Real-life clinical management patterns in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer across France: a multi-method study.

BACKGROUND: We designed this study based on both a physician practice survey and real-world patient data to: (1) evaluate clinical management practices in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) among medical centers located across France; and (2) describe first-line treatment patterns among patients with ES-SCLC following the introduction of immunotherapy into clinical practice. METHODS: A 50-item questionnaire was completed by physicians from 45 medical centers specialized in SCLC management. Responses were collected from June 2022 to January 2023. The survey questions addressed diagnostic workup of ES-SCLC, chemoimmunotherapy in first-line and second-line settings, and use of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) and radiotherapy. In parallel, using a chart review approach, we retrospectively analyzed aggregated information from 548 adults with confirmed ES-SCLC receiving first-line treatment in the same centers. RESULTS: In ES-SCLC, treatment planning is based on chest computed tomography (CT) (as declared by 100% of surveyed centers). Mean time between diagnosis and treatment initiation was 2-7 days, as declared by 82% of centers. For detection of brain metastases, the most common imaging test was brain CT (84%). The main exclusion criteria for first-line immunotherapy in the centers were autoimmune disease (87%), corticosteroid therapy (69%), interstitial lung disease (69%), and performance status ≥ 2 (69%). Overall, 53% and 36% of centers considered that patients are chemotherapy-sensitive if they relapse within ≥ 3 months or ≥ 6 months after first-line chemoimmunotherapy, respectively. Among the 548 analyzed patients, 409 (75%) received chemoimmunotherapy as a first-line treatment, 374 (91%) of whom received carboplatin plus etoposide and 35 (9%) cisplatin plus etoposide. Overall, 340/548 patients (62%) received maintenance immunotherapy. Most patients (68%) did not receive radiotherapy or PCI. CONCLUSIONS: There is an overall alignment of practices reflecting recent clinical guidelines among medical centers managing ES-SCLC across France, and a high prescription rate of immunotherapy in the first-line setting.

Computational markers for personalized prediction of outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer patients with brain metastases.

Intracranial progression after curative treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) occurs from 10 to 50% and is difficult to manage, given the heterogeneity of clinical presentations and the variability of treatments available. The objective of this study was to develop a mechanistic model of intracranial progression to predict survival following a first brain metastasis (BM) event occurring at a time [Formula: see text]. Data included early-stage NSCLC patients treated with a curative intent who had a BM as the first and single relapse site (N = 31). We propose a mechanistic mathematical model able to derive computational markers from primary tumor and BM data at [Formula: see text] and estimate the amount and sizes of (visible and invisible) BMs, as well as their future behavior. These two key computational markers are [Formula: see text], the proliferation rate of a single tumor cell; and [Formula: see text], the per day, per cell, probability to metastasize. The predictive value of these individual computational biomarkers was evaluated. The model was able to correctly describe the number and size of metastases at [Formula: see text] for 20 patients. Parameters [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] were significantly associated with overall survival (OS) (HR 1.65 (1.07-2.53) p = 0.0029 and HR 1.95 (1.31-2.91) p = 0.0109, respectively). Adding the computational markers to the clinical ones significantly improved the predictive value of OS (c-index increased from 0.585 (95% CI 0.569-0.602) to 0.713 (95% CI 0.700-0.726), p < 0.0001). We demonstrated that our model was applicable to brain oligoprogressive patients in NSCLC and that the resulting computational markers had predictive potential. This may help lung cancer physicians to guide and personalize the management of NSCLC patients with intracranial oligoprogression.

Antibody-Drug Conjugates as Novel Therapeutic Agents for Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma with or without Alterations in Oncogenic Drivers.

