The patient's perspective on treatment with dacomitinib: patient-reported outcomes from the Phase III trial ARCHER 1050.

Aim: Patient-reported symptoms, functioning and overall quality of life (QoL) were compared between dacomitinib and gefitinib in ARCHER 1050. Patients & methods: Patients (n = 448) with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer completed the EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire and its lung-specific module, LC-13. Mean scores over time were analyzed using a mixed model for repeated measures. Results: Both treatments showed early improvement in disease-related symptoms that was maintained during treatment. Treatment-related diarrhea and sore mouth decreased following dose reduction with dacomitinib. There were no clinically meaningful changes in functioning and overall QoL in either treatment group. Conclusion: Longer treatment duration, enabled by dose reduction, allowed patients on dacomitinib to improve treatment-related symptoms and maintain functioning and overall QoL for longer than gefitinib.

Two first-in-human studies of xentuzumab, a humanised insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-neutralising antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Xentuzumab, an insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1/IGF-2-neutralising antibody, binds IGF-1 and IGF-2, inhibiting their growth-promoting signalling. Two first-in-human trials assessed the maximum-tolerated/relevant biological dose (MTD/RBD), safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and activity of xentuzumab in advanced/metastatic solid cancers. METHODS: These phase 1, open-label trials comprised dose-finding (part I; 3 + 3 design) and expansion cohorts (part II; selected tumours; RBD [weekly dosing]). Primary endpoints were MTD/RBD. RESULTS: Study 1280.1 involved 61 patients (part I: xentuzumab 10-1800 mg weekly, n = 48; part II: 1000 mg weekly, n = 13); study 1280.2, 64 patients (part I: 10-3600 mg three-weekly, n = 33; part II: 1000 mg weekly, n = 31). One dose-limiting toxicity occurred; the MTD was not reached for either schedule. Adverse events were generally grade 1/2, mostly gastrointestinal. Xentuzumab showed dose-proportional pharmacokinetics. Total plasma IGF-1 increased dose dependently, plateauing at ~1000 mg/week; at ≥450 mg/week, IGF bioactivity was almost undetectable. Two partial responses occurred (poorly differentiated nasopharyngeal carcinoma and peripheral primitive neuroectodermal tumour). Integration of biomarker and response data by Bayesian Logistic Regression Modeling (BLRM) confirmed the RBD. CONCLUSIONS: Xentuzumab was well tolerated; MTD was not reached. RBD was 1000 mg weekly, confirmed by BLRM. Xentuzumab showed preliminary anti-tumour activity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01403974; NCT01317420.

Performance comparison of two next-generation sequencing panels to detect actionable mutations in cell-free DNA in cancer patients.

Background Genomic alterations studies in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) have increasing clinical use in oncology. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology provides the most complete mutational analysis, but nowadays limited data are available related to the comparison of results reported by different platforms. Here we compare two NGS panels for cfDNA: Oncomine™ Pan-Cancer Cell-Free Assay (Thermo Fisher Scientific), suitable for clinical laboratories, and Guardant360® (GuardantHealth), with more genes targeted but only available in an outsourcing laboratory. Methods Peripheral blood was obtained from 16 advanced cancer patients in which Guardant360® (G360) was requested as part of their clinical assistance. Blood samples were sent to be analyzed with G360 panel, and an additional blood sample was drawn to obtain and analyze cfDNA with Oncomine™ Pan-Cancer (OM) panel in an Ion GeneStudio S5™ System. Results cfDNA analysis globally rendered 101 mutations. Regarding the 55/101 mutations claimed to be included by manufacturers in both panels, 17 mutations were reported only by G360, 10 only by OM and 28 by both. In those coincident cases, there was a high correlation between the variant allele fractions (VAFs) calculated with each panel (r = 0.979, p < 0.01). Regarding the six actionable mutations with an FDA-approved therapy reported by G360, one was missed with OM. Also, 12 mutations with clinical trials available were reported by G360 but not by OM. Conclusions In summary, G360 and OM can produce different mutational profile in the same sample, even in genes included in both panels, which is especially important if these mutations are potentially druggable.

A phase Ib study of sonidegib (LDE225), an oral small molecule inhibitor of smoothened or Hedgehog pathway, in combination with docetaxel in triple negative advanced breast cancer patients: GEICAM/2012-12 (EDALINE) study.

