Overall Survival with Durvalumab after Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: An earlier analysis in this phase 3 trial showed that durvalumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival, as compared with placebo, among patients with stage III, unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who did not have disease progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Here we report the results for the second primary end point of overall survival. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive durvalumab intravenously, at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight, or matching placebo every 2 weeks for up to 12 months. Randomization occurred 1 to 42 days after the patients had received chemoradiotherapy and was stratified according to age, sex, and smoking history. The primary end points were progression-free survival (as assessed by blinded independent central review) and overall survival. Secondary end points included the time to death or distant metastasis, the time to second progression, and safety. RESULTS: Of the 713 patients who underwent randomization, 709 received the assigned intervention (473 patients received durvalumab and 236 received placebo). As of March 22, 2018, the median follow-up was 25.2 months. The 24-month overall survival rate was 66.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61.7 to 70.4) in the durvalumab group, as compared with 55.6% (95% CI, 48.9 to 61.8) in the placebo group (two-sided P=0.005). Durvalumab significantly prolonged overall survival, as compared with placebo (stratified hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 99.73% CI, 0.47 to 0.997; P=0.0025). Updated analyses regarding progression-free survival were similar to those previously reported, with a median duration of 17.2 months in the durvalumab group and 5.6 months in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.63). The median time to death or distant metastasis was 28.3 months in the durvalumab group and 16.2 months in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.68). A total of 30.5% of the patients in the durvalumab group and 26.1% of those in the placebo group had grade 3 or 4 adverse events of any cause; 15.4% and 9.8% of the patients, respectively, discontinued the trial regimen because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Durvalumab therapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than placebo. No new safety signals were identified. (Funded by AstraZeneca; PACIFIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02125461 .).

Healthcare resource utilization in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: post hoc analysis of the randomized phase 3 REVEL study.

PURPOSE: In REVEL, patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) and patients with increased tumor aggressiveness (rapid disease progression (RDP), platinum-refractory disease (PRD), and high symptom burden (HSB)) benefited from second-line treatment with ramucirumab plus docetaxel over placebo plus docetaxel. This post hoc analysis describes healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) associated with the treatment. METHODS: aNSCLC patients who had progressed during or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized to receive docetaxel and either ramucirumab or placebo until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal, or death. HCRU included hospitalizations, transfusions, and concomitant medications. Categorical variables (counts and percentages) were compared using Fisher's exact test. Continuous variables (mean, standard deviation (SD), median, minimum, and maximum) were compared using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were largely similar between treatment arms. Within the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (n = 1253), the mean treatment duration was 19.7 and 16.9 weeks in the ramucirumab and control arms, respectively; 51.0% versus 54.9% of patients received subsequent anticancer therapy, respectively. Hospitalization rates were 41.9% versus 42.6% (p = 0.863), mean length of hospital stay was 14.5 days versus 11.3 days (p = 0.066), transfusion rates were 9.9% versus 12.3% (p = 0.206), and use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors was 41.8% versus 36.6% (p = 0.063), respectively. No significant difference was observed in HCRU between treatment arms in both ITT population and in aggressive disease subgroups including RDP (n = 209), PRD (n = 360), and HSB (n = 497). CONCLUSION: In REVEL, the addition of ramucirumab to docetaxel did not increase HCRU among patients with aggressive aNSCLC disease. These results may help inform economic evaluation of treatment for patients with aNSCLC.

