Clinical effectiveness and safety of olaparib in BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in a real-world setting: final analysis of LUCY.

PURPOSE: The interim analysis of the phase IIIb LUCY trial demonstrated the clinical effectiveness of olaparib in patients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC), with median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.11 months, which was similar to that in the olaparib arm of the phase III OlympiAD trial (7.03 months). This prespecified analysis provides final overall survival (OS) and safety data. METHODS: The open-label, single-arm LUCY trial of olaparib (300 mg, twice daily) enrolled adults with gBRCAm or somatic BRCA-mutated (sBRCAm), HER2-negative mBC. Patients had previously received a taxane or anthracycline for neoadjuvant/adjuvant or metastatic disease and up to two lines of chemotherapy for mBC. RESULTS: Of 563 patients screened, 256 (gBRCAm, n = 253; sBRCAm, n = 3) were enrolled. In the gBRCAm cohort, median investigator-assessed PFS (primary endpoint) was 8.18 months and median OS was 24.94 months. Olaparib was clinically effective in all prespecified subgroups: hormone receptor status, previous chemotherapy for mBC, previous platinum-based chemotherapy (including by line of therapy), and previous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor use. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were nausea (55.3%) and anemia (39.2%). Few patients (6.3%) discontinued olaparib owing to a TEAE. No deaths associated with AEs occurred during the study treatment or 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSION: The LUCY patient population reflects a real-world population in line with the licensed indication of olaparib in mBC. These findings support the clinical effectiveness and safety of olaparib in patients with gBRCAm, HER2-negative mBC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials registration number: NCT03286842.

Sample-Wise and Gene-Wise Comparisons Confirm a Greater Similarity of RNA and Protein Expression Data at the Level of Molecular Pathways and Suggest an Approach for the Data Quality Check in High-Throughput Expression Databases.

Identification of genes and molecular pathways with congruent profiles in the proteomic and transcriptomic datasets may result in the discovery of promising transcriptomic biomarkers that would be more relevant to phenotypic changes. In this study, we conducted comparative analysis of 943 paired RNA and proteomic profiles obtained for the same samples of seven human cancer types from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and NCI Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis Consortium (CPTAC) [two major open human cancer proteomic and transcriptomic databases] that included 15,112 protein-coding genes and 1611 molecular pathways. Overall, our findings demonstrated statistically significant improvement of the congruence between RNA and proteomic profiles when performing analysis at the level of molecular pathways rather than at the level of individual gene products. Transition to the molecular pathway level of data analysis increased the correlation to 0.19-0.57 (Pearson) and 0.14-057 (Spearman), or 2-3-fold for some cancer types. Evaluating the gain of the correlation upon transition to the data analysis the pathway level can be used to refine the omics data by identifying outliers that can be excluded from the comparison of RNA and proteomic profiles. We suggest using sample- and gene-wise correlations for individual genes and molecular pathways as a measure of quality of RNA/protein paired molecular data. We also provide a database of human genes, molecular pathways, and samples related to the correlation between RNA and protein products to facilitate an exploration of new cancer transcriptomic biomarkers and molecular mechanisms at different levels of human gene expression.

Personalized targeted therapy prescription in colorectal cancer using algorithmic analysis of RNA sequencing data.

BACKGROUND: Overall survival of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) patients remains poor, and gene expression analysis could potentially complement detection of clinically relevant mutations to personalize CRC treatments. METHODS: We performed RNA sequencing of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) cancer tissue samples of 23 CRC patients and interpreted the data obtained using bioinformatic method Oncobox for expression-based rating of targeted therapeutics. Oncobox ranks cancer drugs according to the efficiency score calculated using target genes expression and molecular pathway activation data. The patients had primary and metastatic CRC with metastases in liver, peritoneum, brain, adrenal gland, lymph nodes and ovary. Two patients had mutations in NRAS, seven others had mutated KRAS gene. Patients were treated by aflibercept, bevacizumab, bortezomib, cabozantinib, cetuximab, crizotinib, denosumab, panitumumab and regorafenib as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy, and information on the success of totally 39 lines of therapy was collected. RESULTS: Oncobox drug efficiency score was effective biomarker that could predict treatment outcomes in the experimental cohort (AUC 0.77 for all lines of therapy and 0.91 for the first line after tumor sampling). Separately for bevacizumab, it was effective in the experimental cohort (AUC 0.87) and in 3 independent literature CRC datasets, n = 107 (AUC 0.84-0.94). It also predicted progression-free survival in univariate (Hazard ratio 0.14) and multivariate (Hazard ratio 0.066) analyses. Difference in AUC scores evidences importance of using recent biosamples for the prediction quality. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that RNA sequencing analysis of tumor FFPE materials may be helpful for personalizing prescriptions of targeted therapeutics in CRC.