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are an emerging class of therapeutics for lung cancer, and several are currently in development for this malignancy. The structure of these molecules is based on an antibody that targets a protein on the lung cancer cell surface and a cytotoxic payload attached by a linker. Many protein targets, including TROP2, c-MET, CEACAM5, HER2, and HER3 have been identified. In metastatic non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) without alterations in oncogenic drivers, platinum-based chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting the programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD1/PDL1) interaction are the standard first-line treatments. In patients with EGFR-mutated or ALK-rearranged NSCLC, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are recommended. However, although the prognosis of patients with metastatic NSCLC differs between such with and without alterations in oncogenic drivers, most patients eventually experience disease progression. A novel therapeutic class is needed in routine practice to overcome the mechanisms of resistance to ICIs and EGFR/ALK TKIs. Several ADCs have already been approved for other cancers, such as breast cancer and urothelial carcinoma. This review summarizes the knowledge about the efficacy and tolerance profiles of ADCs targeting TROP2, HER2, HER3, CEACAM5 and c-MET in metastatic NSCLC with and without alterations in oncogenic drivers.

Outcomes of Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Brain Metastases Treated with the Upfront Single Agent Pembrolizumab: A Retrospective and Multicentric Study of the ESCKEYP GFPC Cohort.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most common cause of brain metastasis (BM). Little is known about immune checkpoint inhibitor activity in the central nervous system, especially in patients receiving monotherapy for tumors with a tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 50%. This noninterventional, retrospective, multicenter study, conducted with the GFPC, included treatment-naïve patients strongly positive for PD-L1 (TPS ≥ 50%) with BM receiving first-line single-agent pembrolizumab treatment between May 2017 and November 2019. The primary endpoints were centrally reviewed intracranial overall response rates (ORRs), centrally reviewed intracranial progression-free survival (cPFS), extracranial PFS, and overall survival were secondary endpoints. Forty-three patients from five centers were included. Surgical or local radiation therapy was administered to 31 (72%) patients, mostly before initiating ICI therapy (25/31). Among 38/43 (88.4%) evaluable patients, the intracranial ORR was 73%. The median PFS was 8.3 months. The cerebral and extracerebral median PFS times were 9.2 and 5.3 months, respectively. The median OS was 25.5 months. According to multivariate analysis, BM surgery before ICI therapy was the only factor significantly associated with both improved PFS (HR = 0.44) and OS (HR = 0.45). This study revealed the feasibility and outcome of front-line pembrolizumab treatment in this population with BM.

Profiles, diagnostic process, and patterns of care of patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer: A French national study.

BACKGROUND: The management of stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains heterogeneous and complex, even after the approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors post-chemoradiotherapy (CRT). This observational study from France evaluated real-world practices in managing stage III NSCLC. METHODS: Between 2020 and 2022, we conducted a physician practice survey in 41 medical centers across France, and retrospectively analyzed aggregated information from 417 consecutive charts of patients with stage III NSCLC. We collected information on diagnostic and staging procedures, biomarker testing, surgical and non-surgical treatments, and follow-up. RESULTS: According to the physician survey, diagnostic workup of stage III NSCLC primarily relied on positron emission tomography/computed tomography and brain magnetic resonance imaging, performed for the majority of patients in 100 % and 78 % of centers, respectively. Of 417 patient charts, 414 were evaluable with 53 % of patients having stage IIIA disease, 37 % IIIB, and 10 % IIIC. The most common node involvement was N2 (59 %). Programmed death-ligand 1 testing was conducted for 98 % of patients. Invasive staging (mediastinoscopy or endobronchial ultrasound) was performed in 41 % of patients, of whom 83 % had N2 or N3 nodal involvement. Surgical resection was offered to 120 patients (29 %), with 85 % achieving R0 resection. In 292 charts of patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC, 190 patients (65 %) were offered CRT followed by consolidation immunotherapy. Within these patients, concurrent CRT was more frequently employed (52 %) than sequential CRT (13 %). CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic procedures and treatment modalities in French medical centers generally align with clinical guidelines for stage III NSCLC, except for invasive staging that was less commonly performed than expected.

Resected EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancers: incidence and outcomes in a European population (GFPC Exerpos Study).

