Osimertinib after definitive chemoradiotherapy in unresectable stage III epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer: analyses of central nervous system efficacy and distant progression from the phase III LAURA study.

BACKGROUND: Distant metastases in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are a poor prognostic factor that negatively impact quality of life. The central nervous system (CNS) is a common site of distant progression in epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated (EGFRm) NSCLC. Osimertinib is a third-generation EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor recommended for advanced EGFRm NSCLC and as adjuvant treatment for resected EGFRm NSCLC. In LAURA (NCT03521154), osimertinib demonstrated statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in unresectable stage III EGFRm NSCLC without progression during/following chemoradiotherapy (CRT). CNS efficacy and time to death or distant metastases (TTDM) analyses are reported here. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients without progression during/following definitive platinum-based CRT were randomised 2 : 1 to receive osimertinib (80 mg daily) or placebo until progression [by blinded independent central review (BICR)] or discontinuation. The primary endpoint was PFS by BICR. CNS PFS by neuroradiologist BICR and TTDM by BICR were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Overall, 216 patients were randomised (143 osimertinib, 73 placebo). Median CNS PFS by neuroradiologist BICR was not reached [95% confidence interval (CI) not calculable (NC)-NC] with osimertinib versus 14.9 months (95% CI 7.4 months-NC) with placebo; hazard ratio (HR) for CNS PFS: 0.17 (95% CI 0.09-0.32). CNS PFS analysis by investigator assessment was consistent with BICR assessment. The cumulative incidence of CNS progression at 12 months was 9% (95% CI 5% to 14%) with osimertinib and 36% (95% CI 24% to 47%) with placebo. There was clinically meaningful improvement in TTDM with osimertinib versus placebo; HR for TTDM: 0.21 (95% CI 0.11-0.38). The cumulative incidence of distant metastases at 12 months was 11% (95% CI 6% to 17%) with osimertinib and 37% (95% CI 26% to 48%) with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Osimertinib demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in CNS PFS and TTDM versus placebo, supporting osimertinib post-CRT as the standard of care in unresectable stage III EGFRm NSCLC.

Durvalumab with or without tremelimumab versus the EXTREME regimen as first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: KESTREL, a randomized, open-label, phase III study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) have a poor prognosis. The phase III KESTREL study evaluated the efficacy of durvalumab [programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody] with or without tremelimumab [cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) antibody], versus the EXTREME regimen in patients with R/M HNSCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with HNSCC who had not received prior systemic treatment for R/M disease were randomized (2 : 1 : 1) to receive durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) plus tremelimumab 75 mg Q4W (up to four doses), durvalumab monotherapy 1500 mg Q4W, or the EXTREME regimen (platinum, 5-fluorouracil, and cetuximab) until disease progression. Durvalumab efficacy, with or without tremelimumab, versus the EXTREME regimen in patients with PD-L1-high tumors and in all randomized patients was assessed. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Durvalumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab were not superior to EXTREME for overall survival (OS) in patients with PD-L1-high expression [median, 10.9 and 11.2 versus 10.9 months, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.32; P = 0.787 and HR = 1.05; 95% CI 0.80-1.39, respectively]. Durvalumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab prolonged duration of response versus EXTREME (49.3% and 48.1% versus 9.8% of patients remaining in response at 12 months), correlating with long-term OS for responding patients; however, median progression-free survival was longer with EXTREME (2.8 and 2.8 versus 5.4 months). Exploratory analyses suggested that subsequent immunotherapy use by 24.3% of patients in the EXTREME regimen arm contributed to the similar OS outcomes between arms. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) for durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and EXTREME were 8.9%, 19.1%, and 53.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PD-L1-high expression, OS was comparable between durvalumab and the EXTREME regimen. Durvalumab alone, and with tremelimumab, demonstrated durable responses and reduced TRAEs versus the EXTREME regimen in R/M HNSCC.

Pembrolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy in platinum-pretreated, recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer (KEYNOTE-122): an open-label, randomized, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab previously demonstrated robust antitumor activity and manageable safety in a phase Ib study of patients with heavily pretreated, programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive, recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). The phase III KEYNOTE-122 study was conducted to further evaluate pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with platinum-pretreated, recurrent and/or metastatic NPC. Final analysis results are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: KEYNOTE-122 was an open-label, randomized study conducted at 29 sites, globally. Participants with platinum-pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic NPC were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to pembrolizumab or chemotherapy with capecitabine, gemcitabine, or docetaxel. Randomization was stratified by liver metastasis (present versus absent). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), analyzed in the intention-to-treat population using the stratified log-rank test (superiority threshold, one-sided P = 0.0187). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population. RESULTS: Between 5 May 2016 and 28 May 2018, 233 participants were randomly assigned to treatment (pembrolizumab, n = 117; chemotherapy, n = 116); Most participants (86.7%) received study treatment in the second-line or later setting. Median time from randomization to data cut-off (30 November 2020) was 45.1 months (interquartile range, 39.0-48.8 months). Median OS was 17.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.7-22.9 months] with pembrolizumab and 15.3 months (95% CI 10.9-18.1 months) with chemotherapy [hazard ratio, 0.90 (95% CI 0.67-1.19; P = 0.2262)]. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 12 of 116 participants (10.3%) with pembrolizumab and 49 of 112 participants (43.8%) with chemotherapy. Three treatment-related deaths occurred: 1 participant (0.9%) with pembrolizumab (pneumonitis) and 2 (1.8%) with chemotherapy (pneumonia, intracranial hemorrhage). CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab did not significantly improve OS compared with chemotherapy in participants with platinum-pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic NPC but did have manageable safety and a lower incidence of treatment-related adverse events.

First-in-human phase 1 study of the anti-TIGIT antibody vibostolimab as monotherapy or with pembrolizumab for advanced solid tumors, including non-small-cell lung cancer☆.

BACKGROUND: In this first-in-human phase 1 study (NCT02964013; MK-7684-001), we investigated the safety and efficacy of the anti-TIGIT (T cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain) antibody vibostolimab as monotherapy or in combination with pembrolizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Part A enrolled patients with advanced solid tumors, and part B enrolled patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients received vibostolimab 2.1-700 mg alone or with pembrolizumab 200 mg in part A and vibostolimab 200 mg alone or with pembrolizumab 200 mg in part B. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Part A enrolled 76 patients (monotherapy, 34; combination therapy, 42). No dose-limiting toxicities were reported. Across doses, 56% of patients receiving monotherapy and 62% receiving combination therapy had treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs); grade 3-4 TRAEs occurred in 9% and 17% of patients, respectively. The most common TRAEs were fatigue (15%) and pruritus (15%) with monotherapy and pruritus (17%) and rash (14%) with combination therapy. Confirmed ORR was 0% with monotherapy and 7% with combination therapy. In part B, 39 patients had anti-PD-1 (programmed cell death protein 1)/PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1)-naive NSCLC (all received combination therapy), and 67 had anti-PD-1/PD-L1-refractory NSCLC (monotherapy, 34; combination therapy, 33). In patients with anti-PD-1/PD-L1-naive NSCLC: 85% had TRAEs-the most common were pruritus (38%) and hypoalbuminemia (31%); confirmed ORR was 26%, with responses occurring in both PD-L1-positive and PD-L1-negative tumors. In patients with anti-PD-1/PD-L1-refractory NSCLC: 56% receiving monotherapy and 70% receiving combination therapy had TRAEs-the most common were rash and fatigue (21% each) with monotherapy and pruritus (36%) and fatigue (24%) with combination therapy; confirmed ORR was 3% with monotherapy and 3% with combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Vibostolimab plus pembrolizumab was well tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with advanced solid tumors, including patients with advanced NSCLC.

ESMO expert consensus statements on the management of EGFR mutant non-small-cell lung cancer.

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a virtual consensus-building process on epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer in 2021. The consensus included a multidisciplinary panel of 34 leading experts in the management of lung cancer. The aim of the consensus was to develop recommendations on topics that are not covered in detail in the current ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline and where the available evidence is either limited or conflicting. The main topics identified for discussion were: (i) tissue and biomarkers analyses; (ii) early and locally advanced disease; (iii) metastatic disease and (iv) clinical trial design, patient's perspective and miscellaneous. The expert panel was divided into four working groups to address questions relating to one of the four topics outlined above. Relevant scientific literature was reviewed in advance. Recommendations were developed by the working groups and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This manuscript presents the recommendations developed, including findings from the expert panel discussions, consensus recommendations and a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation.