Chemotherapy with or without avelumab followed by avelumab maintenance versus chemotherapy alone in patients with previously untreated epithelial ovarian cancer (JAVELIN Ovarian 100): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Although most patients with epithelial ovarian cancer respond to frontline platinum-based chemotherapy, around 70% will relapse within 3 years. The phase 3 JAVELIN Ovarian 100 trial compared avelumab (anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody) in combination with chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance, or chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance, versus chemotherapy alone in patients with treatment-naive epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: JAVELIN Ovarian 100 was a global, open-label, three-arm, parallel, randomised, phase 3 trial run at 159 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 25 countries. Eligible women were aged 18 years and older with stage III-IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer (following debulking surgery, or candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy), and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to receive chemotherapy (six cycles; carboplatin dosed at an area under the serum-concentration-time curve of 5 or 6 intravenously every 3 weeks plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 3 weeks or 80 mg/m2 once a week [investigators' choice]) followed by avelumab maintenance (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks; avelumab maintenance group); chemotherapy plus avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks) followed by avelumab maintenance (avelumab combination group); or chemotherapy followed by observation (control group). Randomisation was in permuted blocks of size six and stratified by paclitaxel regimen and resection status. Patients and investigators were masked to assignment to the two chemotherapy groups without avelumab at the time of randomisation until completion of the chemotherapy phase. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review in all randomly assigned patients (analysed by intention to treat). Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02718417. The trial was fully enrolled and terminated at interim analysis due to futility, and efficacy is no longer being assessed. FINDINGS: Between May 19, 2016 and Jan 23, 2018, 998 patients were randomly assigned (avelumab maintenance n=332, avelumab combination n=331, and control n=335). At the planned interim analysis (data cutoff Sept 7, 2018), prespecified futility boundaries were crossed for the progression-free survival analysis, and the trial was stopped as recommended by the independent data monitoring committee and endorsed by the protocol steering committee. Median follow-up for progression-free survival for all patients was 10·8 months (IQR 7·1-14·9); 11·1 months (7·0-15·3) for the avelumab maintenance group, 11·0 months (7·4-14·5) for the avelumab combination group, and 10·2 months (6·7-14·0) for the control group. Median progression-free survival was 16·8 months (95% CI 13·5-not estimable [NE]) with avelumab maintenance, 18·1 months (14·8-NE) with avelumab combination treatment, and NE (18·2 months-NE) with control treatment. The stratified hazard ratio for progression-free survival was 1·43 (95% CI 1·05-1·95; one-sided p=0·99) with the avelumab maintenance regimen and 1·14 (0·83-1·56; one-sided p=0·79) with the avelumab combination regimen, versus control treatment. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were anaemia (69 [21%] patients in the avelumab maintenance group, 63 [19%] in the avelumab combination group, and 53 [16%] in the control group), neutropenia (91 [28%], 99 [30%], and 88 [26%]), and neutrophil count decrease (49 [15%], 45 [14%], and 59 [18%]). Serious adverse events of any grade occurred in 92 (28%) patients in the avelumab maintenance group, 118 (36%) in the avelumab combination group, and 64 (19%) in the control group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in one (<1%) patient in the avelumab maintenance group (due to atrial fibrillation) and one (<1%) patient in the avelumab combination group (due to disease progression). INTERPRETATION: Although no new safety signals were observed, results do not support the use of avelumab in the frontline treatment setting. Alternative treatment regimens are needed to improve outcomes in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. FUNDING: Pfizer and Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

RNA sequencing for research and diagnostics in clinical oncology.

