Safety and efficacy of pralsetinib in RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer including as first-line therapy: update from the ARROW trial.

BACKGROUND: RET fusions are present in 1%-2% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Pralsetinib, a highly potent, oral, central nervous system-penetrant, selective RET inhibitor, previously demonstrated clinical activity in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC in the phase I/II ARROW study, including among treatment-naive patients. We report an updated analysis from the ARROW study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ARROW is a multi-cohort, open-label, phase I/II study. Eligible patients were ≥18 years of age with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 (later 0-1). Patients initiated pralsetinib at the recommended phase II dose of 400 mg once daily until disease progression, intolerance, consent withdrawal, or investigator's decision. The co-primary endpoints (phase II) were overall response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review and safety. RESULTS: Between 17 March 2017 and 6 November 2020 (data cut-off), 281 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC were enrolled. The ORR was 72% [54/75; 95% confidence interval (CI) 60% to 82%] for treatment-naive patients and 59% (80/136; 95% CI 50% to 67%) for patients with prior platinum-based chemotherapy (enrolment cut-off for efficacy analysis: 22 May 2020); median duration of response was not reached for treatment-naive patients and 22.3 months for prior platinum-based chemotherapy patients. Tumour shrinkage was observed in all treatment-naive patients and in 97% of patients with prior platinum-based chemotherapy; median progression-free survival was 13.0 and 16.5 months, respectively. In patients with measurable intracranial metastases, the intracranial response rate was 70% (7/10; 95% CI 35% to 93%); all had received prior systemic treatment. In treatment-naive patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC who initiated pralsetinib by the data cut-off (n = 116), the most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were neutropenia (18%), hypertension (10%), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (9%), and lymphopenia (9%). Overall, 7% (20/281) discontinued due to TRAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Pralsetinib treatment produced robust efficacy and was generally well tolerated in treatment-naive patients with advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC. Results from the confirmatory phase III AcceleRET Lung study (NCT04222972) of pralsetinib versus standard of care in the first-line setting are pending.

Final efficacy and safety data, and exploratory molecular profiling from the phase III ALUR study of alectinib versus chemotherapy in crizotinib-pretreated ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: At the primary data cut-off, the ALUR study demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and central nervous system (CNS) objective response rate (ORR) with alectinib versus chemotherapy in pretreated, advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. We report final efficacy and safety data, and exploratory molecular profiling. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who received prior platinum-doublet chemotherapy and crizotinib were randomized 2 : 1 to receive alectinib 600 mg twice daily (n = 79) or chemotherapy (pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 or docetaxel 75 mg/m2, every 3 weeks; n = 40) until progressive disease, death or withdrawal. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary endpoints included ORR, CNS ORR and safety. Plasma samples were collected at baseline, then every 6 weeks until progressive disease; molecular factors detected by next-generation sequencing were correlated with outcomes. RESULTS: Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly longer with alectinib than chemotherapy (median 10.9 versus 1.4 months; hazard ratio 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.33; P < 0.001). ORR was 50.6% with alectinib versus 2.5% with chemotherapy (P < 0.001). In patients with measurable CNS metastases at baseline, CNS ORR was 66.7% with alectinib versus 0% with chemotherapy (P < 0.001). No new safety signals were seen. ALK rearrangement was identified in 69.5% (n = 41/59) of baseline plasma samples. Confirmed partial responses were observed with alectinib in 6/11 patients with a secondary ALK mutation and 4/6 patients with a non-EML4-ALK (where EML4 is echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4) fusion. Detection of mutant TP53 in baseline plasma resulted in numerically shorter PFS with alectinib (hazard ratio 1.88, 95% confidence interval 0.9-3.93). CONCLUSIONS: Final efficacy data from ALUR confirmed the superior PFS, ORR and CNS ORR of alectinib versus chemotherapy in pretreated, advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Alectinib prolonged PFS versus chemotherapy in patients with wild-type or mutant TP53; however, alectinib activity was considerably decreased in patients with mutant TP53.