Safety and efficacy of quavonlimab, a novel anti-CTLA-4 antibody (MK-1308), in combination with pembrolizumab in first-line advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Quavonlimab (MK-1308), a novel anti-CTLA-4 antibody, in combination with pembrolizumab was investigated in a phase I study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Dose-escalation (DE) phase: patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors received an initial flat dose of quavonlimab as monotherapy [25 mg (cohort 1), 75 mg (cohort 2), or 200 mg (cohort 3)] followed by four treatments of the same quavonlimab dose plus pembrolizumab every 3 weeks (Q3W). Dose-confirmation phase (DC): patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received first-line quavonlimab [25 mg Q3W (arm A), 25 mg Q6W (arm B), 75 mg Q6W (arm C), or 75 mg Q3W (arm E)] plus pembrolizumab. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability and establishment of the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of quavonlimab when used with pembrolizumab. Objective response rate (ORR) was a secondary endpoint. Efficacy based on PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and changes in circulating CD4+/CD8+ cells were exploratory endpoints. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were enrolled in DE [n = 14 (cohort 1); n = 17 (cohort 2); n = 8 (cohort 3)] and 134 in DC [n = 40 (arm A); n = 40 (arm B); n = 40 (arm C); n = 14 (arm E)]. Maximum-tolerated dose was not reached. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events (AEs; graded according to NCI CTCAE v4.03) occurred in 0%, 23.5%, and 75.0% of patients in DE cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively, and 35.0%, 30.0%, 35.0%, and 57.1% of patients in DC arms A, B, C, and E, respectively. Efficacy was observed at all dose levels/schedules in patients with NSCLC. ORRs were 40.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 24.9-56.7; arm A], 37.5% (95% CI, 22.7-54.2; arm B), 27.5% (95% CI, 14.6-43.9; arm C), and 35.7% (95% CI, 12.8-64.9; arm E). PD-L1 expression and total number of circulating CD4+ cells correlated with ORR. CONCLUSIONS: Quavonlimab 25 mg Q6W plus pembrolizumab demonstrated similar efficacy and a better safety profile among all quavonlimab doses/schedules evaluated; this regimen was the chosen RP2D.

A phase II, multicenter, two cohort study of 160 mg osimertinib in EGFR T790M-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients with brain metastases or leptomeningeal disease who progressed on prior EGFR TKI therapy.

BACKGROUND: Up to 40% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations treated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) present with disease progression in the central nervous system (CNS), either as brain metastases (BM) or leptomeningeal metastases (LM). Osimertinib (80 mg), a third-generation, irreversible, oral EGFR TKI, has shown efficacy in active CNS metastases. However, efficacy of osimertinib 160 mg in BM or LM is unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, single-arm, two cohort study evaluated the efficacy of osimertinib 160 mg in T790M-positive BM or LM NSCLC patients who progressed on prior EGFR TKI (NCT03257124) treatment. The primary end points were objective response rate (ORR) (H1 = 30%) for the BM cohort and overall survival (OS) (H1 = 5 months) for the LM cohort. RESULTS: The median follow-up duration was 10.1 months and 9.6 months for the BM and LM cohorts, respectively. In the BM cohort, intracranial ORR and disease control rate were 55.0% and 77.5%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.0-16.6]; the median OS was 16.9 months [95% CI 7.9-not reached (NR)]. In the LM cohort, intracranial disease control rate was 92.5% and complete response rate was 12.5%. The median OS was 13.3 months (95% CI 9.1-NR); the median PFS was 8.0 months (95% CI 7.2-NR). Subgroup analyses based on previous exposure to T790M-targeting agents, including osimertinib 80 mg or other third-generation EGFR TKIs, showed no difference in PFS in both the BM (n = 18, P = 0.39) and LM (n = 17, P = 0.85) cohorts. Previous radiotherapy favored PFS in the BM cohort (hazard ratio 0.42, P = 0.04). The most common adverse events were decreased appetite, diarrhea, and skin rash; however, most were grade 1-2. CONCLUSION: Thus, osimertinib 160 mg demonstrated promising ORR and survival benefit with a tolerable safety profile in EGFR T790M-positive NSCLC patients with CNS metastasis who progressed on prior EGFR TKIs.

