Amivantamab plus Lazertinib in Previously Untreated EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Amivantamab plus lazertinib (amivantamab-lazertinib) has shown clinically meaningful and durable antitumor activity in patients with previously untreated or osimertinib-pretreated EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor)-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In a phase 3, international, randomized trial, we assigned, in a 2:2:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R), locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC to receive amivantamab-lazertinib (in an open-label fashion), osimertinib (in a blinded fashion), or lazertinib (in a blinded fashion, to assess the contribution of treatment components). The primary end point was progression-free survival in the amivantamab-lazertinib group as compared with the osimertinib group, as assessed by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: Overall, 1074 patients underwent randomization (429 to amivantamab-lazertinib, 429 to osimertinib, and 216 to lazertinib). The median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the amivantamab-lazertinib group than in the osimertinib group (23.7 vs. 16.6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.85; P<0.001). An objective response was observed in 86% of the patients (95% CI, 83 to 89) in the amivantamab-lazertinib group and in 85% of those (95% CI, 81 to 88) in the osimertinib group; among patients with a confirmed response (336 in the amivantamab-lazertinib group and 314 in the osimertinib group), the median response duration was 25.8 months (95% CI, 20.1 to could not be estimated) and 16.8 months (95% CI, 14.8 to 18.5), respectively. In a planned interim overall survival analysis of amivantamab-lazertinib as compared with osimertinib, the hazard ratio for death was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.05). Predominant adverse events were EGFR-related toxic effects. The incidence of discontinuation of all agents due to treatment-related adverse events was 10% with amivantamab-lazertinib and 3% with osimertinib. CONCLUSIONS: Amivantamab-lazertinib showed superior efficacy to osimertinib as first-line treatment in EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MARIPOSA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04487080.).

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.).

Proceedings of the 1st biannual bridging the gaps in lung cancer conference.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the US and globally. The mortality from lung cancer has been declining, due to a reduction in incidence and advances in treatment. Although recent success in developing targeted and immunotherapies for lung cancer has benefitted patients, it has also expanded the complexity of potential treatment options for health care providers. To aid in reducing such complexity, experts in oncology convened a conference (Bridging the Gaps in Lung Cancer) to identify current knowledge gaps and controversies in the diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of various lung cancer scenarios, as described here. Such scenarios relate to biomarkers and testing in lung cancer, small cell lung cancer, EGFR mutations and targeted therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), early-stage NSCLC, KRAS/BRAF/MET and other genomic alterations in NSCLC, and immunotherapy in advanced NSCLC.

Pembrolizumab with platinum-based chemotherapy with or without epacadostat as first-line treatment for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized, partially double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II study.

BACKGROUND: The combination of the checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) pembrolizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy is effective frontline therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) lacking targetable mutations. Indoleamine 2,3- dioxygenase 1 (IDO1), an enzyme involved in kynurenine production, inhibits immune responses. Inhibition of IDO1 may restore antitumor immunity and augment CPI activity. This trial evaluated addition of epacadostat, a potent and highly selective IDO1 inhibitor, to pembrolizumab and chemotherapy for metastatic NSCLC. METHODS: ECHO-306/KEYNOTE-715 was a partial double-blind, randomized phase II study of adults with treatment-naïve stage IV NSCLC not indicated for EGFR-, ALK-, or ROS1-directed therapy. Patients were randomized to one of three treatment arms: epacadostat-pembrolizumab-chemotherapy (E + P + C; blinded), epacadostat-pembrolizumab (E + P; open-label) or placebo-pembrolizumab-chemotherapy (PBO + P + C; blinded). Stratification was by PD-L1 tumor proportion score (< 50% vs. ≥ 50%) and tumor histology (non-squamous vs. squamous). A protocol amendment closed enrollment in the open-label E + P group, excluding it from efficacy analyses. Intravenous pembrolizumab (200 mg) was administered every 21 days and epacadostat 100 mg or matching placebo (oral) twice daily (BID) for ≤ 35 3-week cycles. The primary objective was objective response rate (ORR) for E + P + C vs. PBO + P + C. RESULTS: 178 patients were randomized to E + P + C (n = 91) or PBO + P + C (n = 87); 55 were enrolled in the E + P group. The E + P + C group had a lower confirmed ORR (26.4%; 95% CI 17.7-36.7) than the PBO + P + C group (44.8%; 95% CI 34.1-55.9), with a difference of - 18.5% (95% CI - 32.0 - (- 4.3); one-sided P = 0.9948). The E + P + C group had a numerically higher percentage of confirmed responders with extended response ≥ 6 months (29.2% vs. 15.4%). Circulating kynurenine levels at C1D1 were similar to those at C2D1 in all treatment groups and were not reduced to normal levels with epacadostat 100 mg BID plus P + C. The safety profile of E + P + C was consistent with that for PBO + P + C. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of epacadostat 100 mg BID to pembrolizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy was generally well tolerated but did not improve ORR in patients with treatment-naïve metastatic NSCLC. Evaluating epacadostat doses that normalize circulating kynurenine in combination with CPIs may help determine the clinical potential of this combination. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03322566. Registered October 26, 2017.

