Eosinophils and Lung Cancer: From Bench to Bedside.

Eosinophils are rare, multifunctional granulocytes. Their growth, survival, and tissue migration mainly depend on interleukin (IL)-5 in physiological conditions and on IL-5 and IL-33 in inflammatory conditions. Preclinical evidence supports an immunological role for eosinophils as innate immune cells and as agents of the adaptive immune response. In addition to these data, several reports show a link between the outcomes of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for advanced cancers and blood eosinophilia. In this review, we present, in the context of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the biological properties of eosinophils and their roles in homeostatic and pathological conditions, with a focus on their pro- and anti-tumorigenic effects. We examine the possible explanations for blood eosinophilia during NSCLC treatment with ICI. In particular, we discuss the value of eosinophils as a potential prognostic and predictive biomarker, highlighting the need for stronger clinical data. Finally, we conclude with perspectives on clinical and translational research topics on this subject.

Radiomics and Delta-Radiomics Signatures to Predict Response and Survival in Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

The aim of our study was to determine the potential role of CT-based radiomics in predicting treatment response and survival in patients with advanced NSCLC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. We retrospectively included 188 patients with NSCLC treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors from two independent centers. Radiomics analysis was performed on pre-treatment contrast-enhanced CT. A delta-radiomics analysis was also conducted on a subset of 160 patients who underwent a follow-up contrast-enhanced CT after 2 to 4 treatment cycles. Linear and random forest (RF) models were tested to predict response at 6 months and overall survival. Models based on clinical parameters only and combined clinical and radiomics models were also tested and compared to the radiomics and delta-radiomics models. The RF delta-radiomics model showed the best performance for response prediction with an AUC of 0.8 (95% CI: 0.65-0.95) on the external test dataset. The Cox regression delta-radiomics model was the most accurate at predicting survival with a concordance index of 0.68 (95% CI: 0.56-0.80) (p = 0.02). The baseline CT radiomics signatures did not show any significant results for treatment response prediction or survival. In conclusion, our results demonstrated the ability of a CT-based delta-radiomics signature to identify early on patients with NSCLC who were more likely to benefit from immunotherapy.

Treatment Characteristics and Real-World Progression-Free Survival in Patients With Unresectable Stage III NSCLC Who Received Durvalumab After Chemoradiotherapy: Findings From the PACIFIC-R Study.

INTRODUCTION: The phase 3 PACIFIC trial established consolidation therapy with durvalumab as standard of care for patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC and no disease progression after definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT). The observational PACIFIC-R study assesses the real-world effectiveness of durvalumab in patients from an early access program. Here, we report treatment characteristics and a preplanned analysis of real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS). METHODS: PACIFIC-R (NCT03798535) is an ongoing, international, retrospective study of patients who started durvalumab (intravenously; 10 mg/kg every 2 wk) within an early access program between September 2017 and December 2018. The primary end points are investigator-assessed rwPFS and overall survival (analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method). RESULTS: As of November 30, 2020, the full analysis set comprised 1399 patients from 11 countries (median follow-up duration, 23.5 mo). Patients received durvalumab for a median of 11.0 months. Median rwPFS was 21.7 months (95% confidence interval: 19.1-24.5). RwPFS was numerically longer among patients who received concurrent versus sequential CRT (median, 23.7 versus 19.3 mo) and among patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression greater than or equal to 1% versus less than 1% (22.4 versus 15.6 mo). Overall, 16.5% of the patients had adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation; 9.5% of all patients discontinued because of pneumonitis or interstitial lung disease. CONCLUSIONS: Consolidation durvalumab after definitive CRT was well tolerated and effective in this large, real-world cohort study of patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC. As expected, rwPFS was longer among patients who received concurrent versus sequential CRT and patients with higher programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression. Nevertheless, favorable rwPFS outcomes were observed regardless of these factors.

BMS-986012, an Anti-Fucosyl-GM1 Monoclonal Antibody as Monotherapy or in Combination With Nivolumab in Relapsed/Refractory SCLC: Results From a First-in-Human Phase 1/2 Study.

Introduction: Fucosyl-GM1 is a monosialoganglioside with limited expression in healthy tissues and high expression on SCLC cells. BMS-986012 is a nonfucosylated, first-in-class, fully human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that binds to fucosyl-GM1. Methods: CA001-030 is a phase 1/2, first-in-human study of BMS-986012 as monotherapy or in combination with nivolumab for adults with relapsed or refractory SCLC. Safety is the primary end point. Additional end points include objective response rate, duration of response, progression-free survival, pharmacokinetics, and overall survival. Results: Patients (BMS-986012 monotherapy, n = 77; BMS-986012 + nivolumab, n = 29) were predominantly of male sex (58%), 63 years old (mean), current or past tobacco users (97%), and treated previously with first-line systemic therapy (99%). The most common treatment-related adverse event was pruritus (n = 95 [90%]). Grade 4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 2% (n = 2) of patients. The objective response rate (95% confidence interval [CI]) was higher with BMS-986012 plus nivolumab (38% [20.7%-57.7%]) than with monotherapy (4% [0.8%-11.0%]). Median (95% CI) duration of response with BMS-986012 plus nivolumab was 26.4 (4.4-not reached) months. Progression-free survival (95% CI) at 24 weeks with monotherapy and BMS-986012 plus nivolumab was 12.2% (6.0%-20.7%) and 39.3% (21.7%-56.5%), respectively. The pharmacokinetics profile of monotherapy and BMS-986012 plus nivolumab suggested dose proportionality across the tested dose range. Median overall survival (95% CI) with monotherapy and BMS-986012 plus nivolumab was 5.4 (4.0-7.3) and 18.7 (8.2-37.3) months, respectively. Conclusions: BMS-986012 in combination with nivolumab represents a well-tolerated, potential new therapy for relapsed or refractory SCLC. BMS-986012 is currently being explored in combination with carboplatin, etoposide, and nivolumab as a first-line therapy in extensive-stage SCLC (NCT04702880).

