Targeted Therapies in Small Cell Lung Cancer: From Old Failures to Novel Therapeutic Strategies.

The clinical management of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) treatment remains a major challenge for thoracic oncologists, with very few therapeutic advances significantly impacting patients' survival. The recent introduction of immunotherapy in the clinical setting produced a marginal benefit for a limited subset of metastatic patients, while the therapeutic scenario for relapsing extended-disease small cell lung cancers (ED-SCLCs) remains almost deserted. Recent efforts clarified the molecular features of this disease, leading to the identification of key signalling pathways which may serve as potential targets for clinical use. Despite the large number of molecules tested and the numerous therapeutic failures, some targeted therapies have recently shown interesting preliminary results. In this review, we describe the main molecular pathways involved in SCLC development/progression and provide an updated summary of the targeted therapies currently under investigation in SCLC patients.

Exploring the Potential of Non-Coding RNAs as Liquid Biopsy Biomarkers for Lung Cancer Screening: A Literature Review.

Lung cancer represent the leading cause of cancer mortality, so several efforts have been focused on the development of a screening program. To address the issue of high overdiagnosis and false positive rates associated to LDCT-based screening, there is a need for new diagnostic biomarkers, with liquid biopsy ncRNAs detection emerging as a promising approach. In this scenario, this work provides an updated summary of the literature evidence about the role of non-coding RNAs in lung cancer screening. A literature search on PubMed was performed including studies which investigated liquid biopsy non-coding RNAs biomarker lung cancer patients and a control cohort. Micro RNAs were the most widely studied biomarkers in this setting but some preliminary evidence was found also for other non-coding RNAs, suggesting that a multi-biomarker based liquid biopsy approach could enhance their efficacy in the screening context. However, further studies are needed in order to optimize detection techniques as well as diagnostic accuracy before introducing novel biomarkers in the early diagnosis setting.

Short-Term Safety and Psychosocial Impact of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in Cancer Patients-An Italian Single-Center Experience.

Safety data regarding BNT162b2 in cancer patients (CPs) are scarce. Herein we report the side effects (SEs), the adverse events (AEs), and the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following BNT162b2 administration in CPs treated at the San Luigi Gonzaga University Hospital. All CPs who agreed to participate in our vaccination campaign received BNT162b2 and were included in the descriptive analysis. An anonymous questionnaire investigating the occurrence of SEs/AEs and PROs was administered to the study population 21 days after the first dose. Pearson's chi-squared test was used to estimate the risk of experiencing SEs/AEs according to selected variables. A total of 997 patients were included in the study: 62.0% had stage IV cancer, and 68.8% were receiving an active treatment, of whom 15.9% were receiving immunotherapy. SEs/AEs were recorded in 37.1% of cases after the first dose and in 48.5% of cases after the second dose. The most common SEs were muscle pain/local rash (27.9% and 28%, after the first and second dose, respectively). Patients older than 70 years showed lower risk of SEs/AEs, while women showed a higher risk. Before receiving the vaccine, 18.2% of patients felt fearful and/or insecure about the vaccination. After the first dose, 57.5% of patients changed their feelings positively. Our data support the short-term safety of BNT162b2 in CPs, regardless of disease stage and concurrent treatments. Overall, the vaccination showed a positive impact on quality of life.

Targeting KRAS in NSCLC: Old Failures and New Options for "Non-G12c" Patients.

Kirsten Rat Sarcoma Viral Oncogene Homolog (KRAS) gene mutations are among the most common driver alterations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Despite their high frequency, valid treatment options are still lacking, mainly due to an intrinsic complexity of both the protein structure and the downstream pathway. The increasing knowledge about different mutation subtypes and co-mutations has paved the way to several promising therapeutic strategies. Despite the best results so far having been obtained in patients harbouring KRAS exon 2 p.G12C mutation, even the treatment landscape of non-p.G12C KRAS mutation positive patients is predicted to change soon. This review provides a comprehensive and critical overview of ongoing studies into NSCLC patients with KRAS mutations other than p.G12C and discusses future scenarios that will hopefully change the story of this disease.

Smoking status during first-line immunotherapy and chemotherapy in NSCLC patients: A case-control matched analysis from a large multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Improved outcome in tobacco smoking patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following immunotherapy has previously been reported. However, little is known regarding this association during first-line immunotherapy in patients with high PD-L1 expression. In this study we compared clinical outcomes according to the smoking status of two large multicenter cohorts. METHODS: We compared clinical outcomes according to the smoking status (never smokers vs. current/former smokers) of two retrospective multicenter cohorts of metastatic NSCLC patients, treated with first-line pembrolizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 962 NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% who received first-line pembrolizumab and 462 NSCLC patients who received first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were included in the study. Never smokers were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of disease progression (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.49 [95% CI: 1.15-1.92], p = 0.0022) and death (HR = 1.38 [95% CI: 1.02-1.87], p = 0.0348) within the pembrolizumab cohort. On the contrary, a nonsignificant trend towards a reduced risk of disease progression (HR = 0.74 [95% CI: 0.52-1.05], p = 0.1003) and death (HR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.45-1.01], p = 0.0593) were reported for never smokers within the chemotherapy cohort. After a random case-control matching, 424 patients from both cohorts were paired. Within the matched pembrolizumab cohort, never smokers had a significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 1.68 [95% CI: 1.17-2.40], p = 0.0045) and a nonsignificant trend towards a shortened overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.32 [95% CI: 0.84-2.07], p = 0.2205). On the contrary, never smokers had a significantly longer PFS (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.49-0.95], p = 0.0255) and OS (HR = 0.66 [95% CI: 0.45-0.97], p = 0,0356) compared to current/former smoker patients within the matched chemotherapy cohort. On pooled multivariable analysis, the interaction term between smoking status and treatment modality was concordantly statistically significant with respect to ORR (p = 0.0074), PFS (p = 0.0001) and OS (p = 0.0020), confirming the significantly different impact of smoking status across the two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Among metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% receiving first-line pembrolizumab, current/former smokers experienced improved PFS and OS. On the contrary, worse outcomes were reported among current/former smokers receiving first-line chemotherapy.