Adagrasib in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Harboring a KRASG12C Mutation.

BACKGROUND: Adagrasib, a KRASG12C inhibitor, irreversibly and selectively binds KRASG12C, locking it in its inactive state. Adagrasib showed clinical activity and had an acceptable adverse-event profile in the phase 1-1b part of the KRYSTAL-1 phase 1-2 study. METHODS: In a registrational phase 2 cohort, we evaluated adagrasib (600 mg orally twice daily) in patients with KRASG12C -mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy and anti-programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand 1 therapy. The primary end point was objective response assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included the duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: As of October 15, 2021, a total of 116 patients with KRASG12C -mutated NSCLC had been treated (median follow-up, 12.9 months); 98.3% had previously received both chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Of 112 patients with measurable disease at baseline, 48 (42.9%) had a confirmed objective response. The median duration of response was 8.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.2 to 13.8), and the median progression-free survival was 6.5 months (95% CI, 4.7 to 8.4). As of January 15, 2022 (median follow-up, 15.6 months), the median overall survival was 12.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 19.2). Among 33 patients with previously treated, stable central nervous system metastases, the intracranial confirmed objective response rate was 33.3% (95% CI, 18.0 to 51.8). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 97.4% of the patients - grade 1 or 2 in 52.6% and grade 3 or higher in 44.8% (including two grade 5 events) - and resulted in drug discontinuation in 6.9% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with previously treated KRASG12C -mutated NSCLC, adagrasib showed clinical efficacy without new safety signals. (Funded by Mirati Therapeutics; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03785249.).

EGFR mutation testing, treatment and survival in stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer: CancerLinQ Discovery database retrospective analysis.

Aim: To describe real-world biomarker testing, treatment and survival in stage IA-IIIC non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Methods: Electronic records of USA-based patients in the CancerLinQ Discovery® database with stage IA-IIIC NSCLC (diagnosed between 2014 and 2018) were screened; a curated cohort of 14,452 records was identified for further analysis.Results: Of 3121 (21.6%) patients who had EGFR testing, 493 (15.8%) were EGFR-mutation positive. Of 974 patients who underwent surgical resection, 513 (52.7%) received adjuvant therapy. A quarter of patients with EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC received targeted adjuvant therapy.Conclusion: Approximately a fifth of patients underwent EGFR testing; biomarker testing is important to ensure optimal outcomes for patients with stage I-III NSCLC.

A study investigating how many patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) had mutations in a protein called EGFR and which treatments they received in routine clinical practice: The treatment recommended by medical experts for stage IA­IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is surgical removal of the growth (tumor). Patients with stage II or III, and some with stage IB disease, are recommended to receive treatment with medications such as chemotherapy or oral cancer treatments after surgery (adjuvant treatment). In some lung cancers, there are mutations in a protein called EGFR. Osimertinib, a drug that blocks the activity of mutated EGFR on cancer cells, reducing their growth and spread, is recommended as an adjuvant treatment for patients with EGFR-mutated, stage IB­IIIA NSCLC. This study aimed to understand how many patients with stage I­III NSCLC have tumors with EGFR mutations, and which treatments patients received in everyday clinical practice, before new medicines such as osimertinib (that treat EGFR-mutated NSCLC) were recommended. We looked at anonymous data from 14,452 patients with stage I­III NSCLC treated at cancer clinics in the USA between 2014 and 2018. We found that 3121 (21.6%) patients had an EGFR mutation test and 493 (15.8%) had EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC. Of patients who had surgery to remove the tumor, 55% received adjuvant therapy (treatment after surgery). It is important to perform EGFR mutation testing in patients with stage IB­IIIA NSCLC so that patients with EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC can receive appropriate treatment.