Tribbles 2 pseudokinase confers enzalutamide resistance in prostate cancer by promoting lineage plasticity.

Enzalutamide, a second-generation antiandrogen, is commonly prescribed for the therapy of advanced prostate cancer, but enzalutamide-resistant, lethal, or incurable disease invariably develops. To understand the molecular mechanism(s) behind enzalutamide resistance, here, we comprehensively analyzed a range of prostate tumors and clinically relevant models by gene expression array, immunohistochemistry, and Western blot, which revealed that enzalutamide-resistant prostate cancer cells and tumors overexpress the pseudokinase, Tribbles 2 (TRIB2). Inhibition of TRIB2 decreases the viability of enzalutamide-resistant prostate cancer cells, suggesting a critical role of TRIB2 in these cells. Moreover, the overexpression of TRIB2 confers resistance in prostate cancer cells to clinically relevant doses of enzalutamide, and this resistance is lost upon inhibition of TRIB2. Interestingly, we found that TRIB2 downregulates the luminal markers androgen receptor and cytokeratin 8 in prostate cancer cells but upregulates the neuronal transcription factor BRN2 (Brain-2) and the stemness factor SOX2 (SRY-box 2) to induce neuroendocrine characteristics. Finally, we show that inhibition of either TRIB2 or its downstream targets, BRN2 or SOX2, resensitizes resistant prostate cancer cells to enzalutamide. Thus, TRIB2 emerges as a potential new regulator of transdifferentiation that confers enzalutamide resistance in prostate cancer cells via a mechanism involving increased cellular plasticity and lineage switching.

High-dose alectinib for RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer in the Blood First Assay Screening Trial.

Introduction: This paper presents results from Cohort B (rearranged during transfection [RET], fusion-positive) of the Blood First Assay Screening Trial in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) screened for genetic alterations using blood-based next-generation sequencing. Material and methods: Adults with advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC received alectinib 900 mg twice daily (BID) in Phase I. Enrolment closed prematurely with Phase II uninitiated. Results: Among eight treated patients, confirmed best overall responses in evaluable patients were stable disease (4/5) and progressive disease (1/5). One dose-limiting toxicity (death, unknown cause) was considered by the investigator to be related to treatment and underlying disease. Serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in five patients, and SAEs that may be related to treatment occurred in two patients. Conclusions: Alectinib showed limited activity in advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC, and further investigation was not conducted due to the development of selective RET inhibitors pralsetinib and selpercatinib. No new safety signals were observed, and the safety profile of alectinib was in line with previous reports at the 600 mg BID dose.

Pralsetinib for RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ARROW): a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Oncogenic alterations in RET have been identified in multiple tumour types, including 1-2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of pralsetinib, a highly potent, oral, selective RET inhibitor, in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC. METHODS: ARROW is a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study done at 71 sites (community and academic cancer centres) in 13 countries (Belgium, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours, including RET fusion-positive NSCLC, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 (later limited to 0-1 in a protocol amendment) were enrolled. In phase 2, patients received 400 mg once-daily oral pralsetinib, and could continue treatment until disease progression, intolerance, withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. Phase 2 primary endpoints were overall response rate (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1·1 and assessed by blinded independent central review) and safety. Tumour response was assessed in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC and centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease who had received platinum-based chemotherapy or were treatment-naive because they were ineligible for standard therapy. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03037385, and enrolment of patients with treatment-naive RET fusion-positive NSCLC was ongoing at the time of this interim analysis. FINDINGS: Of 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC enrolled between March 17, 2017, and May 22, 2020 (data cutoff), 92 with previous platinum-based chemotherapy and 29 who were treatment-naive received pralsetinib before July 11, 2019 (efficacy enrolment cutoff); 87 previously treated patients and 27 treatment-naive patients had centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease. Overall responses were recorded in 53 (61%; 95% CI 50-71) of 87 patients with previous platinum-based chemotherapy, including five (6%) patients with a complete response; and 19 (70%; 50-86) of 27 treatment-naive patients, including three (11%) with a complete response. In 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (43 patients [18%]), hypertension (26 [11%]), and anaemia (24 [10%]); there were no treatment-related deaths in this population. INTERPRETATION: Pralsetinib is a new, well-tolerated, promising, once-daily oral treatment option for patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC. FUNDING: Blueprint Medicines.

