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.).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Sequencing of ALK Inhibitors in ALK+ Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: Major therapeutic advances have occurred over the last several years in the management of advanced ALK+ NSCLC patients. Crizotinib was the first agent approved for the management of ALK+ NSCLC patients after it demonstrated significantly greater clinical benefit compared to chemotherapy. Several next generation ALK inhibitors have demonstrated clinical benefit in patients with crizotinib refractory NSCLC patients including in the CNS. Based on available data, therapy with a next generation ALK inhibitor can be initiated following therapy with crizotinib without any assessment of the molecular mechanisms of resistance. The appropriate therapy for patients with progressive disease following two ALK inhibitors is not well defined. In patients with an ALK-resistant mutation in their tumor, an ALK inhibitor with activity against the mutation would be the most appropriate therapy. In others, chemotherapy and PD-1 directed agents can be considered. Clinical data suggests that ALK+ patients are less likely to benefit from PD-1 directed agents and therefore chemotherapy should be considered prior to these agents for the management of ALK+ NSCLC patients.

Carboplatin and pemetrexed with or without pembrolizumab for advanced, non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomised, phase 2 cohort of the open-label KEYNOTE-021 study.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists to show that adding a third agent to platinum-doublet chemotherapy improves efficacy in the first-line advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) setting. The anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab has shown efficacy as monotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC and has a non-overlapping toxicity profile with chemotherapy. We assessed whether the addition of pembrolizumab to platinum-doublet chemotherapy improves efficacy in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 2 cohort of a multicohort study (KEYNOTE-021), patients were enrolled at 26 medical centres in the USA and Taiwan. Patients with chemotherapy-naive, stage IIIB or IV, non-squamous NSCLC without targetable EGFR or ALK genetic aberrations were randomly assigned (1:1) in blocks of four stratified by PD-L1 tumour proportion score (<1% vs ≥1%) using an interactive voice-response system to 4 cycles of pembrolizumab 200 mg plus carboplatin area under curve 5 mg/mL per min and pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 every 3 weeks followed by pembrolizumab for 24 months and indefinite pemetrexed maintenance therapy or to 4 cycles of carboplatin and pemetrexed alone followed by indefinite pemetrexed maintenance therapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response, defined as the percentage of patients with radiologically confirmed complete or partial response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 assessed by masked, independent central review, in the intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients who were allocated to study treatment. Significance threshold was p<0·025 (one sided). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of the assigned study treatment. This trial, which is closed for enrolment but continuing for follow-up, is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02039674. FINDINGS: Between Nov 25, 2014, and Jan 25, 2016, 123 patients were enrolled; 60 were randomly assigned to the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group and 63 to the chemotherapy alone group. 33 (55%; 95% CI 42-68) of 60 patients in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group achieved an objective response compared with 18 (29%; 18-41) of 63 patients in the chemotherapy alone group (estimated treatment difference 26% [95% CI 9-42%]; p=0·0016). The incidence of grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events was similar between groups (23 [39%] of 59 patients in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group and 16 [26%] of 62 in the chemotherapy alone group). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group were anaemia (seven [12%] of 59) and decreased neutrophil count (three [5%]); an additional six events each occurred in two (3%) for acute kidney injury, decreased lymphocyte count, fatigue, neutropenia, and sepsis, and thrombocytopenia. In the chemotherapy alone group, the most common grade 3 or worse events were anaemia (nine [15%] of 62) and decreased neutrophil count, pancytopenia, and thrombocytopenia (two [3%] each). One (2%) of 59 patients in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group experienced treatment-related death because of sepsis compared with two (3%) of 62 patients in the chemotherapy group: one because of sepsis and one because of pancytopenia. INTERPRETATION: Combination of pembrolizumab, carboplatin, and pemetrexed could be an effective and tolerable first-line treatment option for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC. This finding is being further explored in an ongoing international, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study. FUNDING: Merck & Co.

Whole-exome sequencing reveals genetic variability among lung cancer cases subphenotyped for emphysema.

Lung cancer continues to be a major public health challenge in the United States despite efforts to decrease the prevalence of smoking; outcomes are especially poor for African-American patients compared to other races/ethnicities. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) co-occurs with lung cancer frequently, but not always, suggesting both shared and distinct risk factors for these two diseases. To identify germline genetic variation that distinguishes between lung cancer in the presence and absence of emphysema, we performed whole-exome sequencing on 46 African-American lung cancer cases (23 with and 23 without emphysema frequency matched on age, sex, histology and pack years). Using conditional logistic regression, we found 6305 variants (of 168 150 varying sites) significantly associated with lung cancer subphenotype (P ≤ 0.05). Next, we validated 10 of these variants in an independent set of 612 lung cancer cases (267 with emphysema and 345 without emphysema) from the same population of inference as the sequenced cases. We found one variant that was significantly associated with lung cancer subphenotype in the validation sample. These findings contribute to teasing apart shared genetic factors from independent genetic factors for lung cancer and COPD.

