Criteria for assessing evidence for biomarker-targeted therapies in rare cancers-an extrapolation framework.

Background: Advances in targeted therapy development and tumor sequencing technology are reclassifying cancers into smaller biomarker-defined diseases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often impractical in rare diseases, leading to calls for single-arm studies to be sufficient to inform clinical practice based on a strong biological rationale. However, without RCTs, favorable outcomes are often attributed to therapy but may be due to a more indolent disease course or other biases. When the clinical benefit of targeted therapy in a common cancer is established in RCTs, this benefit may extend to rarer cancers sharing the same biomarker. However, careful consideration of the appropriateness of extending the existing trial evidence beyond specific cancer types is required. A framework for extrapolating evidence for biomarker-targeted therapies to rare cancers is needed to support transparent decision-making. Objectives: To construct a framework outlining the breadth of criteria essential for extrapolating evidence for a biomarker-targeted therapy generated from RCTs in common cancers to different rare cancers sharing the same biomarker. Design: A series of questions articulating essential criteria for extrapolation. Methods: The framework was developed from the core topics for extrapolation identified from a previous scoping review of methodological guidance. Principles for extrapolation outlined in guidance documents from the European Medicines Agency, the US Food and Drug Administration, and Australia's Medical Services Advisory Committee were incorporated. Results: We propose a framework for assessing key assumptions of similarity of the disease and treatment outcomes between the common and rare cancer for five essential components: prognosis of the biomarker-defined cancer, biomarker test analytical validity, biomarker actionability, treatment efficacy, and safety. Knowledge gaps identified can be used to prioritize future studies. Conclusion: This framework will allow systematic assessment, standardize regulatory, reimbursement and clinical decision-making, and facilitate transparent discussions between key stakeholders in drug assessment for rare biomarker-defined cancers.

Poor Concordance Between Cancer Antigen-125 and RECIST Assessment for Progression in Patients With Platinum-Sensitive Relapsed Ovarian Cancer on Maintenance Therapy With a Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor.

PURPOSE: Cancer antigen-125 (CA-125) is recommended by treatment guidelines and widely used to diagnose ovarian cancer recurrence. The value of CA-125 as a surrogate for disease progression (PD) and its concordance with radiologic progression are unclear, particularly for women with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSROC) who have responded to chemotherapy and treated with maintenance poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi). METHODS: In this pooled analysis of four randomized trials of maintenance PARPi or placebo (Study 19, SOLO2, ARIEL3, and NOVA), we extracted data on CA-125 PD as defined by Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup criteria and RECIST v1.1. We evaluated the concordance between CA-125 and RECIST PD and reported on the negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV). RESULTS: Of 1,262 participants (n = 818 PARPi, n = 444 placebo), 403 (32%) had CA-125 PD, and of these, 366 had concordant RECIST PD (PPV, 91% [95% CI, 88 to 93]). However, of 859 (68%) without CA-125 PD, 382 also did not have RECIST PD (NPV, 44% [95% CI, 41 to 48]). Within the treatment arms, PPV remained high (PARPi, 91% [95% CI, 86 to 94]; placebo, 91% [95% CI, 86 to 95]) but NPV was lower on placebo (PARPi, 53% [95% CI, 49 to 57]; placebo, 25% [95% CI, 20 to 31]). Of 477 with RECIST-only PD, most (95%) had a normal CA-125 at the start of maintenance therapy and the majority (n = 304, 64%) had CA-125 that remained within normal range. Solid organ recurrence without peritoneal disease was more common in those with RECIST-only PD than in those with CA-125 and RECIST PD (36% v 24%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: In patients with PSROC treated with maintenance PARPi, almost half with RECIST PD did not have CA-125 PD, challenging current guidelines. Periodic computed tomography imaging should be considered as part of surveillance, particularly in those with a normal CA-125 at the start of maintenance therapy and on treatment.

Framework for the Use of External Controls to Evaluate Treatment Outcomes in Precision Oncology Trials.