HLA-corrected tumor mutation burden and homologous recombination deficiency for the prediction of response to PD-(L)1 blockade in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been shown to be beneficial for some patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the underlying mechanisms mediating the limited response to ICIs remain unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out whole-exome sequencing on 198 advanced NSCLC tumors that had been sampled before anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapy. Detailed clinical characteristics were collected on these patients. We designed a new method to estimate human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-corrected tumor mutation burden (TMB), a modification which considers the loss of heterozygosity of HLA from conventional TMB. We carried out external validation of our findings utilizing 89 NSCLC samples and 110 melanoma samples from two independent cohorts of immunotherapy-treated patients. RESULTS: Homology-dependent recombination deficiency was identified in 37 patients (18.7%) and was associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS; P = 0.049). Using the HLA-corrected TMB, non-responders to ICIs were identified, despite having a high TMB (top 25%). Ten patients (21.3% of the high TMB group) were reclassified from the high TMB group into the low TMB group. The objective response rate (ORR), PFS, and overall survival (OS) were all lower in these patients compared with those of the high TMB group (ORR: 20% versus 59%, P = 0.0363; PFS: hazard ratio = 2.91, P = 0.007; OS: hazard ratio = 3.43, P = 0.004). Multivariate analyses showed that high HLA-corrected TMB was associated with a significant survival advantage (hazard ratio = 0.44, P = 0.015), whereas high conventional TMB was not associated with a survival advantage (hazard ratio = 0.63, P = 0.118). Applying this approach to the independent cohorts of 89 NSCLC patients and 110 melanoma patients, TMB-based survival prediction was significantly improved. CONCLUSION: HLA-corrected TMB can reconcile the observed disparity in relationships between TMB and ICI responses, and is of predictive and prognostic value for ICI therapies.

TATTON: a multi-arm, phase Ib trial of osimertinib combined with selumetinib, savolitinib, or durvalumab in EGFR-mutant lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib is a potent, third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). The multi-arm phase Ib TATTON study (NCT02143466) was designed to assess the safety and tolerability of osimertinib in combination with other targeted therapies: selumetinib (MEK1/2 inhibitor), savolitinib (MET-TKI), or durvalumab [anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) monoclonal antibody]. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer and disease progression on a prior EGFR-TKI were enrolled and allocated to dose-escalating cohorts combining osimertinib 80 mg orally (p.o.) once a day with selumetinib (25-75 mg p.o. twice a day; continuous or intermittent), savolitinib (600-800 mg p.o. once a day), or durvalumab (3-10 mg/kg intravenous every 2 weeks). RESULTS: At data cut-off (28 February 2018), 77 patients were enrolled and received osimertinib plus selumetinib (n = 36), savolitinib (n = 18), or durvalumab (n = 23). Most common adverse events (any grade), occurring in ≥20% of patients across dose groups, were: selumetinib arm-diarrhea (75%), rash (58%), nausea (47%); savolitinib arm-nausea (67%), rash (56%), vomiting (50%); durvalumab arm-rash (48%), vomiting (43%), diarrhea (39%). Dose-limiting toxicities were reported in the selumetinib 25 mg (n = 1), 50 mg (n = 1), and 75 mg (n = 4) continuous-dose groups, savolitinib 600 mg (n = 1) and 800 mg dose groups (n = 2), and durvalumab 10 mg/kg (n = 1) dose group. The objective response rate was 42% (95% confidence interval 26% to 59%), 44% (22% to 69%), and 43% (23% to 66%) in the selumetinib, savolitinib, and durvalumab arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate the feasibility of combining osimertinib 80 mg with selumetinib or savolitinib at identified tolerable, active doses. A combination of osimertinib with durvalumab was not feasible due to increased reporting of interstitial lung disease. Osimertinib-based combination therapies represent a compelling approach now being further investigated. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: NCT02143466.

Osimertinib versus platinum-pemetrexed for patients with EGFR T790M advanced NSCLC and progression on a prior EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor: AURA3 overall survival analysis.

