Sotorasib versus docetaxel for previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer with KRASG12C mutation: a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Sotorasib is a specific, irreversible inhibitor of the GTPase protein, KRASG12C. We compared the efficacy and safety of sotorasib with a standard-of-care treatment in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with the KRASG12C mutation who had been previously treated with other anticancer drugs. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial at 148 centres in 22 countries. We recruited patients aged at least 18 years with KRASG12C-mutated advanced NSCLC, who progressed after previous platinum-based chemotherapy and a PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor. Key exclusion criteria included new or progressing untreated brain lesions or symptomatic brain lesions, previously identified oncogenic driver mutation other than KRASG12C for which an approved therapy is available (eg EGFR or ALK), previous treatment with docetaxel (neoadjuvant or adjuvant docetaxel was allowed if the tumour did not progress within 6 months after the therapy was terminated), previous treatment with a direct KRASG12C inhibitor, systemic anticancer therapy within 28 days of study day 1, and therapeutic or palliative radiation therapy within 2 weeks of treatment initiation. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to oral sotorasib (960 mg once daily) or intravenous docetaxel (75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks) in an open-label manner using interactive response technology. Randomisation was stratified by number of previous lines of therapy in advanced disease (1 vs 2 vs >2), ethnicity (Asian vs non-Asian), and history of CNS metastases (present or absent). Treatment continued until an independent central confirmation of disease progression, intolerance, initiation of another anticancer therapy, withdrawal of consent, or death, whichever occurred first. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which was assessed by a blinded, independent central review in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04303780, and is active but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between June 4, 2020, and April 26, 2021, 345 patients were randomly assigned to receive sotorasib (n=171 [50%]) or docetaxel (n=174 [50%]). 169 (99%) patients in the sotorasib group and 151 (87%) in the docetaxel group received at least one dose. After a median follow-up of 17·7 months (IQR 16·4-20·1), the study met its primary endpoint of a statistically significant increase in the progression-free survival for sotorasib, compared with docetaxel (median progression-free survival 5·6 months [95% CI 4·3-7·8] vs 4·5 months [3·0-5·7]; hazard ratio 0·66 [0·51-0·86]; p=0·0017). Sotorasib was well tolerated, with fewer grade 3 or worse (n=56 [33%] vs n=61 [40%]) and serious treatment-related adverse events compared with docetaxel (n=18 [11%] vs n=34 [23%]). For sotorasib, the most common treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse were diarrhoea (n= 20 [12%]), alanine aminotransferase increase (n=13 [8%]), and aspartate aminotransferase increase (n=9 [5%]). For docetaxel, the most common treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse were neutropenia (n=13 [9%]), fatigue (n=9 [6%]), and febrile neutropenia (n=8 [5%]). INTERPRETATION: Sotorasib significantly increased progression-free survival and had a more favourable safety profile, compared with docetaxel, in patients with advanced NSCLC with the KRASG12C mutation and who had been previously treated with other anticancer drugs. FUNDING: Amgen.

Reporting of interventional clinical trial results in an academic center: a survey of completed studies.

BACKGROUND: The dissemination of clinical trial results is an important scientific and ethical endeavour. This survey of completed interventional studies in a French academic center describes their reporting status. METHODS: We explored all interventional studies sponsored by Rennes University Hospital identified on the French Open Science Monitor which tracks trials registered on EUCTR or clinicaltrials.gov, and provides an automatic assessment of the reporting of results. For each study, we ascertained the actual reporting of results using systematic searches on the hospital internal database, bibliographic databases (Google Scholar, PubMed), and by contacting all principal investigators (PIs). We describe several features (including total budget and numbers of trial participants) of the studies that did not report any results. RESULTS: The French Open Science Monitor identified 93 interventional studies, among which 10 (11%) reported results. In contrast, our survey identified 36 studies (39%) reporting primary analysis results and an additional 18 (19%) reporting results for secondary analyses (without results for their primary analysis). The overall budget for studies that did not report any results was estimated to be €5,051,253 for a total of 6,735 trial participants. The most frequent reasons for the absence of results reported by PIs were lack of time for 18 (42%), and logistic difficulties (e.g. delay in obtaining results or another blocking factor) for 12 (28%). An association was found between non-publication and negative results (adjusted Odds Ratio = 4.70, 95% Confidence Interval [1.67;14.11]). CONCLUSIONS: Even allowing for the fact that automatic searches underestimate the number of studies with published results, the level of reporting was disappointingly low. This amounts to a waste of trial participants' implication and money. Corrective actions are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/q5hcs.

A defect of amphiregulin release predicted longer survival independently of YAP expression in patients with pleural mesothelioma in the IFCT-0701 MAPS phase 3 trial.