Risk of brain metastases in patients with nonmetastatic lung cancer: Analysis of the Metropolitan Detroit Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases (BM) remain an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with lung cancer. The current study evaluated population-based incidence and outcomes of BM in patients with nonmetastatic lung cancer. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic first primary lung cancer between 1973 and 2011 in the Metropolitan Detroit Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry were used for the current analysis. Age-adjusted odds ratios of developing BM based on various demographic characteristics and histology were calculated with 95% confidence intervals. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios and log-rank tests of Kaplan-Meier survival curves were calculated to evaluate survival differences for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC). RESULTS: The incidence of BM in patients with nonmetastatic NSCLC and SCLC was 9% and 18%, respectively. There was variation in the incidence of BM according to NCSLC histology. The incidence of BM was higher in patients aged <60 years for both NSCLC and SCLC, but there were no differences noted by race for either histological group. Female patients with NSCLC were more likely to have BM than male patients. There was variation in the proportion of BM in both patients with NSCLC and SCLC over the three 13-year periods of diagnosis. The risk of death (hazard ratio) was found to be significantly higher for patients with NSCLC with BM, but was not significantly higher in patients with SCLC with BM. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of BM in patients with nonmetastatic lung cancer varies according to histology, age, and sex. BM are associated with worse survival for patients with NSCLC but not those with SCLC. Cancer 2016;122:1921-7. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Predictive and Prognostic Biomarkers in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Therapy of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients has evolved over the past few years with the incorporation of targeted therapy and immune therapy. These changes have increased the importance of prognostic and predictive biomarkers to enable practicing physicians in making the most appropriate treatment decisions for NSCLC patients. A variety of prognostic factors based on clinical and pathologic features determine the overall outcome of the patient and these factors do influence decisions regarding initiation of therapy. The most important prognostic factors remain stage of the disease at diagnosis and performance status. For years, the only approved systemic therapy for NSCLC patients was chemotherapy. Despite attempts at defining factors that influence efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents, pemetrexed is the only chemotherapy drug that has differential activity based on a specific factor. In recent years, there is increasing focus on defining the molecular alterations critical to the oncogenic phenotype of NSCLC and targeting these alterations for therapeutic benefit. In addition, there is increasing use of immune-modulating drugs, specifically anti-PD-1 drugs, in advanced NSCLC patients. Several studies have shown that the probability of clinical benefit from these agents is greater in patients with NSCLCs that express PD-L1. The totality of these data suggests that determination of predictive markers prior to initiation of therapy is critical.

Personalized Therapy of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).

Lung cancer remains the most common cause of cancer related deaths in both men and women in the United States and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for over 85 % of all lung cancers. Survival of these patients has not significantly altered in over 30 years. This chapter initially discusses the clinical presentation of lung cancer patients. Most patients diagnosed with lung cancer due to symptoms have advanced stage cancer. Once diagnosed, lung cancer patients need imaging studies to assess the stage of the disease before decisions regarding therapy are finalized. The most important prognostic factors are stage of the disease and performance status and these factors also determine therapy. The chapter subsequently discusses management of each stage of the disease and the impact of several pathologic, clinical factors in personalizing therapy for each individual patient. Transition from chemotherapy for every patient to a more personalized approach based on histology and molecular markers has occurred in the management of advanced stage NSCLC. It is expected that such a personalized approach will extend to all stages of NSCLC and will likely improve the outcomes of all NSCLC patients.

