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.

Pembrolizumab in Patients With Tumors With High Tumor Mutational Burden: Results From the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study.

PURPOSE: The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) Study is a pragmatic basket trial evaluating antitumor activity of approved targeted agents in patients with advanced cancers harboring potentially actionable genomic alterations. Data from cohorts of patients with high tumor mutational burden (HTMB, defined as ≥9 mutations per megabase) with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) and other advanced cancers treated with pembrolizumab are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients were 18 years and older with measurable tumors and a lack of standard treatment options, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and adequate organ function. The primary end point was disease control (DC), defined as complete or partial response or stable disease (SD) of at least 16-weeks duration. For the CRC cohort, Simon's two-stage design with a null DC rate of 15% versus 35% (power = 0.85; α = .10) was used. Low accruing histology-specific cohorts were collapsed into one histology-pooled (HP) cohort. For the HP cohort, the null hypothesis of a DC rate of 15% was rejected if the lower limit of a one-sided 90% CI was >15%. Secondary end points included objective response (OR), safety, progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, and duration of SD. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients with HTMB with CRC (n = 28) or advanced cancers (n = 49) were treated with pembrolizumab. For the CRC cohort, the DC rate was 31% (P = .04) and the OR rate was 11%. For the HP cohort, the DC rate was 45% (one-sided 90% CI, 35 to 100) and the OR rate was 26%. The null hypothesis of a 15% DC rate was rejected for both cohorts. Twelve of 77 patients experienced treatment-related grade 3 adverse events (AEs) or serious AEs, including two deaths. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity in pretreated patients with advanced cancers and HTMB.

Full Dose SBRT in Combination With Mediastinal Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Practical Guide for Planning, Dosimetric Results From a Phase 2 Study, and a Treatment Planning Guide for the Phase 3 NRG Oncology LU-008 Trial.

PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has been used with high effectiveness in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) but has not been studied extensively in locally advanced NSCLC. We conducted a phase 2 study delivering SBRT to the primary tumor followed by conventionally fractionated chemoradiation to the involved lymph nodes for patients with node-positive locally advanced NSCLC. This manuscript serves as both a guide to planning techniques used on this trial and the subsequent phase 3 study, NRG Oncology LU-008, and to report patient dosimetry and toxicity results. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We initiated a phase 2 multicenter single arm study evaluating SBRT to the primary tumor (50-54 Gy in 3-5 fractions) followed by conventionally fractionated chemoradiation to 60 Gy in 2 Gy fractions with doublet chemotherapy to the involved lymph nodes for patients with stage III or unresectable stage II NSCLC. Patients eligible for adjuvant immunotherapy received up to 12 months of durvalumab. We report a detailed guide for the entire treatment process from computed tomography simulation through treatment planning and delivery. The dosimetric outcomes from the 60 patients who completed therapy on study are reported both for target coverage and normal structure doses. We also report correlation between radiation-related toxicities and dosimetric parameters. RESULTS: Sixty patients were enrolled between 2017 and 2022. Planning techniques used were primarily volumetric modulated arc therapy for SBRT to the primary tumor and conventionally fractionated radiation to the involved nodes, with a minority of cases using dynamic conformal arc technique or static dynamic multileaf collimator intensity modulated radiation therapy. Grade 2 or higher pneumonitis was associated with lung dose V5 Gy > 70% and grade 2 or higher pulmonary toxicity was associated with lung dose V10 Gy > 50%. Only 3 patients (5%) experienced grade 3 or higher pneumonitis. Grade 2 or higher esophagitis was associated with esophageal doses, including mean dose > 20 Gy, V60 Gy > 7%, and D1cc > 55 Gy. Only 1 patient (1.7%) experienced grade 3 esophagitis. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT to the primary tumor followed by conventionally fractionated chemoradiation to the involved lymph nodes is feasible with planning techniques as described. Radiation-related toxicity on this phase 2 study was low. This manuscript serves as a guideline for the recently activated NRG Oncology LU-008 phase 3 trial evaluating this experimental regimen.