Durvalumab after Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with locally advanced, unresectable, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have disease progression despite definitive chemoradiotherapy (chemotherapy plus concurrent radiation therapy). This phase 3 study compared the anti-programmed death ligand 1 antibody durvalumab as consolidation therapy with placebo in patients with stage III NSCLC who did not have disease progression after two or more cycles of platinum-based chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive durvalumab (at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight intravenously) or placebo every 2 weeks for up to 12 months. The study drug was administered 1 to 42 days after the patients had received chemoradiotherapy. The coprimary end points were progression-free survival (as assessed by means of blinded independent central review) and overall survival (unplanned for the interim analysis). Secondary end points included 12-month and 18-month progression-free survival rates, the objective response rate, the duration of response, the time to death or distant metastasis, and safety. RESULTS: Of 713 patients who underwent randomization, 709 received consolidation therapy (473 received durvalumab and 236 received placebo). The median progression-free survival from randomization was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.0 to 18.1) with durvalumab versus 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.6 to 7.8) with placebo (stratified hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.65; P<0.001); the 12-month progression-free survival rate was 55.9% versus 35.3%, and the 18-month progression-free survival rate was 44.2% versus 27.0%. The response rate was higher with durvalumab than with placebo (28.4% vs. 16.0%; P<0.001), and the median duration of response was longer (72.8% vs. 46.8% of the patients had an ongoing response at 18 months). The median time to death or distant metastasis was longer with durvalumab than with placebo (23.2 months vs. 14.6 months; P<0.001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 29.9% of the patients who received durvalumab and 26.1% of those who received placebo; the most common adverse event of grade 3 or 4 was pneumonia (4.4% and 3.8%, respectively). A total of 15.4% of patients in the durvalumab group and 9.8% of those in the placebo group discontinued the study drug because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Progression-free survival was significantly longer with durvalumab than with placebo. The secondary end points also favored durvalumab, and safety was similar between the groups. (Funded by AstraZeneca; PACIFIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02125461 .).

Atezolizumab in combination with carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment for metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (IMpower130): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Atezolizumab (a monoclonal antibody against PD-L1), which restores anticancer immunity, improved overall survival in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer and also showed clinical benefit when combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. IMpower130 aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy for non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: IMpower130 was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study done in 131 centres across eight countries (the USA, Canada, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Israel). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, and had histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IV non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and received no previous chemotherapy for stage IV disease. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1; permuted block [block size of six] with an interactive voice or web response system) to receive atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks) plus chemotherapy (carboplatin [area under the curve 6 mg/mL per min every 3 weeks] plus nab-paclitaxel [100 mg/m2 intravenously every week]) or chemotherapy alone for four or six 21-day cycles followed by maintenance therapy. Stratification factors were sex, baseline liver metastases, and PD-L1 tumour expression. Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival in the intention-to-treat wild-type (ie, EGFRwt and ALKwt) population. The safety population included patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02367781. FINDINGS: Between April 16, 2015, and Feb 13, 2017, 724 patients were randomly assigned and 723 were included in the intention-to-treat population (one patient died before randomisation, but was assigned to a treatment group; this patient was excluded from the intention-to-treat population) of the atezolizumab plus chemotherapy group (483 patients in the intention-to-treat population and 451 patients in the intention-to-treat wild-type population) or the chemotherapy group (240 patients in the intention-to-treat population and 228 patients in the intention-to-treat wild-type population). Median follow-up in the intention-to-treat wild-type population was similar between groups (18·5 months [IQR 15·2-23·6] in the atezolizumab plus chemotherapy group and 19·2 months [15·4-23·0] in the chemotherapy group). In the intention-to-treat wild-type population, there were significant improvements in median overall survival (18·6 months [95% CI 16·0-21·2] in the atezolizumab plus chemotherapy group and 13·9 months [12·0-18·7] in the chemotherapy group; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·79 [95% CI 0·64-0·98]; p=0·033) and median progression-free survival (7·0 months [95% CI 6·2-7·3] in the atezolizumab plus chemotherapy group and 5·5 months [4·4-5·9] in the chemotherapy group; stratified HR 0·64 [95% CI 0·54-0·77]; p<0·0001]). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (152 [32%] of 473 in the atezolizumab plus chemotherapy group vs 65 [28%] of 232 in the chemotherapy group), anaemia (138 [29%] vs 47 [20%]), and decreased neutrophil count (57 [12%] vs 19 [8%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 112 (24%) of 473 patients in the atezolizumab plus chemotherapy group and 30 (13%) of 232 patients in the chemotherapy group. Treatment-related (any treatment) deaths occurred in eight (2%) of 473 patients in the atezolizumab plus chemotherapy group and one (<1%) of 232 patients in the chemotherapy group. INTERPRETATION: IMpower130 showed a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival and a significant improvement in progression-free survival with atezolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment of patients with stage IV non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer and no ALK or EGFR mutations. No new safety signals were identified. This study supports the benefit of atezolizumab, in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy, as first-line treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: F. Hoffmann-La Roche.

