Lorlatinib Tolerability and Association With Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Advanced ALK- or ROS1-Rearranged NSCLC: A Brief Report.

Introduction: Treatment with lorlatinib for patients with advanced ALK- and ROS1-rearranged NSCLC (ALK+ and ROS1+ NSCLC) is associated with a unique set of adverse events (AEs) often requiring dose reduction. However, the impact of dose reductions on outcomes remains unclear and is mainly limited to analyses from prospective studies of lorlatinib in the first-line setting. Methods: We reviewed the course of 144 patients with advanced ALK- or ROS1-rearranged NSCLC treated with lorlatinib in the second-line or later setting to assess the frequency of dose reductions resulting from treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) and the association between dose reductions and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 58 patients (40%) had TRAE-related dose reductions, most (59%) owing to neurocognitive AEs or neuropathy. Among all patients, the median PFS was 8.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.4-11.8); the median OS was 20.7 months (95% CI: 16.3-30.5). Among patients who were started on lorlatinib 100 mg/d (n = 122), a Cox regression model with the occurrence of a dose reduction as a time-dependent covariate indicated no association between dose reduction and PFS (hazard ratio = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.54-1.39) or OS (hazard ratio = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.47-1.30). Conclusions: Lorlatinib dose reductions were not associated with inferior clinical outcomes in this multicenter analysis. Prompt identification of lorlatinib TRAEs and implementation of dose reductions may help maximize tolerability without compromising outcomes.

A Safety Analysis of Programmed Death 1 Pathway Inhibitors in Patients With Solid Tumor Malignancies and Preexisting Autoimmune Disease.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to characterize the safety of programmed death 1 inhibitors in patients with preexisting autoimmune disease. METHODS: A medical records review study was conducted on adults with solid tumor malignancies who received ≥1 dose of pembrolizumab or nivolumab at Emory Healthcare from September 4, 2014 until December 31, 2019. All autoimmune patients were included (n = 77), whereas the nonautoimmune patients were randomized and the first 156 patients were included in a 2:1 ratio to autoimmune patients. The primary objective was the comparison of incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) between patients with preexisting autoimmune disease and those without. Secondary objectives included irAE characterization, irAE treatment, and survival analyses. RESULTS: Preexisting autoimmune disease was controlled in all of the autoimmune patients before immunotherapy initiation. The rate of irAE was 32.7% in the nonautoimmune group and 42.9% in the autoimmune group (odds ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-1.14; p = 0.130). In the patient population diagnosed with a rheumatologic autoimmune disease, 23.81% of irAEs were considered to be a flare of their preexisting autoimmune disease. Less patients in the autoimmune group experienced a grade ≥3 irAE (21.21% vs 37.25%, p = 0.379) and received systemic corticosteroids (54.55% vs 67.35%, p = 0.241) for the treatment of the irAE. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that pembrolizumab and nivolumab can be safely administered in patients with controlled preexisting autoimmune diseases without a significant increase in irAE compared with patients without autoimmune diseases. Inclusion of patients with preexisting autoimmune diseases in prospective clinical trials is warranted.

Retrospective Study of Bleeding Risk with Concomitant Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor and Anticoagulation.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer are at higher risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding, in turn complicating anticoagulant therapy. An added complexity is the toxicity profile of agents used to treat certain cancers, namely the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), which are associated with both thromboembolism and hemorrhages. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether patients taking concurrent VEGF TKI and therapeutic anticoagulant were at higher risk for bleeding compared with patients taking VEGF TKI alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective chart review of patients who underwent treatment with a VEGF TKI with or without anticoagulant. The primary outcome included comparison of major bleeding rates between groups. Secondary outcomes included comparison of composite major and minor bleed rates and assessment of VTE incidence and recurrence among patients treated with a VEGF TKI and VEGF TKI plus anticoagulant, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 184 and 74 patients were included in the VEGF TKI alone and VEGF TKI + anticoagulant groups, respectively. Major bleeding events occurred in 6 of 184 patients (3.3%) and 6 of 74 patients (8.1%), respectively (p = .095). Composite major and minor bleeding events occurred in 22 of 184 (13.6%) and 17 of 74 (23%), respectively (p = .026). A total of 26 of 258 patients (10.1%) experienced a VTE event while taking a VEGF TKI, and 1 of 26 (3.8%) experienced a recurrent VTE event while taking a VEGF TKI plus anticoagulant. CONCLUSION: Patients who received concomitant VEGF TKI plus anticoagulant had increased incidence of bleeding, although prospective studies are needed to further explore this association. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The current study showed that use of concomitant vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGF TKI) and therapeutic anticoagulation was associated with an increased risk of composite bleeding events, although at comparable rates between patients treated with VEGF TKI plus direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) versus VEGF TKI plus non-DOAC anticoagulant. This suggests that when anticoagulation is indicated in a patient receiving a VEGF TKI, the novel DOACs may be a safe alternative to historical anticoagulants (warfarin and enoxaparin). These results fill a gap in the literature and will help guide treatment decisions for patients requiring concurrent VEGF TKI and anticoagulation.