Pembrolizumab plus Chemotherapy in Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: First-line therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that lacks targetable mutations is platinum-based chemotherapy. Among patients with a tumor proportion score for programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) of 50% or greater, pembrolizumab has replaced cytotoxic chemotherapy as the first-line treatment of choice. The addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy resulted in significantly higher rates of response and longer progression-free survival than chemotherapy alone in a phase 2 trial. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) 616 patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK mutations who had received no previous treatment for metastatic disease to receive pemetrexed and a platinum-based drug plus either 200 mg of pembrolizumab or placebo every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, followed by pembrolizumab or placebo for up to a total of 35 cycles plus pemetrexed maintenance therapy. Crossover to pembrolizumab monotherapy was permitted among the patients in the placebo-combination group who had verified disease progression. The primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival, as assessed by blinded, independent central radiologic review. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 10.5 months, the estimated rate of overall survival at 12 months was 69.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.1 to 73.8) in the pembrolizumab-combination group versus 49.4% (95% CI, 42.1 to 56.2) in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for death, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.64; P<0.001). Improvement in overall survival was seen across all PD-L1 categories that were evaluated. Median progression-free survival was 8.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 9.2) in the pembrolizumab-combination group and 4.9 months (95% CI, 4.7 to 5.5) in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.64; P<0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 67.2% of the patients in the pembrolizumab-combination group and in 65.8% of those in the placebo-combination group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC without EGFR or ALK mutations, the addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy of pemetrexed and a platinum-based drug resulted in significantly longer overall survival and progression-free survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Merck; KEYNOTE-189 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02578680 .).

Bone Metastases, Skeletal-Related Events, and Survival in Patients With Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases and skeletal-related events (SREs) are a frequent cause of morbidity in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). Data are limited on bone metastases and SREs in patients with mNSCLC treated using immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and on the efficacy of bone-modifying agents (BMAs) in this setting. Here we report the incidence, impact on survival, risk factors for bone metastases and SREs, and impact of BMAs in patients with mNSCLC treated with ICIs in a multi-institutional cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with mNSCLC treated with ICIs at 2 tertiary care centers from 2014 through 2017. Overall survival (OS) was compared between patients with and without baseline bone metastases using a log-rank test. A Cox regression model was used to evaluate the association between OS and the presence of bone metastases at ICI initiation, controlling for other confounding factors. RESULTS: We identified a cohort of 330 patients who had received ICIs for metastatic disease. Median patient age was 63 years, most patients were treated in the second line or beyond (n=259; 78%), and nivolumab was the most common ICI (n=211; 64%). Median OS was 10 months (95% CI, 8.4-12.0). In our cohort, 124 patients (38%) had baseline bone metastases, and 43 (13%) developed SREs during or after ICI treatment. Patients with bone metastases had a higher hazard of death after controlling for performance status, histology, line of therapy, and disease burden (hazard ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.19-2.08; P=.001). Use of BMAs was not associated with OS or a decreased risk of SREs. CONCLUSIONS: Presence of bone metastases at baseline was associated with a worse prognosis for patients with mNSCLC treated with ICI after controlling for multiple clinical characteristics. Use of BMAs was not associated with reduced SREs or a difference in survival.