A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Phase II Trial of Carboplatin and Pemetrexed with or without Apatorsen (OGX-427) in Patients with Previously Untreated Stage IV Non-Squamous-Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: The SPRUCE Trial.

BACKGROUND: This randomized, double-blinded, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of carboplatin and pemetrexed plus either apatorsen, an antisense oligonucleotide targeting heat shock protein (Hsp) 27 mRNA, or placebo in patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to Arm A (carboplatin/pemetrexed plus apatorsen) or Arm B (carboplatin/pemetrexed plus placebo). Treatment was administered in 21-day cycles, with restaging every two cycles, until progression or intolerable toxicity. Serum Hsp27 levels were analyzed at baseline and during treatment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and toxicity. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 155 patients (median age 66 years; 44% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0). Toxicities were similar in the 2 treatment arms; cytopenias, nausea, vomiting, and fatigue were the most frequent treatment-related adverse events. Median PFS and OS were 6.0 and 10.8 months, respectively, for Arm A, and 4.9 and 11.8 months for Arm B (differences not statistically significant). Overall response rates were 27% for Arm A and 32% for Arm B. Sixteen patients (12%) had high serum levels of Hsp27 at baseline. In this small group, patients who received apatorsen had median PFS of 10.8 months, and those who received placebo had median PFS 4.8 months. CONCLUSION: The addition of apatorsen to carboplatin and pemetrexed was well tolerated but did not improve outcomes in patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC cancer in the first-line setting. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This randomized, double-blinded, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of carboplatin and pemetrexed plus either apatorsen, an antisense oligonucleotide targeting heat shock protein 27 mRNA, or placebo in patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The addition of apatorsen to carboplatin and pemetrexed was well tolerated but did not improve outcomes in patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC cancer in the first-line setting.

Phase I/II study of bevacizumab with BKM120, an oral PI3K inhibitor, in patients with refractory solid tumors (phase I) and relapsed/refractory glioblastoma (phase II).

BACKGROUND: Current bevacizumab-based regimens have failed to improve survival in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. To improve treatment efficacy, we evaluated bevacizumab + BKM120, an oral pan-class I PI3K inhibitor, in this patient population. METHODS: A brief phase I study established the optimal BKM120 dose to administer with standard-dose bevacizumab. BKM120 60 mg PO daily + bevacizumab 10 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks in 28-day cycles was then administered to patients with relapsed/refractory glioblastoma in the phase II portion. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients enrolled (phase I, 12; phase II, 76). In phase I, BKM120 80 mg PO daily produced dose limiting toxicity in 3 of 6 patients; a BKM120 dose of 60 mg PO daily was established as the maximum tolerated dose. In phase II, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.0 months (95% CI 3.4, 5.4), PFS at 6 months was 36.5%, and the overall response rate was 26%. Forty-two patients (57%) experienced one or more serious treatment related toxicities. The most common CNS toxicities included mood alteration (17%) and confusion (12%); however, these were often difficult to classify as treatment- versus tumor-related. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy seen in this study is similar to the efficacy previously reported with single-agent bevacizumab. This regimen was poorly tolerated, despite the low daily dose of BKM120. Further development of this combination for the treatment of glioblastoma is not recommended.