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint blockade in self-identified Black patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: To the authors' knowledge, race-based differences in efficacy for the treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have not been studied to date due to the underrepresentation of patients of minority backgrounds in pivotal trials. In the current study, the authors examined real-world differences in outcome in a diverse patient population. METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed the clinical outcomes of patients with advanced NSCLC who were treated with single-agent immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) between 2013 and July 2018 at Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia. Primary efficacy comparison between Black patients and White patients was performed using bivariate and multivariate analyses for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Data from 257 patients were analyzed. The median age of the patients was 69 years; 50.6% of the patients were female, 63.4% were White, 29.5% were Black, and 7.1% of the patients were of "other" race. ICB was the first-line treatment in 51 patients (19.9%), the second-line treatment in 161 patients (62.6%), and the third-line treatment in 33 patients (12.9%). The most commonly used agents were nivolumab (49.0%), pembrolizumab (25.2%), and atezolizumab (21.3%). No differences with regard to OS (P = .839) and PFS (P = .235) were noted between Black and White patients. The sample overall response rate was 20.6% (15.2% in Black patients and 23.1% in White patients). No differences with regard to OS (P = .081) and PFS (P = .176) were observed between female and male patients. The rate of immune-related adverse events was found to be similar in Black and White patients (20.0% vs 29.9%; P = .148). On multivariate analysis, race was not found to be significantly associated with OS or PFS. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world analysis of the authors' institutional experience demonstrated similar efficacy and tolerability of ICB in Black versus White patients with advanced NSCLC. Larger multi-institutional studies including other US minority populations would make the findings of the current study more generalizable.

Afatinib for the treatment of EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC: A review of clinical findings.

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors represent the standard of care in patients with EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The availability of several EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors approved for use in the first-line or later settings in NSCLC warrants an in-depth understanding of the pharmacological properties of, and clinical data supporting, these agents. The second-generation, irreversible ErbB-family blocker, afatinib, has been extensively studied in the context of EGFRm+ NSCLC. Results from the LUX-Lung 3 and 6 studies showed that afatinib was more active and better tolerated than chemotherapy in patients with tumors harboring EGFR mutations. Subanalysis of these trials, along with real-world data, indicates that afatinib is active in patients with certain uncommon EGFR mutations (S768I/G719X/L861Q) as well as common mutations (Del19/L858R), and in patients with active brain metastases. In LUX-Lung 7, a head-to-head phase IIb trial, afatinib improved progression-free survival and time-to-treatment failure versus the first-generation reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, gefitinib, albeit with a higher incidence of serious treatment-related adverse events. Nevertheless, afatinib is generally well tolerated, and adverse events are manageable through supportive care and a well-defined tolerability-guided dose adjustment scheme. In this review, we provide a detailed overview of the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of afatinib, discuss treatment sequencing strategies following emergence of different resistance mechanisms, and shed light on the economic impact of afatinib. We also provide a comparison of afatinib with the available EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors and discuss its position within treatment strategies for patients with EGFRm+ NSCLC.