The Hippo pathway effector YAP is dysregulated in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). YAP's target genes include the secreted growth factor amphiregulin (AREG), which is overexpressed in a wide range of epithelial cancers and plays an elusive role in MPM. We assayed the expression of YAP and AREG in MPM pathology samples and that of AREG additionally in plasma samples of patients from the randomized phase 3 IFCT-0701 Mesothelioma Avastin Cisplatin Pemetrexed Study (MAPS) using immunohistochemistry and ELISA assays, respectively. MPM patients frequently presented high levels of tumor AREG (64.3%), a high cytosolic AREG expression being predictive of a better prognosis with longer median overall and progression-free survival. Surprisingly, tumor AREG cytosolic expression was not correlated with secreted plasma AREG. By investigating the AREG metabolism and function in MPM cell lines H2452, H2052, MSTO-211H and H28, in comparison with the T47D ER+ breast cancer cell line used as a positive control, we confirm that AREG is important for cell invasion, growth without anchorage, proliferation and apoptosis in mesothelioma cells. Yet, most of these MPM cell lines failed to correctly execute AREG posttranslational processing by metalloprotease ADAM17/tumor necrosis factor-alpha-converting enzyme (TACE) and extracell secretion. The favorable prognostic value of high cytosolic AREG expression in MPM patients could therefore be sustained by default AREG posttranslational processing and release. Thus, the determination of mesothelioma cell AREG content could be further investigated as a prognostic marker for MPM patients and used as a stratification factor in future clinical trials.

Carboplatin plus etoposide versus topotecan as second-line treatment for patients with sensitive relapsed small-cell lung cancer: an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Topotecan is currently the only drug approved in Europe in a second-line setting for the treatment of small-cell lung cancer. This study investigated whether the doublet of carboplatin plus etoposide was superior to topotecan as a second-line treatment in patients with sensitive relapsed small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done in 38 hospitals in France, we enrolled patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced stage IV or locally relapsed small-cell lung cancer, who responded to first-line platinum plus etoposide treatment, but who had disease relapse or progression at least 90 days after completion of first-line treatment. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive combination carboplatin plus etoposide (six cycles of intravenous carboplatin [area under the curve 5 mg/mL per min] on day 1 plus intravenous etoposide [100 mg/m2 from day 1 to day 3]) or oral topotecan (2·3 mg/m2 from day 1 to day 5, for six cycles). Randomisation was done using the minimisation method with biased-coin balancing for ECOG performance status, response to the first-line chemotherapy, and treatment centre. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which was centrally reviewed and analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02738346. FINDINGS: Between July 18, 2013, and July 2, 2018, we enrolled and randomly assigned 164 patients (82 in each study group). One patient from each group withdrew consent, therefore 162 patients (81 in each group) were included in the intention-to-treat population. With a median follow-up of 22·7 months (IQR 20·0-37·3), median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the combination chemotherapy group than in the topotecan group (4·7 months, 90% CI 3·9-5·5 vs 2·7 months, 2·3-3·2; stratified hazard ratio 0·57, 90% CI 0·41-0·73; p=0·0041). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (18 [22%] of 81 patients in the topotecan group vs 11 [14%] of 81 patients in the combination chemotherapy group), thrombocytopenia (29 [36%] vs 25 [31%]), anaemia (17 [21%] vs 20 [25%]), febrile neutropenia (nine [11%] vs five [6%]), and asthenia (eight [10%] vs seven [9%]). Two treatment-related deaths occurred in the topotecan group (both were febrile neutropenia with sepsis) and no treatment-related deaths occurred in the combination group. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that carboplatin plus etoposide rechallenge can be considered as a reasonable second-line chemotherapy option for patients with sensitive relapsed small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Amgen and the French Lung Cancer Group (Groupe Français de Pneumo-Cancérologie).

First-line carboplatin plus pemetrexed with pemetrexed maintenance in HIV-positive patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: the phase II IFCT-1001 CHIVA trial.

HIV infection is an exclusion criterion in lung cancer trials. This multicentre phase II trial aimed to assess feasibility, efficacy and safety of first-line carboplatin plus pemetrexed (CaP) followed by pemetrexed (P) maintenance in people living with HIV (PLHIV) with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NS-NSCLC).Four cycles of CaP were followed by P-maintenance therapy in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2. The primary objective was a disease control rate (DCR) ≥30% after 12 weeks.Of the 61 PLHIV enrolled, 49 (80%) had a performance status of 0-1, and 19 (31%) had brain metastases. Median CD4 lymphocyte count was 418 cells·µL-1 (range 18-1230), median CD4 lymphocyte nadir was 169.5 cells·µL-1 (1-822); 48 (80%) patients were virologically controlled. Four-cycle inductions were achieved by 38 (62%) patients, and 31 (51%) started P-maintenance (median of 4.1 cycles (range 1-19)). The 12-week DCR was 50.8% (95% CI 38.3-63.4) and partial response rate 21.3%. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 3.5 (95% CI 2.7-4.4) and 7.6 months (5.7-12.8), respectively. Patients with a performance status of 0-1 had the longest median progression-free survival (4.3 months, 95% CI 3.1-5.2) and overall survival (11.9 months, 95% CI 6.4-14.3). During induction, CaP doublet was well tolerated apart from grade 3-4 haematological toxicities (neutropenia 53.8%; thrombocytopenia 35.0%; anaemia 30.0%). Two fatal treatment-related sepses were reported. No opportunistic infections were experienced.In PLHIV with advanced NS-NSCLC, first-line four-cycle CaP induction followed by P-maintenance was effective and reasonably well-tolerated. Further studies should evaluate combination strategies of CaP with immunotherapy in PLHIV.