First-line crizotinib versus chemotherapy in ALK-positive lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of the ALK inhibitor crizotinib as compared with standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, phase 3 trial comparing crizotinib with chemotherapy in 343 patients with advanced ALK-positive nonsquamous NSCLC who had received no previous systemic treatment for advanced disease. Patients were randomly assigned to receive oral crizotinib at a dose of 250 mg twice daily or to receive intravenous chemotherapy (pemetrexed, 500 mg per square meter of body-surface area, plus either cisplatin, 75 mg per square meter, or carboplatin, target area under the curve of 5 to 6 mg per milliliter per minute) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. Crossover to crizotinib treatment after disease progression was permitted for patients receiving chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by independent radiologic review. RESULTS: Progression-free survival was significantly longer with crizotinib than with chemotherapy (median, 10.9 months vs. 7.0 months; hazard ratio for progression or death with crizotinib, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.60; P<0.001). Objective response rates were 74% and 45%, respectively (P<0.001). Median overall survival was not reached in either group (hazard ratio for death with crizotinib, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54 to 1.26; P=0.36); the probability of 1-year survival was 84% with crizotinib and 79% with chemotherapy. The most common adverse events with crizotinib were vision disorders, diarrhea, nausea, and edema, and the most common events with chemotherapy were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, and decreased appetite. As compared with chemotherapy, crizotinib was associated with greater reduction in lung cancer symptoms and greater improvement in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Crizotinib was superior to standard first-line pemetrexed-plus-platinum chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. (Funded by Pfizer; PROFILE 1014 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01154140.).

First-Line Carboplatin, Pemetrexed, and Panitumumab in Patients with Advanced Non-Squamous KRAS Wild Type (WT) Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).

BACKGROUND: We added panitumumab to standard combination chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with advanced KRAS WT non-squamous NSCLC. METHODS: Patients received panitumumab 9 mg/kg IV, pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 IV, and carboplatin AUC = 6 IV every 21 days. After 6 cycles, maintenance therapy with panitumumab and pemetrexed was administered every 21 days until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: 29 of 66 patients (44%) had objective responses. The median TTP was 6 months; median overall survival (OS) was 17 months. Panitumumab increased treatment-related toxicity, notably skin rash. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of panitumumab increased toxicity, and had no discernible impact on efficacy.

Alectinib in ALK-positive, crizotinib-resistant, non-small-cell lung cancer: a single-group, multicentre, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Alectinib--a highly selective, CNS-active, ALK inhibitor-showed promising clinical activity in crizotinib-naive and crizotinib-resistant patients with ALK-rearranged (ALK-positive) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of alectinib in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who progressed on previous crizotinib. METHODS: We did a phase 2 study at 27 centres in the USA and Canada. We enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with stage IIIB-IV, ALK-positive NSCLC who had progressed after crizotinib. Patients were treated with oral alectinib 600 mg twice daily until progression, death, or withdrawal. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective response by an independent review committee using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Response endpoints were assessed in the response-evaluable population (ie, patients with measurable disease at baseline who received at least one dose of study drug), and efficacy and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population (all enrolled patients). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01871805. The study is ongoing and patients are still receiving treatment. FINDINGS: Between Sept 4, 2013, and Aug 4, 2014, 87 patients were enrolled into the study (intention-to-treat population). At the time of the primary analysis (median follow-up 4·8 months [IQR 3·3-7·1]), 33 of 69 patients with measurable disease at baseline had a confirmed partial response; thus, the proportion of patients achieving an objective response by the independent review committee was 48% (95% CI 36-60). Adverse events were predominantly grade 1 or 2, most commonly constipation (31 [36%]), fatigue (29 [33%]), myalgia 21 [24%]), and peripheral oedema 20 [23%]). The most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were changes in laboratory values, including increased blood creatine phosphokinase (seven [8%]), increased alanine aminotransferase (five [6%]), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (four [5%]). Two patients died: one had a haemorrhage (judged related to study treatment), and one had disease progression and a history of stroke (judged unrelated to treatment). INTERPRETATION: Alectinib showed clinical activity and was well tolerated in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who had progressed on crizotinib. Therefore, alectinib could be a suitable treatment for patients with ALK-positive disease who have progressed on crizotinib. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Randomized Phase II Trial of Erlotinib Beyond Progression in Advanced Erlotinib-Responsive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy is clearly beneficial in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, acquired resistance develops uniformly and the benefit of continuation of EGFR TKI therapy beyond progression remains unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a randomized phase II study of chemotherapy (arm A: pemetrexed or docetaxel) versus chemotherapy plus erlotinib (ERL) (arm B) in patients with progressive NSCLC following clinical benefit from erlotinib. In arm B, chemotherapy was given with erlotinib at an oral daily dose of 150 mg on days 2-19 of each cycle to minimize negative pharmacodynamic interactions. The primary endpoint was that continuation of erlotinib in this patient population could extend progression-free survival (PFS) by 50%. RESULTS: A total of 46 patients were randomized (arm A: 24; arm B: 22). Patient characteristics were well balanced except there were more female patients in arm A (p = .075). The median PFS of patients in arm A was 5.5 months and for those in arm B, 4.4 months (p = .699). The response rates were 13% and 16% in arms A and B, respectively (p = .79). EGFR status data were available for 39 of the 46 patients and no significant difference in PFS was seen for continuing ERL beyond progression in mutation-positive patients. Substantially more toxicity was seen in arm B than arm A. CONCLUSION: There was added toxicity but no benefit with the continuation of ERL beyond progression along with chemotherapy as compared with chemotherapy alone. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The benefits of continuing erlotinib upon progression alongside conventional chemotherapy are unclear. This randomized phase II study, initiated prior to the establishment of routine epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation testing, addressed this clinically relevant issue through randomizing patients with prior clinical benefit from erlotinib (thereby enriching for EGFR-mutated tumors) upon progression in the second- or third-line setting to conventional chemotherapy (single-agent pemetrexed or docetaxel) with or without continued erlotinib. The results showed no benefit to continuing erlotinib beyond progression, while significantly more side effects were noted in the combination arm. Along with other recently presented study findings, these results argue against the routine practice of continuing erlotinib in this setting.

