Perioperative Nivolumab and Chemotherapy in Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receive a diagnosis of stage III disease. There is no current consensus regarding the most appropriate treatment for these patients. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC to receive neoadjuvant nivolumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (experimental group) or chemotherapy alone (control group), followed by surgery. Patients in the experimental group who had R0 resections received adjuvant treatment with nivolumab for 6 months. The primary end point was a pathological complete response (0% viable tumor in resected lung and lymph nodes). Secondary end points included progression-free survival and overall survival at 24 months and safety. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients underwent randomization; 57 were assigned to the experimental group and 29 were assigned to the control group. A pathological complete response occurred in 37% of the patients in the experimental group and in 7% in the control group (relative risk, 5.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34 to 21.23; P = 0.02). Surgery was performed in 93% of the patients in the experimental group and in 69% in the control group (relative risk, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.74). Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival at 24 months were 67.2% in the experimental group and 40.9% in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression, disease recurrence, or death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.88). Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival at 24 months were 85.0% in the experimental group and 63.6% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.98). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 11 patients in the experimental group (19%; some patients had events of both grades) and 3 patients in the control group (10%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC, perioperative treatment with nivolumab plus chemotherapy resulted in a higher percentage of patients with a pathological complete response and longer survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; NADIM II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03838159; EudraCT number, 2018-004515-45.).

Anetumab ravtansine versus vinorelbine in patients with relapsed, mesothelin-positive malignant pleural mesothelioma (ARCS-M): a randomised, open-label phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Few treatment options exist for second-line treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma. We aimed to assess the antibody-drug conjugate anetumab ravtansine versus vinorelbine in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic disease overexpressing mesothelin who had progressed on first-line platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. METHODS: In this phase 2, randomised, open-label study, done at 76 hospitals in 14 countries, we enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic malignant pleural mesothelioma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and who had progressed on first-line platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. Participants were prospectively screened for mesothelin overexpression (defined as 2+ or 3+ mesothelin membrane staining intensity on at least 30% of viable tumour cells by immunohistochemistry) and were randomly assigned (2:1), using an interactive voice and web response system provided by the sponsor, to receive intravenous anetumab ravtansine (6·5 mg/kg on day 1 of each 21-day cycle) or intravenous vinorelbine (30 mg/m2 once every week) until progression, toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival according to blinded central radiology review, assessed in the intention-to-treat population, with safety assessed in all participants who received any study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02610140, and is now completed. FINDINGS: Between Dec 3, 2015, and May 31, 2017, 589 patients were enrolled and 248 mesothelin-overexpressing patients were randomly allocated to the two treatment groups (166 patients were randomly assigned to receive anetumab ravtansine and 82 patients were randomly assigned to receive vinorelbine). 105 (63%) of 166 patients treated with anetumab ravtansine (median follow-up 4·0 months [IQR 1·4-5·5]) versus 43 (52%) of 82 patients treated with vinorelbine (3·9 months [1·4-5·4]) had disease progression or died (median progression-free survival 4·3 months [95% CI 4·1-5·2] vs 4·5 months [4·1-5·8]; hazard ratio 1·22 [0·85-1·74]; log-rank p=0·86). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (one [1%] of 163 patients for anetumab ravtansine vs 28 [39%] of 72 patients for vinorelbine), pneumonia (seven [4%] vs five [7%]), neutrophil count decrease (two [1%] vs 12 [17%]), and dyspnoea (nine [6%] vs three [4%]). Serious drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 12 (7%) patients treated with anetumab ravtansine and 11 (15%) patients treated with vinorelbine. Ten (6%) treatment-emergent deaths occurred with anetumab ravtansine: pneumonia (three [2%]), dyspnoea (two [1%]), sepsis (two [1%]), atrial fibrillation (one [1%]), physical deterioration (one [1%]), hepatic failure (one [1%]), mesothelioma (one [1%]), and renal failure (one [1%]; one patient had 3 events). One (1%) treatment-emergent death occurred in the vinorelbine group (pneumonia). INTERPRETATION: Anetumab ravtansine showed a manageable safety profile and was not superior to vinorelbine. Further studies are needed to define active treatments in relapsed mesothelin-expressing malignant pleural mesothelioma. FUNDING: Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals.

