Top 20 EGFR+ NSCLC Clinical and Translational Science Papers That Shaped the 20 Years Since the Discovery of Activating EGFR Mutations in NSCLC. An Editor-in-Chief Expert Panel Consensus Survey.

The year 2024 is the 20th anniversary of the discovery of activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Since then, tremendous advances have been made in the treatment of NSCLC based on this discovery. Some of these studies have led to seismic changes in the concept of oncology research and spurred treatment advances beyond NSCLC, leading to a current true era of precision oncology for all solid tumors. We now routinely molecularly profile all tumor types and even plasma samples of patients with NSCLC for multiple actionable driver mutations, independent of patient clinical characteristics nor is profiling limited to the advanced incurable stage. We are increasingly monitoring treatment responses and detecting resistance to targeted therapy by using plasma genotyping. Furthermore, we are now profiling early-stage NSCLC for appropriate adjuvant targeted treatment leading to an eventual potential "cure" in early-stage EGFR+ NSCLC which have societal implication on implementing lung cancer screening in never-smokers as most EGFR+ NSCLC patients are never-smokers. All these advances were unfathomable in 2004 when the five papers that described "discoveries" of activating EGFR mutations (del19, L858R, exon 20 insertions, and "uncommon" mutations) were published. To commemorate this 20th anniversary, we assembled a global panel of thoracic medical oncology experts to select the top 20 papers (publications or congress presentation) from the 20 years since this seminal discovery with December 31, 2023 as the cutoff date for inclusion of papers to be voted on. Papers ranked 21 to 30 were considered "honorable mention" and also annotated. Our objective is that these 30 papers with their annotations about their impact and even all the ranked papers will serve as "syllabus" for the education of future thoracic oncology trainees. Finally, we mentioned potential practice-changing clinical trials to be reported. One of them, LAURA was published online on June 2, 2024 was not included in the list of papers to be voted on but will surely be highly ranked if this consensus survery is performed again on the 25th anniversay of the discovery EGFR mutations (i.e. top 25 papers on the 25 years since the discovery of activating EGFR mutations).

Osimertinib after Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III EGFR-Mutated NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib is a recommended treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation and as adjuvant treatment for resected EGFR-mutated NSCLC. EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors have shown preliminary efficacy in unresectable stage III EGFR-mutated NSCLC. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients with unresectable EGFR-mutated stage III NSCLC without progression during or after chemoradiotherapy to receive osimertinib or placebo until disease progression occurred (as assessed by blinded independent central review) or the regimen was discontinued. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: A total of 216 patients who had undergone chemoradiotherapy were randomly assigned to receive osimertinib (143 patients) or placebo (73 patients). Osimertinib resulted in a significant progression-free survival benefit as compared with placebo: the median progression-free survival was 39.1 months with osimertinib versus 5.6 months with placebo, with a hazard ratio for disease progression or death of 0.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10 to 0.24; P<0.001). The percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 12 months was 74% (95% CI, 65 to 80) with osimertinib and 22% (95% CI, 13 to 32) with placebo. Interim overall survival data (maturity, 20%) showed 36-month overall survival among 84% of patients with osimertinib (95% CI, 75 to 89) and 74% with placebo (95% CI, 57 to 85), with a hazard ratio for death of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.42 to 1.56; P = 0.53). The incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher was 35% in the osimertinib group and 12% in the placebo group; radiation pneumonitis (majority grade, 1 to 2) was reported in 48% and 38%, respectively. No new safety concerns emerged. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with osimertinib resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than placebo in patients with unresectable stage III EGFR-mutated NSCLC. (Funded by AstraZeneca; LAURA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03521154.).

Impact of LKB1 status on radiation outcome in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.