Efficacy of Selpercatinib in RET Fusion-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: RET fusions are oncogenic drivers in 1 to 2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). In patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, the efficacy and safety of selective RET inhibition are unknown. METHODS: We enrolled patients with advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy and those who were previously untreated separately in a phase 1-2 trial of selpercatinib. The primary end point was an objective response (a complete or partial response) as determined by an independent review committee. Secondary end points included the duration of response, progression-free survival, and safety. RESULTS: In the first 105 consecutively enrolled patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received at least platinum-based chemotherapy, the percentage with an objective response was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54 to 73). The median duration of response was 17.5 months (95% CI, 12.0 to could not be evaluated), and 63% of the responses were ongoing at a median follow-up of 12.1 months. Among 39 previously untreated patients, the percentage with an objective response was 85% (95% CI, 70 to 94), and 90% of the responses were ongoing at 6 months. Among 11 patients with measurable central nervous system metastasis at enrollment, the percentage with an objective intracranial response was 91% (95% CI, 59 to 100). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were hypertension (in 14% of the patients), an increased alanine aminotransferase level (in 12%), an increased aspartate aminotransferase level (in 10%), hyponatremia (in 6%), and lymphopenia (in 6%). A total of 12 of 531 patients (2%) discontinued selpercatinib because of a drug-related adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Selpercatinib had durable efficacy, including intracranial activity, with mainly low-grade toxic effects in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy and those who were previously untreated. (Funded by Loxo Oncology and others; LIBRETTO-001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03157128.).

TRUST-II: a global phase II study of taletrectinib in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer and other solid tumors.

Crizotinib and entrectinib have been approved to treat ROS1 fusion-positive (ROS1+) non-small-cell lung cancer. However, unmet needs remain, including treatment of patients with resistance mutations, efficacy in brain metastasis and avoidance of neurological side effects. Taletrectinib was designed to: improve efficacy; overcome resistance to first-generation ROS1 inhibitors; and address brain metastasis while conferring fewer neurological adverse events. All of these features are demonstrated and supported by the interim data from the regional phase II TRUST-I clinical study. Here we describe the rationale and design of TRUST-II, a global phase II study of taletrectinib in patients with locally advanced/metastatic ROS1+ non-small-cell lung cancer and other ROS1+ solid tumors. The primary end point is confirmed objective response rate. Secondary end points include duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival and safety. This trial is enrolling patients in North America, Europe and Asia.

The targeted therapies crizotinib and entrectinib are the first options available to treat a type of lung cancer called ROS1 fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ROS1⁺ NSCLC). However, not all patients with ROS1⁺ NSCLC respond to these drugs. In addition, most patients who take these drugs find their cancer eventually develops resistance and begins to grow again. Patients with disease that has spread (metastasized) to the brain have worse outcomes. Taletrectinib is a new type of targeted therapy that is being developed to treat people who have metastatic ROS1⁺ NSCLC. Data from a regional phase II clinical trial showed that taletrectinib is well tolerated, effective for patients who have never taken a ROS1 targeted therapy and inhibits ROS1⁺ NSCLC for patients whose cancer has developed some types of resistance to these drugs. It has also been shown to treat ROS1⁺ NSCLC tumors that have spread to the brain. This article discusses the rationale and design of a new trial called TRUST-II, which is a global phase II clinical trial looking at how well taletrectinib works and how safe it is. TRUST-II is actively enrolling patients in North America, Europe and Asia. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04919811 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Modeling the Cost-Effectiveness of Adjuvant Osimertinib for Patients with Resected EGFR-mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor osimertinib was recently approved for resected EGFR-mutant stages IB-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer due to improved disease-free survival (DFS) in this population compared with placebo. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness (CE) of this strategy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We constructed a Markov model using post-resection health state transitions with digitized DFS data from the ADAURA trial to compare cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 3 years of adjuvant osimertinib versus placebo over a 10-year time horizon. An overall survival (OS) benefit of 5% was assumed. Costs and utility values were derived from Medicare reimbursement data and literature. A CE threshold of 3 times the gross domestic product per capita was used. Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for adjuvant osimertinib was $317 119 per QALY-gained versus placebo. Initial costs of osimertinib are higher in years 1-3. Costs due to progressive disease (PD) are higher in the placebo group through the first 6.5 years. Average pre-PD, post-PD, and total costs were $2388, $379 047, and $502 937, respectively, in the placebo group, and $505 775, $255 638, and $800 697, respectively, in the osimertinib group. Sensitivity analysis of OS gains reaches CE with an hazard ratio (HR) of 0.70-0.75 benefit of osimertinib over placebo. A 50% discount to osimertinib drug cost yielded an ICER of $115 419. CONCLUSIONS: Three-years of adjuvant osimertinib is CE if one is willing to pay $317 119 more per QALY-gained. Considerable OS benefit over placebo or other economic interventions will be needed to reach CE.