Patient-reported outcomes following pembrolizumab or placebo plus pemetrexed and platinum in patients with previously untreated, metastatic, non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-189): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum led to superior overall survival and progression-free survival, and a higher proportion of patients with a confirmed complete or partial response over placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum in the KEYNOTE-189 study. We aimed to evaluate prespecified exploratory patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients in KEYNOTE-189. METHODS: In the multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 KEYNOTE-189 study done at 126 cancer centres in 16 countries, eligible patients aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer without sensitising EGFR or ALK alterations, measurable disease as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive intravenous pembrolizumab (200 mg) or saline placebo every 3 weeks for up to 2 years (35 cycles); all patients received four cycles of intravenous pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) with carboplatin (5 mg/mL per min) or cisplatin (75 mg/m2; investigator's choice) every 3 weeks for four cycles, followed by pemetrexed maintenance therapy every 3 weeks. Permuted block randomisation (block size six) was done with an interactive voice-response system and stratified by PD-L1 expression, choice of platinum, and smoking status. Patients, investigators, and other study personnel were unaware of treatment assignment. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Lung Cancer 13 (QLQ-LC13) were administered at cycles 1-5, every three cycles thereafter during year 1, and every four cycles during years 2-3. The primary endpoints (overall survival and progression-free survival) have been published previously. Key PRO endpoints were change from baseline to week 12 (during chemotherapy) and week 21 (following chemotherapy) in QLQ-C30 global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL) score, and time to deterioration in cough, chest pain, or dyspnoea. PROs were analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study medication and who completed at least one PRO assessment, and the results are provided with two-sided, nominal p values. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02578680. FINDINGS: Between Feb 26, 2016, and March 6, 2017, 616 patients were enrolled; median follow-up was 10·5 months (range 0·2-20·4) as of data cutoff on Nov 8, 2017. 402 (99%) of 405 patients in the pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum group and 200 (99%) of 202 patients in the placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum-treated group completed at least one PRO assessment. At baseline, 359 (89%) of 402 patients in the pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum group and 180 (90%) of 200 in the placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum group were compliant with QLQ-C30; at week 12, 319 (90%) of 354 and 149 (89%) of 167 patients were compliant, respectively; and at week 21, 249 (76%) of 326 and 91 (64%) of 143 patients were compliant, respectively. From baseline to week 12, GHS/QOL scores were maintained with both pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum (least-squares mean change: 1·0 point [95% CI -1·3 to 3·2] increase) and placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum (-2·6 points [-5·8 to 0·5] decrease; between-group difference: 3·6 points [-0·1 to 7·2]; p=0·053). From baseline to week 21, GHS/QOL scores were better maintained with pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum (least-squares mean change: 1·3 points [95% CI -1·2 to 3·6] increase) than with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum (-4·0 points [-7·7 to -0·3] decrease; between-group difference: 5·3 points [1·1 to 9·5]; p=0·014). Median time to deterioration in cough, chest pain, or dyspnoea was not reached (95% CI 10·2 months to not reached) with pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum, and was 7·0 months (4·8 months to not reached) with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum (hazard ratio 0·81 [95% CI 0·60-1·09], p=0·16). INTERPRETATION: The addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy maintained GHS/QOL, with improved GHS/QOL scores at week 21 in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group compared with the placebo plus chemotherapy group. These data further support use of pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum as first-line therapy for patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.

COPD-dependent effects of genetic variation in key inflammation pathway genes on lung cancer risk.

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified several loci contributing to lung cancer and COPD risk independently; however, inflammation-related pathways likely harbor additional lung cancer risk-associated variants in biologically relevant immune genes that differ dependent on COPD. We selected single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) proximal to 2,069 genes within 48 immune pathways. We modeled the contribution of these variants to lung cancer risk in a discovery sample of 1,932 lung cancer cases and controls stratified by COPD status and validation sample of 953 cases and controls also stratified by COPD. There were 43 validated SNPs in those with COPD and 60 SNPs in those without COPD associated with lung cancer risk. Furthermore, 29 of 43 and 28 of 60 SNPs demonstrated a statistically significant interaction with COPD in the pooled sample. These variants demonstrated tissue-dependent effects on proximal gene expression, enhanced network connectivity and resided together in specific immune pathways. These results reveal that key inflammatory related genes and pathways, not found in prior GWAS, impact lung cancer risk in a COPD-dependent manner. Genetic variation identified in our study supplements prior lung cancer GWAS and serves as a foundation to further interrogate risk relationships in smoking and COPD populations.