BACKGROUND: In AURA3 (NCT02151981), osimertinib, a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), significantly prolonged progression-free survival and improved response in patients with EGFR T790M advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and progression on prior EGFR-TKI treatment. We report the final AURA3 overall survival (OS) analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients were randomized 2 : 1 to osimertinib (80 mg orally, once daily) or pemetrexed plus carboplatin/cisplatin (platinum-pemetrexed) intravenously, every 3 weeks (≤6 cycles). Patients could crossover to osimertinib on progression confirmed by blinded independent central review. OS and safety were secondary end points. RESULTS: A total of 279 patients were randomly assigned to receive osimertinib and 140 to platinum-pemetrexed (136 received treatment). At data cut-off (DCO; 15 March 2019), 188 patients (67%) receiving osimertinib versus 93 (66%) receiving platinum-pemetrexed had died. The hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-1.12; P = 0.277]; the median OS was 26.8 months (95% CI 23.5-31.5) versus 22.5 months (95% CI 20.2-28.8) for osimertinib and platinum-pemetrexed, respectively. The estimated 24- and 36-month survival was 55% versus 43% and 37% versus 30%, respectively. After crossover adjustment, there was an HR of 0.54 (95% CI 0.18-1.6). Time to first subsequent therapy or death showed a clinically meaningful advantage toward osimertinib (HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.16-0.28; P < 0.001). At DCO, 99/136 (73%) patients in the platinum-pemetrexed arm had crossed over to osimertinib, 66/99 (67%) of whom had died. The most common adverse events possibly related to study treatment were diarrhea (32%; grade ≥3, 1%) and rash (grouped term; 32%; grade ≥3, <1%) in the osimertinib arm, versus nausea (47%; grade ≥3, 3%) in the platinum-pemetrexed arm. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T790M advanced NSCLC, no statistically significant benefit in OS was observed for osimertinib versus platinum-pemetrexed, which possibly reflects the high crossover rate of patients from platinum-pemetrexed to osimertinib. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02151981; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02151981.

Afatinib versus methotrexate as second-line treatment in Asian patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck progressing on or after platinum-based therapy (LUX-Head & Neck 3): an open-label, randomised phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options are limited for patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) following progression after first-line platinum-based therapy, particularly in Asian countries. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase III trial, we enrolled Asian patients aged ≥18 years, with histologically or cytologically confirmed recurrent/metastatic HNSCC following first-line platinum-based therapy who were not amenable for salvage surgery or radiotherapy, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0/1. Patients were randomised (2 : 1) to receive oral afatinib (40 mg/day) or intravenous methotrexate (40 mg/m2/week), stratified by ECOG performance status and prior EGFR-targeted antibody therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent central review committee blinded to treatment allocation. RESULTS: A total of 340 patients were randomised (228 afatinib; 112 methotrexate). After a median follow-up of 6.4 months, afatinib significantly decreased the risk of progression/death by 37% versus methotrexate (hazard ratio 0.63; 95% confidence interval 0.48-0.82; P = 0.0005; median 2.9 versus 2.6 months; landmark analysis at 12 and 24 weeks, 58% versus 41%, 21% versus 9%). Improved PFS was complemented by quality of life benefits. Objective response rate was 28% with afatinib and 13% with methotrexate. There was no significant difference in overall survival. The most common grade ≥3 drug-related adverse events were rash/acne (4% with afatinib versus 0% with methotrexate), diarrhoea (4% versus 0%), fatigue (1% versus 5%), anaemia (<1% versus 5%) and leukopenia (0% versus 5%). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the phase III LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial, afatinib significantly improved PFS versus methotrexate, with a manageable safety profile. These results demonstrate the efficacy and feasibility of afatinib as a second-line treatment option for certain patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01856478.

Use of archival versus newly collected tumor samples for assessing PD-L1 expression and overall survival: an updated analysis of KEYNOTE-010 trial.

BACKGROUND: In KEYNOTE-010, pembrolizumab versus docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) in patients with programmed death-1 protein (PD)-L1-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A prespecified exploratory analysis compared outcomes in patients based on PD-L1 expression in archival versus newly collected tumor samples using recently updated survival data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PD-L1 was assessed centrally by immunohistochemistry (22C3 antibody) in archival or newly collected tumor samples. Patients received pembrolizumab 2 or 10 mg/kg Q3W or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 Q3W for 24 months or until progression/intolerable toxicity/other reason. Response was assessed by RECIST v1.1 every 9 weeks, survival every 2 months. Primary end points were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and ≥1%; pembrolizumab doses were pooled in this analysis. RESULTS: At date cut-off of 24 March 2017, median follow-up was 31 months (range 23-41) representing 18 additional months of follow-up from the primary analysis. Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel continued to improve OS in patients with previously treated, PD-L1-expressing advanced NSCLC; hazard ratio (HR) was 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57, 0.77]. Of 1033 patients analyzed, 455(44%) were enrolled based on archival samples and 578 (56%) on newly collected tumor samples. Approximately 40% of archival samples and 45% of newly collected tumor samples were PD-L1 TPS ≥50%. For TPS ≥50%, the OS HRs were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.91) and 0.40 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.56) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In patients with TPS ≥1%, OS HRs were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.93) and 0.59 (95% CI: 0.48, 0.73) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In TPS ≥50%, PFS HRs were similar across archival [0.63 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.89)] and newly collected samples [0.53 (95% CI: 0.38, 0.72)]. In patients with TPS ≥1%, PFS HRs were similar across archival [0.82 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.02)] and newly collected samples [0.83 (95% CI: 0.68, 1.02)]. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab continued to improve OS over docetaxel in intention to treat population and in subsets of patients with newly collected and archival samples. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01905657.