RESILIENT part 1: a phase 2 dose-exploration and dose-expansion study of second-line liposomal irinotecan in adults with small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: RESILIENT (NCT03088813) is a phase 2/3 study assessing the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of liposomal irinotecan monotherapy in patients with small cell lung cancer and disease progression on/after first-line platinum-based therapy. Here, we present results from RESILIENT part 1. METHODS: This open-label, single-arm, safety run-in evaluation with dose-exploration and dose-expansion phases included patients ≥18 years old with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0/1; those with asymptomatic central nervous system metastases were eligible. The primary objectives were to evaluate safety and tolerability and recommend a dose for further development. Efficacy end points were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: During dose exploration, 5 patients received intravenous liposomal irinotecan at 85 mg/m2 (deemed not tolerable; dose-limiting toxicity) and 12 patients received 70 mg/m2 (deemed tolerable). During dose expansion, 13 additional patients received intravenous liposomal irinotecan at 70 mg/m2 . Of these 25 patients (median age [range], 59.0 [48.0-73.0] years, 92.0% with metastatic disease), 10 experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), most commonly diarrhea (20.0%) and neutropenia (16.0%), and 3 had serious treatment-related TEAEs, of whom 2 died. ORR was 44.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 24.40-65.07; 1 complete response, 10 partial responses) and median (95% CI) PFS and OS were 3.98 (1.45-4.24) months and 8.08 (5.16-9.82) months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Overall, no new safety signals were identified with liposomal irinotecan, and antitumor activity was promising. RESILIENT part 2, a randomized, controlled, phase 3 study of liposomal irinotecan versus topotecan, is ongoing. LAY SUMMARY: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive disease with few treatment options after platinum-based therapy. Administering 1 option, irinotecan, as a "liposomal" formulation, may extend drug exposure and improve outcomes. The RESILIENT part 1 trial assessed the safety and efficacy of liposomal irinotecan in 25 adults with SCLC after disease progression despite platinum-based therapy. No new safety concerns were reported. The most common moderate-to-severe side effects were diarrhea (20% of patients) and neutropenia (16%). Tumors responded to treatment in 44% of patients. Average survival was 8.08 months, and time to disease progression was 3.98 months. Liposomal irinotecan trials are ongoing.

Durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide alone in first-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CASPIAN): updated results from a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: First-line durvalumab plus etoposide with either cisplatin or carboplatin (platinum-etoposide) showed a significant improvement in overall survival versus platinum-etoposide alone in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in the CASPIAN study. Here we report updated results, including the primary analysis for overall survival with durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide alone. METHODS: CASPIAN is an ongoing, open-label, sponsor-blind, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial at 209 cancer treatment centres in 23 countries worldwide. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older (20 years in Japan) and had treatment-naive, histologically or cytologically documented ES-SCLC, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) in blocks of six, stratified by planned platinum, using an interactive voice-response or web-response system to receive intravenous durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide, durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide, or platinum-etoposide alone. In all groups, patients received etoposide 80-100 mg/m2 on days 1-3 of each cycle with investigator's choice of either carboplatin area under the curve 5-6 mg/mL/min or cisplatin 75-80 mg/m2 on day 1 of each cycle. Patients in the platinum-etoposide group received up to six cycles of platinum-etoposide every 3 weeks and optional prophylactic cranial irradiation (investigator's discretion). Patients in the immunotherapy groups received four cycles of platinum-etoposide plus durvalumab 1500 mg with or without tremelimumab 75 mg every 3 weeks followed by maintenance durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks. The two primary endpoints were overall survival for durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide and for durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043872. FINDINGS: Between March 27, 2017, and May 29, 2018, 972 patients were screened and 805 were randomly assigned (268 to durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide, 268 to durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide, and 269 to platinum-etoposide). As of Jan 27, 2020, the median follow-up was 25·1 months (IQR 22·3-27·9). Durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide was not associated with a significant improvement in overall survival versus platinum-etoposide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-1·00]; p=0·045); median overall survival was 10·4 months (95% CI 9·6-12·0) versus 10·5 months (9·3-11·2). Durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide showed sustained improvement in overall survival versus platinum-etoposide (HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·62-0·91]; nominal p=0·0032); median overall survival was 12·9 months (95% CI 11·3-14·7) versus 10·5 months (9·3-11·2). The most common any-cause grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (85 [32%] of 266 patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide group, 64 [24%] of 265 patients in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group, and 88 [33%] of 266 patients in the platinum-etoposide group) and anaemia (34 [13%], 24 [9%], and 48 [18%]). Any-cause serious adverse events were reported in 121 (45%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide group, 85 (32%) in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group, and 97 (36%) in the platinum-etoposide group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 12 (5%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide group (death, febrile neutropenia, and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each]; enterocolitis, general physical health deterioration and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, pneumonia, pneumonitis and hepatitis, respiratory failure, and sudden death [n=1 each]), six (2%) patients in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group (cardiac arrest, dehydration, hepatotoxicity, interstitial lung disease, pancytopenia, and sepsis [n=1 each]), and two (1%) in the platinum-etoposide group (pancytopenia and thrombocytopenia [n=1 each]). INTERPRETATION: First-line durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide showed sustained overall survival improvement versus platinum-etoposide but the addition of tremelimumab to durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide did not significantly improve outcomes versus platinum-etoposide. These results support the use of durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide as a new standard of care for the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Lurbinectedin as second-line treatment for patients with small-cell lung cancer: a single-arm, open-label, phase 2 basket trial.