Phase II trial of sorafenib in conjunction with chemotherapy and as maintenance therapy in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Sorafenib is a multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor of Raf kinase, VEGFR, and PDGFR. Angiogenesis is important for growth and progression of SCLC. This trial was conducted to evaluate whether the combination of cisplatin and etoposide plus concurrent and sequential sorafenib could prolong survival in patients with previously untreated SCLC. METHODS: Previously untreated patients with extensive stage SCLC were treated with cisplatin and etoposide days 1, 2, 3 for four cycles, concurrent with sorafenib 200 mg orally bid starting day 1 cycle 1. Patients with no disease progression after four cycles continued sorafenib 400 mg orally bid as maintenance for maximum of 12 months. The primary endpoint was 1 year survival with response rate and safety as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 18 patients were enrolled with 17 evaluable patients. One patient had a complete response, seven patients had a partial response (overall response rate of 47 %) and one patient had stable disease. Overall median survival was 7.4 months and 1 year survival was 25 %. The most common treatment-related adverse events included fatigue, anorexia, rash, diarrhea, neutropenia and weight loss. Grade 5 GI bleeding, pulmonary hemorrhage and neutropenia occurred in one pt (6 %) each. Accrual was halted on the basis of safety profile as well as preliminary efficacy data. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of platinum based chemotherapy and sorafenib has significant toxicity at current dose levels and is associated with disappointing efficacy data.

Sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma in the United States: Temporal and geographic patterns associated with HPV testing and positivity.