Advances in genomics have enabled anticancer therapies to be tailored to target specific genomic alterations. Single-arm trials (SATs), including those incorporated within umbrella, basket, and platform trials, are widely adopted when it is not feasible to conduct randomized controlled trials in rare biomarker-defined subpopulations. External controls (ECs), defined as control arm data derived outside the clinical trial, have gained renewed interest as a strategy to supplement evidence generated from SATs to allow comparative analysis. There are increasing examples demonstrating the application of EC in precision oncology trials. The prospective application of EC in conducting comparative studies is associated with distinct methodological challenges, the specific considerations for EC use in biomarker-defined subpopulations have not been adequately discussed, and a formal framework is yet to be established. In this review, we present a framework for conducting a prospective comparative analysis using EC. Key steps are (1) defining the purpose of using EC to address the study question, (2) determining if the external data are fit for purpose, (3) developing a transparent study protocol and a statistical analysis plan, and (iv) interpreting results and drawing conclusions on the basis of a prespecified hypothesis. We specify the considerations required for the biomarker-defined subpopulations, which include (1) specifying the comparator and biomarker status of the comparator group, (2) defining lines of treatment, (3) assessment of the biomarker testing panels used, and (4) assessment of cohort stratification in tumor-agnostic studies. We further discuss novel clinical trial designs and statistical techniques leveraging EC to propose future directions to advance evidence generation and facilitate drug development in precision oncology.

Characteristics and post-metastasis survival of recurrent metastatic breast cancer over time - An Australian population-based record linkage study, 2001-2016.

AIM: To assess population-level characteristics and post-metastasis survival of people with recurrent metastatic breast cancer (rMBC) during a period when new publicly-subsidised adjuvant and metastatic systemic therapies became available. METHODS: Record linkage study of females in NSW Cancer Registry (NSWCR) diagnosed with non-metastatic breast cancer (BC) in 2001-2002 (C1) and 2006-2007 (C2). We identified first rMBC from NSWCR, administrative hospital records, dispensed medicines and radiotherapy services (2001-2016). We used death registrations to estimate cumulative incidence of BC death. RESULTS: The analysis included 2267 women with rMBC (C1:1210, C2:1057). Compared to C1, C2 had access to adjuvant HER2-targeted therapy and were more likely to have received adjuvant chemotherapy (C1:38%, C2:47%) and aromatase inhibitors (C1:52%, C2:73%, of those dispensed endocrine therapy). Five-year probability of BC death was 65% (95%CI:62-68%) in C1 and 63% (95%CI:60-66%) in C2. Regional disease (T4 or N + ) at initial BC diagnosis (C1:62%, C2:68%), and age ≥ 70 years at first metastasis (C1:27%, C2:31%) were more common in C2 and had poorer prognosis. Five-year probability of BC death was lower in C2 than C1 for treatment-defined HER2-positive BC (C1:72% 95%CI:63-79%; C2:52% 95%CI 45-60%) and those dispensed chemotherapy alone (C1:76% 95%CI:69-82, C2:67% 95%CI:59-74%, p = 0.01), but not treatment-defined hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative BC (C1:60% 95%CI 56-63%, C2:64% 95%CI 60-68%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite less favourable prognostic characteristics in C2, BC-related survival following rMBC was similar between the two cohorts; and improved for women with HER2-positive tumours. These findings support the real-world benefits of newer treatments for rMBC.

Decline in the Incidence of Distant Recurrence of Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Health Record Linkage Study, Australia 2001-2016.