International Tailored Chemotherapy Adjuvant (ITACA) trial, a phase III multicenter randomized trial comparing adjuvant pharmacogenomic-driven chemotherapy versus standard adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Several strategies have been investigated to improve the 4% survival advantage of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this investigator-initiated study we aimed to evaluate the predictive utility of the messenger RNA (mRNA) expression levels of excision repair cross complementation group 1 (ERCC1) and thymidylate synthase (TS) as assessed in resected tumor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred and seventy-three completely resected stage II-III NSCLC patients were enrolled and randomly assigned in each of the four genomic subgroups to investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy (C, n = 389) or tailored chemotherapy (T, n = 384). All anticancer drugs were administered according to standard doses and schedules. Stratification factors included stage and smoking status. The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Six hundred and ninety patients were included in the primary analysis. At a median follow-up of 45.9 months, 85 (24.6%) and 70 (20.3%) patients died in arms C and T, respectively. Five-year survival for patients in arms C and T was of 65.4% (95% CI (confidence interval): 58.5% to 71.4%) and 72.9% (95% CI: 66.5% to 78.3%), respectively. The estimated hazard ratio (HR) was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.56-1.06, P value: 0.109) for arm T versus arm C. HR for recurrence-free survival was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.69-1.14, P value: 0.341) for arm T versus arm C. Grade 3-5 toxicities were more frequently reported in arm C than in arm T. CONCLUSION: In completely resected stage II-III NSCLC tailoring adjuvant chemotherapy conferred a non-statistically significant trend for OS favoring the T arm. In terms of safety, the T arm was associated with better efficacy/toxicity ratio related to the different therapeutic choices in the experimental arm.

Consolidation nivolumab and ipilimumab versus observation in limited-disease small-cell lung cancer after chemo-radiotherapy - results from the randomised phase II ETOP/IFCT 4-12 STIMULI trial.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) is the standard treatment in limited-disease small-cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC), with 5-year overall survival (OS) of only 25% to 33%. PATIENTS AND METHODS: STIMULI is a 1:1 randomised phase II trial aiming to demonstrate superiority of consolidation combination immunotherapy versus observation after chemo-radiotherapy plus PCI (protocol amendment-1). Consolidation immunotherapy consisted of four cycles of nivolumab [1 mg/kg, every three weeks (Q3W)] plus ipilimumab (3 mg/kg, Q3W), followed by nivolumab monotherapy (240 mg, Q2W) for up to 12 months. Patient recruitment closed prematurely due to slow accrual and the statistical analyses plan was updated to address progression-free survival (PFS) as the only primary endpoint. RESULTS: Of the 222 patients enrolled, 153 were randomised (78: experimental; 75: observation). Among the randomised patients, median age was 62 years, 60% males, 34%/65% current/former smokers, 31%/66% performance status (PS) 0/1. Up to 25 May 2020 (median follow-up 22.4 months), 40 PFS events were observed in the experimental arm, with median PFS 10.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.0-not estimable (NE)] versus 42 events and median 14.5 months (8.2-NE) in the observation, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02 (0.66-1.58), two-sided P = 0.93. With updated follow-up (03 June 2021; median: 35 months), median OS was not reached in the experimental arm, while it was 32.1 months (26.1-NE) in observation, with HR = 0.95 (0.59-1.52), P = 0.82. In the experimental arm, median time-to-treatment-discontinuation was only 1.7 months. CTCAE v4 grade ≥3 adverse events were experienced by 62% of patients in the experimental and 25% in the observation arm, with 4 and 1 fatal, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The STIMULI trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improving PFS with nivolumab-ipilimumab consolidation after chemo-radiotherapy in LD-SCLC. A short period on active treatment related to toxicity and treatment discontinuation likely affected the efficacy results.

Immune related endonucleases and GTPases are not associated with tumor response in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with checkpoint inhibitors.