Up-regulation of the Hedgehog (Hh) pathway is implicated in the genesis of a wide range of tumors including triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Sonidegib is a potent and selective oral inhibitor of Smo, a key component of the Hh signaling pathway. We designed a phase I clinical study to explore the combination of sonidegib plus docetaxel (fixed dose at 75 mg/m2) in advanced TNBC patients. The primary objective was to ascertain the combination's maximum tolerated dose and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D), based on dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) in the first 2 cycles. A standard "3 + 3" design was followed including three dose levels (DL) of sonidegib: 400 mg (DL1), 600 mg (DL2), and 800 mg (DL3). Twelve patients were included. Sonidegib 800 mg orally q.d. plus docetaxel 75 mg/m2 given intravenously on day 1 of 21-day cycles was established as the RP2D. No DLTs were observed at any DL. The median number of administered cycles at DL3 was 8 (range: 6 to 9). Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) at DL3 were neutropenia (66.7%), CPK increase (33.3%), leukopenia (33.3%), and paresthesia (33.3%), grade 4 AEs were not reported at this DL. At the RP2D, the combination showed antitumor activity in three out of 10 patients with measurable disease. Median time to progression for the overall study was 42.5 days (95% Confidence Interval: 29-155), and 188 days at DL3. No drug-to-drug interactions between sonidegib and docetaxel were found in the PK assessment. Trial Registration: EudraCT study number: 2013-001750-96. Study GEICAM/2012-12. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT study number: 2013-001750-96. Study GEICAM/2012-12. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02027376.

Management of common adverse events related to first-line dacomitinib use in EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled safety analysis.

Aim: This pooled safety analysis was conducted to analyze incidence and management of key dacomitinib-associated adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Patients & methods: Patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who received first-line dacomitinib at the 45 mg/day recommended starting dose were included. ADRs were identified based on reasonable association with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Results: Overall, 251/255 patients (98%) experienced ADRs. The most common were diarrhea, rash, stomatitis, nail disorder and dry skin. Dose interruptions and dose reductions were reported in 47 and 52% of patients, respectively. Fewer grade 3 key ADRs were observed following dose reductions. Conclusion: Dacomitinib was generally tolerable. Most reported ADRs were known to be associated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors and were managed with standard medical management and dose modifications.

Effects of dose modifications on the safety and efficacy of dacomitinib for EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

Aim: We evaluated reasons for dacomitinib dose reduction (DR) and examined adverse event (AE) incidence, key efficacy end points (progression-free survival [PFS]/overall survival [OS]), and pharmacokinetics in dose-reducing patients in the ARCHER 1050 trial. Patients & methods: Newly diagnosed patients with EGFR mutation-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer received oral dacomitinib (45 mg once-daily [QD]), with stepwise toxicity-managing DR (30 and 15 mg QD) permitted. Results: Skin toxicities (62.7%) were the most common DR-leading AEs. The AE incidence and severity decreased following DRs. Initial plasma dacomitinib exposure (45 mg QD) was generally lower in patients remaining at 45 mg QD compared with dose-reducing patients. Median PFS and OS were similar in all dacomitinib-treated patients and dose-reducing patients. Conclusion: Tolerability-guided dose modifications enabled patients to continue with dacomitinib and benefit from PFS/OS improvement. Trial registration number: NCT01774721.

Dacomitinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment for patients with EGFR-mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ARCHER 1050): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Dacomitinib is a second-generation, irreversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor. We compared its efficacy and safety with that of the reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced EGFR-mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In this international, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study (ARCHER 1050), we enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years or ≥20 years in Japan and South Korea) with newly diagnosed advanced NSCLC and one EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or Leu858Arg) at 71 academic medical centres and university hospitals in seven countries or special administrative regions. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to receive oral dacomitinib 45 mg/day (in 28-day cycles) or oral gefitinib 250 mg/day (in 28-day cycles) until disease progression or another discontinuation criterion was met. Randomisation, stratified by race and EGFR mutation type, was done with a computer-generated random code assigned by a central interactive web response system. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by masked independent review in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01774721, and is ongoing but no longer recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between May 9, 2013, and March 20, 2015, 452 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive dacomitinib (n=227) or gefitinib (n=225). Median duration of follow-up for progression-free survival was 22·1 months (95% CI 20·3-23·9). Median progression-free survival according to masked independent review was 14·7 months (95% CI 11·1-16·6) in the dacomitinib group and 9·2 months (9·1-11·0) in the gefitinib group (hazard ratio 0·59, 95% CI 0·47-0·74; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were dermatitis acneiform (31 [14%] of 227 patients given dacomitinib vs none of 224 patients given gefitinib), diarrhoea (19 [8%] vs two [1%]), and raised alanine aminotransferase levels (two [1%] vs 19 [8%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 21 (9%) patients given dacomitinib and in ten (4%) patients given gefitinib. Two treatment-related deaths occurred in the dacomitinib group (one related to untreated diarrhoea and one to untreated cholelithases/liver disease) and one in the gefitinib group (related to sigmoid colon diverticulitis/rupture complicated by pneumonia). INTERPRETATION: Dacomitinib significantly improved progression-free survival over gefitinib in first-line treatment of patients with EGFR-mutation-positive NSCLC and should be considered as a new treatment option for this population. FUNDING: SFJ Pharmaceuticals Group and Pfizer.

Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of PM01183 (a tetrahydroisoquinoline, Lurbinectedin) in combination with gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Background To determine the recommended dose (RD) of a combination of PM01183 and gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors. Methods Forty-five patients received escalating doses of PM01183/gemcitabine on Days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (d1,8 q3wk) following a standard 3 + 3 design. Results PM01183 3.5 mg flat dose (FD)/gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 was the highest dose level tested. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were mostly hematological and resulted in the expansion of a lower dose level (PM01183 3.5 mg FD/gemcitabine 800 mg/m2); 19 patients at this dose level were evaluable but >30% had DLT and >20% had febrile neutropenia. No DLT was observed in 11 patients treated at PM01183 3.0 mg FD/gemcitabine 800 mg/m2, which was defined as the RD. This regimen was feasible and tolerable with manageable toxicity; mainly grade 3/4 myelosuppression. Non-hematological toxicity comprised fatigue, nausea, vomiting, and transaminases increases. Fifteen (33%) patients received ≥6 cycles with no cumulative hematological toxicity. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed no evidence of drug-drug interaction. Nine of 38 patients had response as per RECIST (complete [3%] and partial [21%]), for an overall response rate (ORR) of 24% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 12-40%). Eleven patients (29%) had disease stabilization ≥4 months. Responses were durable (median of 8.5 months): overall median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.7-6.5 months). Conclusions The RD for this combination is PM01183 3.0 mg FD (or 1.6 mg/m2)/gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 d1,8 q3wk. This schedule is well tolerated and has antitumor activity in several advanced solid tumor types.

The role of sex and gender in the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer: the 6th ICAPEM Annual Symposium.

The incidence and mortality of lung cancer in women are rising, with both increasing by 124% between 2003 and 2019. The main risk factor for lung cancer is tobacco use, but indoor radon gas exposure is one of the leading causes in nonsmokers. The most recent evidence demonstrates that multiple factors can make women more susceptible to harm from these risk factors or carcinogens. For this consensus statement, the Association for Lung Cancer Research in Women (ICAPEM) invited a group of lung cancer experts to perform a detailed gender-based analysis of lung cancer. Clinically, female patients have different lung cancer profiles, and most actionable driver alterations are more prevalent in women, particularly in never-smokers. Additionally, the impact of certain therapies seems to be different. In the future, it will be necessary to carry out specific studies to improve the understanding of the role of certain biomarkers and gender in the prognosis and evolution of lung cancer.

The Potential Role of CA-125 as a Biomarker for Short-Term Mortality Risk in Patients with Acute Symptomatic Pulmonary Embolism.

Background: Antigen carbohydrate 125 (CA-125) is a complex glycoprotein extensively studied as a prognostic biomarker in heart failure, yet its potential role in the short-term prognosis of an acute pulmonary embolism (PE) remains unexplored. Methods: In this observational, prospective, single-center study, consecutive patients aged 18 and older with a confirmed acute symptomatic PE and no history of prior anticoagulant therapy were enrolled. Primary and secondary objectives aimed to assess the prognostic capacity of CA-125 at PE diagnosis for 30-day mortality and major bleeding, respectively. Results: A total of 164 patients were included (mean age 69.8 years, SD 17), with 56.1% being male. Within 30 days, 17 patients (10.4%) died and 9 patients (5.5%) suffered major bleeding. ROC curve analysis for 30-day mortality yielded an area under the curve of 0.69 (95% CI 0.53-0.85) with an optimal CA-125 cut-off point of 20 U/mL and a negative predictive value of 96%. Multivariate analysis revealed a significant association between CA-125 levels exceeding 20 U/mL and 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio 4.95; 95% CI 1.61-15.2) after adjusting for age, cancer, NT-proBNP > 600 ng/mL, and the simplified pulmonary embolism severity index score. Survival analysis for 30-day mortality exhibited a hazard ratio of 5.47 (95% CI 1.78-16.8). No association between CA-125 levels and 30-day major bleeding was found. Conclusions: CA-125 emerges as a promising surrogate biomarker for short-term mortality prediction in an acute symptomatic PE. Future investigations should explore the integration of CA-125 into PE mortality prediction scores to enhance the prognostic accuracy in this patient population.