BACKGROUND: Few options exist for treatment of patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) after failure of first-line therapy. Lurbinectedin is a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription. In this phase 2 study, we evaluated the acti and safety of lurbinectedin in patients with SCLC after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: In this single-arm, open-label, phase 2 basket trial, we recruited patients from 26 hospitals in six European countries and the USA. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with a pathologically proven diagnosis of SCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or lower, measurable disease as per Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, absence of brain metastasis, adequate organ function, and pre-treated with only one previous chemotherapy-containing line of treatment (minimum 3 weeks before study initiation) were eligible. Treatment consisted of 3·2 mg/m2 lurbinectedin administered as a 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with an overall response (complete or partial response) as assessed by the investigators according to RECIST 1.1. All treated patients were analysed for activity and safety. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02454972. FINDINGS: Between Oct 16, 2015, and Jan 15, 2019, 105 patients were enrolled and treated with lurbinectedin. Median follow-up was 17·1 months (IQR 6·5-25·3). Overall response by investigator assessment was seen in 37 patients (35·2%; 95% CI 26·2-45·2). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events (irrespective of causality) were haematological abnormalities-namely, anaemia (in nine [9%] patients), leucopenia (30 [29%]), neutropenia (48 [46%]), and thrombocytopenia (seven [7%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 11 (10%) patients, of which neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were the most common (five [5%] patients for each). No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Lurbinectedin was active as second-line therapy for SCLC in terms of overall response and had an acceptable and manageable safety profile. Lurbinectedin could represent a potential new treatment for patients with SCLC, who have few options especially in the event of a relapse, and is being investigated in combination with doxorubicin as second-line therapy in a randomised phase 3 trial. FUNDING: Pharma Mar.

Durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide in first-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CASPIAN): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) have extensive-stage disease at presentation, and prognosis remains poor. Recently, immunotherapy has demonstrated clinical activity in extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). The CASPIAN trial assessed durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, in combination with etoposide plus either cisplatin or carboplatin (platinum-etoposide) in treatment-naive patients with ES-SCLC. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial was done at 209 sites across 23 countries. Eligible patients were adults with untreated ES-SCLC, with WHO performance status 0 or 1 and measurable disease as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (in a 1:1:1 ratio) to durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide; durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide; or platinum-etoposide alone. All drugs were administered intravenously. Platinum-etoposide consisted of etoposide 80-100 mg/m2 on days 1-3 of each cycle with investigator's choice of either carboplatin area under the curve 5-6 mg/mL per min or cisplatin 75-80 mg/m2 (administered on day 1 of each cycle). Patients received up to four cycles of platinum-etoposide plus durvalumab 1500 mg with or without tremelimumab 75 mg every 3 weeks followed by maintenance durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks in the immunotherapy groups and up to six cycles of platinum-etoposide every 3 weeks plus prophylactic cranial irradiation (investigator's discretion) in the platinum-etoposide group. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. We report results for the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group versus the platinum-etoposide group from a planned interim analysis. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned study treatment. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043872, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Patients were enrolled between March 27, 2017, and May 29, 2018. 268 patients were allocated to the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group and 269 to the platinum-etoposide group. Durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide was associated with a significant improvement in overall survival, with a hazard ratio of 0·73 (95% CI 0·59-0·91; p=0·0047]); median overall survival was 13·0 months (95% CI 11·5-14·8) in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group versus 10·3 months (9·3-11·2) in the platinum-etoposide group, with 34% (26·9-41·0) versus 25% (18·4-31·6) of patients alive at 18 months. Any-cause adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 163 (62%) of 265 treated patients in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group and 166 (62%) of 266 in the platinum-etoposide group; adverse events leading to death occurred in 13 (5%) and 15 (6%) patients. INTERPRETATION: First-line durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide significantly improved overall survival in patients with ES-SCLC versus a clinically relevant control group. Safety findings were consistent with the known safety profiles of all drugs received. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Lensometer with autocollimation and a square Ronchi grid.