BACKGROUND: We investigated differences in cumulative incidence of first distant recurrence (DR) following non-metastatic breast cancer over a time period when new adjuvant therapies became available in Australia. METHODS: We conducted a health record linkage study of females with localized (T1-3N0) or regional (T4 or N+) breast cancer in the New South Wales Cancer Registry in 2001 to 2002 and 2006 to 2007. We linked cancer registry records with administrative records from hospitals, dispensed medicines, radiotherapy services, and death registrations to estimate the 9-year cumulative incidence of DR and describe use of adjuvant treatment. RESULTS: The study included 13,170 women (2001-2002 n = 6,338, 2006-2007 n = 6,832). The 9-year cumulative incidence of DR was 3.6% [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.3%-4.9%] lower for 2006-2007 diagnoses (15.0%) than 2001-2002 (18.6%). Differences in the annual hazard of DR between cohorts were largest in year two. DR incidence declined for localized and regional disease. Decline was largest for ages <40 years (absolute difference, 14.4%; 95% CI, 8.3%-20.6%), whereas their use of adjuvant chemotherapy (2001-2002 49%, 2006-2007 75%) and HER2-targeted therapy (2001-2002 0%, 2006-2007 16%) increased. DR did not decline for ages ≥70 years (absolute difference, 0.9%; 95% CI, -3.6%-1.8%) who had low use of adjuvant chemotherapy and HER2-targeted therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This whole-of-population study suggests that DR incidence declined over time. Decline was largest for younger ages, coinciding with changes to adjuvant breast cancer therapy. IMPACT: Study findings support the need for trials addressing questions relevant to older people and cancer registry surveillance of DR to inform cancer control programs.

Infant Maternal Perinatal Advanced Care Team: A Pilot Collaboration for Families Facing a Life-Threatening Fetal Diagnosis.

Background: The Infant Maternal Perinatal Advanced Care Team program was launched in 2018 to enhance perinatal palliative care services in Toronto, Canada. Methods: Pilot patients were (1) carrying a fetus with a life-limiting diagnosis and (2) receiving care at the high-risk fetal center. Individualized care included opportunities for establishing goals, labor/delivery planning, grief support, and pediatric palliative care support. Results: A total of 107 patients were included during the two-year clinical pilot program. Of those who continued their pregnancy, 45% had care goals focused on comfort while 55% had goals focused on life prolongation. A significant proportion in both groups experienced a fetal or neonatal death. For babies who received comfort-focused care, one-third were transferred to hospice or home. Conclusions: A comprehensive perinatal palliative care pathway ensures that more families receive options of pre- and postnatal palliative care supports in varied circumstances where there is significant risk of fetal and neonatal mortality.

Pain management in advanced cancer: physical activity as an outcome - accelerometer feasibility study.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer pain is a common distressing symptom. Numerical Pain Scales (NPS) assess pain but lack information about function and quality of life. This feasibility study assesses the use of triaxial accelerometers to measure function as an outcome measure in pain studies in advanced cancer. METHODS: Advanced cancer participants were recruited from two palliative care services, with an average pain score of ≥3 on NPS. ActiGraph wGT3X-BT Accelerometers were worn for 1 week on the wrist. Patients recorded daily pain scores, Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) scores, and their daily opioid use. RESULTS: 24 participants were recruited. A total of 142 days of accelerometer data was collected (5.9 days/participant). The average daily step count was 5723.7. The average acceleration was 14.4 milligravity units/day. An average of 93 min/day total activity across all intensities was recorded. No correlation was seen between acceleration or average daily minutes in activity and total daily oral morphine equivalent, ESAS, 'average pain' score or 'worst pain' scores using spearman's correlation coefficients. Overall, participants were satisfied with the study. CONCLUSIONS: Accelerometers are a feasible method to measure activity as an outcome measure in advanced cancer. Further study is required to assess the impact of pain management strategies on function.