Open-label Phase II trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of second-line metronomic oral vinorelbine-atezolizumab combination for stage-IV non-small-cell lung cancer - VinMetAtezo trial, (GFPC‡ 04-2017).

Metronomic chemotherapy is defined as frequent low-dose administration without prolonged drug-free breaks. Combining immune-checkpoint inhibitors and metronomic chemotherapy is a new approach to improve responses and delay onset of resistance to immune-checkpoint inhibitors. This multicenter, Phase II, open-label, single-arm study was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of metronomic oral vinorelbine in combination with immune-checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small-cell lung cancers progressing after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The recommended metronomic oral vinorelbine dose will be determined during a safety run-in period including 12 patients; the main study will include 59 additional patients. The primary outcome is progression-free survival at 4 months. Secondary outcomes are safety of the combination, median overall survival, objective response rate, disease-control rate at 4 months and quality of life (NCT03801304).

Durvalumab as third-line or later treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (ATLANTIC): an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a new standard of care for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without EGFR tyrosine kinase or anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) genetic aberrations (EGFR-/ALK-), but clinical benefit in patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements (EGFR+/ALK+) has not been shown. We assessed the effect of durvalumab (anti-PD-L1) treatment in three cohorts of patients with NSCLC defined by EGFR/ALK status and tumour expression of PD-L1. METHODS: ATLANTIC is a phase 2, open-label, single-arm trial at 139 study centres in Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients had advanced NSCLC with disease progression following at least two previous systemic regimens, including platinum-based chemotherapy (and tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy if indicated); were aged 18 years or older; had a WHO performance status score of 0 or 1; and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Key exclusion criteria included mixed small-cell lung cancer and NSCLC histology; previous exposure to any anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 antibody; and any previous grade 3 or worse immune-related adverse event while receiving any immunotherapy agent. Patients in cohort 1 had EGFR+/ALK+ NSCLC with at least 25%, or less than 25%, of tumour cells with PD-L1 expression. Patients in cohorts 2 and 3 had EGFR-/ALK- NSCLC; cohort 2 included patients with at least 25%, or less than 25%, of tumour cells with PD-L1 expression, and cohort 3 included patients with at least 90% of tumour cells with PD-L1 expression. Patients received durvalumab (10 mg/kg) every 2 weeks, via intravenous infusion, for up to 12 months. Retreatment was allowed for patients who benefited but then progressed after completing 12 months. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with increased tumour expression of PD-L1 (defined as ≥25% of tumour cells in cohorts 1 and 2, and ≥90% of tumour cells in cohort 3) who achieved an objective response, assessed in patients who were evaluable for response per independent central review according to RECIST version 1.1. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of durvalumab and for whom any post-dose data were available. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer open to accrual, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02087423. FINDINGS: Between Feb 25, 2014, and Dec 28, 2015, 444 patients were enrolled and received durvalumab: 111 in cohort 1, 265 in cohort 2, and 68 in cohort 3. Among patients with at least 25% of tumour cells expressing PD-L1 who were evaluable for objective response per independent central review, an objective response was achieved in 9 (12·2%, 95% CI 5·7-21·8) of 74 patients in cohort 1 and 24 (16·4%, 10·8-23·5) of 146 patients in cohort 2. In cohort 3, 21 (30·9%, 20·2-43·3) of 68 patients achieved an objective response. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 40 (9%) of 444 patients overall: six (5%) of 111 patients in cohort 1, 22 (8%) of 265 in cohort 2, and 12 (18%) of 68 in cohort 3. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were pneumonitis (four patients [1%]), elevated gamma-glutamyltransferase (four [1%]), diarrhoea (three [1%]), infusion-related reaction (three [1%]), elevated aspartate aminotransferase (two [<1%]), elevated transaminases (two [<1%]), vomiting (two [<1%]), and fatigue (two [<1%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 27 (6%) of 444 patients overall: five (5%) of 111 patients in cohort 1, 14 (5%) of 265 in cohort 2, and eight (12%) of 68 in cohort 3. The most common serious adverse events overall were pneumonitis (five patients [1%]), fatigue (three [1%]), and infusion-related reaction (three [1%]). Immune-mediated events were manageable with standard treatment guidelines. INTERPRETATION: In patients with advanced and heavily pretreated NSCLC, the clinical activity and safety profile of durvalumab was consistent with that of other anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 agents. Responses were recorded in all cohorts; the proportion of patients with EGFR-/ALK- NSCLC (cohorts 2 and 3) achieving a response was higher than the proportion with EGFR+/ALK+ NSCLC (cohort 1) achieving a response. The clinical activity of durvalumab in patients with EGFR+ NSCLC with ≥25% of tumour cells expressing PD-L1 was encouraging, and further investigation of durvalumab in patients with EGFR+/ALK+ NSCLC is warranted. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune-checkpoint-inhibitor antibody, disrupts PD-1-mediated signaling and may restore antitumor immunity. METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, international phase 3 study, we assigned patients with nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that had progressed during or after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy to receive nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks or docetaxel at a dose of 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Overall survival was longer with nivolumab than with docetaxel. The median overall survival was 12.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.7 to 15.0) among 292 patients in the nivolumab group and 9.4 months (95% CI, 8.1 to 10.7) among 290 patients in the docetaxel group (hazard ratio for death, 0.73; 96% CI, 0.59 to 0.89; P=0.002). At 1 year, the overall survival rate was 51% (95% CI, 45 to 56) with nivolumab versus 39% (95% CI, 33 to 45) with docetaxel. With additional follow-up, the overall survival rate at 18 months was 39% (95% CI, 34 to 45) with nivolumab versus 23% (95% CI, 19 to 28) with docetaxel. The response rate was 19% with nivolumab versus 12% with docetaxel (P=0.02). Although progression-free survival did not favor nivolumab over docetaxel (median, 2.3 months and 4.2 months, respectively), the rate of progression-free survival at 1 year was higher with nivolumab than with docetaxel (19% and 8%, respectively). Nivolumab was associated with even greater efficacy than docetaxel across all end points in subgroups defined according to prespecified levels of tumor-membrane expression (≥1%, ≥5%, and ≥10%) of the PD-1 ligand. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported in 10% of the patients in the nivolumab group, as compared with 54% of those in the docetaxel group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC that had progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy, overall survival was longer with nivolumab than with docetaxel. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 057 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01673867.).