A lensometer based on an autocollimation system and a square Ronchi grid was designed, constructed, and tested. Refractive powers of monofocal, astigmatic, bifocal, and progressive lenses were measured. The focal plane was identified when no spots, or a minimum number of fringes, are observed on the bironchigram (pattern with a square Ronchi grid). For cylindrical lenses, the spots were transformed in fringes along the $ x $x and ${y}$y directions from which the cylindrical and spherical powers were obtained. For the progressive lenses, a zero spots circle moved on the bironchigram plane along the umbilic zone while the square Ronchi grid was moved along the optical axis. This lensometer is compact, cheap, and precise. Our measurements and errors were very similar to those obtained with a commercial lensometer.

A cross-sectional, comparative, syndromic description of oncological mixed pain in Medical Oncology units in Spain.

OBJECTIVE: The reason cancer pain remains prevalent and hard to classify may be partially explained by the failure to identify neuropathic mechanisms. The objective of this research was to identify the syndromes of cancer pain that may be particularly hard to manage due to their mixed pathophysiology. DESIGN: A series of 384 patients who had cancer of any type, at any stage, and suffered from chronic pain (symptom onset > 3 months) were assessed during a routine return visit in Spain. Medical oncologists indicated the presence and pathophysiology of 33 predefined pain syndromes on a per-patient basis. This information was then measured against clinical, psychosocial, and health care-related data to determine which syndromes pose particular challenges. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation) age of patients was 61.6 (12.6) years, 49.7% were women. Most (82%) had advanced metastatic disease, 68.7% were on second-line or palliative therapies. The worst syndrome was nociceptive, pure neuropathic, and mixed in 34.6, 26.9, and 38.6% of patients, respectively. Any syndrome could be of mixed pathophysiology. Only 10 syndromes were common (≥ 5% of patients). Syndromes related to malignant bone pain and involvement of chest wall structures were the most frequent. Certain syndromes (including tumor-related bone pain, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathies, paraneoplastic pain syndromes, and malignant neuralgias or injury to cranial nerves) can be particularly challenging when they have a mixed pathophysiology, because the neuropathic component is rarely or unevenly considered. CONCLUSIONS: Virtually all cancer pain syndromes can present mixed pathophysiology. Certain syndromes can include neuropathic components that are frequently overlooked.

Patient preference for oral chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic breast and lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Although new therapies against metastatic cancer have been developed in recent decades, chemotherapy is still an important treatment option. Prolonged treatment and side-effects are often discouraging for patients, and in many cases, therapy is only palliative, not curative. This study explores patient preference for oral or intravenous (IV) chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic breast or lung cancer. METHODS: It is a descriptive, open label, multicentre, nation-wide study, in which a 16-item questionnaire consisting of single-choice questions scored on a 5-point Likert scale was administered to patients in a single visit, and another 11-item questionnaire was self-administered by the patient's oncologist. RESULTS: A total of 131 breast and lung cancer specialists at 64 hospitals enrolled 412 patients (lung cancer = 161; breast cancer = 251). To be eligible, patients must have already received IV therapy and at least 2 cycles of oral chemotherapy. Most (77%) patients expressed preference for oral therapy. Most considered their daily life was less disrupted with tablets (70.4%), had no trouble swallowing them (86.9%), and were not concerned about forgetting to take them (56.8%). Half (56.3%) were worried about problems related to drug infusion with IV therapy, 61.7% were concerned about nurses failing to find a suitable vein, and 63.1% were dissatisfied with hospital waiting times. A uniform response was obtained from both samples of patients. CONCLUSION: Convenience, ease of administration, fewer side effects and better quality of life tilt the balance towards oral drug administration.