Molecular diagnostics is becoming one of the major drivers of personalized oncology. With hundreds of different approved anticancer drugs and regimens of their administration, selecting the proper treatment for a patient is at least nontrivial task. This is especially sound for the cases of recurrent and metastatic cancers where the standard lines of therapy failed. Recent trials demonstrated that mutation assays have a strong limitation in personalized selection of therapeutics, consequently, most of the drugs cannot be ranked and only a small percentage of patients can benefit from the screening. Other approaches are, therefore, needed to address a problem of finding proper targeted therapies. The analysis of RNA expression (transcriptomic) profiles presents a reasonable solution because transcriptomics stands a few steps closer to tumor phenotype than the genome analysis. Several recent studies pioneered using transcriptomics for practical oncology and showed truly encouraging clinical results. The possibility of directly measuring of expression levels of molecular drugs' targets and profiling activation of the relevant molecular pathways enables personalized prioritizing for all types of molecular-targeted therapies. RNA sequencing is the most robust tool for the high throughput quantitative transcriptomics. Its use, potentials, and limitations for the clinical oncology will be reviewed here along with the technical aspects such as optimal types of biosamples, RNA sequencing profile normalization, quality controls and several levels of data analysis.

Disparity between Inter-Patient Molecular Heterogeneity and Repertoires of Target Drugs Used for Different Types of Cancer in Clinical Oncology.

Inter-patient molecular heterogeneity is the major declared driver of an expanding variety of anticancer drugs and personalizing their prescriptions. Here, we compared interpatient molecular heterogeneities of tumors and repertoires of drugs or their molecular targets currently in use in clinical oncology. We estimated molecular heterogeneity using genomic (whole exome sequencing) and transcriptomic (RNA sequencing) data for 4890 tumors taken from The Cancer Genome Atlas database. For thirteen major cancer types, we compared heterogeneities at the levels of mutations and gene expression with the repertoires of targeted therapeutics and their molecular targets accepted by the current guidelines in oncology. Totally, 85 drugs were investigated, collectively covering 82 individual molecular targets. For the first time, we showed that the repertoires of molecular targets of accepted drugs did not correlate with molecular heterogeneities of different cancer types. On the other hand, we found that the clinical recommendations for the available cancer drugs were strongly congruent with the gene expression but not gene mutation patterns. We detected the best match among the drugs usage recommendations and molecular patterns for the kidney, stomach, bladder, ovarian and endometrial cancers. In contrast, brain tumors, prostate and colorectal cancers showed the lowest match. These findings provide a theoretical basis for reconsidering usage of targeted therapeutics and intensifying drug repurposing efforts.

Phase I/II trial of pimasertib plus gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

The selective MEK1/2 inhibitor pimasertib has shown anti-tumour activity in a pancreatic tumour model. This phase I/II, two-part trial was conducted in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPaCa) (NCT01016483). In the phase I part, oral pimasertib was given once daily discontinuously (5 days on/2 days off treatment) or twice daily continuously (n = 53) combined with weekly gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2 ) in 28-day cycles to identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of pimasertib. In the phase II part, patients were randomised to pimasertib (RP2D) or placebo plus weekly gemcitabine (n = 88) to investigate progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The RP2D was determined to be 60 mg BID. PFS and OS outcomes did not indicate any treatment benefit for pimasertib over placebo in combination with gemcitabine (median PFS 3.7 and 2.8 months, respectively, HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.58-1.42: median OS 7.3 vs. 7.6 months, respectively). KRAS status did not influence PFS or OS. The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events was 91.1% and 85.7% for pimasertib/gemcitabine and placebo/gemcitabine respectively, but there was a higher incidence of ocular events with pimasertib/gemcitabine (28.9% vs. 4.8% for placebo/gemcitabine). In conclusion, no clinical benefit was observed with first-line pimasertib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with mPaCa.

Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in Advanced Squamous-Cell Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced squamous-cell non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have disease progression during or after first-line chemotherapy have limited treatment options. This randomized, open-label, international, phase 3 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune-checkpoint-inhibitor antibody, as compared with docetaxel in this patient population. METHODS: We randomly assigned 272 patients to receive nivolumab, at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks, or docetaxel, at a dose of 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: The median overall survival was 9.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.3 to 13.3) with nivolumab versus 6.0 months (95% CI, 5.1 to 7.3) with docetaxel. The risk of death was 41% lower with nivolumab than with docetaxel (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.79; P<0.001). At 1 year, the overall survival rate was 42% (95% CI, 34 to 50) with nivolumab versus 24% (95% CI, 17 to 31) with docetaxel. The response rate was 20% with nivolumab versus 9% with docetaxel (P=0.008). The median progression-free survival was 3.5 months with nivolumab versus 2.8 months with docetaxel (hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.81; P<0.001). The expression of the PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) was neither prognostic nor predictive of benefit. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported in 7% of the patients in the nivolumab group as compared with 55% of those in the docetaxel group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced, previously treated squamous-cell NSCLC, overall survival, response rate, and progression-free survival were significantly better with nivolumab than with docetaxel, regardless of PD-L1 expression level. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 017 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01642004.).

Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune-checkpoint-inhibitor antibody, disrupts PD-1-mediated signaling and may restore antitumor immunity. METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, international phase 3 study, we assigned patients with nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that had progressed during or after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy to receive nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks or docetaxel at a dose of 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Overall survival was longer with nivolumab than with docetaxel. The median overall survival was 12.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.7 to 15.0) among 292 patients in the nivolumab group and 9.4 months (95% CI, 8.1 to 10.7) among 290 patients in the docetaxel group (hazard ratio for death, 0.73; 96% CI, 0.59 to 0.89; P=0.002). At 1 year, the overall survival rate was 51% (95% CI, 45 to 56) with nivolumab versus 39% (95% CI, 33 to 45) with docetaxel. With additional follow-up, the overall survival rate at 18 months was 39% (95% CI, 34 to 45) with nivolumab versus 23% (95% CI, 19 to 28) with docetaxel. The response rate was 19% with nivolumab versus 12% with docetaxel (P=0.02). Although progression-free survival did not favor nivolumab over docetaxel (median, 2.3 months and 4.2 months, respectively), the rate of progression-free survival at 1 year was higher with nivolumab than with docetaxel (19% and 8%, respectively). Nivolumab was associated with even greater efficacy than docetaxel across all end points in subgroups defined according to prespecified levels of tumor-membrane expression (≥1%, ≥5%, and ≥10%) of the PD-1 ligand. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported in 10% of the patients in the nivolumab group, as compared with 54% of those in the docetaxel group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC that had progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy, overall survival was longer with nivolumab than with docetaxel. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 057 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01673867.).

A systematic review of cytoreductive prostatectomy outcomes and complications in oligometastatic disease.

Objective: To analyze outcomes and complications of cytoreductive prostatectomy (CRP) for oligometastatic prostate cancer (PCa) in order to elucidate its role in this space. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search using three databases (Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science). The primary endpoints were oncologic outcomes. The secondary endpoints were complication rates and functional results. Results: In all studies, overall survival was better or at least comparable variable in the groups with CRP compared to no local treatment. The greatest benefit from CRP in 5-year overall survival in one study was 67.4% for CRP versus 22.5% for no local treatment. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) showed the same trend. Several authors found significant benefits from CSS in the CRP group: from 79% vs. 46% to 100% vs. 61%. CRP was a predictor of better CSS (hazard ratio 0.264, p=0.004). Positive surgical margin rates differed widely from 28.6% to 100.0%. Urinary continence in CRP versus RP for localized PCa was significantly lower (57.4% vs. 90.8%, p<0.0001). Severe incontinence occurred seldom (2.5%-18.6%). Total complication rates after CRP differed widely, from 7.0% to 43.6%. Rates of grades 1 and 2 events prevailed. Patients on ADT alone also showed a considerable number of complications varying from 5.9% to 57.7%. Conclusion: CRP improves medium-term cancer control in patients with oligometastatic PCa. The morbidity and complication rates of this surgery are comparable with other approaches, but postoperative incontinence rate is higher compared with RP for localized disease.