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer without tumor PD-L1 expression: A pooled analysis of 3 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes over chemotherapy alone in patients with previously untreated advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. This study pooled data from 3 randomized controlled trials to evaluate outcomes with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC negative for PD-L1 (ie, a tumor proportion score < 1%). METHODS: Individual patient data were pooled from KEYNOTE-021 cohort G (nonsquamous; NCT02039674), KEYNOTE-189 (nonsquamous; NCT02578680 and NCT03950674), and KEYNOTE-407 (squamous; NCT02775435). Treatment comprised pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (pemetrexed and platinum for nonsquamous histology and carboplatin and paclitaxel/nab-paclitaxel for squamous histology) or chemotherapy alone. Responses were assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 by blinded, independent, central review. No α was assigned to this descriptive, exploratory analysis. RESULTS: Four hundred forty-four of the 1328 patients (33.4%) who were enrolled across the 3 trials had PD-L1-negative tumors (256 on pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy [nonsquamous, n = 155; squamous, n = 94; other, n = 7] and 188 on chemotherapy alone [nonsquamous, n = 83; squamous, n = 99; other, n = 6]). The median time from randomization to the data cutoff was 28.0 months (range, 14.7-55.4 months). Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy improved overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50-0.79) and progression-free survival (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83) over chemotherapy. Sixteen patients in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy arm completed 2 years of treatment; the objective response rate was 87.5% (95% CI, 61.7%-98.4%), and the 3-year OS rate was 100%. Adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 99.2% of the patients who received pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and by 98.9% of the patients who received chemotherapy alone, with grade 3 or higher AEs occurring in 71.4% and 72.0%, respectively; immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions were experienced by 29.0% and 12.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated response and survival improvements with manageable safety in comparison with chemotherapy alone in PD-L1-negative advanced/metastatic NSCLC, and it is a standard-of-care first-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression. LAY SUMMARY: Some tumors produce a protein called programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which interacts with the body's immune system and prevents an immune response against cancer. Antibody therapies such as pembrolizumab block interactions between tumor PD-L1 and the immune system and enable an immune response. Used alone, pembrolizumab provides benefit for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors that produce PD-L1. However, when it is combined with chemotherapy, which can stimulate anticancer immune responses, pembrolizumab provides a benefit, regardless of tumor PD-L1 production. This article shows that among patients with NSCLC whose tumors produce no PD-L1, outcomes are better with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in comparison with chemotherapy alone.

Alectinib versus Crizotinib in Untreated ALK-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Alectinib, a highly selective inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), has shown systemic and central nervous system (CNS) efficacy in the treatment of ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated alectinib as compared with crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC, including those with asymptomatic CNS disease. METHODS: In a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 303 patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC to receive either alectinib (600 mg twice daily) or crizotinib (250 mg twice daily). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points were independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival, time to CNS progression, objective response rate, and overall survival. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 17.6 months (crizotinib) and 18.6 months (alectinib), an event of disease progression or death occurred in 62 of 152 patients (41%) in the alectinib group and 102 of 151 patients (68%) in the crizotinib group. The rate of investigator-assessed progression-free survival was significantly higher with alectinib than with crizotinib (12-month event-free survival rate, 68.4% [95% confidence interval (CI), 61.0 to 75.9] with alectinib vs. 48.7% [95% CI, 40.4 to 56.9] with crizotinib; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.34 to 0.65]; P<0.001); the median progression-free survival with alectinib was not reached. The results for independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival were consistent with those for the primary end point. A total of 18 patients (12%) in the alectinib group had an event of CNS progression, as compared with 68 patients (45%) in the crizotinib group (cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.28; P<0.001). A response occurred in 126 patients in the alectinib group (response rate, 82.9%; 95% CI, 76.0 to 88.5) and in 114 patients in the crizotinib group (response rate, 75.5%; 95% CI, 67.8 to 82.1) (P=0.09). Grade 3 to 5 adverse events were less frequent with alectinib (41% vs. 50% with crizotinib). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with crizotinib, alectinib showed superior efficacy and lower toxicity in primary treatment of ALK-positive NSCLC. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; ALEX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02075840 .).