Cost-effectiveness of KRAS, EGFR and ALK testing for decision making in advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma: the French IFCT-PREDICT.amm study.

ALK rearrangement and EGFR/KRAS mutations constitute the primary biomarkers tested to provide targeted or nontargeted therapies in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of biomarker testing for NSCLC.Between 2013 and 2014, 843 treatment-naive patients were prospectively recruited at 19 French hospitals into a longitudinal observational cohort study. Two testing strategies were compared, i.e. with "at least one biomarker status known" and "at least KRAS status known", in addition to "no biomarker testing" as the reference strategy. The Kaplan-Meier approach was employed to assess restricted mean survival time. Direct medical costs incurred by hospitals were estimated with regard to treatment, inpatient care and biomarker testing.Compared with "no biomarker testing", the "at least one biomarker status known" strategy yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EUR13 230 per life-year saved, which decreased to EUR7444 per life-year saved with the "at least KRAS status known" testing strategy. In sensitivity analyses, biomarker testing strategies were less costly and more effective in 41% of iterations.In summary, molecular testing prior to treatment initiation proves to be cost-effective in advanced NSCLC management and may assist decision makers in defining conditions for further implementation of these innovations in general practice.

Efficacy and safety of long-acting pasireotide or everolimus alone or in combination in patients with advanced carcinoids of the lung and thymus (LUNA): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: There are no data from prospective studies focused exclusively on patients with advanced lung and thymic carcinoids. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of long-acting pasireotide and everolimus, administered alone or in combination, in patients with advanced carcinoids of the lung or thymus. METHODS: LUNA was a prospective, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial of adult patients (aged >18 years) with advanced (unresectable or metastatic), well differentiated carcinoid tumours of the lung or thymus, with radiological progression within 12 months before randomisation, and a WHO performance status of 0-2. At each centre, the investigator or their designee registered each patient using an interactive voice recognition system into one of the three treatment groups. The randomisation allocation sequence was generated by an external company; patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive treatment with long-acting pasireotide (60 mg intramuscularly every 28 days), everolimus (10 mg orally once daily), or both in combination, for the core 12-month treatment period. Patients were stratified by carcinoid type (typical vs atypical) and line of study treatment (first line vs others). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients progression-free at month 9, defined as the proportion of patients with overall lesion assessment at month 9 showing a complete response, partial response, or stable disease according to local Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01563354. The extension phase of the study is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Aug 16, 2013, and Sept 30, 2014, 124 patients were enrolled from 36 centres in nine countries: 41 were allocated to the long-acting pasireotide group, 42 to the everolimus group, and 41 to the combination group. At month 9, the proportion of patients with an overall lesion assessment of complete response, partial response, or stable disease was 16 of 41 patients (39·0%, 95% CI 24·2-55·5) in the long-acting pasireotide group, 14 of 42 patients (33·3%, 19·6-49·5) in the everolimus group, and 24 of 41 patients (58·5%, 42·1-73·7) in the combination group. The most common grade 1-2 adverse events with a suspected association with long-acting pasireotide monotherapy were diarrhoea (15 [37%] of 41), hyperglycaemia (17 [41%]), and weight loss (8 [20%]); those with a suspected association with everolimus monotherapy were stomatitis (26 [62%] of 42) and diarrhoea (16 [38%]); and those suspected to be associated with combination treatment were hyperglycaemia (27 [66%] of 41]), diarrhoea (19 [46%]), and asthenia (8 [20%]). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events with a suspected association with long-acting pasireotide monotherapy were γ-glutamyltransferase increased (four [10%] of 41 patients), diarrhoea (three [7%]), and hyperglycaemia (three [7%]); those for everolimus were hyperglycaemia (seven [17%] of 42 patients), stomatitis (four [10%]), and diarrhoea (three [7%]); those for combination treatment were hyperglycaemia (nine [22%] of 41 patients) and diarrhoea (four [10%]). 11 patients died during the core 12-month treatment phase or up to 56 days after the last study treatment exposure date: two (5%) of 41 in the long-acting pasireotide group, six (14%) of 42 in the everolimus group, and three (7%) of 41 in the combination group. No deaths were suspected to be related to long-acting pasireotide treatment. One death in the everolimus group (acute kidney injury associated with diarrhoea), and two deaths in the combination group (diarrhoea and urinary sepsis in one patient, and acute renal failure and respiratory failure in one patient) were suspected to be related to everolimus treatment. In the latter patient, acute renal failure was not suspected to be related to everolimus treatment, but respiratory failure was suspected to be related. INTERPRETATION: The study met the primary endpoint in all three treatment groups. Safety profiles were consistent with the known safety profiles of these agents. Further studies are needed to confirm the antitumour efficacy of the combination of a somatostatin analogue with everolimus in lung and thymic carcinoids. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma AG.