Preclinical studies suggest that loss of LKB1 expression renders cancer cells less responsive to radiation partly through NRF2-mediated upregulation of antioxidant enzymes protecting against radiation-induced DNA damage. Here we investigated the association of an alteration in this pathway with radio-resistance in lung cancer patients. Patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) who were treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and analyzed for LKB1 expression using semiquantitative immunohistochemistry. Clinical characteristics and expression of LKB1 were analyzed for association with radiotherapy outcomes. We analyzed 74 available tumor specimens from 178 patients. After a median follow-up of 40.7 months, 2-year cumulative incidence of locoregional recurrence (LRR) in patients who had LKB1Low expression was significantly higher than those with LKB1High expression (68.8% vs. 31.3%, P = 0.0001). LKB1Low expression was found significantly associated with a higher incidence of distant metastases (DM) (P = 0.0008), shorter disease-free survival (DFS) (P = 0.006), and worse overall survival (OS) (P = 0.02) compared to LKB1High expression. Moreover, patients with LKB1Low expression showed a significantly higher 2-year cumulative incidence of LRR (77.6% vs. 21%; P = 0.02), higher DM recurrence (P = 0.002), and shorter OS (P < 0.0001) compared with the EGFR-mutant group. For all patients with LKB1Low who had LRR, these recurrences occurred within the field of radiation, in contrast to those with LKB1High expression having both in-field, marginal, and out-of-field failures. LKB1 expression may serve as a potential biomarker for poor outcomes after receiving radiation in LA-NSCLC patients. Further studies to confirm the association and application are warranted.

EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for pancreatic cancer (ERAP): An observational open-label pilot study.

Background: No study has compared EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) plus systemic chemotherapy (CMT) with CMT alone for unresectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Methods: This study compared the results of treatment in patients receiving EUS-RFA plus concomitant CMT (group A; n = 14) with those receiving CMT (group B; n = 14) as a pilot study. Results: From July 2017 to August 2018, 4 and 2 patients from groups A and B, respectively, withdrew from the study because of progression of the disease. In total, 10 and 12 patients from groups A and B, respectively, completed the study. All 30 EUS-RFA procedures were successful. Mean maximal tumor diameter before treatment of group A (n = 10) versus B (n = 12) was 62.2 ± 21.0 versus 50.5 ± 22.0 mm, respectively (P = not significant). After treatment, no statistically significant difference in mean maximal tumor diameter was found between both groups. However, in group B, mean maximal tumor diameter was significantly increased from 50.5 ± 22.0 to 56.3 ± 18.7 mm, respectively (P = 0.017). Tumor necrosis occurred in group A versus B at 10 of 10 (100%) versus 6 of 12 (50%) patients, respectively (P = 0.014). After treatment, group A patients could reduce the mean narcotic pain drug dosage at 26.5 mg of morphine equivalent per day (from 63.6 to 37.1 mg, P = 0.022), whereas group B patients could not reduce the dosage of pain-controlled medication. No statistically significant difference in 6-month mortality rate was found. In group A, 1 procedure-related nonsevere adverse event (n = 1 of 30 [3.3%]) occurred in 1 patient (n = 1 of 14 [7.1%]). Conclusions: In this study, the mean tumor diameter of group B was significantly increased after the treatment. Group A had a significantly higher rate of necrosis of tumor and required less narcotic.

Efficacy and safety of cosibelimab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Programmed cell death receptor-1 (PD-1)-blocking antibodies are approved to treat metastatic or locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) cases ineligible for curative surgery or radiation. Notwithstanding, some patients experience inadequate responses or severe immune-related adverse events (AEs), indicating the need for improved therapies. Cosibelimab is a high-affinity programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-blocking antibody that activates innate and adaptive immunity by blocking PD-L1 interaction with PD-1 and B7-1 receptors. It is an unmodified immunoglobulin G1 subtype with a functional Fc domain capable of inducing antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and complement-dependent cytotoxicity. Here, we present results of the pivotal study of patients with metastatic CSCC from an open-label, multicenter, multiregional, multicohort, phase 1 trial of cosibelimab. METHODS: In this trial, participants with metastatic CSCC received cosibelimab 800 mg intravenously every 2 weeks. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by independent central review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, V.1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR) and safety. RESULTS: Objective response was observed in 37 of 78 participants (47.4% (95% CI: 36.0% to 59.1%)), with median follow-up of 15.4 months (range: 0.4 to 40.5) as of data cut-off. Median DOR was not reached (range: 1.4+ to 34.1+ months), with response ongoing in 73.0% of participants. Common treatment-emergent AEs (≥15%) were fatigue (26.9%), rash (16.7%), and anemia (15.4%). Eighteen participants (23.1%) experienced immune-related AEs (grade 3: n=2 (2.6%); no grade 4/5). No treatment-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Cosibelimab demonstrated clinically meaningful ORR and DOR and was associated with a manageable safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03212404.