Perioperative Systemic Therapy for Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Despite remarkable treatment advancements in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), recurrence rates for those with resectable, early-stage disease remains high. Immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies are 2 promising treatment modalities that may improve survival outcomes for patients with resected NSCLC when moved from the advanced stage to the curable setting. There are many clinical studies that have evaluated or are currently evaluating immunotherapy or targeted therapy in the perioperative setting, and recent trials such as CheckMate 816, ADAURA, and IMpower010 have led to new approvals and demonstrated the promise of this approach. This review discusses recent and ongoing neoadjuvant and adjuvant systemic therapy trials in NSCLC, and where the field may be going in the near future.

Clinical impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer (CCC19): a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Data on patients with COVID-19 who have cancer are lacking. Here we characterise the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 and identify potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness. METHODS: In this cohort study, we collected de-identified data on patients with active or previous malignancy, aged 18 years and older, with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection from the USA, Canada, and Spain from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) database for whom baseline data were added between March 17 and April 16, 2020. We collected data on baseline clinical conditions, medications, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 disease course. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 days of diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed the association between the outcome and potential prognostic variables using logistic regression analyses, partially adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and obesity. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Of 1035 records entered into the CCC19 database during the study period, 928 patients met inclusion criteria for our analysis. Median age was 66 years (IQR 57-76), 279 (30%) were aged 75 years or older, and 468 (50%) patients were male. The most prevalent malignancies were breast (191 [21%]) and prostate (152 [16%]). 366 (39%) patients were on active anticancer treatment, and 396 (43%) had active (measurable) cancer. At analysis (May 7, 2020), 121 (13%) patients had died. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with increased 30-day mortality, after partial adjustment, were: increased age (per 10 years; partially adjusted odds ratio 1·84, 95% CI 1·53-2·21), male sex (1·63, 1·07-2·48), smoking status (former smoker vs never smoked: 1·60, 1·03-2·47), number of comorbidities (two vs none: 4·50, 1·33-15·28), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (status of 2 vs 0 or 1: 3·89, 2·11-7·18), active cancer (progressing vs remission: 5·20, 2·77-9·77), and receipt of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine (vs treatment with neither: 2·93, 1·79-4·79; confounding by indication cannot be excluded). Compared with residence in the US-Northeast, residence in Canada (0·24, 0·07-0·84) or the US-Midwest (0·50, 0·28-0·90) were associated with decreased 30-day all-cause mortality. Race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality. INTERPRETATION: Among patients with cancer and COVID-19, 30-day all-cause mortality was high and associated with general risk factors and risk factors unique to patients with cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to better understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with cancer, including the ability to continue specific cancer treatments. FUNDING: American Cancer Society, National Institutes of Health, and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research.

A Review of Immunotherapy for Stage III and Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and the Rationale for the ECOG-ACRIN EA5181 Study.