Oncological patients' reactions to COVID-19 pandemic: A single institution prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The spread of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a rapid reorganization in all human and hospital activities, with impact on cancer patients. AIM: An analysis of cancer patients fears, and awareness of COVID-19 has been done in this study. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed cancer patients' reactions to the pandemic and their perception of oncological care reorganization, through a 12-item survey, proposed at the peak of pandemic and 3 months later. Overall, 237 patients were included in the study. During the peak of pandemic 34.6% of patients were more worried about COVID-19 than cancer versus 26.4% in the post-acute phase (p = .013). Although 49.8% of patients in the acute phase and 42.3% in the post-acute phase considered their risk of death if infected ≥50%, and more than 70% of patients thought to be at higher risk of complications, the majority of them did not consider the possibility to stop or delay their treatment. Patients were more interested in following news about COVID-19 than cancer and they complied with all preventive measures in more than 90% of the cases. CONCLUSIONS: Although cancer patients worried about COVID-19 and evaluated the risk of complication or death due to COVID-19 as extremely high, they were still asking for the best oncological treatment.

Veliparib in Combination with Carboplatin and Etoposide in Patients with Treatment-Naïve Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Study.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the efficacy and safety of oral PARP inhibitor veliparib, plus carboplatin and etoposide in patients with treatment-naïve, extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to veliparib [240 mg twice daily (BID) for 14 days] plus chemotherapy followed by veliparib maintenance (400 mg BID; veliparib throughout), veliparib plus chemotherapy followed by placebo (veliparib combination only), or placebo plus chemotherapy followed by placebo (control). Patients received 4-6 cycles of combination therapy, then maintenance until unacceptable toxicity/progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) with veliparib throughout versus control. RESULTS: Overall (N = 181), PFS was improved with veliparib throughout versus control [hazard ratio (HR), 0.67; 80% confidence interval (CI), 0.50-0.88; P = 0.059]; median PFS was 5.8 and 5.6 months, respectively. There was a trend toward improved PFS with veliparib throughout versus control in SLFN11-positive patients (HR, 0.6; 80% CI, 0.36-0.97). Median overall survival (OS) was 10.1 versus 12.4 months in the veliparib throughout and control arms, respectively (HR, 1.43; 80% CI, 1.09-1.88). Grade 3/4 adverse events were experienced by 82%, 88%, and 68% of patients in the veliparib throughout, veliparib combination-only and control arms, most commonly hematologic. CONCLUSIONS: Veliparib plus platinum chemotherapy followed by veliparib maintenance demonstrated improved PFS as first-line treatment for ED-SCLC with an acceptable safety profile, but there was no corresponding benefit in OS. Further investigation is warranted to define the role of biomarkers in this setting.

Asthma and COPD Are Not Risk Factors for ICU Stay and Death in Case of SARS-CoV2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Asthmatics and patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have more severe outcomes with viral infections than people without obstructive disease. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if obstructive diseases are risk factors for intensive care unit (ICU) stay and death due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19). METHODS: We collected data from the electronic medical record from 596 adult patients hospitalized in University Hospital of Liege between March 18 and April 17, 2020, for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection. We classified patients into 3 groups according to the underlying respiratory disease, present before the COVID19 pandemic. RESULTS: Among patients requiring hospitalization for COVID19, asthma and COPD accounted for 9.6% and 7.7%, respectively. The proportions of asthmatics, patients with COPD, and patients without obstructive airway disease hospitalized in the ICU were 17.5%, 19.6%, and 14%, respectively. One-third of patients with COPD died during hospitalization, whereas only 7.0% of asthmatics and 13.6% of patients without airway obstruction died due to SARS-CoV2. The multivariate analysis showed that asthma, COPD, inhaled corticosteroid treatment, and oral corticosteroid treatment were not independent risk factors for ICU admission or death. Male gender (odds ratio [OR]: 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-3.2) and obesity (OR: 8.5; 95% CI: 5.1-14.1) were predictors of ICU admission, whereas male gender (OR 1.9; 95% CI: 1.1-3.2), older age (OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.6-2.3), cardiopathy (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.1-3.1), and immunosuppressive diseases (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 1.5-8.4) were independent predictors of death. CONCLUSION: Asthma and COPD are not risk factors for ICU admission and death related to SARS-CoV2 infection.