Long term risk of distant metastasis in women with non-metastatic breast cancer and survival after metastasis detection: a population-based linked health records study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the long term risk of distant metastases (DM) for women with initial diagnoses of non-metastatic breast cancer; to estimate breast cancer-specific and overall survival for women with DM. DESIGN: Population-based health record linkage study. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Women diagnosed with localised or regional primary breast cancer recorded in the NSW Cancer Registry, 2001-2002. MAJOR OUTCOME MEASURES: Time from breast cancer diagnosis to first DM, time from first DM to death from breast cancer. SECONDARY OUTCOME: time to death from any cause. RESULTS: 6338 women were diagnosed with non-metastatic breast cancer (localised, 3885; regional, 2453; median age, 59 years [IQR, 49-69 years]). DM were recorded (to 30 September 2016) for 1432 women (23%; median age, 62 years [IQR, 51-73 years]). The 14-year cumulative DM incidence was 22.2% (95% CI, 21.1-23.2%; localised disease: 14.3% [95% CI, 13.2-15.4%]; regional disease: 34.7% [95% CI, 32.8-36.6%]). Annual hazard of DM was highest during the second year after breast cancer diagnosis (localised disease: 2.8%; 95% CI, 2.3-3.3%; regional disease: 9.1%; 95% CI, 7.8-10.3%); from year five it was about 1% for those with localised disease, from year seven about 2% for women with regional disease at diagnosis. Five years after diagnosis, the 5-year conditional probability of DM was 4.4% (95% CI, 3.7-5.1%) for women with localised and 10.4% (95% CI, 9.1-12.0%) for those with regional disease at diagnosis. Median breast cancer-specific survival from first DM record date was 28 months (95% CI, 25-31 months); the annual hazard of breast cancer death after the first DM record declined from 36% (95% CI, 33-40%) during the first year to 14% (95% CI, 11-18%) during the fourth year since detection. CONCLUSIONS: DM risk declines with time from diagnosis of non-metastatic breast cancer, and the annual risk of dying from breast cancer declines with time from initial DM detection. These findings can be used to inform patients at follow-up about changes in risk over time since diagnosis and for planning health services.

Next-generation sequencing, should I use anti-HER2 therapy for HER2-amplified tumors off-label? Illustrating an extrapolation framework.

Background: Next-generation sequencing is used to increase targeted treatment opportunities, particularly for patients who have exhausted standard options. Where randomized controlled trial evidence for a targeted therapy is available for molecular alterations in one tumor type, the dilemma for the clinician is whether 'matching' targeted agents should be recommended off-label for the same molecular alterations detected in other tumor types, for which no trial data are available to guide practice. To judge the likely benefits, it may be possible to extrapolate evidence from cancers where treatment benefits have been established. Methods: We present a framework for assessing the appropriateness of extrapolation using trastuzumab, an anti-HER2 antibody, for HER2-amplified tumors where trastuzumab use would be off-label as an illustrative example. Results: The following should be considered for the tumor type where trastuzumab would be off-label: (a) reliability of the NGS assay for detecting HER2 amplification; (b) criteria for defining HER2 positivity; (c) strength of evidence supporting the actionability of HER2 amplification and trastuzumab; (d) whether better clinical outcomes with trastuzumab are due to a more favorable natural history rather than trastuzumab effect; (e) signals of trastuzumab activity and whether it translates to clinically meaningful benefit; (f) whether the safety profile of trastuzumab differs from established indications; and (g) discussion points for shared decision making (SDM) to facilitate informed consent. Conclusion: We present a systematic approach for appraising evidence to support extrapolating trastuzumab benefits from established indications to off-label applications. Extrapolation criteria and areas of uncertainty to inform SDM are outlined. This framework is potentially generalizable to other tumor-agnostic biomarker-targeted therapy scenarios. It is a practical approach for clinicians to apply in routine practice and should be considered by molecular tumor boards who make off-label recommendations.

Extrapolating evidence for molecularly targeted therapies from common to rare cancers: a scoping review of methodological guidance.