ECOG-ACRIN EA5181 is a phase III prospective, randomized trial that randomizes patients undergoing chemo/radiation for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) to concomitant durvalumab or no additional therapy, with both arms receiving 1 year of consolidative durvalumab. Radiation dose escalation failed to improve overall survival in RTOG 0617. However, conventionally fractionated radiation to 60 Gy with concomitant chemotherapy is associated with a high risk of local failure (38%-46%). It is hoped that concomitant immunotherapy during chemo/radiation can help decrease the risk of local failure, thereby improving overall survival and progression-free survival with acceptable toxicity. In this article, we review conventional chemo/radiation therapy for LA-NSCLC, as well as the quickly evolving world of immunotherapy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer and discuss the rationale and study design of EA5181. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article provides an up-to-date assessment of how immunotherapy is reshaping the landscape of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and how the impact of this therapy is now rapidly moving into the treatment of patients with locally advanced NSCLC who are presenting for curative treatment. This article reviews the recent publications of chemo/radiation as well as those combining immunotherapy with chemotherapy and chemo/radiation, and provides a strategy for improving overall survival of patients with locally advanced NSCLC by using concomitant immunotherapy with standard concurrent chemo/radiation.

Cases from the Immune-Related Adverse Event Tumor Board: Diagnosis and Management of Immune Checkpoint Blockade-Induced Diabetes.

The addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to the armamentarium of cancer therapies has resulted in unprecedented improvement in clinical outcomes for a vast range of malignancies. Because they interfere with the physiologic function of immune checkpoints, such as programmed cell death protein 1 or cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4, to promote self-tolerance, these agents are associated with a unique spectrum of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Immune-mediated endocrinopathies are among the most commonly noted irAEs. Immune-mediated diabetes is an uncommon irAE but can be associated with significant morbidity if it is not recognized and treated in a time-sensitive manner. In this manuscript, we present a case based discussion and review of the literature pertaining to immune-mediated diabetes associated with immune checkpoint blockade. KEY POINTS: Immune checkpoint inhibitor associated diabetes mellitus often resembles type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) in its pathophysiology and clinical manifestations. However, some patients may present with type 2 DM or worsening hyperglycemia in the setting of pre-existent DM. Early recognition and management is key to preventing life-threatening events such as diabetic ketoacidosis. Endocrinology referral and interdisciplinary management should be considered for every patient to optimize glycemic control and to ensure optimal monitoring for long-term microvascular complications.

Phase Ib Study of Crizotinib plus Pembrolizumab in Patients with Previously Untreated Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with ALK Translocation.

LESSONS LEARNED: This study evaluating first-line crizotinib plus pembrolizumab in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was terminated early because increased availability of second-generation ALK inhibitors resulted in difficulty identifying and accruing eligible patients. In the small number of patients enrolled, elevated transaminases were the most common treatment-related toxicity. No other relevant toxicities were observed. Although no definitive conclusions could be drawn because of the small number of patients studied, the higher frequency of severe transaminase increases noted in this sample should be of concern if ALK inhibitor and PD-L1/PD-1 inhibitor combinations are tested in future studies. BACKGROUND: Previous research suggests single-agent crizotinib is efficacious for the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: This study evaluated the safety and preliminary antitumor activity of crizotinib plus pembrolizumab as first-line therapy in patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC. Patients were initially treated at dose level 0 (DL0) with crizotinib 250 mg twice daily and pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks (cycle duration was 3 weeks). If a dose-limiting toxicity occurred, subsequent patients were enrolled at a lower dose level (dose level -1 [DL-1]: 3 weeks of crizotinib monotherapy 250 mg twice daily, followed by crizotinib 250 mg twice daily with the addition of pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks). The primary endpoint was dose-limiting toxicity. Antitumor activity was assessed. RESULTS: Nine patients were enrolled: two at DL0, then seven at DL-1. Dose-limiting toxicities occurred in four patients (grade 3 increases in alanine aminotransferase [ALT] and aspartate aminotransferase [AST] and grade 3 fatigue at DL0; grade 3 increase in ALT and grade 3 increases in both ALT and AST at DL-1). CONCLUSION: The maximum tolerated dose was not determined because slow accrual resulted in early study termination.