Maintenance therapy with pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (PARAMOUNT): a double-blind, phase 3, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) benefit from pemetrexed maintenance therapy after induction therapy with a platinum-containing, non-pemetrexed doublet. The PARAMOUNT trial investigated whether continuation maintenance with pemetrexed improved progression-free survival after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin. METHODS: In this double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, randomised placebo-controlled trial, patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC aged 18 years or older, with no previous systemic chemotherapy for lung cancer, with at least one measurable lesion, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1 participated. Before randomisation, patients entered an induction phase which consisted of four cycles of induction pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2)) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m(2)) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Patients who did not progress after completion of four cycles of induction and who had an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 were stratified according to disease stage (IIIB or IV), ECOG performance status (0 or 1), and induction response (complete or partial response, or stable disease), and randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to receive maintenance therapy with either pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2) every 21 days) plus best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care until disease progression. Randomisation was done with the Pocock and Simon minimisation method. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00789373. FINDINGS: Of the 1022 patients enrolled, 939 participated in the induction phase. Of these, 539 patients were randomly assigned to receive continuation maintenance with pemetrexed plus best supportive care (n=359) or with placebo plus best supportive care (n=180). Among the 359 patients randomised to continuation maintenance with pemetrexed, there was a significant reduction in the risk of disease progression over the placebo group (HR 0·62, 95% CI 0·49-0·79; p<0·0001). The median progression-free survival, measured from randomisation, was 4·1 months (95% CI 3·2-4·6) for pemetrexed and 2·8 months (2·6-3·1) for placebo. Possibly treatment-related laboratory grade 3-4 adverse events were more common in the pemetrexed group (33 [9%] of 359 patients) than in the placebo group (one [<1%] of 180 patients; p<0·0001), as were non-laboratory grade 3-5 adverse events (32 [9%] of 359 patients in the pemetrexed group; eight [4%] of 180 patients in the placebo group; p=0·080); one possibly treatment-related death was reported in each group. The most common adverse events of grade 3-4 in the pemetrexed group were anaemia (16 [4%] of 359 patients), neutropenia (13 [4%]), and fatigue (15 [4%]). In the placebo group, these adverse events were less common: anaemia (one [<1%] of 180 patients), neutropenia (none), and fatigue (one <1%]). The most frequent serious adverse events were anaemia (eight [2%] of 359 patients in the pemetrexed group vs none in the placebo group) and febrile neutropenia (five [1%] vs none). Discontinuations due to drug-related adverse events occurred in 19 (5%) patients in the pemetrexed group and six (3%) patients in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Continuation maintenance with pemetrexed is an effective and well tolerated treatment option for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC with good performance status who have not progressed after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Anti-angiogenic agents for NSCLC following first-line immunotherapy: Rationale, recent updates, and future perspectives.

The implementation of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), with or without chemotherapy, as first-line treatment for patients who do not have actionable mutations has proved to be a major paradigm shift in the management of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the transition of ICIs, such as pembrolizumab and nivolumab, to a first-line setting has left an unmet need for effective second-line treatment options, which is an area of intense research. In 2020, we reviewed the biological and mechanistic rationale for anti-angiogenic agents in combination with, or following, immunotherapy with the aim of eliciting a so called 'angio-immunogenic' switch in the tumor microenvironment. Here, we review the latest clinical evidence of the benefits of incorporating anti-angiogenic agents into treatment regimens. While there is a paucity of prospective data, several recent observational studies indicate that the marketed anti-angiogenic drugs, nintedanib or ramucirumab, are effective in combination with docetaxel following immuno-chemotherapy. Addition of anti-angiogenics, like bevacizumab, have also demonstrated clinical benefit when combined with first-line immuno-chemotherapy regimens. Ongoing clinical trials are assessing these agents in combination with ICIs, with encouraging early results (e.g., ramucirumab plus pembrolizumab in LUNG-MAP S1800A). Also, several emerging anti-angiogenic agents combined with ICIs are currently being assessed in phase III trials following immunotherapy, including lenvatinib (LEAP-008), and sitravatinib (SAPPHIRE) It is hoped that these trials will help expand second-line treatment options in patients with NSCLC. Areas of focus in the future will include further molecular dissection of the mechanisms of resistance to immunotherapy and the various response-progression profiles to immunotherapy observed in the clinic and the monitoring of the dynamics of immunomodulation over the course of treatment. Improved understanding of these phenomena may help identify clinical biomarkers and inform the optimal use of anti-angiogenics in the treatment of individual patients.