Immune related endonucleases have recently been described as potential therapeutic targets and predictors of response to treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). The aim is to evaluate the association between the expression of 5 biomarkers involved in the immune response (CD73, CD39, VISTA, Arl4d and Cytohesin-3) in parallel with the more common ICI-predictive markers, PD-L1 expression and Tumor Mutation Burden (TMB) with response to ICI therapy in an advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cohort. METHODS: Patients with advanced NSCLC treated with ICI single agent were divided into responders and non-responders according to RECIST v1.1 and duration of response (DOR) criteria. Immunohistochemistry was performed on pretreatment tumor tissue samples for PD-L1, CD73, CD39, VISTA, Arl4d, and Cytohesin-3 expression. TMB was estimated with NEOplus v2 RUO (NEO New Oncology GmbH) hybrid capture next generation sequencing assay. Resistance mutations in STK11/KEAP1 and positive predictive mutations in ARID1A/POLE were also evaluated. RESULTS: Included were 56 patients who were treated with ICI single agent. The median progression-free and overall survival for the whole cohort was 3.0 (95% CI, 2.4-3.6) and 15 (95% CI, 9.7-20.2) months, respectively. The distribution of CD73 in tumor cells and CD39, VISTA, Arl4d and Cytohesin-3 expression in immune cells were not different between responders and non-responders. Also, PD-L1 and TMB were not predictive for response. The frequency of STK11, KEAP1 and ARID1A mutations was low and only observed in the non-responder group. CONCLUSION: Separate and combined expression of 5 biomarkers involved in the immune response (CD73, CD39, VISTA, Arl4d, and Cytohesin-3) was not associated with response in our cohort of advanced NSCLC patients receiving single agent ICI. To confirm our findings the analysis of independent larger cohorts is warranted.

Risk stratification of EGFR+ lung cancer diagnosed with panel-based next-generation sequencing.

OBJECTIVE: Panel-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) is increasingly used for the diagnosis of EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and could improve risk assessment in combination with clinical parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To this end, we retrospectively analyzed the outcome of 400 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-treated EGFR+ NSCLC patients with validation of results in an independent cohort (n = 130). RESULTS: EGFR alterations other than exon 19 deletions (non-del19), TP53 co-mutations, and brain metastases at baseline showed independent associations of similar strengths with progression-free (PFS hazard ratios [HR] 2.1-2.3) and overall survival (OS HR 1.7-2.2), in combination defining patient subgroups with distinct outcome (EGFR+NSCLC risk Score, "ENS", p < 0.001). Co-mutations beyond TP53 were rarely detected by our multigene panel (<5%) and not associated with clinical endpoints. Smoking did not affect outcome independently, but was associated with non-del19 EGFR mutations (p < 0.05) and comorbidities (p < 0.001). Laboratory parameters, like the blood lymphocyte-to-neutrophil ratio and serum LDH, correlated with the metastatic pattern (p < 0.01), but had no independent prognostic value. Reduced ECOG performance status (PS) was associated with comorbidities (p < 0.05) and shorter OS (p < 0.05), but preserved TKI efficacy. Non-adenocarcinoma histology was also associated with shorter OS (p < 0.05), but rare (2-3 %). The ECOG PS and non-adenocarcinoma histology could not be validated in our independent cohort, and did not increase the range of prognostication alongside the ENS. CONCLUSIONS: EGFR variant, TP53 status and brain metastases predict TKI efficacy and survival in EGFR+ NSCLC irrespective of other currently available parameters ("ENS"). Together, they constitute a practical and reproducible approach for risk stratification of newly diagnosed metastatic EGFR+ NSCLC.

Strong impact of MammaPrint and BluePrint on treatment decisions in luminal early breast cancer: results of the WSG-PRIMe study.