CNS response to osimertinib in patients with T790M-positive advanced NSCLC: pooled data from two phase II trials.

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) metastases are common in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Osimertinib has shown systemic efficacy in patients with CNS metastases, and early clinical evidence shows efficacy in the CNS. To evaluate osimertinib activity further, we present a pre-specified subgroup analysis of CNS response using pooled data from two phase II studies: AURA extension (NCT01802632) and AURA2 (NCT02094261). Patients and methods: Patients with T790M-positive advanced NSCLC, who had progressed following prior epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment, received osimertinib 80 mg od (n = 411). Patients with stable, asymptomatic CNS metastases were eligible for enrolment; prior CNS treatment was allowed. Patients with ≥1 measurable CNS lesion (per RECIST 1.1) on baseline brain scan by blinded independent central neuroradiology review (BICR) were included in the evaluable for CNS response set (cEFR). The primary outcome for this CNS analysis was CNS objective response rate (ORR) by BICR; secondary outcomes included CNS duration of response, disease control rate (DCR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Of 128 patients with CNS metastases on baseline brain scans, 50 were included in the cEFR. Confirmed CNS ORR and DCR were 54% [27/50; 95% confidence interval (CI) 39-68] and 92% (46/50; 95% CI 81-98), respectively. CNS response was observed regardless of prior radiotherapy to the brain. Median CNS duration of response (22% maturity) was not reached (range, 1-15 months); at 9 months, 75% (95% CI 53-88) of patients were estimated to remain in response. Median follow-up for CNS PFS was 11 months; median CNS PFS was not reached (95% CI, 7, not calculable). The safety profile observed in the cEFR was consistent with the overall patient population. Conclusions: Osimertinib demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy against CNS metastases, with a high DCR, encouraging ORR, and safety profile consistent with that reported previously. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01802632; NCT02094261.

Vandetanib in pretreated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer-harboring RET rearrangement: a phase II clinical trial.

Background: Chromosomal rearrangements involving RET, which are found in about 1% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), define a unique molecular subset. We performed this study to examine the efficacy and safety of vandetanib 300 mg daily in this patient population. Patients and methods: This study was a multi-center, open-label, phase II clinical trial. Patients were enrolled if they had metastatic or recurrent NSCLC with a RET rearrangement, which was confirmed by fluorescence in situ hybridization, had progressive disease against platinum-based doublet chemotherapy, and had a performance status of 0-2. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate. Results: A total of 18 patients were enrolled in this study between July 2013 and October 2015. Patients were aged 35-71 years; three had a performance status of 2, and the majority were a heavily pretreated population (≥ two different previous chemotherapy regimens in 72% of the patients). Among the 17 evaluable patients, three had a partial response (objective response rate = 18%) and eight had a stable disease (disease control rate = 65%). Among these patients, the partial response or disease stabilization was durable for more than 6 months in eight patients. Vandetanib also showed a progression-free survival of 4.5 months, and an overall survival of 11.6 months during a median follow-up duration of 14 months. The safety profile was comparable with previous studies of vandetanib. Most vandetanib-related adverse events were mild with prevalent hypertension and rash (in >70% of patients). Grade 3 toxicity included hypertension (n = 3), QT prolongation (2), and elevation of aminotransferases (1), and as a consequence the dose was reduced in four patients. There were no adverse events associated with grade 4 or 5 toxicity. Conclusion: Vandetanib is moderately active in pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC-harboring RET rearrangements.

Pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for patients with PD-L1-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a phase 1 trial.

