4), respectively. The incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse events from any cause was higher with the combination than with monotherapy - a finding driven by known chemotherapy-related adverse events. The safety profile of osimertinib plus pemetrexed and a platinum-based agent was consistent with the established profiles of the individual agents. CONCLUSIONS: First-line treatment with osimertinib-chemotherapy led to significantly longer progression-free survival than osimertinib monotherapy among patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC. (Funded by AstraZeneca; FLAURA2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04035486.).

Patient-reported outcomes with durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (POSEIDON).

OBJECTIVES: In the phase 3 POSEIDON study, first-line tremelimumab plus durvalumab and chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival and progression-free survival versus chemotherapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We present patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment-naïve patients were randomized 1:1:1 to tremelimumab plus durvalumab and chemotherapy, durvalumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy. PROs (prespecified secondary endpoints) were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item core quality of life questionnaire version 3 (QLQ-C30) and its 13-item lung cancer module (QLQ-LC13). We analyzed time to deterioration (TTD) of symptoms, functioning, and global health status/quality of life (QoL) from randomization by log-rank test and improvement rates by logistic regression. RESULTS: 972/1013 (96 %) patients randomized completed baseline QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 questionnaires, with scores comparable between treatment arms. Patients receiving tremelimumab plus durvalumab and chemotherapy versus chemotherapy had longer median TTD for all PRO items. Hazard ratios for TTD favored tremelimumab plus durvalumab and chemotherapy for all items except diarrhea; 95 % confidence intervals did not cross 1.0 for global health status/QoL, physical functioning, cognitive functioning, pain, nausea/vomiting, insomnia, constipation, hemoptysis, dyspnea, and pain in other parts. For durvalumab plus chemotherapy, median TTD was longer versus chemotherapy for all items except nausea/vomiting and diarrhea. Hazard ratios favored durvalumab plus chemotherapy for all items except appetite loss; 95 % confidence intervals did not cross 1.0 for global health status/QoL, physical functioning, role functioning, dyspnea, and pain in other parts. For both immunotherapy plus chemotherapy arms, improvement rates in all PRO items were numerically higher versus chemotherapy, with odds ratios > 1. CONCLUSIONS: Tremelimumab plus durvalumab and chemotherapy delayed deterioration in symptoms, functioning, and global health status/QoL compared with chemotherapy. Together with significant improvements in survival, these results support tremelimumab plus durvalumab and chemotherapy as a first-line treatment option in metastatic NSCLC.

Prognostic value of MRI volumetric parameters in non-small cell lung cancer patients after immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: comparison with response assessment criteria.

BACKGROUND: Accurate response parameters are important for patients with brain metastasis (BM) undergoing clinical trials using immunotherapy, considering poorly defined enhancement and variable responses. This study investigated MRI-based surrogate endpoints for patients with BM receiving immunotherapy. METHODS: Sixty-three non-small cell lung cancer patients with BM who received immune checkpoint inhibitors and underwent MRI were included. Tumor diameters were measured using a modification of the RECIST 1.1 (mRECIST), RANO-BM, and iRANO adjusted for BM (iRANO-BM). Tumor volumes were segmented on 3D contrast-enhanced T1-weighted imaging. Differences between the sum of the longest diameter (SLD) or total tumor volume at baseline and the corresponding measurement at time of the best overall response were calculated as "changes in SLDs" (for each set of criteria) and "change in volumetry," respectively. Overall response rate (ORR), progressive disease (PD) assignment, and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared among the criteria. The prediction of overall survival (OS) was compared between diameter-based and volumetric change using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. RESULTS: The mRECIST showed higher ORR (30.1% vs. both 17.5%) and PD assignment (34.9% vs. 25.4% [RANO-BM] and 19% [iRANO-BM]). The iRANO-BM had a longer median PFS (13.7 months) than RANO-BM (9.53 months) and mRECIST (7.73 months, P = 0.003). The change in volumetry was a significant predictor of OS (HR = 5.87, 95% CI: 1.46-23.64, P = 0.013). None of the changes in SLDs, as determined by RANO-BM or iRANO-BM, were significant predictors of OS, except for the mRECIST, which exhibited a weak association with OS. CONCLUSION: Quantitative volume measurement may be an accurate surrogate endpoint for OS in patients with BM undergoing immunotherapy, especially considering the challenges of multiplicity and the heterogeneity of sub-centimeter size responses.