Background: Few epidemiological data are available on surgically treated Caucasian patients with non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. The main objective of this study was to describe, in the real-world setting, these patients' incidence, clinical, and tumoral characteristics. Methods: The participating centers included all consecutive localized non-squamous NSCLC patients undergoing surgery between January 2018 and December 2019 in France. EGFR status was determined retrospectively when not available before surgery. Results: The study includes 1391 no squamous NSCLC patients from 16 centers; EGFR status was determined before surgery in 692 (49.7%) of the cases and conducted as part of the study for 699 (50.3%); 171 (12.3%) were EGFR mutated; median age: 70 (range: 36-88) years; female: 59.6%; never smokers: 75.7%; non-squamous histology 97.7%, programmed death ligand-1 expression 0%/1-49%/⩾50 in 60.5%/25.7%/13.8%, respectively. Surgery was predominantly lobectomy (81%) or segmentectomy (14.9%), with systematic lymph node dissection in 95.9%. Resection completeness was R0 for 97%. Post-surgery staging was as follows: IA: 52%, IB: 16%, IIA: 4%, IIB: 10%, IIIA: 16%, and IIIB: 0.05%; EGFR mutation exon was Del19/exon 21 (L858R)/20/18 in 37.4%/36.8%/14%, and 6.4% of cases, respectively; 31 (18%) patients received adjuvant treatment (chemotherapy: 93%, EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor: 0%, radiotherapy: 20%). After a median follow-up of 31 (95% confidence interval: 29.6-33.1) months, 45 (26%) patients relapsed: 11/45 (24%) locally and 34 (76%) with metastatic progression. Median disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival were not reached and 3-year DFS was 60%. Conclusion: This real-world analysis provides the incidence and outcomes of resected EGFR-mutated NSCLCs in a European patient cohort.

Safety and Patient-Reported outcomes of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in stage IIIB/IV non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation, ALK rearrangement or ROS1 fusion progressing after targeted therapies (GFPC 06-2018 study).

BACKGROUND: In an open-label multicenter non-randomized non-comparative phase II study in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), oncogenic addiction (EGFR mutation or ALK/ROS1 fusion), with disease progression after tyrosine-kinase inhibitor and no prior chemotherapy (NCT04042558), atezolizumab, carboplatin, pemetrexed with or without bevacizumab showed some promising result. Beyond the clinical evaluation, we assessed safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to provide additional information on the relative impact of adding atezolizumab to chemotherapy with and without bevacizumab in this population. MATERIALS: Patients received platinum-pemetrexed-atezolizumab-bevacizumab (PPAB cohort) or, if not eligible, platinum-pemetrexed-atezolizumab (PPA cohort). The incidence, nature, and severity of adverse events (AEs) were assessed. PROs were evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-Core 30 and EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer 13). RESULT: Overall, 68 (PPAB) and 72 (PPA) patients were evaluable for safety. Grade 3-4 AEs occurred in 83.8% (PPAB) and 63.9% (PPA). Grade 3-4 atezolizumab-related AEs occurred in 29.4% and 19.4%, respectively. Grade 3-4 bevacizumab-related AEs occurred in 36.8% (PPAB). Most frequent grade 3-4 AEs were neutropenia (19.1% in PPAB; 23.6% in PPA) and asthenia (16.2% in PPAB; 9.7% in PPA). In PPAB, we observed a global stability in global health security (GHS) score, fatigue and dyspnea with a constant tendency of improvement, and a significant improvement in cough. In PPA, we observed a significant improvement in GHS score with a significant improvement in fatigue, dyspnea and cough. At week 54, we observed an improvement from baseline in GHS score for 49.2% of patients. In both cohorts, patients reported on average no clinically significant worsening in their overall health or physical functioning scores. CONCLUSION: PPAB and PPA combinations seem tolerable and manageable in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-squamous NSCLC with oncogenic addiction (EGFR mutation or ALK/ROS1 fusion) after targeted therapies.