Routine molecular profiling of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results of a 1-year nationwide programme of the French Cooperative Thoracic Intergroup (IFCT).

BACKGROUND: The molecular profiling of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for known oncogenic drivers is recommended during routine care. Nationally, however, the feasibility and effects on outcomes of this policy are unknown. We aimed to assess the characteristics, molecular profiles, and clinical outcomes of patients who were screened during a 1-year period by a nationwide programme funded by the French National Cancer Institute. METHODS: This study included patients with advanced NSCLC, who were routinely screened for EGFR mutations, ALK rearrangements, as well as HER2 (ERBB2), KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA mutations by 28 certified regional genetics centres in France. Patients were assessed consecutively during a 1-year period from April, 2012, to April, 2013. We measured the frequency of molecular alterations in the six routinely screened genes, the turnaround time in obtaining molecular results, and patients' clinical outcomes. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01700582. FINDINGS: 18,679 molecular analyses of 17,664 patients with NSCLC were done (of patients with known data, median age was 64·5 years [range 18-98], 65% were men, 81% were smokers or former smokers, and 76% had adenocarcinoma). The median interval between the initiation of analysis and provision of the written report was 11 days (IQR 7-16). A genetic alteration was recorded in about 50% of the analyses; EGFR mutations were reported in 1947 (11%) of 17,706 analyses for which data were available, HER2 mutations in 98 (1%) of 11,723, KRAS mutations in 4894 (29%) of 17,001, BRAF mutations in 262 (2%) of 13,906, and PIK3CA mutations in 252 (2%) of 10,678; ALK rearrangements were reported in 388 (5%) of 8134 analyses. The median duration of follow-up at the time of analysis was 24·9 months (95% CI 24·8-25·0). The presence of a genetic alteration affected first-line treatment for 4176 (51%) of 8147 patients and was associated with a significant improvement in the proportion of patients achieving an overall response in first-line treatment (37% [95% CI 34·7-38·2] for presence of a genetic alteration vs 33% [29·5-35·6] for absence of a genetic alteration; p=0·03) and in second-line treatment (17% [15·0-18·8] vs 9% [6·7-11·9]; p<0·0001). Presence of a genetic alteration was also associated with improved first-line progression-free survival (10·0 months [95% CI 9·2-10·7] vs 7·1 months [6·1-7·9]; p<0·0001) and overall survival (16·5 months [15·0-18·3] vs 11·8 months [10·1-13·5]; p<0·0001) compared with absence of a genetic alteration. INTERPRETATION: Routine nationwide molecular profiling of patients with advanced NSCLC is feasible. The frequency of genetic alterations, acceptable turnaround times in obtaining analysis results, and the clinical advantage provided by detection of a genetic alteration suggest that this policy provides a clinical benefit. FUNDING: French National Cancer Institute (INCa).

