Plain language summary of the updated results from the CROWN study comparing lorlatinib with crizotinib in people with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary shows the updated results of an ongoing research study called CROWN that was published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine in December 2022. In the CROWN study, researchers looked at the effects of two study medicines called lorlatinib and crizotinib. The study included people with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that had not been treated previously. All people in the study had cancer cells with changes (known as alterations) in a gene called anaplastic lymphoma kinase, or ALK. This ALK gene is involved in cancer growth. In this updated study, researchers looked at the continued benefit in people who took lorlatinib compared with people who took crizotinib after 3 years. WHAT DID THIS STUDY FIND?: After 3 years of being observed, people who took lorlatinib were more likely to be alive without their cancer getting worse than people who took crizotinib. At 3 years, 64% of people who took lorlatinib were alive without their cancer getting worse compared with 19% of people who took crizotinib. The cancer was less likely to have spread within or to the brain in people who took lorlatinib than in people who took crizotinib. After 3 years of being observed, 61% of people were still taking lorlatinib and 8% of people were still taking crizotinib. People who took lorlatinib had more severe side effects than people who took crizotinib. However, these side effects were manageable. The most common side effects with lorlatinib were high levels of cholesterol or high levels of triglycerides (a type of fat) in the blood. Life-threatening side effects were seen in 13% of people who took lorlatinib and 8% in crizotinib. Two people who took lorlatinib died because of side effects from lorlatinib. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: The updated results from the CROWN study showed that a larger percentage of people who took lorlatinib continued to benefit from their treatment after being observed for 3 years compared with those who took crizotinib.

Risk factors for immune-related adverse events from anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 treatment in an Asian cohort of nonsmall cell lung cancer patients.

Immune-related adverse events (IrAEs) of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can be serious and unpredictable. We examine the incidence rate and risk factors for IrAEs in an Asian cohort of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with immunotherapy. Between June 2014 and August 2020, we retrospectively analysed IrAEs in NSCLC patients treated with anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 inhibitors at the National University Cancer Institute, Singapore. A Poisson regression model was used to estimate the effect of risk factors on incidence rate of any grade IrAEs. One hundred and forty-one patients were enrolled. Median age was 63. Majority were male (67%) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS 0-1 (77%). More than half (56%) received pembrolizumab. Eleven percent harboured epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. Eighteen percent received concomitant chemotherapy. Median number of cycles was 4, and median duration of treatment was 2.1 months. IrAEs were seen in 71 (50.4%) patients, with an incidence rate of 99 events per 1000 person-months. Fatigue (25%), rash (10.5%) and pneumonitis (7.9%) were the most common IrAEs. Twenty out of 152 IrAEs (13.2%) were Grade 3 or higher in severity: most common being pneumonitis (5.3%), fatigue (3.3%) and transaminitis (1.3%). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that concomitant chemotherapy use, higher BMI and presence of EGFR mutation are significant predictors for IrAEs (P < .0001; P = .016; P = .007). Our findings can help guide risk stratification and monitoring of IrAEs among NSCLC patients on immunotherapy.

"Interchangeability" of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry assays: a meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.

Different clones, protocol conditions, instruments, and scoring/readout methods may pose challenges in introducing different PD-L1 assays for immunotherapy. The diagnostic accuracy of using different PD-L1 assays interchangeably for various purposes is unknown. The primary objective of this meta-analysis was to address PD-L1 assay interchangeability based on assay diagnostic accuracy for established clinical uses/purposes. A systematic search of the MEDLINE database using PubMed platform was conducted using "PD-L1" as a search term for 01/01/2015 to 31/08/2018, with limitations "English" and "human". 2,515 abstracts were reviewed to select for original contributions only. 57 studies on comparison of two or more PD-L1 assays were fully reviewed. 22 publications were selected for meta-analysis. Additional data were requested from authors of 20/22 studies in order to enable the meta-analysis. Modified GRADE and QUADAS-2 criteria were used for grading published evidence and designing data abstraction templates for extraction by reviewers. PRISMA was used to guide reporting of systematic review and meta-analysis and STARD 2015 for reporting diagnostic accuracy study. CLSI EP12-A2 was used to guide test comparisons. Data were pooled using random-effects model. The main outcome measure was diagnostic accuracy of various PD-L1 assays. The 22 included studies provided 376 2×2 contingency tables for analyses. Results of our study suggest that, when the testing laboratory is not able to use an Food and Drug Administration-approved companion diagnostic(s) for PD-L1 assessment for its specific clinical purpose(s), it is better to develop a properly validated laboratory developed test for the same purpose(s) as the original PD-L1 Food and Drug Administration-approved immunohistochemistry companion diagnostic, than to replace the original PD-L1 Food and Drug Administration-approved immunohistochemistry companion diagnostic with a another PD-L1 Food and Drug Administration-approved companion diagnostic that was developed for a different purpose.