Three-Year Safety, Tolerability, and Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes of Adjuvant Osimertinib in Patients With Resected Stage IB to IIIA EGFR-Mutated NSCLC: Updated Analysis From the Phase 3 ADAURA Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In ADAURA, adjuvant osimertinib significantly improved disease-free survival versus placebo in resected stage IB to IIIA EGFR-mutated NSCLC. We report in-depth analyses of three-year safety, tolerability, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) from ADAURA. METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to osimertinib 80 mg or placebo once daily for up to 3 years. Safety assessments were performed at baseline, week 2, week 4, week 12, and every 12 weeks until treatment completion or discontinuation, and 28 days after treatment was stopped. The SF-36 survey measured HRQoL at baseline, week 12, week 24, and every 24 weeks until recurrence, treatment completion or discontinuation. Data cutoff: April 11, 2022. RESULTS: Safety and HRQoL analysis sets: osimertinib, n = 337 and n = 339; placebo, n = 343 each. Median (range) total exposure duration was longer with osimertinib versus placebo: 35.8 (0-38) versus 25.1 (0-39) months. Most adverse events (AEs) were first reported within 12 months of starting treatment (osimertinib 97%, placebo 86%). AEs leading to dose reduction, interruption or discontinuation were reported in 12%, 27% and 13% respectively of patients with osimertinib; 1%, 13% and 3% with placebo. Stomatitis and diarrhea were the most common AEs leading to osimertinib dose reduction or interruption; interstitial lung disease was the most common leading to osimertinib discontinuation (per protocol). There were no differences in time to deterioration for SF-36 physical, mental component summaries between osimertinib and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: No new safety signals were reported and HRQoL was maintained with 3 years of adjuvant osimertinib treatment. Combined with significant efficacy benefit, these data further support adjuvant osimertinib in stage IB to IIIA EGFR-mutated NSCLC.

KEYNOTE-033: Randomized phase 3 study of pembrolizumab vs docetaxel in previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced NSCLC.

KEYNOTE-033 (NCT02864394) was a multicountry, open-label, phase 3 study that compared pembrolizumab vs docetaxel in previously treated, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive, advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with most patients enrolled in mainland China. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1) to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival and were evaluated sequentially using stratified log-rank tests, first in patients with PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and then in patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥1% (significance threshold: P < .025, one-sided). A total of 425 patients were randomized to pembrolizumab (N = 213) or docetaxel (N = 212) between 8 September 2016 and 17 October 2018. In patients with a PD-L1 TPS ≥50% (n = 227), median OS was 12.3 months with pembrolizumab and 10.9 months with docetaxel; the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-1.14; P = .1276). Because the significance threshold was not met, sequential testing of OS and PFS was ceased. In patients with a PD-L1 TPS ≥1%, the HR for OS for pembrolizumab vs docetaxel was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.60-0.95). In patients from mainland China (n = 311) with a PD-L1 TPS ≥1%, HR for OS was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.51-0.89). Incidence of grade 3 to 5 treatment-related AEs was 11.3% with pembrolizumab vs 47.5% with docetaxel. In summary, pembrolizumab improved OS vs docetaxel in previously treated, PD-L1-positive NSCLC without unexpected safety signals; although the statistical significance threshold was not reached, the numerical improvement is consistent with that previously observed for pembrolizumab in previously treated, advanced NSCLC.

A new era of the Asian clinical research network: a report from the ATLAS international symposium.

This report summarizes the presentations and discussions in the first Asian Clinical Trials Network for Cancers (ATLAS) international symposium that was held on 24 April 2022, in Bangkok, Thailand, and hosted by the National Cancer Center Hospital (NCCH), co-hosted by the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), Clinical Research Malaysia (CRM) and the Thai Society of Clinical Oncology (TSCO), and supported by Embassy of Japan in Thailand. Since 2020, the NCCH has conducted the ATLAS project to enhance research environments and infrastructures to facilitate international clinical research and cancer genomic medicine in the Asian region. The purpose of the symposium was to discuss what we can achieve under the ATLAS project, to share the latest topics and common issues in cancer research and to facilitate mutual understanding. Invitees included stakeholders from academic institutions, mainly at ATLAS collaborative sites, as well as Asian regulatory authorities. The invited speakers discussed ongoing collaborative research, regulatory perspectives to improve new drug access in Asia, the status of phase I trials in Asia, the introduction of research activities at the National Cancer Center (NCC) and the implementation of genomic medicine. As the next steps after this symposium, the ATLAS project will foster increased cooperation between investigators, regulatory authorities and other stakeholders relevant to cancer research, and establish a sustainable pan-Asian cancer research group to increase the number of clinical trials and deliver novel drugs to patients with cancer in Asia.

