Exploring the impact of patient-specific clinical features on osimertinib effectiveness in a real-world cohort of patients with EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer.

Osimertinib is prescribed to patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a sensitizing EGFR mutation. Limited data exists on the impact of patient characteristics or osimertinib exposure on effectiveness outcomes. This was a Dutch, multicenter cohort study. Eligible patients were ≥18 years, with metastatic EGFRm+ NSCLC, receiving osimertinib. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were performed. In total, 294 patients were included. Primary EGFR-mutations were mainly exon 19 deletions (54%) and p.L858R point mutations (30%). Osimertinib was given in first-line (40%), second-line (46%) or beyond (14%), with median PFS 14.4 (95% CI: 9.4-19.3), 13.9 (95% CI: 11.3-16.1) and 8.7 months (95% CI: 4.6-12.7), respectively. Patients with low BMI (<20.0 kg/m2 ) had significantly shorter PFS/OS compared to all other subgroups. Patients with a high plasma trough concentration in steady state (Cmin,SS ; >271 ng/mL) had shorter PFS compared to a low Cmin,SS (<163 ng/mL; aHR 2.29; 95% CI: 1.13-4.63). A significant longer PFS was seen in females (aHR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.45-0.82) and patients with the exon 19 deletion (aHR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.36-0.92). A trend towards longer PFS was seen for TP53 wild-type patients, while age did not impact PFS. Patients with a primary EGFR exon 19 deletion had longer PFS, while a low BMI, male sex and a high Cmin,SS were indicative for shorter PFS and/or OS. Age was not associated with effectiveness outcomes of osimertinib.

Proactive monitoring of drug-drug interactions between direct oral anticoagulants and small-molecule inhibitors in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Small-molecule inhibitors (SMIs) have revolutionised the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, SMI-induced drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with frequently co-administered direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), increase thromboembolic and bleeding risks. This study investigated and proactively managed the consequences of DOAC-SMI DDIs. METHODS: This prospective, observational study enrolled patients with NSCLC concomitantly using a DOAC and SMI. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with DOAC plasma trough (Ctrough) and peak (Cpeak) concentrations outside expected ranges. Secondary outcomes included DOAC treatment modifications, incidence of bleeding and thromboembolic events and feasibility evaluation of pharmacokinetically guided DOAC dosing. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were analysed. Thirty-nine percent (13/33) had DOAC Ctrough and/or Cpeak were outside the expected ranges in 39% (13/33). In 71% (5/7) of patients with DOAC concentrations quantified before and during concurrent SMI use, DOAC Ctrough and/or Cpeak increased or decreased >50% upon SMI initiation. In all patients in whom treatment modifications were deemed necessary, DOAC concentrations were adjusted to within the expected ranges. CONCLUSION: Proactive monitoring showed that a substantial proportion of patients had DOAC concentrations outside the expected ranges. DOAC concentrations were successfully normalised after treatment modifications. These results highlight the importance of proactive monitoring of DOAC-SMI DDIs to improve treatment in patients with NSCLC.

Development and validation of an HPLC-MS/MS method to simultaneously quantify brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib in human K2-EDTA plasma.

A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was developed and validated to quantify the small-molecule inhibitors (SMIs) brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib, which are used in patients with oncogenic-driven non-small cell lung cancer. Chromatographic separation was performed on a HyPURITY® C18 analytical column with a gradient elution using ammonium acetate in water and in methanol, both acidified with formic acid 0,1%. Detection and quantification were performed using a triple quad mass spectrometer with an electrospray ionization interface. The assay was validated over a linear range of 50-2,500 ng/ml for brigatinib, 25-1,000 ng/ml for lorlatinib, 100-10,000 ng/ml for pralsetinib and 50-5,000 ng/ml for selpercatinib. All four SMIs were stable for at least 7 days under cool conditions (2-8°C), and at least 24 h at room temperature (15-25°C) in K2-EDTA plasma. Under freezing conditions (-20°C), all SMIs were stable for at least 30 days, except for the lowest quality control (QCLOW ) of pralsetinib. The QCLOW of pralsetinib was stable for at least 7 days at -20°C. This method provides an efficient and simple way to quantify four SMIs with a single assay in clinical practice.

Osimertinib Plasma Trough Concentration in Relation to Brain Metastases Development in Patients With Advanced EGFR-Mutated NSCLC.

Introduction: Brain metastases (BM) are common in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated (EGFRm+) NSCLC. Despite good BM-related outcomes of osimertinib, several patients still experience intracranial progression. A possible explanation is pharmacologic failure due to low plasma trough levels (Cmin,SS) and consequently limited intracranial osimertinib exposure. We investigated the relation between osimertinib Cmin,SS and BM development or progression. Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study, including patients receiving osimertinib for advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC. At osimertinib start, patients were allocated to the BM or no or unknown BM cohort and were further divided into subgroups based on osimertinib Cmin,SS (low, middle, and high exposure). Cumulative incidence of BM progression or development and overall survival were determined for each group. Results: A total of 173 patients were included, with 49 (28.3%) had baseline BM. Of these patients, 36.7% experienced BM progression, of which 16.7% in the low (<159.3 ng/mL), 40.0% in the middle, and 47.1% in the high (>270.7 ng/mL) Cmin,SS subgroups. After 12 months, the cumulative incidence of BM progression for the BM cohort was 20% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6-49.0), 31% (95% CI:10.6-53.9), and 31% (95% CI:10.8-54.5) per Cmin,SS subgroup, respectively. After 20 months, this was 20% (95% CI:2.6-49.0), 52% (95% CI:23.8-74.2), and 57% (95% CI:24.9-79.7), respectively. For the no or unknown BM cohort, 4.0% developed BM without differences within Cmin,SS subgroups. Conclusions: No relation was found between osimertinib Cmin,SS and BM development or progression in patients with advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC. This suggests that systemic osimertinib exposure is not a surrogate marker for BM development or progression.

Durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: real-world outcomes versus clinical trial results.

Aim: We investigated the effectiveness of durvalumab post-concurrent CRT (cCRT) and post-sequential CRT (sCRT) versus cCRT and sCRT alone and compared these outcomes with the PACIFIC trial. Methods: Four cohorts of stage III NSCLC patients who received CRT were included: cCRT with and without durvalumab, sCRT with and without durvalumab. PFS and OS were analyzed using Cox regression. Results: Durvalumab improved PFS (cCRT: aHR = 0.69, sCRT: aHR = 0.71) and OS (cCRT: aHR = 0.71, sCRT: aHR = 0.32), although not all results were significant. PFS was longer in the real-world than in the trial, while OS did not differ. Conclusion: Durvalumab after CRT improved the survival outcomes. The difference between PFS in our study and the trial may be due to differences in follow-up methods.

We assessed a medicine called durvalumab on patients with non-small cell lung cancer who received chemoradiotherapy in a real-world setting. We compared their outcomes with those from a clinical trial. Patients who received two types of chemoradiotherapy with or without durvalumab were included, and their progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes were analyzed. We found that patients treated with durvalumab had better PFS and OS than those treated without durvalumab. PFS was longer in the real-world than in the clinical trial, but OS was similar. The difference in PFS may be due to differences in measuring PFS.

Validated extended multiplexed LC-MS/MS assay for the quantification of adagrasib and sotorasib in human plasma, together with four additional SMIs.

Recently, two small molecular inhibitors (SMIs) -adagrasib and sotorasib- have been introduced for targeting Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) p.G12C mutations in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In order to support pharmacokinetic research as well as clinical decision making, we developed and validated a simple and accurate liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for the multiplexed quantification of adagrasib and sotorasib. This assay was co-validated with the quantification for brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib. Methanol was used for single-step protein precipitation. Chromatographic separation was performed using an Acquity® HSS C18 UPLC column, with an elution gradient of ammonium formate 0.1 % v/v in water and acetonitrile. In K2-EDTA plasma, adagrasib was found to be stable for at least seven days at room temperature and 4 °C, and at least 3 months at -80 °C. Sotorasib was found to be stable for at least three days at room temperature, seven days at 4 °C and at least 3 months at -80 °C. The method was validated over a linear range of 80-4000 ng/mL for adagrasib and 25-2500 ng/mL for sotorasib. The assay is therefore well-equipped for determining plasma concentrations in clinical practice.

Practical recommendations to combine small-molecule inhibitors and direct oral anticoagulants in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The risk for thromboembolisms in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients is increased and often requires treatment or prophylaxis with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Small-molecule inhibitors (SMIs) to treat NSCLC may cause relevant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with DOACs. Guidance on how to combine these drugs is lacking, leaving patients at risk of clotting or bleeding. Here, we give practical recommendations to manage these DDIs. METHODS: For all DOACs and SMIs approved in Europe and the USA up to December 2021, a literature review was executed and reviews by the US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency were analysed for information on DDIs. A DDI potency classification for DOACs was composed and brought together with DDI characteristics of each SMI, resulting in recommendations for each combination. RESULTS: Half of the combinations result in relevant DDIs, requiring an intervention to prevent ineffective or toxic treatment with DOACs. These actions include dose adjustments, separation of administration or switching between anticoagulant therapies. Combinations of SMIs with edoxaban never cause relevant DDIs, compared to more than half of combinations with other DOACs and even increasing to almost all combinations with rivaroxaban. CONCLUSIONS: Combinations of SMIs and DOACs often result in relevant DDIs that can be prevented by adjusting the DOAC dosage, separation of administration or switching between anticoagulants.

Nivolumab exposure in a hemodialysis patient with metastatic melanoma.

The effect of intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) on nivolumab serum concentrations in patients with severe renal impairment is largely unknown. Here, we present a 79-year-old patient with metastatic melanoma and end-stage renal disease on IHD three times a week, treated with 480 mg nivolumab every 4 weeks. A serum trough concentration of nivolumab was determined before the start of the third cycle, and two samples were taken immediately before and after a hemodialysis session during this cycle. All nivolumab serum concentrations were within a similar range as those previously measured among patients without renal insufficiency, after a comparable duration of nivolumab treatment. Therefore, we conclude that IHD does not influence nivolumab exposure. Furthermore, nivolumab treatment was continued without complications and appears to be well tolerated for patients on IHD.