An Open-Label Phase II Trial of Bevacizumab plus Docetaxel and Gemcitabine in Advanced, Previously Untreated Nonsquamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: The combination of bevacizumab with docetaxel-gemcitabine resulted in unacceptable toxicity, particularly a high rate of pulmonary toxicity (30%).Despite promising efficacy, excessive toxicity of this regimen does not support its use in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer. BACKGROUND: Prior to immunotherapy, standard treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was platinum doublet chemotherapy. In a previous phase II study, docetaxel-gemcitabine demonstrated comparable efficacy and tolerability to platinum doublets. In this phase II trial, we evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of adding bevacizumab to docetaxel- gemcitabine in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. METHODS: Patients with untreated advanced nonsquamous NSCLC were treated with up to six cycles of docetaxel-gemcitabine-bevacizumab, followed by bevacizumab until progression. The primary endpoint for this study was 1-year progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were safety, overall response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). The planned sample size was 46 patients. RESULTS: A total of 13 patients were enrolled and received a median of six cycles of chemotherapy and four cycles of bevacizumab. The treatment was poorly tolerated, with five patients requiring dose reduction and four discontinuing treatment for toxicity. Grade 3-5 nonhematologic toxicity was seen in 10 patients, and 4 (30%) were hospitalized with pulmonary toxicity possibly related to study drugs. At this point, enrollment was halted for safety concerns. The 12-month PFS was 8%. In 11 evaluable patients, ORR was 72%, median PFS 6 months, and median OS was 11 months. CONCLUSION: Docetaxel, gemcitabine, and bevacizumab at this dose and schedule resulted in excessive toxicity. Despite promising efficacy, in light of efficacious and safe alternative therapies, this regimen should not be used to treat advanced NSCLC.

Cases from the irAE Tumor Board: A Multidisciplinary Approach to a Patient Treated with Immune Checkpoint Blockade Who Presented with a New Rash.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment paradigms for a broad spectrum of malignancies. Because immune checkpoint inhibitors rely on immune reactivation to eliminate cancer cells, they can also lead to the loss of immune tolerance and result in a wide range of phenomena called immune-related adverse events (irAEs). At our institution, the management of irAEs is based on multidisciplinary input obtained at an irAE tumor board that facilitates expedited opinions from various specialties and allows for a more uniform approach to these patients. In this article, we describe a case of a patient with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who developed a maculopapular rash while being treated with a programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitor. We then describe the approach to management of dermatologic toxicities with ICIs based on the discussion at our irAE Tumor Board. KEY POINTS: Innocuous symptoms such as pruritis or a maculopapular rash may herald potentially fatal severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs); therefore, close attention must be paid to the symptoms, history, and physical examination of all patients.Consultation with dermatology should be sought for patients with grade 3 or 4 toxicity or SCARs and prior to resumption of immune checkpoint inhibitors for patients with grade 3 or higher toxicity.A multidisciplinary immune-related adverse events (irAE) tumor board can facilitate timely input and expertise from various specialties, thereby ensuring a streamlined approach to management of irAEs.

Improved tumor vascularization after anti-VEGF therapy with carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel associates with survival in lung cancer.

Addition of anti-VEGF antibody therapy to standard chemotherapies has improved survival and is an accepted standard of care for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the mechanisms by which anti-VEGF therapy increases survival remain unclear. We evaluated dynamic CT-based vascular parameters and plasma cytokines after bevacizumab alone and after bevacizumab plus chemotherapy with carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel in advanced NSCLC patients to explore potential biomarkers of treatment response and resistance to this regimen. Thirty-six patients were enrolled in this study. The primary end point was 6-mo progression-free survival rate, which was 74% (95% CI: 57, 97). This regimen has a promising overall response rate of 36% and median time to progression of 8.5 (6.0, 38.7) mo and overall survival of 12.2 (9.6, 44.1) mo. We found that anti-VEGF therapy led to a sustained increase in plasma PlGF, a potential pharmacodynamic marker. We also found that higher levels of soluble VEGFR1 measured before starting bevacizumab with chemotherapy were associated with worse survival, supporting its potential role as biomarker of treatment resistance. Our imaging biomarker studies indicate that bevacizumab-based treatment-while reducing blood flow, volume, and permeability in the overall population-may be associated with improved survival in patients with improved tumor vasculature and blood perfusion after treatment. This hypothesis-generating study supports the notion that excessively decreasing vascular permeability and pruning/rarefaction after bevacizumab therapy may negatively impact the outcome of combination therapy in NSCLC patients. This hypothesis warrants further dose-titration studies of bevacizumab to examine the dose effect on tumor vasculature and treatment efficacy.