Association of Antifolate Response Signature Status and Clinical Activity of Pemetrexed-Platinum Chemotherapy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Piedmont Study.

PURPOSE: The Piedmont study is a prospectively designed retrospective evaluation of a new 48-gene antifolate response signature (AF-PRS) in patients with locally advanced/metastatic nonsquamous (NS) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with pemetrexed-containing platinum doublet chemotherapy (PMX-PDC). The study tested the hypothesis that AF-PRS identifies patients with NS-NSCLC who have a higher likelihood of responding positively to PMX-PDC. The goal was to gather clinical evidence supporting AF-PRS as a potential diagnostic test. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Residual pretreatment FFPE tumor samples and clinical data were analyzed from 105 patients treated with first-line (1L) PMX-PDC. Ninety-five patients had sufficient RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) data quality and clinical annotation for inclusion in the analysis. Associations between AF-PRS status and associate genes and outcome measures including progression-free survival (PFS) and clinical response were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 53% of patients were AF-PRS(+), which was associated with extended PFS, but not overall survival, versus AF-PRS(-) (16.6 months vs. 6.6 months; P = 0.025). In patients who were stage I to III patients at the time of treatment, PFS was further extended in AF-PRS(+) versus AF-PRS(-) (36.2 months vs. 9.3 months; P = 0.03). Complete response (CR) to therapy was noted in 14 of 95 patients. AF-PRS(+) preferentially selected a majority (79%) of CRs, which were evenly split between patients stage I to III (six of seven) and stage IV (five of seven) at the time of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: AF-PRS identified a significant population of patients with extended PFS and/or clinical response following PMX-PDC treatment. AF-PRS may be a useful diagnostic test for patients indicated for systemic chemotherapy, especially when determining the optimal PDC regimen for locally advanced disease.

Prognostic Mutational Signatures of NSCLC Patients treated with chemotherapy, immunotherapy and chemoimmunotherapy.

Different types of therapy are currently being used to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) depending on the stage of tumor and the presence of potentially druggable mutations. However, few biomarkers are available to guide clinicians in selecting the most effective therapy for all patients with various genetic backgrounds. To examine whether patients' mutation profiles are associated with the response to a specific treatment, we collected comprehensive clinical characteristics and sequencing data from 524 patients with stage III and IV NSCLC treated at Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist. Overall survival based Cox-proportional hazard regression models were applied to identify mutations that were "beneficial" (HR < 1) or "detrimental" (HR > 1) for patients treated with chemotherapy (chemo), immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and chemo+ICI combination therapy (Chemo+ICI) followed by the generation of mutation composite scores (MCS) for each treatment. We also found that MCS is highly treatment specific that MCS derived from one treatment group failed to predict the response in others. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses showed a superior predictive power of MCS compared to TMB and PD-L1 status for immune therapy-treated patients. Mutation interaction analysis also identified novel co-occurring and mutually exclusive mutations in each treatment group. Our work highlights how patients' sequencing data facilitates the clinical selection of optimized treatment strategies.

Rate of COVID-19 vaccination among patients with cancer who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2: Analysis of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Registry.

BACKGROUND: The availability of safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines has enabled protections against serious COVID-19 outcomes, which are particularly important for patients with cancer. The American Society of Clinical Oncology Registry enabled the study of COVID-19 vaccine uptake in patients with cancer who were positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2. METHODS: Medical oncology practices entered data on patients who were in cancer treatment. The cohort included patients who had severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 infection in 2020 and had visits and vaccine data after December 31, 2020. The primary end point was the time to first vaccination from January 1, 2021. Cumulative incidence estimates and Cox regression with death as a competing risk were used to describe the time to vaccine uptake and factors associated with vaccine receipt. RESULTS: The cohort included 1155 patients from 56 practices. Among 690 patients who received the first vaccine dose, 92% received the second dose. The median time to vaccine was 99 days. After adjustment, older patients were associated with a higher likelihood of vaccination compared with patients younger than 50 years in January through March 2021, and age exhibited a linear effect, with older patients showing higher rates of vaccination. Metastatic solid tumors (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.98) or non-B-cell hematologic malignancies (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54-0.93) compared with nonmetastatic solid tumors, and any comorbidity (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.95) compared with no comorbidity, were associated with lower vaccination rates. Area-level social determinants of health (lower education attainment and higher unemployment rates) were associated with lower vaccination rates. CONCLUSIONS: Patient age, cancer type, comorbidity, area-level education attainment, and unemployment rates were associated with differential vaccine uptake rates. These findings should inform strategies to communicate about vaccine safety and efficacy to patients with cancer.

