Impact of Simultaneous Circulating Tumor DNA and Tissue Genotyping in the Workup of Stage IV Lung Adenocarcinoma on Quality of Care in an Academic Community Medical Center.

PURPOSE: In patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma, evidence-based first-line treatment decisions require analysis of tumors for genomic alterations (GAs). Optimizing the genotyping paradigm may improve the delivery of precision oncology care. Actionable GAs can be identified by analyzing tumor tissue or circulating tumor DNA using liquid biopsy. Consensus guidelines for when to use liquid biopsy have not been established. We evaluated the routine use of liquid biopsy performed simultaneously with tissue testing in patients with newly diagnosed, stage IV lung adenocarcinoma. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study comparing patients who underwent tissue genotyping alone (standard biopsy group) with patients who had simultaneous liquid and tissue genotyping (combined biopsy group). We examined the time to reach a final diagnosis, the need for repeat biopsies, and diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Forty two patients in the combined biopsy group and 78 in the standard biopsy group met the inclusion criteria. The standard group had a mean time to diagnosis of 33.5 days, compared with 20.6 days in the combined group (P < .001 by two-tailed t-test). In the combined group, 14 patients did not have sufficient tissue for molecular analysis (30%); however, in 11 (79%) of these patients, liquid biopsy identified a GA that eliminated the need for a second tissue biopsy. In patients who completed both tests, each test found actionable GAs missed by the other. CONCLUSION: Performing liquid biopsy simultaneously with tissue genotyping is feasible in an academic community medical center. Potential advantages of simultaneous liquid and tissue biopsies include shorter time to obtain a definitive molecular diagnosis, reduced need for a repeat biopsy, and improved detection of actionable mutations, although a sequential strategy that saves costs by beginning with a liquid biopsy may be ideal.

A Phase II Open-Label Trial of Binimetinib and Hydroxychloroquine in Patients With Advanced KRAS-Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In RAS-mutant tumors, combined MEK and autophagy inhibition using chloroquine demonstrated synthetic lethality in preclinical studies. This phase II trial evaluated the safety and activity of the MEK inhibitor binimetinib combined with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in patients with advanced KRAS-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Eligibility criteria included KRAS-mutant NSCLC, progression after first-line therapy, ECOG PS 0-1, and adequate end-organ function. Binimetinib 45 mg was administered orally (p.o.) bid with HCQ 400 mg p.o. bid. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). A Simon's 2-stage phase II clinical trial design was used, with an α error of 5% and a power ß of 80%, anticipating an ORR of 30% to proceed to the 2-stage expansion. RESULTS: Between April 2021 and January 2022, 9 patients were enrolled to stage I: median age 64 years, 44.4% females, 78% smokers. The best response was stable disease in one patient (11.1%). The median progression free survival (PFS) was 1.9 months, and median overall survival (OS) was 5.3 months. Overall, 5 patients (55.6%) developed a grade 3 adverse event (AE). The most common grade 3 toxicity was rash (33%). Pre-specified criteria for stopping the trial early due to lack of efficacy were met. CONCLUSION: The combination of B + HCQ in second- or later-line treatment of patients with advanced KRAS-mutant NSCLC did not show significant antitumor activity. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04735068).

A stratified phase I dose escalation trial of hypofractionated radiotherapy followed by ipilimumab in metastatic melanoma: long-term follow-up and final outcomes.

We conducted a phase I dose-escalation trial of radiation with ipilimumab in patients with melanoma with ≥2 metastatic lesions. Here, we report the final full clinical analysis. Patients received RT (6 or 8 Gy x 2 or 3 doses) to a single lesion followed by 4 cycles of ipilimumab. The primary endpoint was maximum tolerated dose of RT, and secondary endpoint was response at non-radiated sites. Twenty-two patients with treatment-naïve (n = 11) or treatment-refractory (n = 11) Stage IV melanoma were enrolled. There were 31 treatment-related adverse events (AEs), of which 16 were deemed immune-related. Eleven patients had grade 3 AEs (no grade 4/5). There were no dose-limiting toxicities related to the radiation/ipilimumab combination. Five of 22 patients (22.7%, 95% CI 7.8-45.4%) had partial response as best response and three (13.6%) had stable disease. Median overall survival was 10.7 months (95% CI, 4.9 months to not-estimable) and median progression-free survival 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.9 months to 7.8 months). Seven patients were still alive at the time of last follow-up (median follow-up 89.2 months), most of whom received pembrolizumab after progression. Radiotherapy followed by ipilimumab was well tolerated and yielded a response rate that compares favorably to the objective response rate with ipilimumab alone. Furthermore, 32% of patients are long-term survivors, most of whom received pembrolizumab. Based on these results, the recommended dose that was used in subsequent Phase 2 trials was 8 Gy x 3 doses. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01497808 (www.clinicaltrials.gov).