A phase Ib study of GSK3052230, an FGF ligand trap in combination with pemetrexed and cisplatin in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Background Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) have a fundamental role in cancer. Sequestering FGFs with GSK3052230 (FP-1039) blocks their ability to activate FGFRs while avoiding toxicities associated with small molecule inhibitors of FGFR, including hyperphosphatemia and retinal, nail, and skin toxicities. Methods A multicenter, open-label, phase Ib study evaluated weekly GSK3052230 added to pemetrexed/cisplatin in patients with treatment-naive, unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma. Doses were escalated according to a 3 + 3 design, followed by cohort expansion at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Endpoints included safety, overall response rate, progression-free survival, and pharmacokinetics. Results 36 patients were dosed at 10, 15, and 20 mg/kg doses of GSK3052230. Three dose-limiting toxicities were observed at 20 mg/kg and one at 15 mg/kg. The MTD was defined as 15 mg/kg and used for cohort expansion. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were nausea (56%), decreased appetite (36%), infusion reactions (36%), decreased neutrophil counts (36%), and fatigue (33%). The confirmed ORR was 39% (95% CI: 23.1-56.5) (14/36 PRs) and 47% had stable disease (17/36), giving a disease control rate of 86%. At 15 mg/kg GSK3052230 (n = 25), the ORR was 44% (95% CI: 24.4-65.1), and the median PFS was 7.4 months (95% CI: 6.7-13.4). Four patients had disease control for over 1 year, and three were still ongoing. Conclusion At 15 mg/kg weekly, GSK3052230 was well tolerated in combination with pemetrexed/cisplatin and durable responses were observed. Importantly, AEs associated with small molecule inhibitors of FGFR were not observed, as predicted by the unique mechanism of action of this drug.

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

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

Cumulative incidence rates for CNS and non-CNS progression in two phase II studies of alectinib in ALK-positive NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the cumulative incidence rate (CIR) of central nervous system (CNS) and non-CNS progression in alectinib-treated patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to determine the extent to which alectinib may treat or control CNS disease. METHODS: Patients with crizotinib-pretreated locally advanced or metastatic disease received alectinib 600 mg orally twice daily in two phase II trials. All patients underwent baseline imaging and regular centrally reviewed scans. RESULTS: At 24 months, the CIR for CNS progression was lower in patients without vs with baseline CNS metastases (8.0 vs 43.9%). Patients with baseline CNS disease and prior radiotherapy had a higher CIR of CNS progression than radiotherapy-naive patients (50.5 vs 27.4%) and a lower CIR of non-CNS progression (25.8 vs 42.5%). Adverse events leading to withdrawal occurred in 5.9% and 6.7% of patients with and without baseline CNS metastases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates a potential role for alectinib in controlling and preventing CNS metastases.

Atezolizumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (OAK): a phase 3, open-label, multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Atezolizumab is a humanised antiprogrammed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody that inhibits PD-L1 and programmed death-1 (PD-1) and PD-L1 and B7-1 interactions, reinvigorating anticancer immunity. We assessed its efficacy and safety versus docetaxel in previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial (OAK) in 194 academic or community oncology centres in 31 countries. We enrolled patients who had squamous or non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, were 18 years or older, had measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients had received one to two previous cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens (one or more platinum based combination therapies) for stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients with a history of autoimmune disease and those who had received previous treatments with docetaxel, CD137 agonists, anti-CTLA4, or therapies targeting the PD-L1 and PD-1 pathway were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenously receive either atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks by permuted block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive voice or web response system. Coprimary endpoints were overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1-expression population TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 (≥1% PD-L1 on tumour cells or tumour-infiltrating immune cells). The primary efficacy analysis was done in the first 850 of 1225 enrolled patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02008227. FINDINGS: Between March 11, 2014, and April 29, 2015, 1225 patients were recruited. In the primary population, 425 patients were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab and 425 patients were assigned to receive docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly longer with atezolizumab in the ITT and PD-L1-expression populations. In the ITT population, overall survival was improved with atezolizumab compared with docetaxel (median overall survival was 13·8 months [95% CI 11·8-15·7] vs 9·6 months [8·6-11·2]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·62-0·87], p=0·0003). Overall survival in the TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 population was improved with atezolizumab (n=241) compared with docetaxel (n=222; median overall survival was 15·7 months [95% CI 12·6-18·0] with atezolizumab vs 10·3 months [8·8-12·0] with docetaxel; HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·58-0·93]; p=0·0102). Patients in the PD-L1 low or undetectable subgroup (TC0 and IC0) also had improved survival with atezolizumab (median overall survival 12·6 months vs 8·9 months; HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·59-0·96]). Overall survival improvement was similar in patients with squamous (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·54-0·98]; n=112 in the atezolizumab group and n=110 in the docetaxel group) or non-squamous (0·73 [0·60-0·89]; n=313 and n=315) histology. Fewer patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events with atezolizumab (90 [15%] of 609 patients) versus docetaxel (247 [43%] of 578 patients). One treatment-related death from a respiratory tract infection was reported in the docetaxel group. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, OAK is the first randomised phase 3 study to report results of a PD-L1-targeted therapy, with atezolizumab treatment resulting in a clinically relevant improvement of overall survival versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer, regardless of PD-L1 expression or histology, with a favourable safety profile. FUNDING: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech, Inc.