OBJECTIVES: Human papillomavirus (HPV) has emerged as a potential etiological factor in sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma (SNSCC), but a clear understanding of HPV prevalence and its temporal patterns in SNSCC remains elusive. This study aimed to investigate temporal trends in HPV testing and positivity rates, and explore demographic and geographic factors associated with these trends. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study included patients diagnosed with invasive SNSCC between 2011 and 2017 from the US National Cancer Database (NCDB). Prevalence ratios (PR) of HPV positivity and testing rates were estimated with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). RESULTS: The overall HPV testing rate was 45.4 % (N = 1762/3880), and the prevalence of HPV testing significantly decreased during the study period (adjusted PR: 0.97, 95 % CI: 0.95 - 0.99, p < 0.001). Overall HPV positivity frequency was 37.3 % (N = 650/1741), and the overall prevalence of HPV positive tumors significantly increased during the study period (adjusted PR: 1.04, 95 % CI: 1.02 - 1.05, p < 0.001). The increase in HPV positivity rate was observed solely in the white population (unadjusted PR: 1.10, 95 % CI: 1.06 - 1.14; p < 0.001). A significant geographical variation was observed for both HPV testing (range: 28.6 % - 61.7 %) and positivity (range: 28.3 % - 44.7 %). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides novel insights into the temporal trends and demographic factors associated with HPV testing and positivity in SNSCC. Despite increasing HPV positivity rates, disparities in testing rates persist, highlighting the need for standardized testing protocols and targeted interventions.

Pembrolizumab With or Without Lenvatinib for First-Line Metastatic NSCLC With Programmed Cell Death-Ligand 1 Tumor Proportion Score of at least 1% (LEAP-007): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was found to have antitumor activity and acceptable safety in previously treated metastatic NSCLC. We evaluated first-line lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus placebo plus pembrolizumab in metastatic NSCLC in the LEAP-007 study (NCT03829332/NCT04676412). METHODS: Patients with previously untreated stage IV NSCLC with programmed cell death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score of at least 1% without targetable EGFR/ROS1/ALK aberrations were randomized 1:1 to lenvatinib 20 mg or placebo once daily; all patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and overall survival (OS). We report results from a prespecified nonbinding futility analysis of OS performed at the fourth independent data and safety monitoring committee review (futility bound: one-sided p < 0.4960). RESULTS: A total of 623 patients were randomized. At median follow-up of 15.9 months, median (95% confidence interval [CI]) OS was 14.1 (11.4‒19.0) months in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group versus 16.4 (12.6‒20.6) months in the placebo plus pembrolizumab group (hazard ratio = 1.10 [95% CI: 0.87‒1.39], p = 0.79744 [futility criterion met]). Median (95% CI) PFS was 6.6 (6.1‒8.2) months versus 4.2 (4.1‒6.2) months, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.78 [95% CI: 0.64‒0.95]). Grade 3 to 5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 57.9% of patients (179 of 309) versus 24.4% (76 of 312). Per data and safety monitoring committee recommendation, the study was unblinded and lenvatinib and placebo were discontinued. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab did not have a favorable benefit‒risk profile versus placebo plus pembrolizumab. Pembrolizumab monotherapy remains an approved treatment option in many regions for first-line metastatic NSCLC with programmed cell death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score of at least 1% without EGFR/ALK alterations.

The role of consolidation treatment in locally advanced unresectable NSCLC.

Concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy remains the standard-of-care treatment in patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. Most regimens include low doses of radiosensitizing agents. Because of concern for the presence of micrometastatic disease and the high rate of systemic failure, many trials have addressed the role of additional consolidation chemotherapy. Only a few of these studies have been performed in a randomized setting on a large number of patients, and the rest are smaller phase I and phase II trials that explore the safety and efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens. More recently, targeted agents have also been evaluated in such regimens, although molecular and histologic markers have not been fully incorporated in these studies. In this review, we discuss these trials and compare the different sequences and regimens of systemic doses of chemotherapy when delivered in addition to concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy.