Background: Pembrolizumab improved survival as first- and second-line therapy compared with chemotherapy in patients with highly programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expressing advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report the long-term safety and clinical activity of pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC and the correlation between PD-L1 expression and efficacy. Patients and methods: In the open-label phase 1b KEYNOTE-001 trial, treatment-naive patients with advanced NSCLC whose tumors expressed PD-L1 (≥1% staining, assessed using a prototype assay) were randomly assigned to intravenous pembrolizumab 2 or 10 mg/kg every 3 (Q3W) or 2 (Q2W) weeks. Response was assessed per central RECIST v1.1 every 9 weeks in all patients who received ≥1 pembrolizumab dose. Using pre-treatment tumor tissue, a clinical assay quantified the percentage of tumor cells expressing PD-L1 as tumor proportion score (TPS). Results: Between 1 March 2013 and 18 September 2015, 101 patients received pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg Q3W (n = 6), 10 mg/kg Q3W (n = 49), or 10 mg/kg Q2W (n = 46). Of these, 27 (26.7%) had TPS ≥50%, 52 (51.5%) had TPS 1%-49%, and 12 (11.9%) had TPS <1%. The objective response rate (ORR) was 27% (27/101, 95% CI 18-37) and median overall survival was 22.1 months (95% CI 17.1-27.2). In patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥50%, ORR, 12-month PFS, and 12-month OS were higher [14/27 (51.9%; 95% CI 32%-71%), 54%, and 85%, respectively] than the overall population [27/101 (26.7%; 95% CI 18.4%-36.5%), 35%, 71%]. Pembrolizumab was well tolerated, with only 12 (11.9%) patients experiencing grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events and no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: Pembrolizumab provides promising long-term OS benefit with a manageable safety profile for PD-L1-expressing treatment-naive advanced NSCLC, with greatest efficacy observed in patients with TPS ≥50%. Clinical trial name and number: KEYNOTE-001 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01295827).

Co-clinical trials demonstrate predictive biomarkers for dovitinib, an FGFR inhibitor, in lung squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We conducted co-clinical trials in patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models to identify predictive biomarkers for the multikinase inhibitor dovitinib in lung squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC). METHODS: The PDX01-02 were established from LSCC patients enrolled in the phase II trial of dovitinib (NCT01861197) and PDX03-05 were established from LSCC patients receiving surgery. These five PDX tumors were subjected to in vivo test of dovitinib efficacy, whole exome sequencing and gene expression profiling. RESULTS: The PDX tumors recapitulate histopathological properties and maintain genomic characteristics of originating tumors. Concordant with clinical outcomes of the trial enrolled-LSCC patients, dovitinib produced substantial tumor regression in PDX-01 and PDX-05, whereas it resulted in tumor progression in PDX-02. PDX-03 and -04 also displayed poor antitumor efficacy to dovitinib. Mutational and genome-wide copy number profiles revealed no correlation between genomic alterations of FGFR1-3 and sensitivity to dovitinib. Of note, gene expression profiles revealed differentially expressed genes including FGF3 and FGF19 between PDX-01 and 05 and PDX-02-04. Pathway analysis identified two FGFR signaling-related gene sets, FGFR ligand binding/activation and SHC-mediated cascade pathway were substantially up-regulated in PDX-01 and 05, compared with PDX-02-04. The comparison of gene expression profiles between dovitinib-sensitive versus -resistant lung cancer cell lines in the Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia database also found that transcriptional activation of 18 key signaling components in FGFR pathways can predict the sensitivity to dovitinib both in cell lines and PDX tumors. These results highlight FGFR pathway activation as a key molecular determinant for sensitivity to dovitinib. CONCLUSIONS: FGFR gene expression signatures are predictors for the response to dovitinib in LSCC.

Small-cell lung cancer detection in never-smokers: clinical characteristics and multigene mutation profiling using targeted next-generation sequencing.