Safety Following COVID-19 Booster Vaccine with BNT162b2 Compared to mRNA-1273 in Solid Cancer Patients Previously Vaccinated with ChAdOx1 or CoronaVac.

Safety data following the COVID-19 booster mRNA vaccine in solid cancer patients are scarce. We prospectively evaluated adverse events after a booster dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine as compared to the mRNA-1273 vaccine in solid malignancy patients who had previously received two doses of ChAdOx1 or heterogenous CoronaVac/ChAdOx1. Data regarding solicited and unsolicited adverse events were collected using questionnaires. The primary endpoint was the difference in incidence and severity of adverse events between BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines. A total of 370 subjects were enrolled, including 172 (47%) and 198 (54%) patients receiving booster doses of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines, respectively. The overall incidence of adverse events in the two groups was comparable (BNT162b2 vs. mRNA-1273; 63% vs. 66%, p = 0.6). There was no significant difference in severity, and the majority of adverse events reported were classed as mild to moderate. Tenderness at the injection site was the only reaction that had a statistically higher reported incidence after the mRNA-1273 vaccine than after the BNT162b2 vaccine (56% vs. 41%, p = 0.003). In conclusion, a booster dose of the mRNA vaccine, either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, in solid cancer patients previously vaccinated with ChAdOx1 and CoronaVac appears safe, and no new safety concerns were observed.

Development of Clinical Prediction Score for Chemotherapy Response in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.

The outcomes of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients have been significantly improved with novel therapies, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, in resource-limited countries, platinum-doublet chemotherapy is mainly used as a first-line treatment. We investigate clinical parameters to predict the response after chemotherapy, which may be useful for patient selection. A clinical prediction score (CPS) was developed, based on data from a retrospective cohort study of unresectable stage IIIB or IV NSCLC patients who were treated with platinum-doublet chemotherapy in the first-line setting with at least two cycles and an evaluated response by RECIST 1.1 at Surin Hospital Cancer Center, Thailand, between July 2014 and December 2018. The clinical parameters in the prediction model were derived by risk regression analysis. There were 117 responders (CR or PR) and 90 non-responders (SD or PD). The clinical prediction score was developed by six clinical parameters including gender, age, smoking status, ECOG, pre-treatment albumin, and histologic subtype. The AuROC of the model was 0.71 (95% CI 0.63-0.78). The internal validation was performed using a bootstrap technique and showed a consistent AuROC of 0.66 (95% CI 0.59-0.72). The prediction score ranged from 0-13, with a score of 0-8 meaning a low probability (PPV = 50%) and a score of 8.5-13 meaning a high probability (PPV = 83.7%) for chemotherapy response. Advanced NSCLC patients who cannot access novel therapies and have a CPS of 8.5-13 have a high probability for chemotherapy response in the first-line setting. This CPS could be used for risk communication and making decisions with patients, especially in regard to chemotherapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Ceritinib 450 mg/day with Food and 750 mg/day in Fasted State in Treatment-Naïve Patients with ALK+ Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Results from the ASCEND-8 Asian Subgroup Analysis.

PURPOSE: Previous report from the ASCEND-8 trial showed consistent efficacy with less gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-rearranged (ALK+) advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with ceritinib 450-mg with food compared with 750-mg fasted. In this subgroup analysis, we report outcomes in Asian patients of the ASCEND-8 trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Key efficacy endpoints were blinded independent review committee (BIRC)-assessed overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) evaluated per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Other efficacy endpoints were investigator-assessed ORR and DOR; BIRC- and investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and disease control rate; overall survival (OS). Safety was evaluated by frequency and severity of adverse events. RESULTS: At final data cutoff (6 March 2020), 198 treatment-naïve patients were included in efficacy analysis, of which 74 (37%) comprised the Asian subset; 450-mg fed (n=29), 600-mg fed (n=19), and 750-mg fasted (n=26). Baseline characteristics were mostly comparable across study arms. At baseline, more patients in 450-mg fed arm (44.8%) had brain metastases than in 750-mg fasted arm (26.9%). Per BIRC, patients in the 450-mg fed arm had a numerically higher ORR, 24-month DOR rate and 24-month PFS rate than the 750-mg fasted arm. The 36-month OS rate was 93.1% in 450-mg fed arm and 70.9% in 750-mg fasted arm. Any-grade GI toxicity occurred in 82.8% and 96.2% of patients in the 450-mg fed and 750-mg fasted arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: Asian patients with ALK+ advanced/metastatic NSCLC treated with ceritinib 450-mg fed showed numerically higher efficacy and lower GI toxicity than 750-mg fasted patients.