PURPOSE: The WSG-PRIMe Study prospectively evaluated the impact of the 70-gene signature MammaPrint® (MP) and the 80-gene molecular subtyping assay BluePrint® on clinical therapy decisions in luminal early breast cancer. METHODS: 452 hormone receptor (HR)-positive and HER2-negative patients were recruited (N0, N1). Physicians provided initial therapy recommendations based on clinicopathological factors. After prospective risk classification by MammaPrint/BluePrint was revealed, post-test treatment recommendations and actual treatment were recorded. Decisional Conflict and anxiety were measured by questionnaires. RESULTS: Post-test switch (in chemotherapy (CT) recommendation) occurred in 29.1% of cases. Overall, physician adherence to MP risk assessment was 92.3% for low-risk and 94.3% for high-risk MP scores. Adherence was remarkably high in "discordant" groups: 74.7% of physicians initially recommending CT switched to CT omission following low-risk MP scores; conversely, 88.9% of physicians initially recommending CT omission switched to CT recommendations following high-risk MP scores. Most patients (99.2%) recommended to forgo CT post-test and 21.3% of patients with post-test CT recommendations did not undergo CT; among MP low-risk patients with pre-test and post-test CT recommendations, 40% did not actually undergo CT. Luminal subtype assessment by BluePrint was discordant with IHC assessment in 34% of patients. Patients' State Anxiety scores improved significantly overall, particularly in MP low-risk patients. Trait Anxiety scores increased slightly in MP high risk and decreased slightly in MP low-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: MammaPrint and BluePrint test results strongly impacted physicians' therapy decisions in luminal EBC with up to three involved lymph nodes. The high adherence to genetically determined risk assessment represents a key prerequisite for achieving a personalized cost-effective approach to disease management of early breast cancer.

[Strategies to Overcome Acquired Resistance to EGFR-TKI Therapy Based on T790M Specific Substances using Osimertinib as an Example]. / Strategien zur Überwindung der erworbenen EGFR-TKI-Resistenz durch T790M spezifische Substanzen am Beispiel von Osimertinib.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) are widely used in non-small cell lung cancer patients harboring activating EGFR mutations. However, resistance mechanisms, particularly the T790 M mutation, hamper longer-term therapeutic success of first and second generation EGFR-TKIs. To address this unmet medical need, EGFR-TKIs of the third generation are under clinical development. Relevant clinical efficacy with mainly mild to moderate class-specific side effects has been shown for third-generation EGFR-TKIs. Molecular testing is of major importance in deciding for treatment with third generation EGFR-TKIs. This article elucidates the developmental state of third generation EGFR-TKIs with its focus on Osimertinib, the first and currently the only compound in this class which is approved in Germany. Additionally, the medical importance of molecular diagnosis using tumor tissue and circulating tumor DNA is discussed.

Alectinib versus chemotherapy in crizotinib-pretreated anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: results from the phase III ALUR study.

Background: This is the first trial to directly compare efficacy and safety of alectinib versus standard chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who have progressed on, or were intolerant to, crizotinib. Patients and methods: ALUR (MO29750; NCT02604342) was a randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III trial of alectinib versus chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic ALK-positive NSCLC patients previously treated with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and crizotinib. Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to receive alectinib 600 mg twice daily or chemotherapy (pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 or docetaxel 75 mg/m2, both every 3 weeks) until disease progression, death, or withdrawal. Primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Altogether, 107 patients were randomized (alectinib, n = 72; chemotherapy, n = 35) in 13 countries across Europe and Asia. Median investigator-assessed PFS was 9.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.9-12.2] with alectinib and 1.4 months (95% CI: 1.3-1.6) with chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) 0.15 (95% CI: 0.08-0.29); P < 0.001]. Independent Review Committee-assessed PFS was also significantly longer with alectinib [HR 0.32 (95% CI: 0.17-0.59); median PFS was 7.1 months (95% CI: 6.3-10.8) with alectinib and 1.6 months (95% CI: 1.3-4.1) with chemotherapy]. In patients with measurable baseline central nervous system (CNS) disease (alectinib, n = 24; chemotherapy, n = 16), CNS objective response rate was significantly higher with alectinib (54.2%) versus chemotherapy (0%; P < 0.001). Grade ≥3 adverse events were more common with chemotherapy (41.2%) than alectinib (27.1%). Incidence of AEs leading to study-drug discontinuation was lower with alectinib (5.7%) than chemotherapy (8.8%), despite alectinib treatment duration being longer (20.1 weeks versus 6.0 weeks). Conclusion: Alectinib significantly improved systemic and CNS efficacy versus chemotherapy for crizotinib-pretreated ALK-positive NSCLC patients, with a favorable safety profile. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02604342; Roche study MO29750.

