Neoadjuvant Osimertinib Followed by Sequential Definitive Radiation Therapy and/or Surgery in Stage III Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: An Open-Label, Single-Arm, Phase 2 Study.

PURPOSE: The treatment for unresectable, locally advanced stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CRT) followed by consolidation durvalumab. This study aimed to evaluate the benefit of neoadjuvant osimertinib as an alternative therapy to this approach with the aim of reducing the radiation field. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This investigation was a nonrandomized, open-label, single-arm, phase 2, prospective, proof-of-concept study. Eligible patients were classified as having treatment-naïve, nonoperable, stage III epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant NSCLC. Patients received 80 mg of oral osimertinib daily for 12 weeks before definitive radiation therapy (RT) and/or surgery. The response was assessed at weeks 6 and 12. For responders, sequential definitive RT and/or surgery were planned. Nonresponders were started on standard CRT. After RT ± surgery or CRT, patients were followed for 2 years without adjuvant therapy. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR), with September 20, 2022, set as the cut-off for data collection. Secondary endpoints were safety and the gross tumor volume (GTV), planned tumor volume (PTV), and the percentage of total lung volume minus GTV exceeding 20 Gy (V20%) before versus after osimertinib. Exploratory analyses included assessments of the presence of plasma circulating tumor-free DNA (ctDNA) before osimertinib treatment, at weeks 6 and 12, at the end of RT, and 6 weeks post-RT. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were included (19 women; median age, 73 years; range, 51-82 years). Nineteen of 24 had never smoked, 20 of 24 had adenocarcinoma, 16 of 24 had exon 19 deletions, and 8 of 24 had exon 21 mutations. Participants had stage IIIA (10), IIIB (9), or IIIC (5) disease. Three patients were excluded from the analysis (1 dropped out and 2 were still undergoing osimertinib treatment at the cut-off date). The ORR to induction osimertinib was 95.2% (17 partial response, 3 complete response, and 1 progressive disease). After induction osimertinib, 13 of 20 patients were definitively radiated, 3 of 20 underwent surgery, and 5 of 20 were excluded. Four patients were restaged as stage IV (contralateral ground-glass opacities responded to osimertinib), and 1 patient withdrew informed consent. Three patients underwent surgery, one of whom was treated with RT. Two patients achieved pT1aN0, and one achieved pathologic complete response. The median GTV, PTV, and V20% before osimertinib treatment were 47.4 ± 76.9 cm3 (13.5-234.9), 227.0 ± 258.8 cm3 (77.8-929.2), and 27.1 ± 16.4% (6.2-60.3), respectively. The values after osimertinib treatment were 27.5 ± 42.3 cm3 (2.99-137.7; -48 ± 20%; P = .02), 181.9 ±198.4 cm3 (54-718.1; -31 ± 20%; P = .01), and 21.8 ± 11.7% (9.1-44.15; -24 ± 40%; P = .04), respectively. PTV/GTV/V20% reduction was associated with tumor size and central location. The median follow-up time was 28.71 months (range, 0.4-45.1 months), and median disease-free survival was not reached (mean, 30.59; standard error, 3.94; 95% confidence interval, 22.86-38.31). ctDNA was detected in 5 patients; 4 of 5 were positive for ctDNA at baseline and became negative during osimertinib induction but were again positive after osimertinib treatment was terminated. Interestingly, 3 patients who were ctDNA negative at baseline became weakly positive after RT and then were negative at follow-up. No significant adverse events were reported during the osimertinib or radiation phases. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant osimertinib therapy is feasible in patients with stage III lung cancer NSCLC, followed by definitive radiation and/or surgery, with an ORR of 95.2% and an excellent safety profile. Osimertinib induction for 12 weeks before definitive radiation (chemo-free) significantly reduced the radiation field by nearly 50% with a linear association with tumor size. Further studies are needed to test this chemo-free approach for long-term outcomes before practices are changed.

Real-world efficacy and safety of mobocertinib in EGFR exon 20 insertion-mutated lung cancer.

Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring EGFR exon 20 insertions (EGFRex20ins) is relatively resistant to the existing EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Mobocertinib is a novel TKI that selectively targets EGFRex20ins and has demonstrated therapeutic efficacy in pretreated patients with tumors harboring these mutations. Methods: This is a retrospective, non-interventional, multicenter real-world study aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of mobocertinib in patients with EGFRexon20ins who received 160 mg QD monotherapy as part of expanded access. Data collection was based on patients' records. PET-CT or CT scans were used to measure systemic response, while brain MRIs were used to examine intracranial response as part of the follow-up. Results: 16 patients were included in this report. Mobocertinib was administered to 31.3% (5) of patients as first-line, 50% (8) as second-line, and 18.7% (3) as a later-line therapy. The median age was 65 years (range, 38-83), 75% (12/16) were female, and 50% (8/16) had brain metastases at baseline before mobocertinib treatment. The objective response rate (ORR) to mobocertinib was 25% (4/16) (1/5 for first line and 3/11 for other lines), disease control rate (DCR) was 75% (12/16) with a follow-up period of 11 months. The median duration of treatment (mDoT) was 5.6 months across all patients, and 8.6 months in responders. Based on the presence or absence of brain metastasis, the mDoT was 14.8 and 5.4 months (p=0.01), respectively. Mobocertinib Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) included diarrhea (19%), nausea (6%) and renal failure (6%). Dose reduction was reported in 25% of cases to 80 mg. Conclusion: Mobocertinib in compassionate use exhibited an ORR of 25%, which is very similar to that of the phase 2 EXCLAIM study and clearly better than historical data of monochemotherapy or conventional EGFR inhibitors. The greatest benefit was noted in patients without brain metastases, who showed durable effects with mDoT 14.8 months, while intracranial activity was limited. These findings may assist therapeutic considerations, inasmuch as results from the EXCLAIM cohort-3 dedicated to brain lesions are not available yet.

Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in oncologic patients undergoing numerous cancer treatment options: A retrospective single-center study.

ABSTRACT: The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV2 virus, has infected millions worldwide with cancer patients demonstrating a higher prevalence for severe disease and poorer outcomes. Recently, the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was released as the primary means to combat COVID-19. The currently reported incidence of local and systemic side effects was 27% in the general public. The safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine has not been studied in patients with an active cancer diagnosis who are either ongoing or plan to undergo oncologic therapy.This single center study reviewed the charts of 210 patients with active cancer diagnoses that received both doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. The development of side effects from the vaccine, hospitalizations or exacerbations from various oncologic treatment were documented. Type of oncologic treatment (immunotherapy, chemotherapy, hormonal, biologic, radiation or mixed) was documented to identify if side effects were related to treatment type. The time at which the vaccine was administered in relation to treatment onset (on long term therapy, within 1 month of therapy or prior to therapy) was also documented to identify any relationships.Sixty five (31%) participants experienced side effects from the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, however most were mild to moderate. Treatment protocol was not linked to the development of vaccine related side effects (P = .202), nor was immunotherapy (P = .942). The timing of vaccine administered in relation to treatment onset was also not related to vaccine related side effects (P = .653). Six (2.9%) participants were hospitalized and 4 (2%) died.The incidence of side effects in cancer patients is similar to what has been reported for the general public (31% vs 27%). Therefore, we believe that the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is safe in oncologic patients undergoing numerous cancer treatments.