Clinical management and outcome of patients with advanced NSCLC carrying EGFR mutations in Spain.

BACKGROUND: Although the benefit of first-line epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) over chemotherapy has been demonstrated in several clinical trials, data from clinical practice is lacking and the optimal EGFR TKI to be used remains unclear. This study aims to assess the real-life diagnostic and clinical management and outcome of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) carrying EGFR mutations in Spain. METHODS: All consecutive patients recently diagnosed with advanced or metastatic NSCLC from April 2010 to December 2011 in 18 Spanish hospitals and carrying EGFR mutations were retrospectively evaluated. RESULTS: Between March and November 2013, a total of 187 patients were enrolled (98.3% Caucasian, 61.9% female, 54.9% never-smokers, 89.0% adenocarcinoma). Mutation testing was mainly performed on biopsy tumour tissue specimens (69.0%) using a qPCR-based test (90%) (47.0% Therascreen EGFR PCR Kit). Common sensitising mutations were detected in 79.8% of patients: 57.1% had exon 19 deletions and 22.6% exon 21 L858R point mutations. The vast majority of patients received first-line therapy (n = 168; 92.8%). EGFR TKIs were the most commonly used first-line treatment (81.5%), while chemotherapy was more frequently administered as a second- and third-line option (51.9% and 56.0%, respectively). Of 141 patients who experienced disease progression, 79 (56.0%) received second-line treatment. After disease progression on first-line TKIs (n = 112), 33.9% received chemotherapy, 8.9% chemotherapy and a TKI, and 9.8% continued TKI therapy. Most patients received first-line gefitinib (83.0%), while erlotinib was more frequently used in the second-line setting (83.0%). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients harbouring common mutations were 11.1 months and 20.1 months respectively (exon 19 deletions: 12.4 and 21.4 months; L858R: 8.3 and 14.5 months), and 3.9 months and 11.1 months respectively for those with rare mutations. CONCLUSION: EGFR TKIs (gefitinib and erlotinib) are used as the preferred first-line treatment while chemotherapy is more frequently administered as a second- and third-line option in routine clinical practice in Spain. In addition, efficacy data obtained in the real-life setting seem to concur with data from EGFR TKI phase III pivotal studies in NSCLC.

SIADH-related hyponatremia in hospital day care units: clinical experience and management with tolvaptan.

Hyponatremia (Na ˂ 135 mmol/l) is the most frequent electrolyte disorder in clinical practice, and the syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion (SIADH) is the commonest cause of hyponatremia in cancer patients. Correcting hyponatremia in these patients can reduce morbidity and mortality, increase the response to anti-cancer agents, and help reduce hospital length of stay and costs. Tolvaptan is an oral medication used to treat SIADH-related hyponatremia patients that needs to be initiated at hospital so patients can have their serum sodium monitored. If tolvaptan could be initiated in hospital day care units (DCUs), performing the same tests, hospitalization could be avoided, quality of life improved, and costs reduced. This is the first publication where a panel of oncologists are sharing their experience and making some recommendations with the use of tolvaptan to treat SIADH-related hyponatremia in DCU after collecting and examining 35 clinical cases with these type of patients. The conclusion from this retrospective observational analysis is that the use of tolvaptan in DCU is safe and effective in the therapeutic management of SIADH-related hyponatremia.