Afatinib versus erlotinib as second-line treatment of patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the lung (LUX-Lung 8): an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a major unmet need for effective treatments in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. LUX-Lung 8 compared afatinib (an irreversible ErbB family blocker) with erlotinib (a reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor), as second-line treatment for patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. METHODS: We did this open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial at 183 cancer centres in 23 countries worldwide. We enrolled adults with stage IIIB or IV squamous cell carcinoma of the lung who had progressed after at least four cycles of platinum-based-chemotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or erlotinib (150 mg per day) until disease progression. The randomisation was done centrally with an interactive voice or web-based response system and stratified by ethnic origin (eastern Asian vs non-eastern Asian). Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by independent central review (intention-to-treat population). The key secondary endpoint was overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01523587. FINDINGS: 795 eligible patients were randomly assigned (398 to afatinib, 397 to erlotinib). Median follow-up at the time of the primary analysis of progression-free survival was 6·7 months (IQR 3·1-10·2), at which point enrolment was not complete. Progression free-survival at the primary analysis was significantly longer with afatinib than with erlotinib (median 2·4 months [95% CI 1·9-2·9] vs 1·9 months [1·9-2·2]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-1·00], p=0·0427). At the time of the primary analysis of overall survival (median follow-up 18·4 months [IQR 13·8-22·4]), overall survival was significantly greater in the afatinib group than in the erloinib group (median 7·9 months [95% CI 7·2-8·7] vs 6·8 months [5·9-7·8]; HR 0·81 [95% CI 0·69-0·95], p=0·0077), as were progression-free survival (median 2·6 months [95% CI 2·0-2·9] vs 1·9 months [1·9-2·1]; HR 0·81 [95% CI 0·69-0·96], p=0·0103) and disease control (201 [51%] of 398 patients vs 157 [40%] of 397; p=0·0020). The proportion of patients with an objective response did not differ significantly between groups (22 [6%] vs 11 [3%]; p=0·0551). Tumour shrinkage occurred in 103 (26%) of 398 patients versus 90 (23%) of 397 patients. Adverse event profiles were similar in each group: 224 (57%) of 392 patients in the afatinib group versus 227 (57%) of 395 in the erlotinib group had grade 3 or higher adverse events. We recorded higher incidences of treatment-related grade 3 diarrhoea with afatinib (39 [10%] vs nine [2%]), of grade 3 stomatitis with afatinib (16 [4%] vs none), and of grade 3 rash or acne with erlotinib (23 [6%] vs 41 [10%]). INTERPRETATION: The significant improvements in progression-free survival and overall survival with afatinib compared with erlotinib, along with a manageable safety profile and the convenience of oral administration suggest that afatinib could be an additional option for the treatment of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim.

Safety and activity of alectinib against systemic disease and brain metastases in patients with crizotinib-resistant ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (AF-002JG): results from the dose-finding portion of a phase 1/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and ALK rearrangements generally have a progression-free survival of 8-11 months while on treatment with the ALK inhibitor crizotinib. However, resistance inevitably develops, with the brain a common site of progression. More potent ALK inhibitors with consistently demonstrable CNS activity and good tolerability are needed urgently. Alectinib is a novel, highly selective, and potent ALK inhibitor that has shown clinical activity in patients with crizotinib-naive ALK-rearranged NSCLC. We did a phase 1/2 study of alectinib to establish the recommended phase 2 dose of the drug and examine its activity in patients resistant or intolerant to crizotinib. METHODS: We enrolled patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC who progressed on or were intolerant to crizotinib. We administered various oral doses of alectinib (300-900 mg twice a day) during the dose-escalation portion of the study (phase 1), to ascertain the recommended dose for phase 2. We used Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria (version 1.1) to investigate the activity of alectinib in all patients with a baseline scan and at least one post-treatment scan (CT or MRI), with central radiological review of individuals with brain metastases. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of alectinib. Here, we present data for the phase 1 portion of the study, the primary objective of which was to establish the recommended phase 2 dose; phase 2 is ongoing. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01588028. FINDINGS: 47 patients were enrolled. Alectinib was well tolerated, with the most common adverse events being fatigue (14 [30%]; all grade 1-2), myalgia (eight [17%]; all grade 1-2), and peripheral oedema (seven [15%] grade 1-2, one [2%] grade 3). Dose-limiting toxic effects were recorded in two patients in the cohort receiving alectinib 900 mg twice a day; one individual had grade 3 headache and the other had grade 3 neutropenia. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were increased levels of γ-glutamyl transpeptidase (two [4%]), a reduction in the number of neutrophils (two [4%]), and hypophosphataemia (two [4%]). Three patients reported four grade 4 serious adverse events that were deemed unrelated to alectinib: acute renal failure; pleural effusion and pericardial effusion; and brain metastasis. At data cut-off (median follow-up 126 days [IQR 84-217]), 44 patients could be assessed for activity. Investigator-assessed objective responses were noted in 24 (55%) patients, with a confirmed complete response in one (2%), a confirmed partial response in 14 (32%), and an unconfirmed partial response in nine (20%). 16 (36%) patients had stable disease; the remaining four (9%) had progressive disease. Of 21 patients with CNS metastases at baseline, 11 (52%) had an objective response; six (29%) had a complete response (three unconfirmed) and five (24%) had a partial response (one unconfirmed); eight (38%) patients had stable disease and the remaining two (10%) had progressive disease. Pharmacokinetic data indicated that mean exposure (AUC0-10) after multiple doses of alectinib (300-600 mg twice a day) was dose-dependent. INTERPRETATION: Alectinib was well tolerated, with promising antitumour activity in patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC resistant to crizotinib, including those with CNS metastases. On the basis of activity, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic data, we chose alectinib 600 mg twice a day as the recommended dose for phase 2. FUNDING: Chugai Pharmaceuticals, F Hoffmann La-Roche.