Best Practices in Treatment Selection for Patients With Advanced NSCLC.

Worldwide, lung cancer is the most prevalent form of cancer, and its non-small-cell subtype constitutes up to 85% of cases. Overall, lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer-related death in the United States for both sexes, and its 5-year survival rate is 17%. It is a heterogeneous disease characterized by a variety of biomarkers and differing histologies. Non-small-cell lung cancer may be squamous or nonsquamous in nature and fueled by a number of oncodrivers. Obtaining sufficient tissue during biopsy to perform thorough biomarker testing is a challenge but essential for the modern, targeted therapeutic environment. Although platinum-based doublets still play a major role in first-line treatment, novel therapeutic agent targeting BRAF, EGFR, ALK, and ROS1, as well as agents targeting the T790M mutation, may offer options for patients whose disease fails to respond to initial therapy or relapses following an initial response. The emergence of immunotherapy as second-line standard therapy has changed the treatment paradigm. Some patients will have more favorable outcomes in the first-line setting with immunotherapy. However, managing lung cancer has become more complex than it was 15 years ago when the challenge of treatment was seen as being only binary, ie, small-cell vs non-small-cell disease.

Randomized Phase II Trial of Erlotinib Beyond Progression in Advanced Erlotinib-Responsive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy is clearly beneficial in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, acquired resistance develops uniformly and the benefit of continuation of EGFR TKI therapy beyond progression remains unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a randomized phase II study of chemotherapy (arm A: pemetrexed or docetaxel) versus chemotherapy plus erlotinib (ERL) (arm B) in patients with progressive NSCLC following clinical benefit from erlotinib. In arm B, chemotherapy was given with erlotinib at an oral daily dose of 150 mg on days 2-19 of each cycle to minimize negative pharmacodynamic interactions. The primary endpoint was that continuation of erlotinib in this patient population could extend progression-free survival (PFS) by 50%. RESULTS: A total of 46 patients were randomized (arm A: 24; arm B: 22). Patient characteristics were well balanced except there were more female patients in arm A (p = .075). The median PFS of patients in arm A was 5.5 months and for those in arm B, 4.4 months (p = .699). The response rates were 13% and 16% in arms A and B, respectively (p = .79). EGFR status data were available for 39 of the 46 patients and no significant difference in PFS was seen for continuing ERL beyond progression in mutation-positive patients. Substantially more toxicity was seen in arm B than arm A. CONCLUSION: There was added toxicity but no benefit with the continuation of ERL beyond progression along with chemotherapy as compared with chemotherapy alone. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The benefits of continuing erlotinib upon progression alongside conventional chemotherapy are unclear. This randomized phase II study, initiated prior to the establishment of routine epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation testing, addressed this clinically relevant issue through randomizing patients with prior clinical benefit from erlotinib (thereby enriching for EGFR-mutated tumors) upon progression in the second- or third-line setting to conventional chemotherapy (single-agent pemetrexed or docetaxel) with or without continued erlotinib. The results showed no benefit to continuing erlotinib beyond progression, while significantly more side effects were noted in the combination arm. Along with other recently presented study findings, these results argue against the routine practice of continuing erlotinib in this setting.

Biofeedback Assisted Stress Management in Patients with Lung Cancer: A Feasibility Study.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer-related death for men and women in the United States. NSCLC causes a variety of symptoms which result in significant distress and reduced quality of life for patients. Behavioral and other non-pharmacologic treatment interventions for NSCLC have resulted in improved quality of life, reduced emotional distress, and improved longevity. This study investigates the feasibility and effectiveness of biofeedback assisted stress management (BFSM) to reduce stress in patients with NSCLC. Because of patient dropout, this study was terminated prematurely. Despite this, evaluation of data revealed positive trends, with patients learning to reduce their stress, improve their respiration and heart rate variability, and improve coping. These trends suggest that patients with NSCLC can learn to self-regulate physiology and BFSM may be useful for them, although a less ill patient population may be desirable for future investigations.