BACKGROUND: Once regarded as a smoker's disease, small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) has been occasionally detected in never-smokers as smoking rates decrease worldwide. We investigated the clinical and genetic characteristics of SCLC in never-smokers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with SCLC were grouped into smokers and never-smokers. The clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared. For SCLC in never-smokers, somatic mutation profiling was carried out using the AmpliSeq™ Cancer Hotspot Panel v2 and semiconductor sequencing technology. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation was confirmed by PNAClamp™. RESULTS: In total, 391 SCLC patients treated over a 5-year period were analyzed. Fifty patients (13%) were never-smokers. The median overall survival was 18.2 months in never-smokers and 13.1 months in smokers (P = 0.054). Never-smoking history was independently a good prognostic factor [hazard ratio = 0.645, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.456-0.914], as were limited disease (HR = 0.372, 95% CI 0.294-0.471), and lower age (HR = 0.709, 95% CI 0.566-0.888). The objective response rates to first-line etoposide/cisplatin therapy were similar between never-smokers and smokers (75% versus 81%). Of 28 genetically evaluable never-smokers, EGFR mutations were detected in four cases (two L858R, one deletion in exon 19, and one G719A). Other mutations were in TP53 (n = 26), RB1 (n = 7), PTEN (n = 5), MET (n = 4), and SMAD4 (n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: Never-smokers with SCLC are increasingly prevalent and have a better prognosis than smokers with SCLC in Korea. Our study warrants further investigation in this group.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of erlotinib with or without a c-Met inhibitor tivantinib (ARQ 197) in Asian patients with previously treated stage IIIB/IV nonsquamous nonsmall-cell lung cancer harboring wild-type epidermal growth factor receptor (ATTENTION study).

BACKGROUND: A previous randomized phase II study demonstrated that the addition of a c-Met inhibitor tivantinib to an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib might prolong progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with previously treated, nonsquamous nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). On a subset analysis, the survival benefit was greater in patients with wild-type EGFR (WT-EGFR) than in those with activating EGFR mutations. Herein, this phase III study compared overall survival (OS) between Asian nonsquamous NSCLC patients with WT-EGFR who received erlotinib plus tivantinib (tivantinib group) or erlotinib plus placebo (placebo group). METHODS: A total of 460 NSCLC patients were planned to be randomized to the tivantinib or placebo group. Primary end point was OS. Secondary end points were PFS, tumor response, and safety. Tissue was collected for biomarker analysis, including c-Met and HGF expression. RESULTS: Enrollment was stopped when 307 patients were randomized, following the Safety Review Committee's recommendation based on an imbalance in the interstitial lung disease (ILD) incidence between the groups. ILD developed in 14 patients (3 deaths) and 6 patients (0 deaths) in the tivantinib and the placebo groups, respectively. In the enrolled patients, median OS was 12.7 and 11.1 months in the tivantinib and the placebo groups, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.891, P = 0.427]. Median PFS was 2.9 and 2.0 months in the tivantinib and the placebo groups, respectively (HR = 0.719, P = 0.019). The commonly observed grade ≥ 3 adverse events in the tivantinib group were neutropenia (24.3%), leukopenia (18.4%), febrile neutropenia (13.8%), and anemia (13.2%). CONCLUSIONS: This study was prematurely terminated due to the increased ILD incidence in the tivantinib group. Although this study lacked statistical power because of the premature termination and did not demonstrate an improvement in OS, our results suggest that tivantinib plus erlotinib might improve PFS than erlotinib alone in nonsquamous NSCLC patients with WT-EGFR. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01377376.

A randomized phase III trial of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) versus observation for patients with asymptomatic cerebral oligo-metastases in non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether treating brain metastasis before starting systemic chemotherapy can improve survival compared with upfront chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with asymptomatic cerebral oligo-metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We undertook a randomized, controlled trial of 105 patients with one to four brain metastases, admitted to Samsung Medical Center between 2008 and 2013. Patients were randomly assigned to receive stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) (49 patients) followed by chemotherapy or upfront chemotherapy (49 patients). The primary end point was overall survival (OS) and secondary end points included central nervous system (CNS) progression-free survival, progression to symptomatic brain metastasis and brain functional outcome. RESULTS: The median age was 58 years (range, 29-85) with ECOG 0-1 performance status, and 40% of patients were never smokers. Most patients had adenocarcinoma, and about half of patients had only one brain metastasis, while the rest had multiple cerebral metastases. The median OS time was 14.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 9.2-20.0] in the SRS group and 15.3 months (95% CI, 7.2-23.4) for the upfront chemotherapy group (P = 0.418). There was no significant difference in time to CNS disease progression [median, 9.4 months (SRS) versus 6.6 months (upfront chemotherapy), P = 0.248]. Symptomatic progression of brain metastases was observed more frequently in the upfront chemotherapy group (26.5%) than the SRS group (18.4%) but without statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Although this study included smaller sample size than initially anticipated due to early termination, SRS followed by chemotherapy did not improve OS in oligo-brain metastases NSCLC patients compared with upfront chemotherapy. Further study with large number of patients should be needed to confirm the use of upfront chemotherapy alone in this subgroup of patients. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: NCT01301560.