Gefitinib plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in EGFR-mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer after progression on first-line gefitinib (IMPRESS): a phase 3 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimum management strategies for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with acquired resistance to EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors are undefined. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of continuing gefitinib combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with EGFR-mutation-positive advanced NSCLC with acquired resistance to first-line gefitinib. METHODS: The randomised, phase 3, multicentre IMPRESS study was done in 71 centres in 11 countries in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed, chemotherapy-naive, stage IIIB-IV EGFR-mutation-positive advanced NSCLC with previous disease control with first-line gefitinib and recent disease progression (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by central block randomisation to oral gefitinib 250 mg or placebo once daily in tablet form; randomisation did not include stratification factors. All patients also received the platinum-based doublet chemotherapy cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) plus pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on the first day of each cycle. After completion of a maximum of six chemotherapy cycles, patients continued their randomly assigned treatment until disease progression or another discontinuation criterion was met. All study investigators and participants were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The study has completed enrolment, but patients are still in follow-up for overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01544179. FINDINGS: Between March 29, 2012, and Dec 20, 2013, 265 patients were randomly assigned: 133 to the gefitinib group and 132 to the placebo group. At the time of data cutoff (May 5, 2014), 98 (74%) patients had disease progression in the gefitinib group compared with 107 (81%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·65-1·13; p=0·27; median progression-free survival 5·4 months in both groups [95% CI 4·5-5·7 in the gefitinib group and 4·6-5·5 in the placebo group]). The most common adverse events of any grade were nausea (85 [64%] of 132 patients in the gefitinib group and 81 [61%] of 132 patients in the placebo group) and decreased appetite (65 [49%] and 45 [34%]). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or worse were anaemia (11 [8%] of 132 patients in the gefitinib group and five [4%] of 132 patients in the placebo group) and neutropenia (nine [7%] and seven [5%]). 37 (28%) of 132 patients in the gefitinib group and 28 (21%) of 132 patients in the placebo group reported serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Continuation of gefitinib after radiological disease progression on first-line gefitinib did not prolong progression-free survival in patients who received platinum-based doublet chemotherapy as subsequent line of treatment. Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy remains the standard of care in this setting. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Prognostic value of dual-specificity phosphatase 6 expression in non-small cell lung cancer.

Dual-specificity phosphatase 6 (DUSP6/MKP-3) is a mitogen-activated protein kinase phosphatase that regulates extracellular signal-regulated kinases (ERKs) activity via feedback mechanisms, with an increasingly recognized role in tumour biology. The aim of this study was to explore the role of DUSP6 expression in the prognosis of human non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). DUSP6 expression levels were evaluated by real-time quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in 60 NSCLC samples from patients who underwent pulmonary resection at 12 de Octubre University Hospital. We performed a statistical analysis to investigate the correlation of DUSP6 expression and the clinical outcomes. We found that 66.7% of the tumour samples show the downregulation of DUSP6 at the messenger RNA (mRNA) levels compared to benign epithelial lung tissues and 55% of them show at least twofold downregulation of DUSP6 gene expression. Patients were classified into three groups according to their DUSP6 expression levels and those with very low levels (at least twofold downregulation) had the worst outcomes. Using the value of twice below the mean value in benign epithelial lung tissue as a cutoff, the overall survival of patients with very low DUSP6 levels was significantly lower than that in the rest of patients (31.9 ± 18.8 months vs. not reached, P = 0.049). This was most pronounced in adenocarcinoma histology and high-stage tumour samples. Our results suggest that DUSP6 gene expression in tumour samples may be a prognostic marker in NSCLC.

Phase 1 first-in-human dose-escalation study of ANV419 in patients with relapsed/refractory advanced solid tumors.

Patients with advanced cancer, previously treated with immune checkpoint blockade therapy, may retain residual treatment when undergoing the initial infusion of experimental monotherapy in phase 1 clinical trials. ANV419, an antibody-cytokine fusion protein, combines interleukin-2 (IL-2) with an anti-IL-2 monoclonal antibody, aiming to stimulate the expansion of CD8 T and natural killer lymphocytes while restricting regulatory T lymphocytes. In the recent publication of the phase 1 dose escalation study of ANV419, a notable gap exists in detailed information regarding patients' prior antitumoral treatments, specifically programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) targeted monoclonal antibodies. Some patients likely retained residual anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies, potentially influencing the outcomes of ANV419. In a separate clinical cohort, we retrospectively measured the residual concentration of nivolumab and pembrolizumab, revealing persistent serum concentrations of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies even months after treatment cessation. This underscores the importance of comprehensively documenting prior immunotherapy details in clinical trials. Such information is crucial for understanding potential interactions that may impact both immunological and clinical effects.

Impact of Clonal Hematopoiesis-Associated Mutations in Phase I Patients Treated for Solid Tumors: An Analysis of the STING Trial.