Impact of a Clinical Genomics Program on Trial Accrual for Targeted Treatments: Practical Approach Overcoming Barriers to Accrual for Underserved Patients.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials of novel and targeted agents increasingly require biomarkers for eligibility. Precision oncology continues to evolve, but challenges hamper broad use of molecular profiling (MP) that could increase the number of patients benefiting from targeted therapy. We implemented an integrated clinical genomics program (CGP), including a virtual Molecular Tumor Board (MTB), and examined its impact on MP use and impact on clinical trial accrual in a multisite regional-based cancer system with an emphasis on effects for isolated clinicians. METHODS: We assessed MP and MTB use from 2010 to 2020 by practice location, physician experience, and patient characteristics. Use of MTB-recommended treatments was assessed. Clinical trial enrollment was evaluated for patients with MP versus MP and MTB review. RESULTS: After CGP implementation, the number of physicians using MP and the number of MP tests increased ≥ 10-fold. The proportion of Hispanic patients with MP was the same as that in the system (both 2%) with marginal differences observed in the proportion of African Americans tested compared with the system population (16% v 19%). Physicians followed MTB treatment recommendations in 74% of cases. Rapid clinical decline was the most common reason why physicians did not follow MTB recommendations. Clinical trial accrual was 15% (669 of 4,459) for patients with MP alone and 28% (94 of 334) with both MP and MTB review. Clinical trial availability and patient out-of-pocket costs affected MP use. CONCLUSION: Integrating CGP into clinical workflow with decision support tools, trial matching, and management of patient costs led to increased use of MP by physicians with all levels of experience, enhanced clinical trial accrual, and has the potential to reduce disparities in MP.

Changes Over Time in COVID-19 Severity and Mortality in Patients Undergoing Cancer Treatment in the United States: Initial Report From the ASCO Registry.

PURPOSE: People with cancer are at increased risk for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. ASCO's COVID-19 registry promotes systematic data collection across US oncology practices. METHODS: Participating practices enter data on patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer treatment. In this analysis, we focus on all patients with hematologic or regional or metastatic solid tumor malignancies. Primary outcomes are 30- and 90-day mortality rates and change over time. RESULTS: Thirty-eight practices provided data for 453 patients from April to October 2020. Sixty-two percent had regional or metastatic solid tumors. Median age was 64 years. Forty-three percent were current or previous cigarette users. Patients with B-cell malignancies age 61-70 years had twice mortality risk (hazard ratio = 2.1 [95% CI, 1.3 to 3.3]) and those age > 70 years had 4.5 times mortality risk (95% CI, 1.8 to 11.1) compared with patients age ≤ 60 years. Association between survival and age was not significant in patients with metastatic solid tumors (P = .12). Tobacco users had 30-day mortality estimate of 21% compared with 11% for never users (log-rank P = .005). Patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 before June 2020 had 30-day mortality rate of 20% (95% CI, 14% to 25%) compared with 13% (8% to 18%) for those diagnosed in or after June 2020 (P = .08). The 90-day mortality rate for pre-June patients was 28% (21% to 34%) compared with 21% (13% to 28%; P = .20). CONCLUSION: Older patients with B-cell malignancies were at increased risk for death (unlike older patients with metastatic solid tumors), as were all patients with cancer who smoke tobacco. Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 later in 2020 was associated with more favorable 30- and 90-day mortality, likely related to more asymptomatic cases and improved clinical management.

Defining comprehensive biomarker-related testing and treatment practices for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: Results of a survey of U.S. oncologists.