Pan-cancer experimental characteristic of human transcriptional patterns connected with telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) gene expression status.

The TERT gene encodes the reverse transcriptase subunit of telomerase and is normally transcriptionally suppressed in differentiated human cells but reactivated in cancers where its expression is frequently associated with poor survival prognosis. Here we experimentally assessed the RNA sequencing expression patterns associated with TERT transcription in 1039 human cancer samples of 27 tumor types. We observed a bimodal distribution of TERT expression where ∼27% of cancer samples did not express TERT and the rest showed a bell-shaped distribution. Expression of TERT strongly correlated with 1443 human genes including 103 encoding transcriptional factor proteins. Comparison of TERT- positive and negative cancers showed the differential activation of 496 genes and 1975 molecular pathways. Therein, 32/38 (84%) of DNA repair pathways were hyperactivated in TERT+ cancers which was also connected with accelerated replication, transcription, translation, and cell cycle progression. In contrast, the level of 40 positive cell cycle regulator proteins and a set of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition pathways was specific for the TERT- group suggesting different proliferation strategies for both groups of cancer. Our pilot study showed that the TERT+ group had ∼13% of cancers with C228T or C250T mutated TERT promoter. However, the presence of promoter mutations was not associated with greater TERT expression compared with other TERT+ cancers, suggesting parallel mechanisms of its transcriptional activation in cancers. In addition, we detected a decreased expression of L1 retrotransposons in the TERT+ group, and further decreased L1 expression in promoter mutated TERT+ cancers. TERT expression was correlated with 17 genes encoding molecular targets of cancer therapeutics and may relate to differential survival patterns of TERT- positive and negative cancers.

A single-lead ECG based cardiotoxicity detection in patients on polychemotherapy.

Background: Anti-cancer treatment can be fraught with cardiovascular complications, which is the most common cause of death among oncological survivors. Without appropriate cardiomonitoring during anti-cancer treatment, it becomes challenging to detect early signs of cardiovascular complications. In order to achieve higher survival rates, it is necessary to monitor oncological patients outpatiently after anti-cancer treatment administration. In this regard, we aim to evaluate the efficacy of single-lead ECG remote monitoring to detect cardiotoxicity in cancer patients with minimal cardiovascular diseases after the first cycle of polychemotherapy. Materials and methods: The study included patients 162 patients over 18 years old with first diagnosed different types of solid tumors, planed for adjuvant (within 8 weeks after surgery) or neoadjuvant polychemotherapy. All patients were monitored, outpatiently, during 14-21 days (depending on the regimen of polychemotherapy) after polychemotherapy administration using single-lead ECG. Results: QTc > 500 mc prolongation was detected in 8 patients (6.6 %), first-diagnosed arial fibrillation was detected in 11 patients (9 %) in period after chemotherapy administration. Moreover, left ventricular diastolic dysfunction using single-lead ECG after polychemotherapy was detected in 49 (40.1 %) patients with sensitivity 80 %, specificity 95 %, AUC 0.88 (95 % CI, 0.82-0.93). Conclusions: The side effects of cancer treatment may cause life-threatening risks. Early identification of cardiotoxicity plays a vital role in the solution of this problem. Using portable devices to detect early cardiotoxicity is a simple, convenient and affordable screening method, that can be used for promptly observation of patients.

Datopotamab Deruxtecan Versus Docetaxel for Previously Treated Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Randomized, Open-Label Phase III TROPION-Lung01 Study.