Overall Survival From the EORTC LCG-1613 APPLE Trial of Osimertinib Versus Gefitinib Followed by Osimertinib in Advanced EGFR-Mutant Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Osimertinib has been established as a standard of care for patients with common sensitizing EGFR-mutant advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) although the sequential approach (first-generation inhibitor gefitinib followed by osimertinib) has not been formally compared. The phase II APPLE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02856893) enrolled 156 treatment-naïve patients, and two treatment strategies were evaluated: osimertinib up front or the sequential treatment approach with gefitinib up front followed by osimertinib at the time of progression, either molecular progression (detection of plasma T790M resistance mutation) regardless of the radiologic status or just at the time of radiologic progression. Patients' characteristics were well balanced, except for the higher proportion of baseline brain metastases in the sequential approach (29% v 19%). Per protocol, 73% of patients switched to osimertinib in the sequential arm. Up-front treatment with osimertinib was associated with a lower risk of brain progression versus the sequential approach (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54 [90% CI, 0.34 to 0.86]), but a comparable overall survival was observed between both strategies (HR, 1.01 [90% CI, 0.61 to 1.68]), with the 18-month survival probability of 84% and 82.3%, respectively. The APPLE trial suggests that a sequential treatment approach is associated with more frequent progression in the brain but a similar survival in advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC.

Real-World efficacy and safety of combination nivolumab plus ipilimumab for Untreated, Unresectable, pleural Mesothelioma: The Meso-Immune (GFPC 04-2021) trial.

BACKGROUND: First-line standard-of-care for unresectable, pleural mesothelioma (PM) changed with the phase 3 CheckMate 743 study results, showing that nivolumab plus ipilimumab (Nivo + Ipi) significantly extended overall survival (OS) versus platinum + pemetrexed chemotherapy for PM (median OS 18.1 versus 14.1 months; hazard ratio: 0.74; p = 0.002). Efficacy and safety data in real-world (rw) settings are needed to confirm these results. METHODS: This French multicenter, retrospective cohort study was undertaken to assess the outcomes of treatment-naïve PM patients given Nivo + Ipi via an early-access program (EAP). The primary objective was investigator-assessed real world -progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary objectives were the combination's -overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: From 1 April 2021 to 15 Feb 2022, the analysis included 201 of the 305 EAP-enrolled patients treated in 63 centers (79.6 % men; median age: 75 years; 91.8 % Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) 0/1; 74.5 % epithelioid histology). With median (95 % CI) follow-up for all patients of 18.4 (17.7-19.2) months, -PFS and OS were 6.3 (5.3-7.5) and 18.9 (17.6-not reached (NR)) months, with 1-year OS at 66.4 % (60.1-73.3 %). Median OS and 1-year survival rates were 21.0 (18.7-NR) and 70.8 % (63.9 %-780.6 %), and 14.1 (10.9-21.0) months and 54.9 % (42.8 %-70.4 %) for epithelioid and non-epithelioid PM subgroups, respectively. PFS was equal between the two subgroups. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 23.3 % of patients and three deaths were treatment-related. CONCLUSIONS: For this unselected PM population, efficacy and safety outcomes compared favorably with CheckMate 743 trial results.

EORTC-SPECTA Arcagen study, comprehensive genomic profiling and treatment adaptation of rare thoracic cancers.

Arcagen (NCT02834884) is a European prospective study aiming at defining the molecular landscape of rare cancers for treatment guidance. We present data from the cohort of rare thoracic tumors. Patients with advanced pleural mesothelioma (PM) or thymic epithelial tumors (TET) underwent genomic profiling with large targeted assay [>300 genes, tumor mutational burden (TMB), microsatellite instability (MSI) status] on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) or plasma samples. EORTC molecular tumor board (MTB) advised for biomarker-guided treatments. 102 patients recruited from 8 countries between July 2019 and May 2022 were evaluable: 56 with PM, 46 with TET (23 thymomas, 23 thymic carcinomas). Molecular profiling was performed on 70 FFPE samples (42 PM, 28 TET), and 32 cases on ctDNA (14 PM, 18 TET), within a median turnaround time of 8 days from sample reception. We detected relevant molecular alterations in 66 out of 102 patients (65%; 79% PM, 48% TET), 51 of 70 FFPE samples (73%; 90% PM, 46% TET), and 15 of 32 plasma samples (47%; 43% PM, 50% TET). The most frequently altered genes were CDKN2A/B, BAP1, MTAP in PM and TP53, CDKN2A/B, SETD2 in TET. The TMB was low (mean 3.2 Muts/MB), 2 PM had MSI-high status. MTB advised molecular-guided treatment options in 32 situations, for 17 PM and 15 TET patients (75% clinical trial option, 22% off-label drug or compassionate use, 3% early access program). Molecular testing and MTB discussion were feasible for patients with rare thoracic cancers and allowed the broadening of treatment options for 30% of the cases.