Outcomes for pembrolizumab stratified by pemetrexed maintenance post pembrolizumab-platinum-pemetrexed induction in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

Aim: We assessed treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) who initiated first-line pembrolizumab-platinum-pemetrexed (induction) in US community oncology settings. Methods: Patients initiating induction were retrospectively identified. Patients continuing pembrolizumab afterward underwent chart review. Clinical outcomes were described by maintenance pemetrexed exposure after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Results: Median induction pembrolizumab and pemetrexed durations were 5.1 and 4.2 months. Among patients continuing pembrolizumab after induction, 64% received maintenance pemetrexed. Common discontinuation reasons for induction pemetrexed were completion of planned therapy (79%) and partial response (68%) and progressive disease (38%) and toxicity (29%) for maintenance pemetrexed. After IPTW, median overall survival and real-world progression-free survival were longer in patients continuing pembrolizumab with versus without maintenance pemetrexed (20.3 vs 12.0 months and 10.3 vs 5.8 months, respectively). Conclusion: Patient characteristics and planned treatment decisions affect maintenance pemetrexed utilization in the community oncology setting.

What is this summary about? Pembrolizumab is a drug that helps the lung cancer patient's immune system fight the cancer, even after the cancer has spread, or metastasized. After the patient gets better, the patient is treated with chemotherapy so the cancer will not come back. This is called 'maintenance treatment'. In KEYNOTE-189, a clinical trial, patients lived longer if they had pembrolizumab added to pemetrexed and platinum, which are chemotherapy drugs. If patients had maintenance treatment with pembrolizumab and pemetrexed, they also lived longer. However, do patients in community practices get those treatments? What were the results? We found that at cancer practices in the community instead of clinical trials, not all patients received pemetrexed in maintenance treatment. Many had finished their planned therapy and their tumors had shrunk. Also, some physicians chose not to give their patients pemetrexed. In addition, some women and some older and sicker patients did not get pemetrexed. Some patients had pemetrexed in maintenance but stopped because their cancer grew worse or because they had side effects. Those patients did not live as long as patients who did have maintenance pemetrexed. What do the results mean? Patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer in the community practice do better on the treatments tested in clinical trials. However, certain patients do not get those treatments. The reasons need to be understood, to make sure that those patients get better treatments.

Modeling Costs and Life-Years Gained by Population-Wide Next-Generation Sequencing or Single-Gene Testing in Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in the United States.

PURPOSE: Many patients with actionable driver oncogenes (ADOs) are never identified and thus never receive targeted treatment. This study evaluated the economic impact and the potential life-years gained (LYG) that can be attributed to the extent of next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing in the United States compared with single-gene testing (SGT) in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer in the United States. METHODS: A model was developed to evaluate incremental rates of SGT or NSG testing on the basis of LYG and cost per LYG. ADOs included for NGS included EGFR, ALK, ROS1, BRAF, RET, MET, and NTRK. SGT included EGFR and ALK. Assumptions were made for expected incidence of ADOs. Survival distributions were fit to published trial averages of median and 5-year overall survival. Treatment costs were estimated from drug cost averages. Reimbursement costs were based on data from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. RESULTS: Each incremental 10% increase in NGS testing produces an average of 2,627.4 additional LYG, with an average cost savings per LYG of $75 US dollars (USD). Replacing SGT at the current rate of 80% with NGS testing would result in an average additional 21,09.6 LYG and reduce cost per LYG by an average of $599 USD. If 100% of eligible patients were tested with NGS and each identified patient had matched treatment, the total average cost per LYG would be $16,641.57 USD. CONCLUSION: On the basis of current evidence, population-level simulations demonstrate that clinically relevant gains in survival with non-negligible reduction in costs are obtainable from widespread adoption of NGS testing and appropriate treatment matching for patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.