PURPOSE: The randomized, open-label, global phase III TROPION-Lung01 study compared the efficacy and safety of datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) versus docetaxel in patients with pretreated advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients received Dato-DXd 6 mg/kg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks. Dual primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Objective response rate, duration of response, and safety were secondary end points. RESULTS: In total, 299 and 305 patients were randomly assigned to receive Dato-DXd or docetaxel, respectively. The median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 4.2 to 5.6) with Dato-DXd and 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 4.2) with docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.91]; P = .004). The median OS was 12.9 months (95% CI, 11.0 to 13.9) and 11.8 months (95% CI, 10.1 to 12.8), respectively (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.14]; P = .530). In the prespecified nonsquamous histology subgroup, the median PFS was 5.5 versus 3.6 months (HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.79]) and the median OS was 14.6 versus 12.3 months (HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.05]). In the squamous histology subgroup, the median PFS was 2.8 versus 3.9 months (HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.95 to 2.08]) and the median OS was 7.6 versus 9.4 months (HR, 1.32 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.92]). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 25.6% and 42.1% of patients, and any-grade adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease/pneumonitis occurred in 8.8% and 4.1% of patients, in the Dato-DXd and docetaxel groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Dato-DXd significantly improved PFS versus docetaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC, driven by patients with nonsquamous histology. OS showed a numerical benefit but did not reach statistical significance. No unexpected safety signals were observed.

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy as first line treatment for advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: RATIONALE-305 randomised, double blind, phase 3 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab added to chemotherapy as first line (primary) treatment for advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma compared with placebo plus chemotherapy. DESIGN: Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, phase 3 study. SETTING: 146 medical centres across Asia, Europe, and North America, between 13 December 2018 and 28 February 2023. PARTICIPANTS: 1657 patients aged ≥18 years with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression status, who had not received systemic anticancer therapy for advanced disease. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly (1:1) assigned to receive either tislelizumab 200 mg or placebo intravenously every three weeks in combination with chemotherapy (investigator's choice of oxaliplatin and capecitabine, or cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil) and stratified by region, PD-L1 expression, presence or absence of peritoneal metastases, and investigator's choice of chemotherapy. Treatment continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was overall survival, both in patients with a PD-L1 tumour area positivity (TAP) score of ≥5% and in all randomised patients. Safety was assessed in all those who received at least one dose of study treatment. RESULTS: Of 1657 patients screened between 13 December 2018 and 9 February 2021, 660 were ineligible due to not meeting the eligibility criteria, withdrawal of consent, adverse events, or other reasons. Overall, 997 were randomly assigned to receive tislelizumab plus chemotherapy (n=501) or placebo plus chemotherapy (n=496). Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy showed statistically significant improvements in overall survival versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with a PD-L1 TAP score of ≥5% (median 17.2 months v 12.6 months; hazard ratio 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.94); P=0.006 (interim analysis)) and in all randomised patients (median 15.0 months v 12.9 months; hazard ratio 0.80 (0.70 to 0.92); P=0.001 (final analysis)). Grade 3 or worse treatment related adverse events were observed in 54% (268/498) of patients in the tislelizumab plus chemotherapy arm versus 50% (246/494) in the placebo plus chemotherapy arm. CONCLUSIONS: Tislelizumab added to chemotherapy as primary treatment for advanced or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma provided superior overall survival with a manageable safety profile versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with a PD-L1 TAP score of ≥5%, and in all randomised patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03777657.

Human Blood Serum Can Diminish EGFR-Targeted Inhibition of Squamous Carcinoma Cell Growth through Reactivation of MAPK and EGFR Pathways.

Regardless of the presence or absence of specific diagnostic mutations, many cancer patients fail to respond to EGFR-targeted therapeutics, and a personalized approach is needed to identify putative (non)responders. We found previously that human peripheral blood and EGF can modulate the activities of EGFR-specific drugs on inhibiting clonogenity in model EGFR-positive A431 squamous carcinoma cells. Here, we report that human serum can dramatically abolish the cell growth rate inhibition by EGFR-specific drugs cetuximab and erlotinib. We show that this phenomenon is linked with derepression of drug-induced G1S cell cycle transition arrest. Furthermore, A431 cell growth inhibition by cetuximab, erlotinib, and EGF correlates with a decreased activity of ERK1/2 proteins. In turn, the EGF- and human serum-mediated rescue of drug-treated A431 cells restores ERK1/2 activity in functional tests. RNA sequencing revealed 1271 and 1566 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in the presence of cetuximab and erlotinib, respectively. Erlotinib- and cetuximab-specific DEGs significantly overlapped. Interestingly, the expression of 100% and 75% of these DEGs restores to the no-drug level when EGF or a mixed human serum sample, respectively, is added along with cetuximab. In the case of erlotinib, EGF and human serum restore the expression of 39% and 83% of DEGs, respectively. We further assessed differential molecular pathway activation levels and propose that EGF/human serum-mediated A431 resistance to EGFR drugs can be largely explained by reactivation of the MAPK signaling cascade.