Immunogenicity after a Third COVID-19 mRNA Booster in Solid Cancer Patients Who Previously Received the Primary Heterologous CoronaVac/ChAdOx1 Vaccine.

No data regarding the efficacy of a third mRNA vaccine for solid cancer patients previously primed with the heterologous CoronoVac/ChAdOx1 vaccination implemented in Thailand during the shortage of vaccine supply are available. Forty-four cancer patients who previously received the heterologous CoronaVac-ChAdOx1 regimen were boosted with a third mRNA COVID vaccine, either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273. Anti-RBD IgG was measured immediately before, two weeks after, and four weeks after the third dose. The antibody response was compared to 87 age- and gender-matched cancer patients who were primed with the homologous ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1 regimens. Post-third dose anti-RBD IgG levels significantly increased compared to pre-third dose levels. There was no statistical difference in post-third dose antibody titers or neutralization levels between these two primary series regimens. Treatment with chemotherapy was associated with a lower antibody response compared to endocrine therapy/biologics. Similar antibody levels were observed after a third booster with either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 following heterologous CoronaVac/ChAdOx1 vaccination. There was no statistical difference in the immune response following the third-dose vaccination between cancer patients and healthy individuals who received the same heterologous CoronaVac/ChAdOx1 vaccination. In conclusion, a similar degree of enhanced immunogenicity was observed after a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in solid cancer patients who previously received the heterologous CoronaVac/ChAdOx1 regimens.

Durability of Immune Response to ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 Vaccine in Solid Cancer Patients Undergoing Anticancer Treatment.

There are limited data available about the durability of the immune response after administration of the widely used adenovirus-vectored ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine in cancer patients. This prospective longitudinal observational study analyzed follow-up data of immunogenic responses 12 weeks after the second dose of the ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine in 290 oncological patients compared to healthy controls. The study aimed to assess the persistence of the humoral immune response three months after the second dose, and omicron neutralization was also evaluated. Three months after completion of the second vaccine dose, the geometric mean titer of SARS-CoV-2 binding total Ig statistically decreased by 42% compared to those at 4 weeks, and was lower than that of the healthy control. Six percent of patients became seronegative for anti-RBD total Ig. Only 5% (2 of 40 samples) tested positive for surrogate neutralization against SAR-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2. Across different therapy types, a waning in immunogenicity was observed within three months after the second dose of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine, rendering it insufficient at that point to protect against the SAR-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 variant.

Palbociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in Asian postmenopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer: Primary results from PALOMA-4.

BACKGROUND: The cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib has demonstrated efficacy and a manageable safety profile in combination with endocrine therapy in women with oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) in international phase 3 trials. The phase 3 PALOMA-4 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of palbociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in Asian women with ER+/HER2- ABC. METHODS: Postmenopausal women (n = 340) with no prior systemic treatment for advanced disease were randomised 1:1 to palbociclib (125 mg/d orally; 3 weeks on, 1 week off) plus letrozole (2.5 mg/d orally; continuously) or placebo plus letrozole. The primary end-point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end-points included tumour response and safety. RESULTS: Median (95% CI) PFS was 21.5 (16.6-24.9) months with palbociclib plus letrozole and 13.9 (13.7-16.6) months with placebo plus letrozole (hazard ratio, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.53-0.87]; P = 0.0012). Consistent with the established safety profile, the most common adverse events (AEs) with palbociclib plus letrozole were neutropenia, leukopenia, thrombocytopaenia, and anaemia. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was reported in 84.5% of patients in the palbociclib arm versus 1.2% in the placebo arm. One serious AE of febrile neutropenia in the palbociclib group was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from PALOMA-4 support the efficacy and safety of first-line palbociclib plus letrozole in postmenopausal Asian women with ER+/HER2- ABC. No new safety concerns of palbociclib plus letrozole were identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials. gov, NCT02297438.

Prognostic factors in completely resected lymph-node-negative pulmonary adenocarcinoma.