Durvalumab and tremelimumab with or without stereotactic body radiation therapy in relapsed small cell lung cancer: a randomized phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) targeting programmed cell death protein 1 and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4 has achieved modest clinical activity as salvage therapy in relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC). We conducted this signal-finding study to assess the efficacy of ICB with or without radiation in relapsed SCLC. METHODS: Patients with relapsed SCLC and ≤2 previous lines of therapy were randomized to (1) arm A: durvalumab (D) 1500 mg/tremelimumab (T) 75 mg (intravenously every 4 weeks without stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)) or (2) arm B: immune-sensitizing SBRT to one selected tumor site (9 Gy × 3 fractions) followed by D/T. Treatment continued until progression or a maximum of 12 months. The co-primary endpoints of the study were overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). We evaluated circulating lymphocyte repertoire in serial peripheral blood samples and tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) from on-treatment biopsies as pharmacodynamic markers. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were randomized to arms A and B (n=9 each): median age 70 years; 41.2% women. The median PFS and ORR were 2.1 months and 0% in arm A and 3.3 months and 28.6% in arm B. The median overall survival (OS) was 2.8 months in arm A and 5.7 months in arm B (p=0.3772). Pooled efficacy of D/T±SBRT in 15 Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) evaluable patients across both arms showed the best ORR in terms of partial response in 13.3%, stable disease in 26.6% and progressive disease in 60.0%; the overall median PFS and OS were 2.76 and 3.9 months. The most common adverse events were grade 1 fatigue (66%) and grade 1 elevated amylase (56%) in arm A, and grade 1 fatigue (56%) and pain (44%) in arm B. There was a significant increase in activated CD8(+)ICOS+ T cells (p=0.048) and a reduction in naïve T cells (p=0.0454) in peripheral blood following treatment, along with a significant amount of activated CD8+ICOS+ T cells in TILs from responders. CONCLUSIONS: The D/T combination with and without SBRT was safe but did not show sufficient efficacy signal in relapsed SCLC. Changes in peripheral blood lymphocyte and TILs were consistent with an immunologic response.Trial registration number NCT02701400.

Tacrolimus for the treatment of immune-related adverse effects refractory to systemic steroids and anti-tumor necrosis factor α therapy.

Immunotherapy treatments in oncology have garnered much attention and use throughout the past several years. With increased use and new approvals in many different types of solid tumors and hematological malignancies, practitioners in oncology should have an appreciation and understanding of the potential adverse effects of these unique treatment approaches. The most common adverse effects with immunotherapy treatment are immune-related adverse effects with activation of patients' immune systems against a wide array of tissues and organ systems. Immune-related adverse effects are typically treated first with high doses of immunosuppressive corticosteroids. Patients with immune-related adverse effects refractory to high dose corticosteroid treatment may receive anti-tumor necrosis factor α therapy in an attempt to halt the immune system from causing further organ dysfunction. However, these agents are not always successful and other immunomodulatory agents should be considered for refractory cases. Presented here are three patient cases supporting the use of the calcinuerin inhibitor tacrolimus to treat immune-related adverse effects refractory to corticosteroids and anti-tumor necrosis factor α.

Alectinib and Brigatinib: New Second-Generation ALK Inhibitors for the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

The treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been revolutionized by the discovery of genetic driver mutations and associated targeted therapies. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) mutations are present in about 5% of NSCLC cases, and treatment with the first-generation ALK inhibitor crizotinib has shown better progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate compared to traditional chemotherapy. However, eventually, ALK-mutated NSCLC develops resistance to treatment with crizotinib, and second-generation ALK inhibitors such as ceritinib, brigatinib, and alectinib have been shown to be effective in the second-line setting after progression on crizotinib. In the second-line setting, alectinib showed an objective response rate (ORR) of 45% and PFS of 8 to 12 months. Brigatinib showed an ORR of 45% to 54% with a PFS of 9.2 to 12.9 months in the second-line setting. A more recent trial compared alectinib to crizotinib in the treatment-naive setting and showed a significant PFS benefit to treatment with alectinib. The second-generation ALK inihibitors brigatinib and alectinib offer new options for the treatment of ALK mutation-positive NSCLC.