TG4010 immunotherapy and first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (TIME): results from the phase 2b part of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: MUC1 is a tumour-associated antigen expressed by many solid tumours, including non-small-cell lung cancer. TG4010 is a modified vaccinia Ankara expressing MUC1 and interleukin 2. In a previous study, TG4010 combined with chemotherapy showed activity in non-small-cell lung cancer and the baseline value of CD16, CD56, CD69 triple-positive activated lymphocytes (TrPAL) was shown to be potentially predictive of TG4010 efficacy. In this phase 2b part of the phase 2b/3 TIME trial, we further assess TG4010 in combination with first-line chemotherapy and use of the TrPAL biomarker in this setting. METHODS: In this phase 2b part of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b/3 trial, we recruited previously untreated patients aged 18 years or older with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer without a known activating EGFR mutation and with MUC1 expression in at least 50% of tumoural cells. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) by an external service provider to subcutaneous injections of 10(8) plaque-forming units of TG4010 or placebo from the beginning of chemotherapy every week for 6 weeks and then every 3 weeks up to progression, discontinuation for any reason, or toxic effects, stratified according to baseline value of TrPAL (≤ or > the upper limit of normal [ULN]) and, in addition, a dynamic minimisation procedure was used, taking into account chemotherapy regimen, histology, addition or not of bevacizumab, performance status, and centre. Patients, site staff, monitors, the study funder, data managers, and the statistician were masked to treatment identity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed every 6 weeks, to validate the predictive value of the TrPAL biomarker. If patients with TrPAL values of less than or equal to the ULN had a Bayesian probability of more than 95% that the true hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival was less than 1, and if those with TrPAL values of greater than the ULN had a probability of more than 80% that the true HR for progression-free survival was more than 1, the TrPAL biomarker would be validated. We did primary analyses in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses in those who had received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one valid post-baseline safety assessment. Monitors, site staff, and patients are still masked to treatment assignment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01383148. FINDINGS: Between April 10, 2012, and Sept 12, 2014, we randomly allocated 222 patients (TG4010 and chemotherapy 111 [50%]; placebo and chemotherapy 111 [50%]). In the whole population, median progression-free survival was 5·9 months (95% CI 5·4-6·7) in the TG4010 group and 5·1 months (4·2-5·9) in the placebo group (HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·55-0·98]; one-sided p=0·019). In patients with TrPAL values of less than or equal to the ULN, the HR for progression-free survival was 0·75 (0·54-1·03); the posterior probability of the HR being less than 1 was 98·4%, and thus the primary endpoint was met. In patients with TrPAL values of greater than the ULN, the HR for progression-free survival was 0·77 (0·42-1·40); the posterior probability of the HR being greater than 1 was 31·3%, and the primary endpoint was not met. We noted grade 1-2 injection-site reactions in 36 (33%) of 110 patients in the TG4010 group versus four (4%) of 107 patients in the placebo group. We noted no grade 3 or 4 nor serious adverse events deemed to be related to TG4010 only. Four (4%) patients presented grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to TG4010 and other study treatments (chemotherapy or bevacizumab) versus 11 (10%) in the placebo group. No serious adverse event was related to the combination of TG4010 with other study treatments. The most frequent severe adverse events were neutropenia (grade 3 29 [26%], grade 4 13 [12%] in the TG4010 group vs grade 3 22 [21%], grade 4 11 [10%] in the placebo group), anaemia (grade 3 12 [11%] vs grade 3 16 [15%]), and fatigue (grade 3 12 [11%], grade 5 one [1%] vs grade 3 13 [12%]; no grade 4 events). INTERPRETATION: TG4010 plus chemotherapy seems to improve progression-free survival relative to placebo plus chemotherapy. These data support the clinical value of the TrPAL biomarker in this clinical setting; because the primary endpoint was met, the trial is to continue into the phase 3 part. FUNDING: Transgene, Avancées Diagnostiques pour de Nouvelles Approches Thérapeutiques (ADNA), and OSEO.

Activity and safety of nivolumab, an anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, for patients with advanced, refractory squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 063): a phase 2, single-arm trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with squamous non-small-cell lung cancer that is refractory to multiple treatments have poor outcomes. We assessed the activity of nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody, for patients with advanced, refractory, squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: We did this phase 2, single-arm trial at 27 sites (academic, hospital, and private cancer centres) in France, Germany, Italy, and USA. Patients who had received two or more previous treatments received intravenous nivolumab (3 mg/kg) every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a confirmed objective response as assessed by an independent radiology review committee. We included all treated patients in the analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01721759. FINDINGS: Between Nov 16, 2012, and July 22, 2013, we enrolled and treated 117 patients. 17 (14·5%, 95% CI 8·7-22·2) of 117 patients had an objective response as assessed by an independent radiology review committee. Median time to response was 3·3 months (IQR 2·2-4·8), and median duration of response was not reached (95% CI 8·31-not applicable); 13 (77%) of 17 of responses were ongoing at the time of analysis. 30 (26%) of 117 patients had stable disease (median duration 6·0 months, 95% CI 4·7-10·9). 20 (17%) of 117 patients reported grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events, including: fatigue (five [4%] of 117 patients), pneumonitis (four [3%]), and diarrhoea (three [3%]). There were two treatment-associated deaths caused by pneumonia and ischaemic stroke that occurred in patients with multiple comorbidities in the setting of progressive disease. INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab has clinically meaningful activity and a manageable safety profile in previously treated patients with advanced, refractory, squamous non-small cell lung cancer. These data support the assessment of nivolumab in randomised, controlled, phase 3 studies of first-line and second-line treatment. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Cost-utility analysis of maintenance therapy with gemcitabine or erlotinib vs observation with predefined second-line treatment after cisplatin-gemcitabine induction chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC: IFCT-GFPC 0502-Eco phase III study.

BACKGROUND: The IFCT-GFPC 0502 phase III study reported prolongation of progression-free survival with gemcitabine or erlotinib maintenance vs. observation after cisplatin-gemcitabine induction chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This analysis was undertaken to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of these strategies for the global population and pre-specified subgroups. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis evaluated the ICER of gemcitabine or erlotinib maintenance therapy vs. observation, from randomization until the end of follow-up. Direct medical costs (including drugs, hospitalization, follow-up examinations, second-line treatments and palliative care) were prospectively collected per patient during the trial, until death, from the primary health-insurance provider's perspective. Utility data were extracted from literature. Sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The ICERs for gemcitabine or erlotinib maintenance therapy were respectively 76,625 and 184,733 euros per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Gemcitabine continuation maintenance therapy had a favourable ICER in patients with PS = 0 (52,213 €/QALY), in responders to induction chemotherapy (64,296 €/QALY), regardless of histology (adenocarcinoma, 62,292 €/QALY, non adenocarcinoma, 83,291 €/QALY). Erlotinib maintenance showed a favourable ICER in patients with PS = 0 (94,908 €/QALY), in patients with adenocarcinoma (97,160 €/QALY) and in patient with objective response to induction (101,186 €/QALY), but it is not cost-effective in patients with PS =1, in patients with non-adenocarcinoma or with stable disease after induction chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine- or erlotinib-maintenance therapy had ICERs that varied as a function of histology, PS and response to first-line chemotherapy.