A randomized phase II trial evaluating the addition of low dose, short course sunitinib to docetaxel in advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported that low-dose, short-course sunitinib prior to neoadjuvant doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (AC) normalised tumour vasculature and improved perfusion, but resulted in neutropenia and delayed subsequent cycles in breast cancer patients. This study combined sunitinib with docetaxel, which has an earlier neutrophil nadir than AC. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid cancers were randomized 1:1 to 3-weekly docetaxel 75 mg/m2, with or without sunitinib 12.5 mg daily for 7 days prior to docetaxel, stratified by primary tumour site. Primary endpoints were objective-response (ORR:CR + PR) and clinical-benefit rate (CBR:CR + PR + SD); secondary endpoints were toxicity and progression-free-survival (PFS). RESULTS: We enrolled 68 patients from 2 study sites; 33 received docetaxel-sunitinib and 35 docetaxel alone, with 33 breast, 25 lung and 10 patients with other cancers. There was no difference in ORR (30.3% vs 28.6%, p = 0.432, odds-ratio [OR] 1.10, 95% CI 0.38-3.18); CBR was lower in the docetaxel-sunitinib arm (48.5% vs 71.4%, p = 0.027 OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-1.01). Median PFS was shorter in the docetaxel-sunitinib arm (2.9 vs 4.9 months, hazard-ratio [HR] 2.00, 95% CI 1.15-3.48, p = 0.014) overall, as well as in breast (4.2 vs 5.6 months, p = 0.048) and other cancers (2.0 vs 5.3 months, p = 0.009), but not in lung cancers (2.9 vs 4.1 months, p = 0.597). Median OS was similar in both arms overall (9.9 vs 10.5 months, HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.51-1.67, p = 0.789), and in the breast (18.9 vs 25.8 months, p = 0.354), lung (7.0 vs 6.7 months, p = 0.970) and other cancers (4.5 vs 8.8 months, p = 0.449) subgroups. Grade 3/4 haematological toxicities were lower with docetaxel-sunitinib (18.2% vs 34.3%, p = 0.132), attributed to greater discretionary use of prophylactic G-CSF (90.9% vs 63.0%, p = 0.024). Grade 3/4 non-haematological toxicities were similar (12.1% vs 14.3%, p = 0.792). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of sunitinib to docetaxel was well-tolerated but did not improve outcomes. The possible negative impact in metastatic breast cancer patients is contrary to results of adding sunitinib to neoadjuvant AC. These negative results suggest that the intermittent administration of sunitinib in the current dose and schedule with docetaxel in advanced solid tumours, particularly breast cancers, is not beneficial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered ( NCT01803503 ) prospectively on clinicaltrials.gov on 4th March 2013.

Sequential afatinib and osimertinib in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: final analysis of the GioTag study.