A prospective analysis of the management practices for patients with Stage-III-N2Non-Small-Cell lung cancer (OBSERVE IIIA-B GFPC 04-2020Study).

BACKGROUND: Management of stage-III-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on a multimodal strategy (surgery or radiotherapycombined with systemic drugs) remains controversial. Patients are treated with a curative intent, and available data suggestprolonged survival after complete resection. However, no consensual definition of "tumor resectability" exists. This study aimed to analyze the concordanceamong French tumor board meeting (TBM)-emittedtherapeutic decisions forstage-III-N2 NSCLC. METHODS: Six patients with stage-III-N2 NSCLC discussed at Saint-Etienne University Hospital'sthoracic TBMs were selected, anonymouslyreported, and submitted to the participating TBMs. The primary goal of this multicenter, prospective, observational study was to assess the consistency of TBMpanel decisions for each case. The secondary endpointwas identifying the demographic or technical factors that potentiallyaffected decision-making. RESULTS: Twenty-seven TBMs from university hospitals, a cancer center, general hospitals, and a private hospitalparticipated in this study. None of their decisions for the six cases were unanimous.The decisions were homogenous for three cases (78%, 85%, and 88% TBMs opted for medical treatment, respectively),andmore ambivalent for the other three (medical versus surgical strategies were favored by 44%/56%, 46%/54%, and 58%/42% TBMs, respectively). Interestingly, decisions regarding chemoradiationand perioperative chemotherapyinthe medical and surgical strategies, respectively, were also discordant. Hospital type, specialist participation in TBMs, and activity volumes were not significantly associated with therapeutic decisions. CONCLUSION: The results of this study highlight substantial disparities amongFrench TBMs regarding therapeutic management of stage-III-N2 NSCLC. The decisions were not associated with local conditions.

Subcutaneous versus Intravenous Amivantamab, both in Combination with Lazertinib, in Refractory EGFR-mutated NSCLC: Primary Results from the Phase 3 PALOMA-3 Study.

PURPOSE: Phase 3 studies of intravenous amivantamab demonstrated efficacy across EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A subcutaneous formulation could improve tolerability and reduce administration time while maintaining efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC who progressed following osimertinib and platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive subcutaneous or intravenous amivantamab, both combined with lazertinib. Co-primary pharmacokinetic noninferiority endpoints were trough concentrations (Ctrough; on cycle-2-day-1 or cycle-4-day-1) and cycle-2 area under the curve (AUCD1-D15). Key secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS) was a predefined exploratory endpoint. RESULTS: Overall, 418 patients underwent randomization (subcutaneous group, n=206; intravenous group, n=212). Geometric mean ratios of Ctrough for subcutaneous to intravenous amivantamab were 1.15 (90% CI, 1.04-1.26) at cycle-2-day-1 and 1.42 (90% CI, 1.27-1.61) at cycle-4-day-1; the cycle-2 AUCD1-D15 was 1.03 (90% CI, 0.98-1.09). ORR was 30% in the subcutaneous and 33% in the intravenous group; median PFS was 6.1 and 4.3 months, respectively. OS was significantly longer in the subcutaneous versus intravenous group (hazard ratio for death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.92; nominal P=0.02). Fewer patients in the subcutaneous group experienced infusion-related reactions (13% versus 66%) and venous thromboembolism (9% versus 14%) versus the intravenous group. Median administration time for first infusion was reduced to 4.8 minutes (range, 0-18) for subcutaneous amivantamab from 5 hours (range, 0.2-9.9) for intravenous amivantamab. During cycle-1-day-1, 85% and 52% of patients in the subcutaneous and intravenous groups, respectively, considered treatment convenient; end-of-treatment rates were 85% and 35%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Subcutaneous amivantamab-lazertinib demonstrated noninferiority to intravenous amivantamab-lazertinib, offering a consistent safety profile with reduced infusion-related reactions, increased convenience, and prolonged survival.