Characterization and management of adverse events observed with mobocertinib (TAK-788) treatment for EGFR exon 20 insertion-positive non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mobocertinib has demonstrated durable clinical benefit in platinum-pretreated patients (PPP) with epidermal growth factor receptor exon 20 insertion-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Pooled safety analysis of two studies included patients with NSCLC (N = 257) treated with the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of mobocertinib (160 mg once daily). We report overall safety (treatment-emergent adverse events [TEAEs]) in the RP2D population; characterization of GI and skin-related events in 114 PPP from a phase 1/2 study (NCT02716116); and clinical activity in PPP with and without dose reductions due to TEAEs. RESULTS: In the RP2D population (N = 257), the most common TEAEs were diarrhea (93%), nausea (47%), rash (38%), and vomiting (37%). In PPP (N = 114), median times to diarrhea onset and resolution were 5 and 2 days, respectively. Median times to onset and resolution of skin-related events were 9 and 78 days, respectively. Among PPP with (n = 29) or without (n = 85) dose reductions due to TEAEs, overall response rates were 21% and 31% and median durations of response were 5.7 and 17.5 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: GI and skin-related events are common with mobocertinib; minimizing dose reductions with proactive management may improve clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02716116; NCT03807778.

Mobocertinib is a treatment for patients with a certain type of lung cancer. We analyzed the safety of mobocertinib in 257 patients with lung cancer. The most common side effects with mobocertinib were diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and skin rash. In 114 patients with lung cancer who were treated in the past with chemotherapy that included platinum-based drugs, diarrhea started after about 5 days of mobocertinib treatment and went away in about 2 days. Skin-related side effects started after about 9 days and went away in about 2.5 months. One-fifth of patients who had to receive a smaller amount of mobocertinib because of side effects responded to treatment compared with one-third of patients who received the recommended mobocertinib amount. Managing side effects quickly can better help patients with lung cancer who are treated with mobocertinib.

Phase I/II trial of subcutaneous interleukin-2, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor and interferon-α in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To determine, in a phase I/II trial, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), clinical activity and safety of concurrent subcutaneous (s.c.) interleukin-2 (IL-2), interferon-α2b (IFN-α) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) received on a 3+3 trial design escalating doses of s.c. GM-CSF, IL-2 and IFN-α. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during the first 6-week cycle were used to determine the MTD. A phase II trial was then initiated to determine clinical activity. RESULTS: A total of sixty patients were enrolled in the study (phase I = 31; phase II = 29). Two DLTs were observed (G3 nausea/vomiting and fatigue) and the MTD was determined to be GM-CSF 5.0 µg/kg/day, IL-2 9.0 mIU/m(2)/day and IFN-α 5.0 mU/m(2)/day. Patients received a median (range) of four (one to 11) cycles of therapy. G3 adverse events were reported in 10 of 31 (32%) patients. The overall response rate was 20% (one complete response and 11 partial responses), including patients who were rendered free of disease with surgery. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 6.0 and 23.4 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Immunotherapy with concurrent s.c. GM-CSF, IL-2 and IFN-α is generally well tolerated. The overall response rate observed with this combination continues to show the efficacy of immunotherapy in a selected group of metastatic RCC patients.

Thymic neoplasms: a clinical update.

Thymoma is a unique neoplasm of the anterior mediastinum that is frequently associated with indolent growth and a variety of paraneoplastic syndromes. One third of cases are detected during the evaluation of myasthenia gravis. Classification systems of thymoma have limited ability in accurately predicting prognosis and course of disease. Thus, staging is the only way to predict clinical behavior. Encapsulated tumors that are surgically resected carry the best prognosis. Adjuvant radiotherapy is recommended for incompletely excised and most invasive thymomas. Chemotherapy in anthracycline-based chemotherapy remains the most effective chemotherapy for neoadjuvant, adjuvant or palliative treatment.

