Canadian Consensus Recommendations on the Management of Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive, neuroendocrine tumour with high relapse rates, and significant morbidity and mortality. Apart from advances in radiation therapy, progress in the systemic treatment of SCLC had been stagnant for over three decades despite multiple attempts to develop alternative therapeutic options that could improve responses and survival. Recent promising developments in first-line and subsequent therapeutic approaches prompted a Canadian Expert Panel to convene to review evidence, discuss practice patterns, and reach a consensus on the treatment of extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). The literature search included guidelines, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials. Regular meetings were held from September 2022 to March 2023 to discuss the available evidence to propose and agree upon specific recommendations. The panel addressed biomarkers and histological features that distinguish SCLC from non-SCLC and other neuroendocrine tumours. Evidence for initial and subsequent systemic therapies was reviewed with consideration for patient performance status, comorbidities, and the involvement and function of other organs. The resulting consensus recommendations herein will help clarify evidence-based management of ES-SCLC in routine practice, help clinician decision-making, and facilitate the best patient outcomes.

Canadian Consensus Recommendations on the Management of KRAS G12C-Mutated NSCLC.

Activating mutations in Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homologue (KRAS), in particular, a point mutation leading to a glycine-to-cysteine substitution at codon 12 (G12C), are among the most frequent genomic alterations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Several agents targeting KRAS G12C have recently entered clinical development. Sotorasib, a first-in-class specific small molecule that irreversibly inhibits KRAS G12C, has since obtained Health Canada approval. The emergence of novel KRAS-targeted therapies warrants the development of evidence-based consensus recommendations to help clinicians better understand and contextualize the available data. A Canadian expert panel was convened to define the key clinical questions, review recent evidence, and discuss and agree on recommendations for the treatment of advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC. The panel agreed that testing for KRAS G12C should be performed as part of a comprehensive panel that includes current standard-of-care biomarkers. Sotorasib, the only approved KRAS G12C inhibitor in Canada, is recommended for patients with advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC who progressed on guideline-recommended first-line standard of care for advanced NSCLC without driver alterations (immune-checkpoint inhibitor(s) [ICIs] +/- chemotherapy). Sotorasib could also be offered as second-line therapy to patients who progressed on ICI monotherapy that are not candidates for a platinum doublet and those that received first-line chemotherapy with a contraindication to ICIs. Preliminary data indicate the activity of KRAS G12C inhibitors in brain metastases; however, the evidence is insufficient to make specific recommendations. Regular liver function monitoring is recommended when patients are prescribed KRAS G12C inhibitors due to risk of hepatotoxicity.

Canadian Consensus Recommendations on the Management of MET-Altered NSCLC.

In Canada, the therapeutic management of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with rare actionable mutations differs between provinces, territories, and individual centres based on access to molecular testing and funded treatments. These variations, together with the emergence of several novel mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) factor-targeted therapies for the treatment of NSCLC, warrant the development of evidence-based consensus recommendations for the use of these agents. A Canadian expert panel was convened to define key clinical questions, review evidence, discuss practice recommendations and reach consensus on the treatment of advanced MET-altered NSCLC. Questions addressed by the panel include: 1. How should the patients most likely to benefit from MET-targeted therapies be identified? 2. What are the preferred first-line and subsequent therapies for patients with MET exon 14 skipping mutations? 3. What are the preferred first-line and subsequent therapies for advanced NSCLC patients with de novo MET amplification? 4. What is the preferred therapy for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated NSCLC with acquired MET amplification progressing on EGFR inhibitors? 5. What are the potential strategies for overcoming resistance to MET inhibitors? Answers to these questions, along with the consensus recommendations herein, will help streamline the management of MET-altered NSCLC in routine practice, assist clinicians in therapeutic decision-making, and help ensure optimal outcomes for NSCLC patients with MET alterations.

A phase II trial of the effect of perindopril on hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) incidence and severity in patients receiving regorafenib for refractory mCRC.

PURPOSE: Regorafenib is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor that offers an OS benefit to patients with mCRC refractory to standard therapy (Grothey et al., in Lancet 381:303-312, 2013), but comes with potential significant toxicities including grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR). The pathogenesis of regorafenib-induced HFSR is not well established, but may be related to alterations in the capillary endothelium. We hypothesized that perindopril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor, indicated for the treatment of hypertension (Ceconi et al., in Cardiovasc Res 73:237-246, 2007), and which plays a role in preventing endothelial dysfunction, may help to prevent or reduce the severity of regorafenib-induced HFSR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-center phase II open-label trial, patients with refractory mCRC were treated with both regorafenib (160 mg/day) and perindopril (4 mg/day) for 21 days per 28-day cycle. The primary end point was to assess the proportion of patients with any grade HFSR toxicity. Secondary end points included time to development of worst (grade 3) HFSR, reduction of all grades of hypertension and all grade toxicities, as well as progression-free survival. All toxicities were evaluated using CTCAE v4.03. RESULTS: A planned interim analysis was performed after ten evaluable patients had completed their first cycle of study treatment. As 50% (5/10) experienced grade 3 HFSR, enrolment was stopped as the addition of perindopril did not lead to a reduced level of HFSR compared with regorafenib alone. Other grade 3 toxicities included hypertension (16.7%) and increased AST (16.7%). CONCLUSION: The addition of an ACE inhibitor perindopril to regorafenib did not reduce HFSR incidence or severity in patients with refractory mCRC.

Canadian Cancer Trials Group (CCTG) IND211: A randomized trial of pelareorep (Reolysin) in patients with previously treated advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer receiving standard salvage therapy.

OBJECTIVES: Pelareorep (reolysin), a Dearing strain of reovirus serotype 3, has demonstrated oncolytic activity as single agent and synergy with chemotherapy. We evaluated pelareorep, combined with standard second-line chemotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized phase II trial enrolled patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC after first line chemotherapy. After a safety run-in, patients were randomized 1:1 to chemotherapy (pemetrexed [500 mg/m2, non-squamous], or docetaxel [75 mg/m2], day 1 every 21 days]) +/- pelareorep (4.5 × 1010 TCID50, days 1-3 every 21 days), stratified by EGFR mutation status. The primary outcome was progression free survival (PFS) of patients randomized to chemotherapy + pelareorep vs. chemotherapy alone. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, objective response rate and exploratory translational analyses. RESULTS: Between October 2012 and August 2015, 166 patients were enrolled (14 to the safety run in). Pelareorep did not improve the PFS vs. single agent chemotherapy (median PFS 3.0 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6-4.1) vs. 2.8 months (95% CI 2.5-4.0), hazard ratio (HR) 0.90 (95% CI 0.65-1.25), P = 0.53). Neither KRAS or EGFR mutation was associated with improved PFS, but STK11 mutations did appear to have an association with improved PFS (HR 0.29 [0.12-0.67); as did PIK3CA mutation (HR 0.45 [0.22-0.93]). The combination was tolerable, although associated with increased rates of neutropenic fever. CONCLUSION: The addition of pelareorep to second-line chemotherapy did not improve the PFS of patients with NSCLC. The three-day pelareorep schedule was tolerable. Further research is needed to evaluate the potential benefit in molecular subtypes of NSCLC.