Background: Lymph node involvement is one of the important prognostic factors for early-stage lung cancer. However, in lymph node-negative (N0) lung cancer the recurrent rate may be as high as 30%. We aimed to study potential prognostic factors including clinicopathological factors and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status in this lung cancer population. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records and pathological examinations of patients with completely resected N0 pulmonary adenocarcinoma treated in our institute between 2009 and 2016. We used Cobas® test to determine EGFR mutation status. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was analyzed by univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses. Results: We recruited 220 patients with median duration of follow up 5 years. Majority of these patients were in stage I (80%) and did not receive adjuvant therapy (86%). There were 53% with EGFR mutations which comprised of exon 19 deletion 51% and L858R 43%. Recurrence occurred in 64 out of 220 patients (29%). The median time to recurrence was 2.1 years. Statistically significant prognostic factors in both univariate and multivariate analyses included tumor size ≥4 centimeter (cm) (HR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.03-3.67), visceral pleural invasion (HR: 2.53; 95% CI: 1.34-4.79), tumor necrosis (HR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.13-5.31) and bronchial resection margin <2 cm (HR: 1.96; 95% CI: 1.10-3.51). However, presence of sensitizing EGFR mutation was not found to be a significant prognostic factor (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.66-2.18; P=0.56). Conclusions: In N0 surgically resected lung adenocarcinoma, there were significant pathological prognostic factors including tumor 4 cm or more, visceral pleural invasion, tumor necrosis and bronchial resection margin less than 2 cm. Mutation of EGFR is not a significant prognostic factor to determine the risk of recurrence in this population and their risks shall be determined by the other poor prognostic factors.

Incidence of oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reaction among colorectal cancer patients: A 5-year retrospective study.

Background: Oxaliplatin is a third-generation platinum compound that has efficacy against colorectal cancer. Hypersensitivity reactions during oxaliplatin infusion are a key problem during its use, with the varying incidences and deficiencies of clearly identified risk factors. Objective: To determine the incidence, severity and risk factors of oxaliplatin-related hypersensitivity reaction (HSR). Method: This retrospective study investigated 245 colorectal cancer patients (1,690 treatment cycles) receiving care at King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross society between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. The patients' demographic data, laboratory data and clinical features suggesting hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin were reviewed. The Fisher's Exact test and unpaired t-test were used to determine the differences among patients with and without oxaliplatin HSR. The potential risk factors for oxaliplatin HSR were analyzed for statistical significance by logistic regression. Results: A total of 245 colorectal cancer patients (1,690 treatment cycles) were included in this study. The incidence of oxaliplatin HSR was 37.96%, according to the US National Cancer Institute (NCI)-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NTCAE) version 5.0, grade 1, grade 2 and higher grades were 27.35% (67 patients), 6.53% (16 patients) and 4.08% (10 patients), respectively. The proportion of male patients and patients with a history of prior exposure to platinum-based chemotherapy were statistically higher in the HSR group. The eosinophil count and serum creatinine level were also significantly greater in the HSR group. On the contrary, the total lymphocyte count and serum albumin level were significantly lower in the HSR group. The multivariate logistic regression found 5 risk factors with a significant difference. Male gender, prior exposure to platinum-based chemotherapy and elevated eosinophil count were associated with increased risk of oxaliplatin HSR, whereas elevated monocyte count and elevated serum albumin were protective factors for the development of oxaliplatin HSR. Conclusion: Colorectal cancer patients treated with an oxaliplatin-based regimen with male gender, prior exposure to platinum-based chemotherapy and elevated eosinophil count have a greater risk of oxaliplatin related hypersensitivity reactions.

Immunogenicity of ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine in solid malignancy patients by treatment regimen versus healthy controls: A prospective, multicenter observational study.