BACKGROUND: An ASCO taskforce comprised of representatives of oncology clinicians, the American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable (NLCRT), LUNGevity, the GO2 Foundation for Lung Cancer, and the ROS1ders sought to: characterize U.S. oncologists' biomarker ordering and treatment practices for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); ascertain barriers to biomarker testing; and understand the impact of delays on treatment decisions. METHODS: We deployed a survey to 2374 ASCO members, targeting U.S. thoracic and general oncologists. RESULTS: We analyzed 170 eligible responses. For non-squamous NSCLC, 97% of respondents reported ordering tests for EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and BRAF. Testing for MET, RET, and NTRK was reported to be higher among academic versus community providers and higher among thoracic oncologists than generalists. Most respondents considered 1 (46%) or 2 weeks (52%) an acceptable turnaround time, yet 37% usually waited three or more weeks to receive results. Respondents who waited ≥3 weeks were more likely to defer treatment until results were reviewed (63%). Community and generalist respondents who waited ≥3 weeks were more likely to initiate non-targeted treatment while awaiting results. Respondents <5 years out of training were more likely to cite their concerns about waiting for results as a reason for not ordering biomarker testing (42%, vs. 19% with ≥6 years of experience). CONCLUSIONS: Respondents reported high biomarker testing rates in patients with NSCLC. Treatment decisions were impacted by test turnaround time and associated with practice setting and physician specialization and experience.

Landscape and clinical impact of metabolic alterations in non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.

Background: Metabolomics studies to date have described widespread metabolic reprogramming events during the development of non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Extending far beyond the Warburg effect, not only is carbohydrate metabolism affected, but also metabolism of amino acids, cofactors, lipids, and nucleotides. Methods: We evaluated the clinical impact of metabolic reprogramming. We performed comparative analysis of publicly available data on non-squamous NSCLC, to identify concensus altered metabolic pathways. We investigated whether alterations of metabolic genes controlling those consensus metabolic pathways impacted clinical outcome. Using the clinically annotated lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) cohort from The Cancer Genome Atlas, we surveyed the distribution and frequency of function-altering mutations in metabolic genes and their impact on overall survival (OS). Results: We identified 42 metabolic genes of clinical significance, the majority of which (37 of 42) clustered across three metabolic superpathways (carbohydrates, amino acids, and nucleotides) and most functions (40 of 42) were associated with shorter OS. Multivariate analyses showed that dysfunction of carbohydrate metabolism had the most profound impact on OS [hazard ratio (HR) =5.208; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.272 to 8.291], false discovery rate (FDR)-P≤0.0001, followed by amino acid metabolism (HR =3.346; 95% CI: 2.129 to 5.258), FDR-P≤0.0001 and nucleotide metabolism (HR =2.578; 95% CI: 1.598 to 4.159), FDR-P=0.0001. The deleterious effect of metabolic reprogramming on non-squamous NSCLC was observed independently of disease stage and across treatments groups. Conclusions: By providing a detailed landscape of metabolic alterations in non-squamous NSCLC, our findings offer new insights in the biology of the disease and metabolic adaptation mechanisms of clinical significance.

Modernizing Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria: Recommendations of the ASCO-Friends of Cancer Research Washout Period and Concomitant Medication Work Group.

PURPOSE: Washout periods and concomitant medication exclusions are common in cancer clinical trial protocols. These exclusion criteria are often applied inconsistently and without evidence to justify their use. The authors sought to determine how washout period and concomitant medication allowances can be broadened to speed trial enrollment and improve the generalizability of trial data to a larger oncology practice population without compromising the safety of trial participants. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A multistakeholder working group was convened to define problems associated with excessively long washout periods and exclusion of patients due to concomitant medications. The group performed a literature search and evaluated study data from the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network (PanCAN), Emory University School of Medicine (Atlanta, GA), and the FDA to understand recent approaches to these eligibility criteria. The group convened to develop consensus recommendations for broadened eligibility criteria. RESULTS: The data analysis found that exclusion criteria based on washout periods and concomitant medications are frequently inconsistent and lack scientific rationale. Scientific rationale for appropriate eligibility criteria are presented in the article; for washout periods, rationale is presented by treatment type. CONCLUSIONS: Arbitrary or blanket washout and concomitant medication exclusions should be eliminated. Where there is evidence to support them, clinically relevant washout periods and concomitant medication-related eligibility criteria may be included.See related commentary by Giantonio, p. 2369.