Afatinib or Bevacizumab in combination with Osimertinib efficiently control tumor development in orthotopic murine models of non-small lung cancer.

Lung cancer is one of the most common and deadliest cancers. Preclinical models are essential to study new therapies and combinations taking tumor genetics into account. We have established cell lines expressing the luciferase gene from lines with varied genetic backgrounds, commonly encountered in patients with pulmonary adenocarcinoma. We have characterized these lines by testing their response to multiple drugs. Thus, we have developed orthotopic preclinical mouse models of NSCLC with very high engraftment efficiency. These models allow the easy monitoring of tumor growth, particularly in response to treatment, and of tumor cells dissemination in the body. We show that concomitant treatment with osimertinib (3rd generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting mutated EGFR) and bevacizumab (anti-angiogenic targeting VEGF) can have a beneficial therapeutic effect on EGFR-mutated tumors. We also show that the addition of afatinib to osimertinib-treated tumors in escape leads to tumor growth inhibition. No such effect is observed with selumetinib or simvastatin. These preclinical mouse models therefore make it possible to test innovative therapeutic combinations and are also a tool of choice for studying resistance mechanisms.

Real-world overview of therapeutic strategies and prognosis of older patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer from the ESME database.

INTRODUCTION: In France, 40% of patients diagnosed with lung cancer are ≥70 years old, but these are under-represented in clinical trials. Using data from the French Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics (ESME) platform on Lung Cancer (LC), the objective is to provide an overview of the management and the prognosis of older patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (AM-NSCLC) in a real-world context. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the ESME-LC database, we selected patients with AM-NSCLC (stage IIIB, IIIC, and IV), diagnosed between 2015 and 2019, and who received first-line systemic treatment. Demographics, tumour characteristics, and treatment received were described in patients ≥70, and compared to younger ones. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using the multivariable Cox model. RESULTS: Among 10,002 patients with AM-NSCLC, the median age was 64 years, with 2,754 (27.5%) aged ≥70. In comparison with patients <70, older patients were more often male, with worse performance status and more comorbidities, but they were less underweight and more often non-smokers. The proportion of EGFR mutated non-squamous NSCLC was higher in older patients (25.0% vs 12.8%, p < 0.001), particularly among smokers and former smokers (12.7% vs 7.3%, p < 0.001). Among patients ≥70, 76.6% received first-line chemotherapy (including 67.0% treated with a platinum-based doublet), 15.0% received only targeted therapy, and 11.0% received immunotherapy (alone or in combination). Median first-line rwPFS was 5.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI] = [4.8;5.4]) for patients ≥70 and 4.6 months (95%CI = [4.4;4.8]) for patients <70, but age was not associated with rwPFS in multivariable analysis. Median OS was 14.8 months (95%CI = [13.9;16.1]) for patients ≥70 and 16.7 months (95%CI = [15.9;17.5]) for patients <70, with a significant effect of age in multivariable analysis for patients treated with chemotherapy and/or with targeted therapy, but not for patients treated with immunotherapy (alone or in combination with chemotherapy). DISCUSSION: In this real-world cohort of patients with AM-NSCLC, age was not associated with first-line rwPFS regardless of treatment received, nor with OS for patients receiving immunotherapy. However, OS was significantly shorter for patients aged ≥70 treated with chemotherapy or with targeted therapy alone.

Safety and efficacy of immunotherapy using a double-dose regimen in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): results of IDEE study.

Background: Pembrolizumab 400 mg every six weeks (Q6W) and nivolumab 480 mg every four weeks (Q4W) are used since 2020 and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This recommendation relied on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models. The objective of the IDEE (Immunothérapie Double dose Etendue: Experience bretonne) study is to determine the safety and efficacy of this treatment regimen in real life conditions. Methods: We conducted an observational, retrospective, multicentric study including 117 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received pembrolizumab Q6W or nivolumab Q4W between March 2020 and March 2021. Results: The median age was 67 years, 68% were men with predominantly lung adenocarcinoma. The median time to double-dose regimen failure (TDDF) was 9.2 months. The survival rate at 12 months was 79%. TDDF was not influenced by sex, line of treatment, pathologic subtypes or anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) antibody. There was no correlation between TDDF and duration of prior exposition to immunotherapy before switching. Sixty-eight patients experienced double-dose treatment failure, 28% because of toxicity including five definitive discontinuations. Five grade ≥3 immune-adverse events were reported included two cases of pneumonitis, all responding to corticosteroid therapy. Conclusions: Our multicentric cohort supports the feasibility of pembrolizumab Q6W and nivolumab Q4W for patients with advanced NSCLC. There is no warning signal regarding safety neither efficacy in our real-life data.

