Immuno-Oncological Treatment and Tumor Mass in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Case-Control Analysis of Overall Survival in Routine Clinical Practice.

BACKGROUND: Immuno-oncological (IO) therapies such as PD-1 and PD-L1 antibodies have been introduced in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) since 2015 based on randomized trials showing unprecedented advantages in overall survival (OS) with hazard ratios (HRs) between 0.5 and 0.7. The impact of these treatments on OS in routine clinical practice and the role of tumor mass have not been studied. METHODS: 557 consecutive patients with inoperable stage III or stage IV NSCLC diagnosed in our certified lung cancer center from 2006 to 2018 were included if they had received at least one line of systemic treatment. OS of immuno-oncologically treated patients (IO patients, n = 144) who received treatment with a PD-1 antibody (nivolumab [n = 77] or pembrolizumab [n = 51]) or a PD-L1 antibody (atezolizumab [n = 4] or durvalumab [n = 12]) was compared to historic controls treated before availability of IO treatment (n = 413) using case-control analysis. IO patients and historic controls were individually matched for stage, performance state, histology, smoking status, gender, age, and initial treatment mode (palliative vs. definitive radio-chemotherapy). RESULTS: Case-control analysis of 91 matched pairs showed significantly longer OS in IO patients compared to historic controls (21.2 vs. 10.9 months, HR 0.526, CI 0.373-0.723). The benefit was more pronounced in patients with lower tumor stage (HR 0.48 [stage III], 0.40 [IVA], 0.63 [IVB]) or smaller tumor size (HR 0.38 [RECIST ≤57 mm], 0.40 [RECIST 58-94 mm], 0.59 [RECIST 95-141 mm], 0.75 [RECIST ≥142 mm]). CONCLUSIONS: IO patients showed significant benefit in OS with HRs comparable to those reported in phase III trials. The benefit tended to be greater in patients with lower tumor mass.

Second malignancy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): prevalence and overall survival (OS) in routine clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a prior or synchronous second malignancy are generally excluded from clinical trials. Therefore, little is known on prevalence and prognosis of these patients. METHODS: 1252 patients diagnosed with NSCLC in our center from 2006 to 2017 were studied. Overall survival (OS) of patients with a prior or synchronous malignancy was compared to controls including case-control analysis. RESULTS: 158 patients (12.6%) had a prior malignancy. The most common sites were prostate (17%), breast (16%), gastrointestinal tract (12%), head and neck (11%), bladder (10%), and lung (8%). Compared to controls, patients with prior malignancy were older (71.3 vs. 67.5 years), but had otherwise better prognostic characteristics (stage I-III 63 vs. 53%). Survival was identical compared to controls [hazard ratio (HR) 1.017, CI 0.776-1.333]. A further 3.5% of patients had a synchronous malignancy including 34% prior lung cancer. Patients with a synchronous malignancy had an earlier stage (I-III 84%), and had longer median OS in unselected patients (38.6 vs. 16.2 months, p = 0.021). However, the case-control analysis showed similar OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.899, CI 0.497-1.621]. CONCLUSIONS: Prior or synchronous second malignancies are common at diagnosis of NSCLC. The sites reflect the high proportion of smokers in the population. The earlier stage of NSCLC with a second malignancy might be attributed to chance finding of NSCLC during follow-up. The second malignancy does not affect OS of NSCLC. Therefore, the exclusion of patients with second malignancies from NSCLC trials should be reconsidered.

Oncogenic driver mutations, treatment, and EGFR-TKI resistance in a Caucasian population with non-small cell lung cancer: survival in clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION: Oncogenic driver mutations activating EGFR, ALK, or BRAF in NSCLC predict sensitivity to specific tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs). We provide data on prevalence, treatment and survival of driver-mutation positive NSCLC in a predominantly Caucasian population in routine clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NSCLC patients diagnosed from 2006-2015 with an EGFR-test result were included (n=265). Testing for EGFR, ALK, or BRAF was performed if specific TKI therapy was considered. Case-control analyses of overall survival (OS) comparing driver-mutation positive and negative patients were performed. RESULTS: 44 sensitizing EGFR mutations (17%), 8 ALK translocations (7%, n=111) and 3 BRAF mutations (8%, n=39) were detected in adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous carcinoma. We did not find mutations in tumors without an adenocarcinoma-component. More than 90% of inoperable driver-mutation positive patients received TKI-therapy. Case-control analysis revealed improved OS of driver-mutation positive patients (39.6 vs. 19.4 months, HR 0.51). OS was improved in stage IV patients but not in stage I-III patients.OS of EGFR-TKI treated patients was similar for 1st and 2nd-line EGFR-TKI treatment. Patients not treated with EGFR-TKI had no benefit in OS. Re-biopsies obtained at progression revealed an EGFR-T790M mutation in 73% (n=11). These patients responded to the 3rd-generation EGFR-TKI osimertinib. DISCUSSION: Testing guided by predictive clinical parameters resulted in twice as high rates of mutation-positive patients than expected, and TKI treatment resulted in a strong long-term OS advantage. CONCLUSION: Testing for driver mutations is feasible in routine clinical practice, and identifies patients who benefit from TKI-therapy. OS compares favorably with OS in clinical studies.