ALK-Testing in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or fluorescence in-situ Hybridisation (FISH)?: Statement of the Germany Society for Pathology (DGP) and the Working Group Thoracic Oncology (AIO) of the German Cancer Society e.V. (Stellungnahme der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Pathologie und der AG Thorakale Onkologie der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Onkologie/Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft e.V.).

The EML4-ALK pathway plays an important role in a significant subset of non-small cell lung cancer patients. Treatment options such as ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors lead to improved progression free survival and overall survival. These therapeutic options are chosen on the basis of the identification of the underlying genetic signature of the EML-ALK translocation. Efficient and easily accessible testing tools are required to identify eligible patients in a timely fashion. While FISH techniques are commonly used to detect this translocation, the broad implementation of this type of ALK testing into routine diagnostics is not optimal due to technical, structural and financial reasons. Immunohistochemical techniques to screen for EML4-ALK translocations may therefore play an important role in the near future. This consensus paper provides recommendations for the test algorithm and quality of the respective test approaches, which are discussed in the light of the current literature.

[Exon-dependent Subgroup-analysis of the Non-interventional REASON-Study: PFS and OS in EGFR-mutated NSCLC Patients Treated with Gefitinib or Chemotherapy]. / Exonabhängige Subgruppenanalyse der nicht-interventionellen REASON-Studie: PFS und OS beim EGFR-mutierten NSCLC mit Behandlung von Gefitinib versus Chemotherapie.

PURPOSE: To analyze the influence of the localization of mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with gefitinib (gef) or chemotherapy (CT) under real world conditions within the REASON study. METHODS: Subgroups of pts with mutations in exon 19 (n = 141), 18/20 (n = 43), and 21 (n = 104) were analyzed for PFS and OS according to gef or CT treatment and compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Pts with mutations in exon 19 and 18/20 treated with gef as first line therapy showed increased PFS and OS compared to CT. This increase was statistically significant in pts with exon 19 mutation (11.3 vs. 6.5 months), but was not found in pts with exon 21 mutation (9.1 vs. 9.3 months). Also, OS was significantly increased in patients with mutation in exon 19 treated with gef ever over all treatment lines compared to CT (21.8 vs. 10.6 months), whereas this was not found in pts with mutation in exon 21 (14.1 vs. 13.9 months). CONCLUSION: Localization and nature of EGFR mutations influences gefitinib treatment outcomes under routine conditions and should therefore be analyzed in detail.

[ALK-Diagnostics in NSCLC - Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or Fluorescence-in-situ Hybridisation (FISH)]. / ALK-Testung beim nicht-kleinzelligen Lungenkarzinom (NSCLC): Immunhistochemie (IHC) und/oder Fluoreszenz-in-situ-Hybridisierung (FISH)?

The EML4-ALK pathway plays an important role in a significant subset of non-small cell lung cancer patients. Treatment options such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors directed against the EML4-ALK signalling pathway lead to improved progression free and overall survival. These therapeutic options are chosen on the basis of the identification of the underlying genetic signature of the EML-ALK translocation. Efficient and easily accessible testing tools are required to identify the patients in time. While FISH techniques have been implemented to characterize this translocation for some time, the implementation of this testing is hampered by its broad use of resources. Immunohistochemical techniques to identify and screen for EML4-ALK translocations may play an important role in the near future. This consensus paper offers recommendations of the sequence and quality of the respective test approaches which are validated on the basis of the current literature.