Rociletinib in EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a mutation in the gene encoding epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is sensitive to approved EGFR inhibitors, but resistance develops, mediated by the T790M EGFR mutation in most cases. Rociletinib (CO-1686) is an EGFR inhibitor active in preclinical models of EGFR-mutated NSCLC with or without T790M. METHODS: In this phase 1-2 study, we administered rociletinib to patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC who had disease progression during previous treatment with an existing EGFR inhibitor. In the expansion (phase 2) part of the study, patients with T790M-positive disease received rociletinib at a dose of 500 mg twice daily, 625 mg twice daily, or 750 mg twice daily. Key objectives were assessment of safety, side-effect profile, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of rociletinib. Tumor biopsies to identify T790M were performed during screening. Treatment was administered in continuous 21-day cycles. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were enrolled. The first 57 patients to be enrolled received the free-base form of rociletinib (150 mg once daily to 900 mg twice daily). The remaining patients received the hydrogen bromide salt (HBr) form (500 mg twice daily to 1000 mg twice daily). A maximum tolerated dose (the highest dose associated with a rate of dose-limiting toxic effects of less than 33%) was not identified. The only common dose-limiting adverse event was hyperglycemia. In an efficacy analysis that included patients who received free-base rociletinib at a dose of 900 mg twice daily or the HBr form at any dose, the objective response rate among the 46 patients with T790M-positive disease who could be evaluated was 59% (95% confidence interval [CI], 45 to 73), and the rate among the 17 patients with T790M-negative disease who could be evaluated was 29% (95% CI, 8 to 51). CONCLUSIONS: Rociletinib was active in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC associated with the T790M resistance mutation. (Funded by Clovis Oncology; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01526928.).

Targeted Therapy and Immune Therapy for Small Cell Lung Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: Approximately 15% of the over 220,000 new lung cancers diagnosed each year in the USA are small cell lung cancer (SCLC). The standard of care for SCLC patients has not changed for many years. Therefore, there remains a need to evaluate novel drugs for the management of SCLC patients. In recent years, there is a greater understanding of the molecular alterations that occur in SCLC. There is an expectation that targeting these molecular alterations could provide clinical benefit. Targeting angiogenesis by inhibiting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway has been evaluated in SCLC patients and has shown only limited clinical benefit. Alterations in DNA repair make these tumors susceptible to DNA repair pathway inhibitors and formed the basis for PARP inhibitor trials. Initial trials with PARP inhibitors have shown promising activity in some SCLC patients. Due to increased expression of anti-apoptotic Bcl-2 proteins, drugs targeting these proteins may also provide clinical benefit. Pre-clinical studies have shown that pathways of self-renewal such as the hedgehog and NOTCH pathways may be altered in SCLCs and could be targeted for therapeutic benefit. Initial trials with drugs targeting these pathways, including drugs-targeting DLL3, a NOTCH ligand, suggest the need for appropriate biomarkers to identify SCLC patients most likely to benefit from these strategies. Trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown that these agents may have therapeutic role in SCLC. As is true in other tumor types, these agents benefit only a proportion of patients but the benefit when observed can be sustained. Tumor mutational burden and PD-L1 expression may predict for clinical benefit with these agents. Ongoing trials will define the role of these agents in management of SCLC patients.

The use of alectinib in the first-line treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements as driver genetic alterations occur in approximately 2-4% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Alectinib, a next generation ALK inhibitor, recently demonstrated, in two separate Phase III trials, superior efficacy to crizotinib, the first ALK inhibitor to demonstrate clinical efficacy in ALK-positive NSCLC patients. Alectinib also demonstrated superior efficacy in the CNS. The data from these two Phase III studies suggest that the efficacy of starting with alectinib is superior to the overall clinical efficacy of starting with crizotinib followed by switching to alectinib at the time of disease progression. These results have changed the standard of care to alectinib as front-line therapy for advanced ALK-positive NSCLC patients. Areas covered: this paper reviews the available data on alectinib as front-line therapy in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC patients including its activity against brain metastases. In addition, the paper will review the data with other ALK inhibitors as front-line therapy.