Tislelizumab Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Previously Treated Advanced NSCLC (RATIONALE-303): A Phase 3, Open-Label, Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The phase 3 RATIONALE-303 trial (NCT03358875) investigated the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab versus docetaxel in pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC. Here, we report the efficacy and safety results and describe the exploratory biomarker analyses. METHODS: A total of 805 patients aged more than or equal to 18 years with locally advanced or metastatic squamous or nonsquamous NSCLC were randomized 2:1 to intravenous tislelizumab 200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Co-primary end points were overall survival (OS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor cell expression greater than or equal to 25% populations. The exploratory biomarker analyses included PD-L1 expression, tumor mutation burden, and gene expression profile. RESULTS: At the prespecified interim analysis (August 10, 2020), the co-primary end point of OS in the ITT population was met, with a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in OS with tislelizumab versus docetaxel (median 17.2 versus 11.9 mo, respectively; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64, p < 0.0001). At the final analysis (July 15, 2021), the other co-primary end point of OS in the PD-L1 tumor cell greater than or equal to 25% population was further met (median 19.3 versus 11.5 mo, respectively; HR = 0.53, p < 0.0001), and OS continued to improve in the ITT population (median 16.9 versus 11.9 mo, respectively, HR = 0.66). Exploratory biomarker analyses revealed the potential association of NOTCH1-4 mutations with improved tislelizumab efficacy for both OS and progression-free survival, whereas tissue tumor mutation burden correlated with progression-free survival benefit, but not OS benefit. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Tislelizumab was found to have a significantly improved and long-term clinical benefit in OS versus docetaxel in pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.

Lazertinib Versus Gefitinib as First-Line Treatment in Patients With EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From LASER301.

PURPOSE: Lazertinib is a potent, CNS-penetrant, third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. This global, phase III study (LASER301) compared lazertinib versus gefitinib in treatment-naïve patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion [ex19del]/L858R) locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were 18 years and older with no previous systemic anticancer therapy. Neurologically stable patients with CNS metastases were allowed. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to lazertinib 240 mg once daily orally or gefitinib 250 mg once daily orally, stratified by mutation status and race. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Overall, 393 patients received double-blind study treatment across 96 sites in 13 countries. Median PFS was significantly longer with lazertinib than with gefitinib (20.6 v 9.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.58; P < .001). The PFS benefit of lazertinib over gefitinib was consistent across all predefined subgroups. The objective response rate was 76% in both groups (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.59). Median duration of response was 19.4 months (95% CI, 16.6 to 24.9) with lazertinib versus 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.9 to 10.9) with gefitinib. Overall survival data were immature at the interim analysis (29% maturity). The 18-month survival rate was 80% with lazertinib and 72% with gefitinib (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; P = .116). Observed safety of both treatments was consistent with their previously reported safety profiles. CONCLUSION: Lazertinib demonstrated significant efficacy improvement compared with gefitinib in the first-line treatment of EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC, with a manageable safety profile.

Pan-cancer antagonistic inhibition pattern of ATM-driven G2/M checkpoint pathway vs other DNA repair pathways.

DNA repair mechanisms keep genome integrity and limit tumor-associated alterations and heterogeneity, but on the other hand they promote tumor survival after radiation and genotoxic chemotherapies. We screened pathway activation levels of 38 DNA repair pathways in nine human cancer types (gliomas, breast, colorectal, lung, thyroid, cervical, kidney, gastric, and pancreatic cancers). We took RNAseq profiles of the experimental 51 normal and 408 tumor samples, and from The Cancer Genome Atlas and Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis Consortium databases - of 500/407 normal and 5752/646 tumor samples, and also 573 normal and 984 tumor proteomic profiles from Proteomic Data Commons portal. For all the samplings we observed a congruent trend that all cancer types showed inhibition of G2/M arrest checkpoint pathway compared to the normal samples, and relatively low activities of p53-mediated pathways. In contrast, other DNA repair pathways were upregulated in most of the cancer types. The G2/M checkpoint pathway was statistically significantly downregulated compared to the other DNA repair pathways, and this inhibition was strongly impacted by antagonistic regulation of (i) promitotic genes CCNB and CDK1, and (ii) GADD45 genes promoting G2/M arrest. At the DNA level, we found that ATM, TP53, and CDKN1A genes accumulated loss of function mutations, and cyclin B complex genes - transforming mutations. These findings suggest importance of activation for most of DNA repair pathways in cancer progression, with remarkable exceptions of G2/M checkpoint and p53-related pathways which are downregulated and neutrally activated, respectively.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, including patients with ECOG performance status 2 and other special populations: CheckMate 817.