Nanoparticle Albumin-bound Paclitaxel Plus Carboplatin Induction Followed by Nanoparticle Albumin-bound Paclitaxel Maintenance in Squamous Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer (ABOUND.sqm): A Phase III Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated maintenance nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab) paclitaxel in the treatment of advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with treatment-naive squamous non-small-cell lung cancer received four 21-day cycles of nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 plus carboplatin area under the curve 6 on day 1 as induction therapy. Patients without disease progression after induction were randomized 2:1 to maintenance nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 (days 1 and 8 every 21 days) plus best supportive care (BSC) or BSC alone. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included safety and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 420 patients had received induction therapy; 202 (nab-paclitaxel plus BSC, 136; BSC, 66) had received maintenance therapy. Enrollment was discontinued after a preplanned interim futility analysis (patients could remain in the study at the investigator's discretion). The median PFS was 3.12 months for nab-paclitaxel plus BSC and 2.60 months for BSC; the difference was not statistically significant (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.19; P = .36). The median OS (median follow-up, 24.2 months) was 17.18 months for nab-paclitaxel plus BSC and 12.16 months for BSC (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.48-1.02; nominal P = .07). An updated analysis (median follow-up, 28.4 months) revealed a median OS of 17.61 months for nab-paclitaxel plus BSC and 12.16 months for BSC (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-0.98; nominal P = .037). The most frequent grade 3 and 4 treatment-emergent adverse events for the entire study were neutropenia (53.1% [nab-paclitaxel plus BSC] vs. 50.0% [BSC]) and anemia (33.1% [nab-paclitaxel plus BSC] vs. 32.3% [BSC]). Only peripheral neuropathy had occurred in ≥ 5% of patients during maintenance therapy (13.1%; nab-paclitaxel plus BSC). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the ABOUND.sqm did not meet the primary endpoint of PFS. An updated OS analysis revealed a trend favoring nab-paclitaxel plus BSC.

The utilization of immunotherapy with radiation therapy in lung cancer: a narrative review.

Despite decreasing smoking rates, lung cancer remains the leading cause of death from cancer in the United States. Radiation therapy has been established as an effective locoregional therapy for both early stage and locally advanced disease and is known to stimulate local immune response. Past treatment paradigms have established the role of combining cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens and radiation therapy to help address the local and systemic nature of lung cancer. However, these regimens have limitations in their tolerability due to toxicity. Additionally, cytotoxic chemotherapy has limited efficacy in preventing systemic spread of lung cancer. Newer systemic agents such as immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown improved survival in metastatic and locally advanced lung cancer and have the advantage of more limited toxicity profiles compared to cytotoxic chemotherapy. Furthermore, improved overall response rates and systemic tumor responses have been observed with the combination of radiation therapy and immunotherapy, leading to numerous active clinical trials evaluating the combination of immune checkpoint inhibition with radiotherapy. This comprehensive review discusses the current clinical data and ongoing studies evaluating the combination of radiation therapy and immunotherapy in both non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

Initial Results from Mobile Low-Dose Computerized Tomographic Lung Cancer Screening Unit: Improved Outcomes for Underserved Populations.