Aim: Final overall survival (OS) and time on treatment analysis of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received sequential afatinib and osimertinib. Patients & methods: Patients (n = 203) had T790M-positive disease following first-line afatinib and started osimertinib treatment ≥10 months before data entry. Primary outcome was time on treatment; OS analysis was exploratory. Results: Median time on treatment with afatinib and osimertinib was 27.7 months (90% CI: 26.7-29.9). Median OS was 37.6 months (90% CI: 35.5-41.3); median OS was 41.6 and 44.8 months in Del19-positive patients and Asian patients, respectively. Conclusion: In real-world clinical practice, sequential afatinib and osimertinib was associated with encouraging outcomes in patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC, especially in Del19-positive patients and Asian patients. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03370770 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Lorlatinib in advanced ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 1-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib is a potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that targets ALK and ROS1 with preclinical activity against most known resistance mutations in ALK and ROS1. We investigated the antitumour activity and safety of lorlatinib in advanced, ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In this open-label, single-arm, phase 1-2 trial, we enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced ROS1-positive NSCLC, with or without CNS metastases, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less (≤1 for phase 1 only) from 28 hospitals in 12 countries worldwide. Lorlatinib 100 mg once daily (escalating doses of 10 mg once daily to 100 mg twice daily in phase 1 only) was given orally in continuous 21-day cycles until investigator-determined disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death. The primary endpoint was overall and intracranial tumour response, assessed by independent central review. Activity endpoints were assessed in patients who received at least one dose of lorlatinib. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01970865. FINDINGS: Between Jan 22, 2014, and Oct 2, 2016, we assessed 364 patients, of whom 69 with ROS1-positive NSCLC were enrolled. 21 (30%) of 69 patients were TKI-naive, 40 (58%) had previously received crizotinib as their only TKI, and eight (12%) had previously received one non-crizotinib ROS1 TKI or two or more ROS1 TKIs. The estimated median duration of follow-up for response was 21·1 months (IQR 15·2-30·3). 13 (62%; 95% CI 38-82) of 21 TKI-naive patients and 14 (35%; 21-52) of 40 patients previously treated with crizotinib as their only TKI had an objective response. Intracranial responses were achieved in seven (64%; 95% CI 31-89) of 11 TKI-naive patients and 12 (50%; 29-71) of 24 previous crizotinib-only patients. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were hypertriglyceridaemia (13 [19%] of 69 patients) and hypercholesterolaemia (ten [14%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in five (7%) of 69 patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Lorlatinib showed clinical activity in patients with advanced ROS1-positive NSCLC, including those with CNS metastases and those previously treated with crizotinib. Because crizotinib-refractory patients have few treatment options, lorlatinib could represent an important next-line targeted agent. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Rogaratinib in patients with advanced cancers selected by FGFR mRNA expression: a phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical activity of fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors seems restricted to cancers harbouring rare FGFR genetic aberrations. In preclinical studies, high tumour FGFR mRNA expression predicted response to rogaratinib, an oral pan-FGFR inhibitor. We aimed to assess the safety, maximum tolerated dose, recommended phase 2 dose, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary clinical activity of rogaratinib. METHODS: We did a phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study of rogaratinib in adults with advanced cancers at 22 sites in Germany, Switzerland, South Korea, Singapore, Spain, and France. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, and were ineligible for standard therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, a life expectancy of at least 3 months, and at least one measurable or evaluable lesion according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. During dose escalation, rogaratinib was administered orally twice daily at 50-800 mg in continuous 21-day cycles using a model-based dose-response analysis (continuous reassessment method). In the dose-expansion phase, all patients provided an archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumour biopsy or consented to a new biopsy at screening for the analysis of FGFR1-3 mRNA expression. In the dose-expansion phase, rogaratinib was given at the recommended dose for expansion to patients in four cohorts: urothelial carcinoma, head and neck squamous-cell cancer (HNSCC), non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and other solid tumour types. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, determination of maximum tolerated dose including dose-limiting toxicities and determination of recommended phase 2 dose, and pharmacokinetics of rogaratinib. Safety analyses were reported in all patients who received at least one dose of rogaratinib. Patients who completed cycle 1 or discontinued during cycle 1 due to an adverse event or dose-limiting toxicity were included in the evaluation of recommended phase 2 dose. Efficacy analyses were reported for all patients who received at least one dose of study drug and who had available post-baseline efficacy data. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01976741, and is fully recruited. FINDINGS: Between Dec 30, 2013, and July 5, 2017, 866 patients were screened for FGFR mRNA expression, of whom 126 patients were treated (23 FGFR mRNA-unselected patients in the dose-escalation phase and 103 patients with FGFR mRNA-overexpressing tumours [52 patients with urothelial carcinoma, eight patients with HNSCC, 20 patients with NSCLC, and 23 patients with other tumour types] in the dose-expansion phase). No dose-limiting toxicities were reported and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached; 800 mg twice daily was established as the recommended phase 2 dose and was selected for the dose-expansion phase. The most common adverse events of any grade were hyperphosphataemia (in 77 [61%] of 126 patients), diarrhoea (in 65 [52%]), and decreased appetite (in 48 [38%]); and the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were fatigue (in 11 [9%] of 126 patients) and asymptomatic increased lipase (in 10 [8%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in five patients (decreased appetite and diarrhoea in one patient with urothelial carcinoma, and acute kidney injury [NSCLC], hypoglycaemia [other solid tumours], retinopathy [urothelial carcinoma], and vomiting [urothelial carcinoma] in one patient each); no treatment-related deaths occurred. Median follow-up after cessation of treatment was 32 days (IQR 25-36 days). In the expansion cohorts, 15 (15%; 95% CI 8·6-23·5) out of 100 evaluable patients achieved an objective response, with responses recorded in all four expansion cohorts (12 in the urothelial carcinoma cohort and one in each of the other three cohorts), and in ten (67%) of 15 FGFR mRNA-overexpressing tumours without apparent FGFR genetic aberration. INTERPRETATION: Rogaratinib was well tolerated and clinically active against several types of cancer. Selection by FGFR mRNA expression could be a useful additional biomarker to identify a broader patient population who could be eligible for FGFR inhibitor treatment. FUNDING: Bayer AG.