Brief report: High incidence of peridiagnosis thromboembolic events in patients with BRAF-mutant lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to determine if advanced BRAF-mutant NSCLC has a higher thromboembolic events (TEE) rate than the expected. METHODS: Between 2008 and 2021, 182 patients with BRAF-mutant advanced NSCLC (BRAF V600E, n = 70; BRAF non-V600E, n = 112) were retrospectively identified from 18 centers in Spain. Patients received chemotherapy (n = 147), immunotherapy (n = 69), targeted therapy (n = 42), and immunotherapy + chemotherapy (n = 26). RESULTS: Incidence rate of TEE was 26.4 % (95%CI: 19.9 %-32.9 %). A total of 72 TEE were documented among 48 patients, as 18 patients (37.5 %) developed more than one event. Median time to TEE onset was 2 months, 69 % of TEE occurred in the peridiagnostic period (+/- 90 days from cancer diagnosis), and in 16 pts. (33 %) TEE was the form of lung cancer presentation. Although most TEE were only venous (82 %; PE, n = 33; DVT, n = 16), arterial events were reported in 31 % and occurred earlier, or TEE presented in atypical locations (13.9 %). TEE were related to high hospitalization rate (59 %), recurrence (23 %), and mortality (10.4 %) despite appropriate anticoagulant/antiaggregant treatment. Median OS in patients without-TEE was 19.4 months (95%CI: 4.6-34.1), and significantly shorter in patients with arterial-TEE vs venous-TEE vs both of them: 9.9 months (95%CI: 0-23.5) vs 41.7 months (95%CI: 11.3-72.2 m) vs 2.7 months (95%CI: 2.1-3.3), p = 0.001. Neither clinical or molecular features (BRAF V600E/non-V600E), nor cancer treatment was associated to TEE occurrence. Khorana score underperformed to predict thrombosis at cancer diagnosis, as only 19.2 % of patients were classified as high-risk. CONCLUSIONS: Thrombotic events represent a new clinical feature of BRAF-mutant lung cancer. Patients with almost a 30 % incidence of TEE should be offered systematic anticoagulation.

FGF receptor inhibitors: role in cancer therapy.

The fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling pathway is implicated as a key driver of tumor progression and growth via the dysregulation of cell proliferation, differentiation, survival, and angiogenesis in multiple tumor types. In addition, it may serve as a mechanism of resistance to antivascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapy. As such this pathway has emerged as a relevant therapeutic target, and several agents that can inhibit or modulate its signaling are in various stages of development. This review will summarize the current clinical status of agents targeting FGF receptors. In addition, strategies to accelerate the clinical development of these targeted agents will be presented.

SEOM clinical guidelines for the prophylaxis of infectious diseases in cancer patients (2021).

Infections are still a major cause of morbi-mortality in patients with cancer. Some of these infections are preventable through specific measures, such as vaccination or prophylaxis. This guideline aims to summarize the evidence and recommendations for the prevention of infections in cancer patients, devoting special attention to the most prevalent preventable infectious disease. All the evidences will be graded according to The Infectious Diseases Society of America grading system.