A phase I, open-label, single-arm study for QT assessment of eribulin mesylate in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Several cancer therapies can prolong cardiac repolarization. This study assessed the potential of eribulin to affect cardiac repolarization in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: In this Phase I, open-label, single-arm study, patients received eribulin mesylate (1.4 mg/m(2); Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle). The primary objective was to assess the effect of eribulin on the QTcF pre- and post-infusion; QTcF and QTcNi were compared for ability to remove heart-rate dependence of the QT interval. Relationship between concentration of eribulin and ΔQTc was explored using linear mixed-effects analysis. Secondary objectives explored pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were enrolled. QTcNi was more effective than QTcF in correcting for heart-rate dependency of the QT interval. On Day 1, mean ΔQTcNi were ~0 at all timepoints. An apparent time-dependent increase in ΔQTc was observed: on Day 8, changes from baseline were larger and more variable, without clear relation to plasma levels of eribulin. Day 8 predose ΔQTcNi was 5 ms, post-infusion mean values ranged from 2 to 9 ms (largest mean ΔQTcNi at 6 h). No new or unexpected toxicities were reported. CONCLUSION: Eribulin demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and a minor prolongation of QTc not expected to be of clinical concern in oncology patients.

Enrolment of older adults with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in first-line clinical trials in the multicentre ESME cohort.

INTRODUCTION: There is a great need for data based on clinical trials for the older population in order to improve treatment. Historically, the inclusion rate of older adults in clinical trials has been low, but the rate specific to lung cancer is unknown, as are the factors associated with enrolment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the national Epidemio-Strategy and Medical Economics Advanced or Metastatic Lung Cancer (AMLC) Data Platform, a multicentre real-life database. Inclusion criteria were patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (AMNSCLC) aged 70 years or older, with at least one line of systemic treatment from 01 January 2015 to 31 December 2018. The primary objective was to evaluate the proportion of older adults enrolled in clinical trials. Secondary objectives were to identify factors associated with enrolment in clinical trials for older patients and to compare the overall survival of older adults included in trials versus those not included. RESULTS: There were 3488 patients aged ≥70 years (median age at AMNSCLC 75 years). Among older patients, 234 (6.7%) were enrolled in a clinical trial in the first-line setting. Significant factors associated with enrolment in the multivariable analysis in older patients were: good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status (PS 0) (p < 0.001), de novo versus recurrent presentation at diagnosis (p < 0.001), and non-central nervous system (CNS) metastases versus advanced setting or CNS metastases (p < 0.001). Medical history was associated with fewer inclusions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.56; 0.99]). Among older patients, being enrolled in a trial in the first-line setting was not associated with better overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.03; 95%CI 0.86-1.22) in the multivariable analysis. DISCUSSION: In this large database, few older AMNSCLC patients were enrolled in a trial. Factors associated with enrolment were: good ECOG PS, absence of medical history, de novo AMNSCLC, and presentation with non-CNS metastases.

Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of extensive stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in the real-world evidence ESME cohort before the era of immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly aggressive entity of lung cancer with tendency toward early recurrence after first-line treatment. As per recently updated European Society for Medical Oncology recommendations, first-line treatment with up to 4 cycles of platinum-etoposide combined with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICIs)-targeting PD-L1, is now the standard of care. The purpose of the current analysis is to identify current patient profiles and treatment strategies in real life clinical practice, and report outcomes in Extensive Stage (ES)-SCLC. METHODS: Non-interventional, retrospective, multicentre, comparative study was carried out to describe the outcome of ES-SCLC patients included in the Epidémiologie Stratégie Médico-Economique (ESME) data platform for advanced and metastatic lung cancer. Patients were selected from 34 health care facilities between January 2015 and December 2017, before the era of immunotherapy. RESULTS: 1315 patients were identified, including 64% male and 78% under 70 year-old; 24% had at least 3 metastatic sites, mainly liver metastases (43%), bone metastases (36%), brain metastases (32%). 49% received only one line of systemic treatment; 30% and 21% received 2 and 3 lines or more, respectively. Carboplatin was more frequently used than cisplatin (71% and 29%, respectively). Prophylactic cranial irradiation was infrequent (4% of patients), but 16% of patients received thoracic radiation therapy, mainly after the completion of first-line chemotherapy (72% of patients); such strategies were more frequently applied in cisplatin/etoposide than carboplatin/etoposide patients (p = 0.006 and p = 0.015, respectively). After a median follow-up time of 21.8 (95% CI: 20.9-23.3) months, median real-world Progression-Free Survival (rw-PFS) was 6.2 (95% CI: 5.7; 6.9) and 6.1 (95% CI: 5.8; 6.3) months for cisplatin/etoposide and carboplatin/etoposide doublet regimens, respectively; 24-month rwPFS and Overall Survival were 3.2% (95% CI: 2.3; 4;2) and 22.2% (95% CI: 19.4; 25.1) in the whole population, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our data provide with landmark reference findings on ES-SCLC before the immunotherapy era, and cover many aspects of the treatment strategy, while highlighting on the role of radiotherapy, subsequent lines of therapy, and the outcomes of patients. Generation of real-world data focusing on patients who received platinum-based chemotherapy combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors is under way.