Sequential afatinib and osimertinib in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: updated analysis of the observational GioTag study.

Aims: Overall survival (OS) and updated time to treatment failure (TTF) analysis of patients with EGFR mutation-positive (Del19, L858R) non-small-cell lung cancer who received sequential afatinib/osimertinib in the real-world GioTag study. Patients & methods: Patients had T790M-positive disease following first-line afatinib and received osimertinib treatment (n = 203). Primary outcome was TTF. The OS analysis was exploratory. Results: Median OS was 41.3 months (90% CI: 36.8-46.3) overall and 45.7 months (90% CI: 45.3-51.5) in patients with Del19-positive tumors (n = 149); 2-year survival was 80 and 82%, respectively. Updated median TTF with afatinib and osimertinib was 28.1 months (90% CI: 26.8-30.3). Conclusion: Sequential afatinib/osimertinib was associated with encouraging OS/TTF in patients with EGFR T790M-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, especially in patients with Del19-positive tumors. Trial registration number: NCT03370770.

Somatic mutations and immune checkpoint biomarkers.

The development of molecular testing for identifying somatic mutations and immune checkpoint biomarkers has directed treatment towards personalized medicine for patients with non-small cell lung cancer. The choice of molecular testing in a clinical setting is influenced by cost, expertise in the technology, instrumentation setup and sample type availability. The molecular techniques described in this review include immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescent in situ hybridization, direct sequencing, real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography, matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry and next-generation sequencing (NGS). IHC is routinely used in clinical practice for the classification, differentiation, histology and identification of targetable alterations of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1). Recently, the PD-L1 pathway was identified as being exploited by tumour cells, allowing immune resistance and tumour evasion. The development of immune checkpoint inhibitors as treatment for tumours expressing checkpoints has highlighted the need for standardized IHC assays to inform treatment decisions for patients. Direct sequencing was historically the gold standard for mutation testing for EGFR, KRAS (Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homologue) and BRAF (v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homologue B1) requiring a high ratio of tumour to normal cells, but this has been superseded by more sensitive methods. NGS is a new emerging technique, which allows high-throughput coverage of frequently mutated genes, including less common BRAF and MET mutations and alterations in tumour suppressor genes. When an NGS platform is unavailable, PCR-based technologies offer an efficient and cost-effective single gene test to guide patient treatment. This article will review these techniques and discuss the future of molecular platforms underpinning clinical management decisions.