BACKGROUND: CheckMate 817, a phase 3B study, evaluated flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, in this research, we report on first-line treatment in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0-1 (cohort A) and special populations (cohort A1: ECOG PS 2; or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases, renal impairment, hepatic impairment, or controlled HIV infection). METHODS: Cohorts A and A1 received nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 3-4 and grade 5 immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs; adverse events (AEs) deemed potentially immune-related, occurring <100 days of last dose, and treated with immune-modulating medication (except endocrine events)) and treatment-related select AEs (treatment-related AEs with potential immunological etiology requiring frequent monitoring/intervention, reported between first dose and 30 days after the last dose) in cohort A; efficacy endpoints were secondary/exploratory. In cohort A1, safety/efficacy assessment was exploratory. RESULTS: The most common grade 3-4 IMAEs were pneumonitis (5.1%), diarrhea/colitis (4.9%), and hepatitis (4.6%) in cohort A (N=391) and diarrhea/colitis (3.5%), hepatitis (3.5%), and rash (3.0%) in cohort A1 (N=198). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related select AEs were hepatic (5.9%), gastrointestinal (4.9%), and pulmonary (4.6%) events in cohort A and gastrointestinal (4.0%), skin (3.5%), and endocrine (3.0%) events in cohort A1. No grade 5 IMAEs or treatment-related select AEs occurred. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 4 (1.0%) and 3 (1.5%) patients in cohorts A and A1, respectively. Three-year overall survival (OS) rates were 33.7% and 20.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab was associated with manageable safety and durable efficacy in cohort A, consistent with data from phase 3 metastatic NSCLC studies. Special populations of cohort A1 including patients with ECOG PS 2 or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases had manageable treatment-related toxicity and clinically meaningful 3-year OS rate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02869789.

Large-scale assessment of pros and cons of autopsy-derived or tumor-matched tissues as the norms for gene expression analysis in cancers.

Normal tissues are essential for studying disease-specific differential gene expression. However, healthy human controls are typically available only in postmortal/autopsy settings. In cancer research, fragments of pathologically normal tissue adjacent to tumor site are frequently used as the controls. However, it is largely underexplored how cancers can systematically influence gene expression of the neighboring tissues. Here we performed a comprehensive pan-cancer comparison of molecular profiles of solid tumor-adjacent and autopsy-derived "healthy" normal tissues. We found a number of systemic molecular differences related to activation of the immune cells, intracellular transport and autophagy, cellular respiration, telomerase activation, p38 signaling, cytoskeleton remodeling, and reorganization of the extracellular matrix. The tumor-adjacent tissues were deficient in apoptotic signaling and negative regulation of cell growth including G2/M cell cycle transition checkpoint. We also detected an extensive rearrangement of the chemical perception network. Molecular targets of 32 and 37 cancer drugs were over- or underexpressed, respectively, in the tumor-adjacent norms. These processes may be driven by molecular events that are correlated between the paired cancer and adjacent normal tissues, that mostly relate to inflammation and regulation of intracellular molecular pathways such as the p38, MAPK, Notch, and IGF1 signaling. However, using a model of macaque postmortal tissues we showed that for the 30 min - 24-hour time frame at 4ºC, an RNA degradation pattern in lung biosamples resulted in an artifact "differential" expression profile for 1140 genes, although no differences could be detected in liver. Thus, such concerns should be addressed in practice.