COVID-19 Outcomes in Stage IV Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Cancer patients are a vulnerable population in the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. The impact of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) on the outcomes of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients remains largely unclear. We retrospectively investigated all solid cancer patients who received at least one cycle of ICIs at a single institution between August 2020 and August 2021. All stage IV solid cancer patients who were on or ceased ICI treatment when diagnosed with COVID-19 were eligible. All COVID-19 infections were confirmed by RT-PCR. Risk factors for hospitalization, severe symptoms, and death were analyzed. A total of 56 patients were included in our study. Twenty (35.7%) patients require hospitalization, 12 (21.4%) developed severe symptoms, and 10 (17.9%) died from COVID-19 infection. ICI treatment was interrupted in 37 patients (66.1%), 24 of whom (64.9%) had treatment resumed. Eight (80%) COVID-19-related death occurred in unvaccinated individuals. Reinfection occurred in seven patients (12.5%), and three of them died from their second COVID-19 infection. Factors associated with hospitalization were high Charlson comorbidity score (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.10-2.23, p = 0.01) and lymphocyte ≤ 1500 mm3 (OR 10.05, 95% CI 2.03-49.85, p = 0.005). Age, chemoimmunotherapy, and ICI treatment duration were not associated with increased risk of hospitalization, severe symptoms, or COVID-19-related mortality. ICI therapy does not impose an increased risk for severe COVID-19 infection in stage IV cancer patients. Vaccination should be encouraged among this population. Clinicians should be cognizant of a potential worse outcome in COVID-19-reinfected patients.

Brief Report: Safety and Antitumor Activity of Alectinib Plus Atezolizumab From a Phase 1b Study in Advanced ALK-Positive NSCLC.

Introduction: Alectinib is a preferred first-line treatment option for advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. Combination regimens of alectinib with immune checkpoint inhibitors are being evaluated for synergistic effects. Methods: Adults with treatment-naive, stage IIIB/IV, or recurrent ALK-positive NSCLC were enrolled into a two-stage phase 1b study. Patients received alectinib 600 mg (twice daily during cycle 1 and throughout each 21-d cycle thereafter) plus atezolizumab 1200 mg (d8 of cycle 1 and then d1 of each 21-d cycle). Primary objectives were to evaluate safety and tolerability of alectinib plus atezolizumab. Secondary objectives included assessments of antitumor activity. Results: In total, 21 patients received more than or equal to 1 dose of alectinib or atezolizumab. As no dose-limiting toxicities were observed in stage 1 (n = 7), the starting dose and schedule were continued into stage 2 (n = 14). Median duration of follow-up was 29 months (range: 1-39). Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 57% of the patients, most often rash (19%). No grade 4 or 5 treatment-related adverse events were reported. Confirmed objective response rate was 86% (18 of 21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 64-97). Median progression-free survival was not estimable (NE) (95% CI: 13 mo-NE), neither was median overall survival (95% CI: 33 mo-NE). Conclusions: The combination of alectinib and atezolizumab is feasible, but increased toxicity was found compared with the individual agents. With small sample sizes and relatively short follow-up, definitive conclusions regarding antitumor activity cannot be made.

A Single Center Retrospective Study of the Impact of COVID-19 Infection on Immune-related Adverse Events in Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can cause a variety of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with increased amounts of pro-inflammatory cytokines, which may affect the outcome of irAEs. Data are limited regarding the impact of COVID-19 on irAEs in ICI-treated cancer patients. Hence, in this study, we retrospectively analyzed ICI-treated adult patients with malignant solid tumors at a single institution between August 2020 and August 2021. Patients who had the most recent ICI treatment over 1-month before or after the positive COVID-19 test were excluded from the study. For the COVID-19 positive group, only the irAEs that developed after COVID-19 infection were considered as events. A total of 579 patients were included in our study, with 46 (7.9%) in the COVID-19 positive group and 533 (92.1%) in the COVID-19 negative group. The baseline characteristics of patients in the 2 groups were similar. With a median follow-up of 331 days (range: 21-2226), we noticed a nonsignificant higher incidence of all-grade irAEs in the COVID-19 positive group (30.4% vs. 19.9%, P =0.18). The incidence of grade 3 and 4 irAEs was significantly higher in the COVID-19 positive group (10.9% vs. 3.2%, P =0.02). Multivariate analysis confirmed the association between COVID-19 infection and increased risk of severe irAE development (odds ratio: 1.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.14, P =0.01). Our study suggested that COVID-19 may pose a risk of severe irAEs in cancer patients receiving ICIs. Close monitoring and possibly delaying ICI administration could be considered when cancer patients are infected with COVID-19.