Durvalumab as third-line or later treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (ATLANTIC): an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a new standard of care for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without EGFR tyrosine kinase or anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) genetic aberrations (EGFR-/ALK-), but clinical benefit in patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements (EGFR+/ALK+) has not been shown. We assessed the effect of durvalumab (anti-PD-L1) treatment in three cohorts of patients with NSCLC defined by EGFR/ALK status and tumour expression of PD-L1. METHODS: ATLANTIC is a phase 2, open-label, single-arm trial at 139 study centres in Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients had advanced NSCLC with disease progression following at least two previous systemic regimens, including platinum-based chemotherapy (and tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy if indicated); were aged 18 years or older; had a WHO performance status score of 0 or 1; and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Key exclusion criteria included mixed small-cell lung cancer and NSCLC histology; previous exposure to any anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 antibody; and any previous grade 3 or worse immune-related adverse event while receiving any immunotherapy agent. Patients in cohort 1 had EGFR+/ALK+ NSCLC with at least 25%, or less than 25%, of tumour cells with PD-L1 expression. Patients in cohorts 2 and 3 had EGFR-/ALK- NSCLC; cohort 2 included patients with at least 25%, or less than 25%, of tumour cells with PD-L1 expression, and cohort 3 included patients with at least 90% of tumour cells with PD-L1 expression. Patients received durvalumab (10 mg/kg) every 2 weeks, via intravenous infusion, for up to 12 months. Retreatment was allowed for patients who benefited but then progressed after completing 12 months. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with increased tumour expression of PD-L1 (defined as ≥25% of tumour cells in cohorts 1 and 2, and ≥90% of tumour cells in cohort 3) who achieved an objective response, assessed in patients who were evaluable for response per independent central review according to RECIST version 1.1. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of durvalumab and for whom any post-dose data were available. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer open to accrual, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02087423. FINDINGS: Between Feb 25, 2014, and Dec 28, 2015, 444 patients were enrolled and received durvalumab: 111 in cohort 1, 265 in cohort 2, and 68 in cohort 3. Among patients with at least 25% of tumour cells expressing PD-L1 who were evaluable for objective response per independent central review, an objective response was achieved in 9 (12·2%, 95% CI 5·7-21·8) of 74 patients in cohort 1 and 24 (16·4%, 10·8-23·5) of 146 patients in cohort 2. In cohort 3, 21 (30·9%, 20·2-43·3) of 68 patients achieved an objective response. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 40 (9%) of 444 patients overall: six (5%) of 111 patients in cohort 1, 22 (8%) of 265 in cohort 2, and 12 (18%) of 68 in cohort 3. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were pneumonitis (four patients [1%]), elevated gamma-glutamyltransferase (four [1%]), diarrhoea (three [1%]), infusion-related reaction (three [1%]), elevated aspartate aminotransferase (two [<1%]), elevated transaminases (two [<1%]), vomiting (two [<1%]), and fatigue (two [<1%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 27 (6%) of 444 patients overall: five (5%) of 111 patients in cohort 1, 14 (5%) of 265 in cohort 2, and eight (12%) of 68 in cohort 3. The most common serious adverse events overall were pneumonitis (five patients [1%]), fatigue (three [1%]), and infusion-related reaction (three [1%]). Immune-mediated events were manageable with standard treatment guidelines. INTERPRETATION: In patients with advanced and heavily pretreated NSCLC, the clinical activity and safety profile of durvalumab was consistent with that of other anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 agents. Responses were recorded in all cohorts; the proportion of patients with EGFR-/ALK- NSCLC (cohorts 2 and 3) achieving a response was higher than the proportion with EGFR+/ALK+ NSCLC (cohort 1) achieving a response. The clinical activity of durvalumab in patients with EGFR+ NSCLC with ≥25% of tumour cells expressing PD-L1 was encouraging, and further investigation of durvalumab in patients with EGFR+/ALK+ NSCLC is warranted. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a global phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib is a potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation inhibitor of ALK and ROS1 tyrosine kinases with broad coverage of ALK mutations. In a phase 1 study, activity was seen in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, most of whom had CNS metastases and progression after ALK-directed therapy. We aimed to analyse the overall and intracranial antitumour activity of lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: In this phase 2 study, patients with histologically or cytologically ALK-positive or ROS1-positive, advanced, non-small-cell lung cancer, with or without CNS metastases, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2, and adequate end-organ function were eligible. Patients were enrolled into six different expansion cohorts (EXP1-6) on the basis of ALK and ROS1 status and previous therapy, and were given lorlatinib 100 mg orally once daily continuously in 21-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall and intracranial tumour response by independent central review, assessed in pooled subgroups of ALK-positive patients. Analyses of activity and safety were based on the safety analysis set (ie, all patients who received at least one dose of lorlatinib) as assessed by independent central review. Patients with measurable CNS metastases at baseline by independent central review were included in the intracranial activity analyses. In this report, we present lorlatinib activity data for the ALK-positive patients (EXP1-5 only), and safety data for all treated patients (EXP1-6). This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01970865. FINDINGS: Between Sept 15, 2015, and Oct 3, 2016, 276 patients were enrolled: 30 who were ALK positive and treatment naive (EXP1); 59 who were ALK positive and received previous crizotinib without (n=27; EXP2) or with (n=32; EXP3A) previous chemotherapy; 28 who were ALK positive and received one previous non-crizotinib ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor, with or without chemotherapy (EXP3B); 112 who were ALK positive with two (n=66; EXP4) or three (n=46; EXP5) previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors with or without chemotherapy; and 47 who were ROS1 positive with any previous treatment (EXP6). One patient in EXP4 died before receiving lorlatinib and was excluded from the safety analysis set. In treatment-naive patients (EXP1), an objective response was achieved in 27 (90·0%; 95% CI 73·5-97·9) of 30 patients. Three patients in EXP1 had measurable baseline CNS lesions per independent central review, and objective intracranial responses were observed in two (66·7%; 95% CI 9·4-99·2). In ALK-positive patients with at least one previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EXP2-5), objective responses were achieved in 93 (47·0%; 39·9-54·2) of 198 patients and objective intracranial response in those with measurable baseline CNS lesions in 51 (63·0%; 51·5-73·4) of 81 patients. Objective response was achieved in 41 (69·5%; 95% CI 56·1-80·8) of 59 patients who had only received previous crizotinib (EXP2-3A), nine (32·1%; 15·9-52·4) of 28 patients with one previous non-crizotinib ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EXP3B), and 43 (38·7%; 29·6-48·5) of 111 patients with two or more previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EXP4-5). Objective intracranial response was achieved in 20 (87·0%; 95% CI 66·4-97·2) of 23 patients with measurable baseline CNS lesions in EXP2-3A, five (55·6%; 21·2-86·3) of nine patients in EXP3B, and 26 (53·1%; 38·3-67·5) of 49 patients in EXP4-5. The most common treatment-related adverse events across all patients were hypercholesterolaemia (224 [81%] of 275 patients overall and 43 [16%] grade 3-4) and hypertriglyceridaemia (166 [60%] overall and 43 [16%] grade 3-4). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 19 (7%) of 275 patients and seven patients (3%) permanently discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Consistent with its broad ALK mutational coverage and CNS penetration, lorlatinib showed substantial overall and intracranial activity both in treatment-naive patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, and in those who had progressed on crizotinib, second-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors, or after up to three previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Thus, lorlatinib could represent an effective treatment option for patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer in first-line or subsequent therapy. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Third generation EGFR TKIs: current data and future directions.