Real life safety and effectiveness of nivolumab in older patients with non-small cell lung cancer: Results from the Belgian compassionate use program.

OBJECTIVES: To compare real life effectiveness and safety of nivolumab in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), according to age and Eastern Cooperative Group performance status (ECOG-PS). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients treated with nivolumab for NSCLC within a Belgian compassionate use program from July 2015 until December 2016. Safety and effectiveness were compared between patients aged ≥70 years and < 70 years and between ECOG-PS 0/1 and ≥ 2. RESULTS: A total of 324 patients with NSCLC were included. There was no significant difference between older (≥70) and younger (<70 years) patients with regards to progression free survival (PFS) (4 months (95%CI 2.6;4.8) versus 3.7 months (95%CI 1;7), p = 0.483) and overall survival (OS) (9.3 months (95% CI 5.5;13.1 months) versus 8.4 months (95%CI 6.3; 10.5), p = 0,638). Patients with an ECOG-PS ≥2 had a significant lower median PFS and OS compared to patients with an ECOG-PS 0-1 (2.2 (95%CI 1.4; 2.9) versus 5.6 months (95%CI 4.1; 7.1), p = 0.001 and 3.4 (95%CI 2.3; 4.5) versus 11.1 months (95%CI 8.9; 13.2), p < 0.001 respectively). No significant difference in all grades or grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were observed between the different age groups (p = 0.526 and p = 0.603 respectively). Patients with an ECOG-PS 0/1 had significantly more all grades AEs (p = 0.009) but no difference in grade 3/4 AEs was observed (p = 0.406) compared to ECOG-PS ≥2. CONCLUSION: This real life retrospective study confirms that safety and effectiveness of nivolumab is similar between different age groups, but that effectiveness is driven by performance status.

Granulomatosis With Polyangiitis in a Patient on Programmed Death-1 Inhibitor for Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer.

Objectives: To contribute to a precise and thorough knowledge of immune-related adverse events (irAE) induced by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and to emphasize the importance of this specific form of toxicity in terms of potential predictive value and long-term effects. Materials and Methods: We report the first case of granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) in a patient treated with an anti-Programmed Death protein-1 (PD-1) antibody for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Results: After a single dose of this drug the patient showed severe myositis associated with a high anti-PR3 anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody titer. Discontinuation of the anti-PD-1 and introduction of corticoids led to a remission of the irAE. Regarding tumor a partial response was noted. A year later a neutrophilic, sterile pleural exudate and cutaneous lesions appeared with the pathological findings of neutrophilic vasculitis. Retreatment with corticoids induced a new remission of symptoms. It remains unclear whether GPA was preexisting and clinically silent but revealed by the use of ICI or primarily induced by this treatment. Conclusions: irAE are rare when anti-PD-1 antibodies are used in monotherapy. They present with a distinct clinical picture and temporal course and require specific treatment. Patients with irAE usually have a favorable oncological outcome.

Maintenance therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: ready for clinical practice?

The treatment paradigm for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer has changed in recent years with the importance of histological subtyping for the choice of chemotherapy, and the use of molecular markers to select patients for targeted therapy. Maintenance therapy (MT) is another focus of interest. The potential benefit of MT for the patient is that it prolongs tumor control reached with first-line chemotherapy in order to improve overall survival with little added toxicity. Historical studies have never reached this goal, as the agents used for MT were too poorly tolerated. We review the data of the two types of recent MT studies, 'continuation' and 'switch' or 'consolidation' MT. We comment on how the benefits demonstrated in these studies may change clinical practice and reflect on factors that may identify subgroups of patients who derive the greatest benefit from MT in general, as this will help in a rational use of MT.

Maintenance therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a pilot study on patients' perceptions.

INTRODUCTION: Several randomized trials on maintenance therapy (MT) for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have demonstrated benefit in progression-free survival. More recently, a study with pemetrexed and one with erlotinib also showed significant gains in overall survival (OS). Yet, in this palliative treatment setting, the benefit has to be weighed against the potential burden of treatment, and thus patients' preferences should be taken into account. METHODS: In the absence of data on this topic, we undertook a pilot survey with 10 questions covering the overall patient attitude toward MT, the benefit expected by patients, and the acceptance of side effects or modes of administration. Included patients had stage IV NSCLC and were planned to start first-line platinum-based doublet chemotherapy. The questionnaire was submitted at the start of and after two and four cycles of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Thirty patients were included. Overall, patients had a positive attitude toward MT. At baseline, it was considered worthwhile by 83%, 67%, and 43% of patients for an OS benefit of 6, 3, or 1 month, respectively, with some decrease over time. Effects on symptom control were crucial for about 90% of the patients. There was a slight preference for oral versus intravenous administration. Side effects were accepted by most patients as long as they were mild to moderate. CONCLUSION: Our pilot survey showed that metastatic NSCLC patients in general are in favor of MT. They expect either an OS benefit of at least several months, or better symptom control, in balance with mild-to-moderate side effects.