INTRODUCTION: The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated that screening high-risk patients with low-dose computed tomography (CT) of the chest reduces lung cancer mortality compared with screening with chest x-ray. Uninsured and Medicaid patients usually lack access to this hospital-based screening test because of geographic and socioeconomic factors. We hypothesized that a mobile screening unit would improve access and confer the benefits demonstrated by the NLST to this underserved group, which is most at risk of lung cancer deaths. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We created a mobile unit by building a Samsung BodyTom portable 32-slice low-dose CT scanner into a 35-foot coach; it delivers high-quality images for both soft tissue and bone and includes a waiting area and high-speed wireless internet connection for fast image transfer. The unit was extensively tested to show robustness and stability of mobile equipment. This project was designed to screen uninsured and underinsured patients, otherwise with eligibility criteria identical to that of the National Lung Screening Trial, with the only difference being exclusion of patients eligible for Medicare (which provides financial coverage for CT-based lung cancer screening). RESULTS: We screened 550 patients (20% black, 3% Hispanic, 70% rural) with a male-to-female ratio of 1.1:1, median age 61 years (range, 55-64), and found 12 lung cancers at initial screen (2.2%), including 6 at stage I-II (58% of total lung cancers early stage) and 38 Lung-RADS 4 (highly suspicious) lesions that are being followed closely. Incidental findings included nonlung cancers and coronary artery disease. DISCUSSION: In this initial pilot study, using the first mobile low-dose whole body CT screening unit in the U.S., the initial cancer detection rate is comparable to that reported in the NLST, despite excluding patients over the age of 64 years who have Medicare coverage, but with marked improvement of screening rates specifically in underserved sociodemographic, racial, and ethnic groups and with better outcomes than conventionally found in the underserved and at lower cost per case. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study shows clearly that a mobile low-dose CT scanning unit allows effective lung cancer screening for underserved populations, such as impoverished African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, or isolated rural groups, and has a pick-up rate of 1% for early stage disease. If confirmed in a planned randomized trial, this will be policy changing, as these groups usually present with advanced disease; this approach will produce better survival data at lower cost per case.

Assessing an ASCO Decision Aid for Improving the Accuracy and Attribution of Serious Adverse Event Reporting From Investigators to Sponsors.

PURPOSE: Investigators often send reports to sponsors that incorrectly categorize adverse event (AE)s as serious or attribute AEs to investigational drugs. Such errors can contribute to high volumes of uninformative investigational new drug safety reports that sponsors submit to the US Food and Drug Administration and participating investigators, which strain resources and impede the detection of valid safety signals. To improve the quality of serious AE (SAE) reporting by physician-investigators and research staff, ASCO developed and tested a Decision Aid. METHODS: A preliminary study with crossover design was conducted in a convenience sample. Physician-investigators and research staff were randomly assigned to receive case studies. Case studies were assessed for seriousness and attribution, first unassisted and then with the Decision Aid. Participants completed a feedback survey about the Decision Aid. Effectiveness of reporting and attribution are reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CI. Power to detect associations was limited because of a small sample size. RESULTS: The Decision Aid did not significantly affect accuracy of determining seriousness (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.31 to 2.46), but it did significantly increase accuracy of attributing an SAE to a drug (OR, 3.60; 95% CI, 1.15 to 11.4). Most of the 29 participants reported that the Decision Aid was helpful (93%) and improved decision-making time (69%) and confidence in reporting (83%), and that they would use the Decision Aid in practice (83%). CONCLUSION: The Decision Aid shows promise as a method to improve the quality of SAE attribution, which may improve the detection of valid safety signals and reduce the administrative burden of uninformative investigational new drug safety reports. Study of the Decision Aid in a larger sample with analysis stratified by participant role and SAE reporting experience would further assess the tool's impact.

Trial Reporting in Immuno-Oncology (TRIO): An American Society of Clinical Oncology-Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer Statement.

PURPOSE: To develop recommendations for clinical trial reporting that address the unique efficacy, toxicity, and combination and sequencing aspects of immuno-oncology (IO) treatments. METHODS: ASCO and the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a working group that consisted of practicing medical oncologists, immunologists, clinical researchers, biostatisticians, and representatives from industry and government to develop Trial Reporting in Immuno-Oncology (TRIO) recommendations. These recommendations are based on expert consensus, given that existing data to support evidence-based recommendations are limited. CONCLUSION: The TRIO recommendations are intended to improve the reporting of IO clinical trials and thus provide more complete evidence on the relative benefits and risks of an IO therapeutic approach. Given the rapid expansion of the number of IO clinical trials and ongoing improvements to the evidence base supporting the use of IO treatments in clinical care, these recommendations will likely need regular revision as the IO field develops.