Acquired T790 M mutation is the commonest cause of resistance for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutant patients who had progressed after first line EGFR TKI (tyrosine kinase inhibitor). Several third generation EGFR TKIs which are EGFR mutant selective and wild-type (WT) sparing were developed to treat these patients with T790 M acquired resistant mutation. Osimertinib is one of the third generation EGFR TKIs and is currently the most advanced in clinical development. Unfortunately, despite good initial response, patients who was treated with third generation EGFR TKI would develop acquired resistance and several mechanisms had been identified and the commonest being C797S mutation at exon 20. Several novel treatment options were being developed for patients who had progressed on third generation EGFR TKI but they are still in the early phase of development. Osimertinib under FLAURA study had been shown to have better progression-free survival over first generation EGFR TKI in the first line setting and likely will become the new standard of care.

Discovering novel SNPs that are correlated with patient outcome in a Singaporean cancer patient cohort treated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) can influence patient outcome such as drug response and toxicity after drug intervention. The purpose of this study is to develop a systematic pathway approach to accurately and efficiently predict novel non-synonymous SNPs (nsSNPs) that could be causative to gemcitabine-based chemotherapy treatment outcome in Singaporean non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. METHODS: Using a pathway approach that incorporates comprehensive protein-protein interaction data to systematically extend the gemcitabine pharmacologic pathway, we identified 77 related nsSNPs, common in the Singaporean population. After that, we used five computational criteria to prioritize the SNPs based on their importance for protein function. We specifically selected and screened six candidate SNPs in a patient cohort with NSCLC treated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. RESULT: We performed survival analysis followed by hematologic toxicity analyses and found that three of six candidate SNPs are significantly correlated with the patient outcome (P < 0.05) i.e. ABCG2 Q141K (rs2231142), SLC29A3 S158F (rs780668) and POLR2A N764K (rs2228130). CONCLUSIONS: Our computational SNP candidate enrichment workflow approach was able to identify several high confidence biomarkers predictive for personalized drug treatment outcome while providing a rationale for a molecular mechanism of the SNP effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00695994. Registered 10 June, 2008 'retrospectively registered'.

Sequential treatment with afatinib and osimertinib in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: an observational study.

AIM: To assess outcomes in patients with EGFR mutation-positive (Del19, L858R) non-small-cell lung cancer receiving sequential afatinib and osimertinib in a real-world clinical setting. Materials & methods: In this retrospective, observational, multicenter study, patients (n = 204) had T790M-positive disease following first-line afatinib and started osimertinib treatment ≥10 months prior to data entry. Primary outcome was time on treatment. RESULTS: Overall median time on treatment was 27.6 months (90% CI: 25.9-31.3), 30.3 months (90% CI: 27.6-44.5) in Del19-positive patients and 46.7 months (90% CI: 26.8-not reached) in Asians. The 2-year overall survival was 78.9%. CONCLUSION: In real-world clinical practice, sequential afatinib and osimertinib facilitates prolonged, chemotherapy-free treatment in patients with T790M acquired resistance, and is a potentially attractive strategy, especially for Del19-positive tumors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03370770.

De-novo and acquired resistance to immune checkpoint targeting.

Use of immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting the programmed cell death protein-1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein-4 axes has yielded impressive results in some clinical trials. However, only a subset of patients initially respond to these inhibitors, and increasing clinical evidence indicates that a substantial proportion of initial responders ultimately relapse with lethal, drug-resistant disease months or years later. Studies that have used massively parallel sequencing have shed light on the rich functional landscape of mutations that endow tumour cells with the ability to evade T-cell-mediated immunosurveillance. Cancer genomes bear signatures of clonal evolution and selection, particularly implicating acquired defects in interferon receptor signalling and antigen presentation. In this Review, we discuss the biological processes that operate in the formation of so-called immunoresistant niches, and describe the latest progress in the development of combination strategies to reinstate immunosurveillance in immune-refractory tumours.

Molecular targeted therapy in the treatment of advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Historically, patients with advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were treated with chemotherapy alone, but a therapeutic plateau has been reached. Advances in the understanding of molecular genetics have led to the recognition of multiple molecularly distinct subsets of NSCLC. This in turn has led to the development of rationally directed molecular targeted therapy, leading to improved clinical outcomes. Tumour genotyping for EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangement has meant chemotherapy is no longer given automatically as first-line treatment but reserved for when patients do not have a 'druggable' driver oncogene. In this review, we will address the current status of clinically relevant driver mutations and emerging new molecular subsets in lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, and the role of targeted therapy and mechanisms of acquired resistance to targeted therapy.

Novel SNP improves differential survivability and mortality in non-small cell lung cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a major cause of cancer-related death worldwide due to poor patient prognosis and clinical outcome. Here, we studied the genetic variations underlying NSCLC pathogenesis based on their association to patient outcome after gemcitabine therapy. RESULTS: Bioinformatics analysis was used to investigate possible effects of POLA2 G583R (POLA2+1747 GG/GA, dbSNP ID: rs487989) in terms of protein function. Using biostatistics, POLA2+1747 GG/GA (rs487989, POLA2 G583R) was identified as strongly associated with mortality rate and survival time among NSCLC patients. It was also shown that POLA2+1747 GG/GA is functionally significant for protein localization via green fluorescent protein (GFP)-tagging and confocal laser scanning microscopy analysis. The single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) causes DNA polymerase alpha subunit B to localize in the cytoplasm instead of the nucleus. This inhibits DNA replication in cancer cells and confers a protective effect in individuals with this SNP. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that POLA2+1747 GG/GA may be used as a prognostic biomarker of patient outcome in NSCLC pathogenesis.