PURPOSE: With liquid biopsy's widespread adoption in oncology, an increased number of clonal hematopoiesis-associated mutations (CHm) have been identified in patients with solid tumors. However, its impact on patient outcomes remains unclear. This study aimed to analyze and describe CHm in a cohort of phase I patients. METHODS: Retrospective data collection from medical records and molecular profiles (Foundation One Liquid CDx Assay) was performed before first study drug administration at the Drug Development Department of Gustave Roussy (France) within the STING trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04932525). CHm prevalence was assessed using any and ≥1% variant allele frequency (VAF) in epigenetic modifier genes (DNMT3A, TET2, and ASXL1). RESULTS: From January 2021 to December 2022, 255 patients were enrolled in a phase I clinical trial. A total of 55% were male, with a median age of 62 years (24-86). Principal tumor locations were GI (27%) and genitourinary (21%). Overall, 104 patients (41%) had at least one CHm in liquid biopsy, with 55 patients (22%) having a VAF of ≥ 1%. The most frequent mutation was DNMT3A 73% at any VAF (n = 76) and 22% at 1% VAF (n = 23). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 3.8 months (m) for the CHm group versus 3.2 m for nonclonal hematopoiesis (CH; P = .08) and 18.26 m CHm versus 15.8 m non-CH (P = .9), respectively. PFS increased in the CHm population treated with targeted therapy (hazard ratio, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.84]; P = .004). CONCLUSION: CHm was commonly found in patients with solid tumors treated in phase I trials, with a prevalence of 41% in our cohort. The most frequently mutated gene was DNMT3A. The presence of CHm had no impact on the population of patients treated in the phase I trials.

Genomic landscape of liquid biopsy mutations in TP53 and DNA damage genes in cancer patients.

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays based on plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) are increasingly used for clinical trials inclusion. Their optimized limit of detection applied to a large number of genes leads to the identification of mutations not confirmed in tissue. It becomes essential to describe the characteristics and consequences of these liquid biopsy-only mutations. In the STING protocol (Gustave Roussy, NCT04932525), 542 patients with advanced solid cancer had cfDNA-based and tissue-based NGS analysis (performed by FoundationOne® Liquid CDx and FoundationOne CDx™, respectively). Mutations identified in the liquid biopsy but not in the paired tissue were considered as liquid biopsy-only mutations irrespective of their variant allelic frequency (VAF). Out of 542 patients, 281 (51.8%) harbored at least one liquid biopsy-only mutation. These patients were significantly older, and more heavily pretreated. Liquid biopsy-only mutations occurring in TP53, and in DDR genes (ATM, CHEK2, ATR, BRCA2, and BRCA1) accounted for 90.8% of all the mutations. The median VAF of these mutations was generally low (0.37% and 0.40% for TP53 and DDR genes respectively). The variant type repartition depended on the gene. Liquid biopsy-only mutations affected hotspot in TP53 codon 273, 125, 195, 176, 237 or 280 and ATM codon 2891 and 3008. In a subset of 37 patients, 75.0%, 53.5% and 83.3% of the liquid biopsy-only mutations occurring respectively in ATM, TP53, and CHEK2 were confirmed in the matching whole blood sample. Although liquid biopsy-only mutations makes the interpretation of liquid biopsy results more complex, they have distinct characteristics making them more easily identifiable.

BRAF mutational status is associated with survival outcomes in locally advanced resectable and metastatic NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy-based treatments have demonstrated high efficacy in patients with advanced and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). BRAF mutations affect a small but significant fraction of NSCLC. The efficacy of these therapies in this subgroup of patients is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Plasma and tissue samples from 116 resectable stage IIIA/B NSCLC patients, included in NADIM and NADIM II clinical trials (NADIM cohort), and from a prospective academic cohort with 84 stage IV NSCLC patients (BLI-O cohort), were analyzed by next-generation sequencing. RESULTS: The p.G464E, p.G466R, p.G466V, p.G469V, p.L597Q, p.T599I, p.V600E (n = 2) BRAF mutations, were identified in four (3.45 %) samples from the NADIM cohort, all of which were cases treated with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (CH-IO), and four (4.76 %) samples from the BLI-O cohort, corresponding to cases treated with first-line immunotherapy (n = 2) or CH-IO (n = 2). All these patients were alive and had no evidence of disease at data cut-off. Conversely, patients with BRAF wild-type (wt) tumors in the BLI-O cohort had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.49 months and a median overall survival (OS) of 12.00 months (P-LogRank = 0.013 and 0.046, respectively). Likewise, PFS and OS probabilities at 36 months were 60.5 % and 76.1 % for patients with BRAF-wt tumors in the NADIM cohort. The pathological complete response (pCR) rate after neoadjuvant CH-IO in patients with BRAF-positive tumors (n = 4) was 100 %, whereas the pCR rate in the BRAF-wt population was 44.3 % (RR: 2.26; 95 % CI: 1.78-2.85; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: BRAF mutations may be a good prognostic factor for advanced and locally advanced NSCLC patients undergoing immunotherapy-based treatments.