Randomized phase 2 trial on refinement of early-stage NSCLC adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed versus cisplatin and vinorelbine: the TREAT study.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant chemotherapy is beneficial in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, balancing toxicity and efficacy mandates improvement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with completely resected stages IB-pT3N1 NSCLC were randomly assigned to either four cycles cisplatin (C: 50 mg/m(2) day (d)1 + 8) and vinorelbine (V: 25 mg/m(2) d1, 8, 15, 22) q4 weeks or four cycles cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) d1) and pemetrexed (Px: 500 mg/m(2) d1) q3 weeks. Primary objective was the clinical feasibility rate (no grade (G)4 neutropenia/thrombocytopenia or thrombocytopenia with bleeding, no G3/4 febrile neutropenia or non-hematological toxicity; no premature withdrawal/death). Secondary objectives were drug delivery and efficacy. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty two patients were randomized (stages: 38% IB, 10% IIA, 47% IIB, 5% pT3pN1; histology: 43% squamous, 57% non-squamous). The feasibility rates were 95.5% (cisplatin and pemetrexed, CPx) and 75.4% (cisplatin and vinorelbine, CVb) (P = 0.001); hematological G3/4 toxic effects were 10% (CPx) and 74% (CVb) (P < 0.001), non-hematological toxic effects were comparable (33% and 31%, P = 0.798). Delivery of total mean doses was 90% of planned with CPx, but 66% (cisplatin) and 64% (vinorelbine) with CVb (P < 0.0001). The median number of cycles [treatment time (weeks)] was 4 for CPx (11.2) and 3 for CVb (9.9). Time to withdrawal from therapy differed significantly between arms favoring CPx (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Adjuvant chemotherapy with CPx is safe and feasible with less toxicity and superior dose delivery compared with CVb.

Docetaxel-carboplatin chemotherapy combined with cetuximab in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)--results of the nonrandomised phase II study TaxErb.

This open label, single arm phase II study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the addition of cetuximab to first line chemotherapy with carboplatin and weekly docetaxel in patients with advanced non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). From February 2007 to December 2008 74 patients with NSCLC (stage IIIB and IV), ECOG PS ≤2 and no prior systemic chemotherapy were enrolled and treated with carboplatin (area under the curve=5 on day 1) and docetaxel (35 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15). Cycles were repeated every 4 weeks for a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 6 cycles. Cetuximab (400mg/m(2) on day 1 with subsequent doses of 250 mg/m(2) weekly) was administered until progression or intolerable toxicity up to a maximum treatment duration of 12 months. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (CR+PR) according to RECIST. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. Patients received a median of 4 cycles of docetaxel-carboplatin-chemotherapy. The median number of administrations of cetuximab was 14. Sixty-seven patients were evaluable for response. Partial response was seen in 29/67 patients corresponding to an overall response rate (ORR) of 43.3% (95%CI, 28.5-53.7). No patient experienced complete response. The clinical benefit rate (PR+SD) was 79.1%. The 1-year rates for PFS and OS were 11.2% and 64.4%, respectively. Median PFS was 4.8 months (95%CI, 3.70-5.31) and median OS 12.9 months (95%CI 8.26-∞). Adverse events were mainly grades 1-2. Skin toxicity (76% of pts), dyspnea (36.5%) and anemia (31.1%) were most frequent. Results from this phase II study suggest that the addition of cetuximab to first-line doublet carboplatin and weekly docetaxel results in a considerable clinical efficacy with an acceptable toxicity profile for patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC.

[Treatment strategies for the multidisciplinary management of spinal metastasis]. / Konzepte zur interdisziplinären Behandlung spinaler Metastasen.

Spinal metastases represent a significant cause of morbidity in patients diagnosed with malignancies. The treatment paradigm involves a cohesive multidisciplinary approach that allows treatment plans to be made in the context of a patient' overall condition. Opinions vary widely as to the role of surgery, from none to wide margin excision. The treatment should be taylor made for the individual. The primary aim of any treatment is the improvement of the quality of life by treatment of pain and avoidance of new neurological deficits. In individual cases a long lasting tumor control can be achieved.