An ultra-high-throughput spiral microfluidic biochip for the enrichment of circulating tumor cells.

The detection and characterization of rare circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from the blood of cancer patients can potentially provide critical insights into tumor biology and hold great promise for cancer management. The ability to collect a large number of viable CTCs for various downstream assays such as quantitative measurements of specific biomarkers or targeted somatic mutation analysis is increasingly important in medical oncology. Here, we present a simple yet reliable microfluidic device for the ultra-high-throughput, label-free, size-based isolation of CTCs from clinically relevant blood volumes. The fast processing time of the technique (7.5 mL blood in less than 10 min) and the ability to collect more CTCs from larger blood volumes lends itself to a broad range of potential genomic and transcriptomic applications. A critical advantage of this protocol is the ability to return all fractions of blood (i.e., plasma (centrifugation), CTCs and white blood cells (WBCs) (size-based sorting)) that can be utilized for diverse biomarker studies or time-sensitive molecular assays such as RT-PCR. The clinical use of this biochip was demonstrated by detecting CTCs from 100% (10/10) of blood samples collected from patients with advanced-stage metastatic breast and lung cancers. The CTC recovery rate ranged from 20 to 135 CTCs mL(-1) and obtained under high purity (of 1 CTC out of every 30-100 WBCs which gives ∼4 log depletion of WBCs). They were identified with immunofluorescence assays (pan-cytokeratin+/CD45-) and molecular probes such as HER2/neu.

Prevalence of EGFR Mutations in Patients With Resected Stage I-III NSCLC: Results From the EARLY-EGFR Study.

BACKGROUND: There is limited literature on the prevalence of EGFR mutations in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). EARLY-EGFR (NCT04742192), a cross-sectional study, determined the prevalence of EGFR mutations in early-stage NSCLC. METHODS: This non-interventional, real-world study enrolled consecutive patients with resected stage IA-IIIB (American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition) NSCLC from 14 countries across Asia, Latin America, and Middle East and Africa. The primary endpoint was prevalence of EGFR mutations and secondary endpoints included prevalence of EGFR mutation subtypes and treatment patterns. RESULTS: Of 601 patients (median [range] age: 62.0 [30.0-86.0] years) enrolled, 52.7% were females and 64.2% were non-smokers. The majority had stage IA-IB NSCLC (64.1%) and adenocarcinoma histology (98.7%). Overall prevalence of EGFR mutations was 51.0%; majority reported exon-19 deletions (48.5%) followed by exon-21 L858R mutations (34.0%). Women had a higher EGFR mutation rate than men (64.0% versus 36.4%). Compared with no EGFR mutations, patients with EGFR mutations were more likely to be non-smokers (35.1% versus 60.9%) and have stage I NSCLC compared to stage II and III NSCLC (54.8% versus 47.3% and 35.6%). Systemic adjuvant therapy was planned in 33.8% patients with stage IB to IIIB disease and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in 6.8% patients. Age ≥60 years, females, and Asians were found to have a significantly (p < 0.05) higher odds of EGFR mutations, while smoking history and stage III disease had lower odds of EGFR mutations. CONCLUSION: The EARLY-EGFR study provides an overview of EGFR mutations and subtype prevalence in patients with early-stage NSCLC. The study highlights the limited adherence to treatment guidelines suggesting an unmet need for improved adjuvant therapy.

Modulating the gut microbiome in non-small cell lung cancer: Challenges and opportunities.

Despite the efficacy of immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the majority of the patients experience relapse with limited subsequent treatment options. Preclinical studies of various epithelial tumors, such as melanoma and NSCLC, have shown that harnessing the gut microbiome resulted in improvement of therapeutic responses to immunotherapy. Is this review, we summarize the role of microbiome, including lung and gut microbiome in the context of NSCLC, provide overview of the mechanisms of microbiome in efficacy and toxicity of chemotherapies and immunotherapies, and address current ongoing clinical trials for NSCLC including fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) and live biotherapeutic products (LBPs).