Association Between Lung Immune Prognostic Index and Durvalumab Consolidation Outcomes in Patients With Locally Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The LIPI, based on pretreatment derived neutrophils/[leukocytes-neutrophils] ratio (dNLR) and LDH, is associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) outcomes in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess baseline LIPI correlation with durvalumab consolidation outcomes in the locally advanced setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Multicentre retrospective study (330 patients) with stage III unresectable NSCLC treated with durvalumab after chemo-radiotherapy between April 2015 and December 2020; 65 patients treated with chemo-radiotherapy only. Baseline LIPI characterized 3 groups: good (dNLR≤3+LDH≤ULN), intermediate (dNLR>3/LDH>ULN) and poor (dNLR>3+LDH>ULN). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In the durvalumab cohort, median age was 67 years, 95% smokers, 98% with a performance status of 0-1; 60% had nonsquamous histology and 16% a PD-L1 expression <1%. Radiotherapy was delivered concurrently in 81%. LIPI was evaluable in 216 patients: 66% good, 31% intermediate, 3% poor. LIPI significantly correlated with median OS (median follow-up: 19 months): 18.1 months vs. 47.0 months vs. not reached in poor, intermediate and good LIPI groups, respectively (P = .03). A trend between objective response rate and LIPI groups was observed: 0% vs. 41% vs. 45%, respectively (P = .05). The pooled intermediate/poor LIPI group was associated with shorter OS (HR 1.97; P = .03) and higher risk of progressive disease (OR 2.68; P = .047). Survivals and response were not influenced in the control cohort. CONCLUSION: Baseline LIPI correlated with outcomes in patients with locally advanced NSCLC treated with durvalumab consolidation, but not in those who only received chemo-radiotherapy, providing further evidence of its prognostic and potential predictive role of ICI benefit in NSCLC.

[Treatment of non-small cell lung carcinoma in early stages]. / Tratamiento del carcinoma broncogénico de célula no pequeña en estadios precoces.

Treatment of lung carcinoma is multidisciplinary. There are different therapeutic strategies available, although surgery shows the best results in those patients with lung carcinoma in early stages. Other options such as stereotactic radiation therapy are relegated to patients with small tumors and poor cardiopulmonary reserve or to those who reject surgery. Adjuvant chemotherapy is not justified in patients with stage i of the disease and so double adjuvant chemotherapy should be considered. This adjuvant chemotherapy should be based on cisplatin after surgery in those patients with stages ii and IIIA.

ONCOS-102 plus pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a randomized phase 2 study investigating clinical outcomes and the tumor microenvironment.

BACKGROUND: ONCOS-102, an oncolytic adenovirus expressing granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, can alter the tumor microenvironment to an immunostimulatory state. Combining ONCOS-102 with standard-of-care chemotherapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) may improve treatment outcomes. METHODS: In this open-label, randomized study, patients with unresectable MPM received intratumoral ONCOS-102 (3×1011 virus particles on days 1, 4, 8, 36, 78, and 120) and pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin (from day 22), or pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin alone. The primary endpoint was safety. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, objective response rate, and tumor immunologic activation (baseline and day 36 biopsies) were also assessed. RESULTS: In total, 31 patients (safety lead-in: n=6, randomized: n=25) were enrolled. Anemia (15.0% and 27.3%) and neutropenia (40.0% and 45.5%) were the most frequent grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) in the ONCOS-102 (n=20) and chemotherapy-alone (n=11) cohorts. No patients discontinued ONCOS-102 due to AEs. No statistically significant difference in efficacy endpoints was observed. There was a numerical improvement in OS (30-month OS rate 34.1% vs 0; median OS 20.3 vs 13.5 months) with ONCOS-102 versus chemotherapy alone in chemotherapy-naïve patients (n=17). By day 36, ONCOS-102 was associated with increased T-cell infiltration and immune-related gene expression that was not observed in the control cohort. Substantial immune activation in the tumor microenvironment was associated with survival at month 18 in the ONCOS-102 cohort. CONCLUSIONS: ONCOS-102 plus pemetrexed and cisplatin/carboplatin was well tolerated by patients with MPM. In injected tumors, ONCOS-102 promoted a proinflammatory environment, including T-cell infiltration, which showed association with survival at month 18.