Background: Limited data exists regarding the efficacy of ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine against Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS­CoV­2) in solid cancer patients. We aimed to assess the immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine and the impact of different anticancer therapies for solid malignancies on immune response. Methods: This prospective, longitudinal observational study of immunogenicity following ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccination among 385 solid cancer patients on active cancer treatment was conducted in two oncology centers. Participants received the first dose between June 18 and July 27, 2021 and the second dose at 8-10 weeks later. Blood samples were evaluated for total immunoglobulins against the receptor-binding of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (anti-RBD total-Ig) before, and 4-week after the first- and second-doses. The primary endpoint was the geometric mean titers (GMT) of antibody among solid cancer patients compared to healthy controls and the impact of different cancer treatment types. Findings: Among solid cancer patients, the antibody level increased more slowly to significantly lower levels than achieved in healthy controls. The GMT at 4-weeks post-vaccination in cancer vs. healthy were 224.5 U/ml (95%CI 176.4-285.6) vs. 877.1 U/ml (95%CI 763.5-1008), p<0.0001), respectively. For different types of cancer treatments, chemotherapy agents, especially anthracyclines (GMR 0.004; 95%CI 0.002-0.008), paclitaxel (GMR 0.268; 95%CI 0.123-0.581), oxaliplatin (GMR 0.340; 95%CI 0.165-0.484), and immunotherapy (GMR 0.203; 95%CI 0.109-0.381) showed significantly lower antibody response. Anti-HER2, endocrine therapy and 5-fluouracil or gemcitabine, however, had less impact on the immune response. Interpretation: Suboptimal and heterogeneous immunologic responses were observed in cancer patients being treated with different systemic treatments. Immunotherapy or chemotherapy significantly suppressed the antibody response. Funding: Quality Improvement Fund, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, The Thai Red Cross Society and Center of Excellence in Clinical Virology at Chulalongkorn University and Chulalongkorn Medical Oncology Research Fund.

Vaccine-Related adverse events following AZD1222 (ChAdOx1-nCoV-19) Covid-19 vaccine in solid malignancy patients receiving cancer treatment, as compared to age-matched healthy controls.

The study aimed to evaluate vaccine-related adverse events (VRAEs) following ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine in solid cancer patients receiving treatment compared to healthy controls. 399 cancer patients and 90 healthy volunteers were enrolled. In the overall population, the incidence of VRAEs was significantly lower in cancer patients than in healthy volunteers (57% vs 80%, P < .001). Because the mean age of the cancer patients was higher than the healthy volunteers (59 vs 48 years, P < .001), we analyzed age-matched comparison and found that there was no significant difference of VRAEs between two groups (74% vs 79%, P .32). Most VRAEs were of mild severity in both groups. The most common local VRAE was pain at the injection site in both groups, and the most common systemic VRAE was fatigue in the cancer cohort, while myalgia was the most common VRAE among the healthy controls. In the cancer cohort, fever was the only VRAE that led to interruption of the cancer treatment (in two cases). Among the cancer treatment types, patients undergoing chemotherapy-containing regimens had a lower likelihood of experiencing VRAEs. In summary, the overall incidence of VRAEs following ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine in actively treated cancer patients was comparable to healthy controls after adjusting for age. The VRAEs that occurred rarely interfered with the cancer treatment. These findings substantiate that vaccination with AZD1222 is safe in cancer patients undergoing treatment.

Co-occurrence CDK4/6 amplification serves as biomarkers of de novo EGFR TKI resistance in sensitizing EGFR mutation non-small cell lung cancer.

Despite the development of predictive biomarkers to shape treatment paradigms and outcomes, de novo EGFR TKI resistance advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains an issue of concern. We explored clinical factors in 332 advanced NSCLC who received EGFR TKI and molecular characteristics through 65 whole exome sequencing of various EGFR TKI responses including; de novo (progression within 3 months), intermediate response (IRs) and long-term response (LTRs) (durability > 2 years). Uncommon EGFR mutation subtypes were significantly variable enriched in de novo resistance. The remaining sensitizing EGFR mutation subtypes (exon 19 del and L858R) accounted for 75% of de novo resistance. Genomic landscape analysis was conducted, focusing in 10 frequent oncogenic signaling pathways with functional contributions; cell cycle, Hippo, Myc, Notch, Nrf2, PI-3-Kinase/Akt, RTK-RAS, TGF-ß, p53 and ß-catenin/Wnt signaling. Cell cycle pathway was the only significant alteration pathway among groups with the FDR p-value of 6 × 10-4. We found only significant q-values of < 0.05 in 7 gene alterations; CDK6, CCNE1, CDK4, CCND3, MET, FGFR4 and HRAS which enrich in de novo resistance [range 36-73%] compared to IRs/LTRs [range 4-22%]. Amplification of CDK4/6 was significant in de novo resistance, contrary to IRs and LTRs (91%, 27.9% and 0%, respectively). The presence of co-occurrence CDK4/6 amplification correlated with poor disease outcome with HR of progression-free survival of 3.63 [95% CI 1.80-7.31, p-value < 0.001]. The presence of CDK4/6 amplification in pretreatment specimen serves as a predictive biomarker for de novo resistance in sensitizing EGFR mutation.