C-Reactive Protein and Serum Albumin Ratio: A Feasible Prognostic Marker in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

(1) Background: C-reactive protein (CRP) and albumin are inflammatory markers. We analyzed the prognostic capacity of serum albumin (SA) and CRP for an outcome comprising mortality, length of stay, ICU admission, and non-invasive mechanical ventilation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on the Spanish national SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Two multivariate logistic models were adjusted for SA, CRP, and their combination. Training and testing samples were used to validate the models. (3) Results: The outcome was present in 41.1% of the 3471 participants, who had lower SA (mean [SD], 3.5 [0.6] g/dL vs. 3.8 [0.5] g/dL; p < 0.001) and higher CRP (108.9 [96.5] mg/L vs. 70.6 [70.3] mg/L; p < 0.001). In the adjusted multivariate model, both were associated with poorer evolution: SA, OR 0.674 (95% CI, 0.551−0.826; p < 0.001); CRP, OR 1.002 (95% CI, 1.001−1.004; p = 0.003). The CRP/SA model had a similar predictive capacity (honest AUC, 0.8135 [0.7865−0.8405]), with a continuously increasing risk and cutoff value of 25 showing the highest predictive capacity (OR, 1.470; 95% CI, 1.188−1.819; p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: SA and CRP are good independent predictors of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. For the CRP/SA ratio value, 25 is the cutoff for poor clinical course.

Molecular biomarkers in early stage lung cancer.

Low dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening, together with the recent advances in targeted and immunotherapies, have shown to improve non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) survival. Furthermore, screening has increased the number of early stage-detected tumors, allowing for surgical resection and multimodality treatments when needed. The need for improved sensitivity and specificity of NSCLC screening has led to increased interest in combining clinical and radiological data with molecular data. The development of biomarkers is poised to refine inclusion criteria for LDCT screening programs. Biomarkers may also be useful to better characterize the risk of indeterminate nodules found in the course of screening or to refine prognosis and help in the management of screening detected tumors. The clinical implications of these biomarkers are still being investigated and whether or not biomarkers will be included in further decision-making algorithms in the context of screening and early lung cancer management still needs to be determined. However, it seems clear that there is much room for improvement even in early stage lung cancer disease-free survival (DFS) rates; thus, biomarkers may be the key to refine risk-stratification and treatment of these patients. Clinicians' capacity to register, integrate, and analyze all the available data in both high risk individuals and early stage NSCLC patients will lead to a better understanding of the disease's mechanisms, and will have a direct impact in diagnosis, treatment, and follow up of these patients. In this review, we aim to summarize all the available data regarding the role of biomarkers in LDCT screening and early stage NSCLC from a multidisciplinary perspective. We have highlighted clinical implications, the need to combine risk stratification, clinical data, radiomics, molecular information and artificial intelligence in order to improve clinical decision-making, especially regarding early diagnostics and adjuvant therapy. We also discuss current and future perspectives for biomarker implementation in routine clinical practice.

Updated Overall Survival in a Randomized Study Comparing Dacomitinib with Gefitinib as First-Line Treatment in Patients with Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and EGFR-Activating Mutations.

BACKGROUND: ARCHER 1050, an ongoing, randomized, open-label, phase III trial of dacomitinib versus gefitinib in newly diagnosed patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and an EGFR-activating mutation, reported significant improvement in overall survival (OS) with dacomitinib. OBJECTIVE: This paper reports an updated OS analysis of ARCHER 1050 after an extended follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multinational, multicenter trial, adults (aged ≥ 18 years or ≥ 20 years in Japan and Korea) with newly diagnosed NSCLC and EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 L858R substitution), and no history of central nervous system metastases, were randomized 1:1 to receive dacomitinib 45 mg/day (n = 227) or gefitinib 250 mg/day (n = 225). Randomization was stratified by race and EGFR mutation type. An ad hoc updated analysis of OS was conducted at the protocol-defined cut-off of 48 months from first dosing of the last enrolled patient (13 May 2019). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 47.9 months, 133 (58.6%) patients had died in the dacomitinib arm and 152 (67.6%) in the gefitinib arm. The hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.748 (95% CI 0.591-0.947; two-sided P = 0.0155); median OS was 34.1 months with dacomitinib versus 27.0 months with gefitinib. The HR for OS in patients with dose reduction(s) in the dacomitinib arm (n = 154) compared with all patients in the gefitinib arm was 0.554 (95% CI 0.420-0.730); median OS was 42.5 months for patients with dose reduction(s) in the dacomitinib arm. The most common adverse events were diarrhea (87.7%), paronychia (61.7%), dermatitis acneiform (49.3%), and stomatitis (43.6%) with dacomitinib, and diarrhea (55.8%) and alanine aminotransferase increased (40.2%) with gefitinib. CONCLUSIONS: The OS benefit from first-line treatment with dacomitinib versus gefitinib was maintained after extended follow-up in patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR-activating mutations. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT01774721 (registered 24 January 2013).