OBJECTIVES: Cancer is increasingly classified according to biomarkers that drive tumour growth and therapies developed to target them. In rare biomarker-defined cancers, randomised controlled trials to adequately assess targeted therapies may be infeasible. Extrapolating existing evidence of targeted therapy from common cancers to rare cancers sharing the same biomarker may reduce evidence requirements for regulatory approval in rare cancers. It is unclear whether guidelines exist for extrapolation. We sought to identify methodological guidance for extrapolating evidence from targeted therapies used for common cancers to rare biomarker-defined cancers. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Websites of health technology assessment agencies, regulatory bodies, research groups, scientific societies and industry. EBM Reviews-Cochrane Methodology Register and Health Technology Assessment, Embase and MEDLINE databases (1946 to 11 May 2022). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Papers proposing a framework or recommendations for extrapolating evidence for rare cancers, small populations and biomarker-defined cancers. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We extracted framework details where available and guidance for components of extrapolation. We used these components to structure and summarise recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 23 papers. One paper provided an extrapolation framework but was not cancer specific. Extrapolation recommendations addressed six distinct components: strategies for grouping cancers as the same biomarker-defined disease; analytical validation requirements of a biomarker test to use across cancer types; strategies to generate control data when a randomised concurrent control arm is infeasible; sources to inform biomarker clinical utility assessment in the absence of prospective clinical evidence; requirements for surrogate endpoints chosen for the rare cancer; and assessing and augmenting safety data in the rare cancer. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of an established framework, our recommendations for components of extrapolation can be used to guide discussions about interpreting evidence to support extrapolation. The review can inform the development of an extrapolation framework for biomarker-targeted therapies in rare cancers.

Adverse events in the placebo arm of maintenance therapy trials in advanced ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance treatment is standard of care for front-line (FL) and platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC) following response to chemotherapy. Adverse events (AEs) on maintenance therapies are common and usually attributable to investigational treatments but could also be unrelated. Randomised controlled trial (RCT) with blinded placebo design is the gold standard for determining the relative differences in efficacy and AEs between treatment arms. We performed a meta-analysis to quantify AE rates in placebo arms of RCTs to determine AEs not due to investigational agents. METHODS: We performed an electronic search to identify eligible RCTs in FL and PSROC settings. Data from placebo arms were extracted and pooled using the inverse variance method to determine the risk of any AE, overall and specific grade 3 or higher (G ≥ 3) AEs, and AE-related treatment delay, reduction and discontinuation. RESULTS: We identified 13 eligible RCTs (FL, N = 8; PSROC, N = 5) with 2224 patients who received placebo (FL, N = 1541; PSROC, N = 683). The majority experienced an AE of any grade (FL, 93.0%; PSROC, 95.2%). Substantial proportions experienced G ≥ 3 AEs (FL, 14.6%; PSROC, 18.2%). In the FL setting, AEs led to treatment delay in 14.4%, dose reduction in 4.1% and discontinuation in 2.6%. Findings were similar for PSROC: 8.4%, 5.5% and 2.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: AEs not due to investigational agents are common in ovarian cancer patients in maintenance therapy RCTs. Potential explanations include the nocebo effect, residual toxicities from previous treatment or underlying disease. Further research is required to identify better approaches to assessing AEs in this population.

Reimagining Perinatal Palliative Care: A Broader Role for Support in the Face of Uncertainty.

Perinatal medicine is confronted by a growing number of complex fetal conditions that can be diagnosed prenatally. The evolution of potentially life-prolonging interventions for the baby before and after birth contributes to prognostic uncertainty. For clinicians who counsel families in these circumstances, determining which ones might benefit from early palliative care referral can be challenging. We assert that all women carrying a fetus diagnosed with a life-threatening condition for which comfort-focused care at birth is one ethically reasonable option ought to be offered palliative care support prenatally, regardless of the chosen plan of care. Early palliative care support can contribute to informed decision making, enhance psychological and grief support, and provide opportunities for care planning that includes ways to respect and honor the life of the fetus or baby, however long it may be.

Does Cannabidiol Have a Benefit as a Supportive Care Drug in Cancer?

OPINION STATEMENT: Cannabinoids have been purported as having a wide range of therapeutic uses although currently, there is minimal evidence to support these claims. Patients with advanced cancer experience many distressing symptoms, with some turning to medicinal cannabis to help alleviate these. Focus has fallen on cannabidiol (CBD) as a potential treatment for a variety of symptoms in advanced cancer due to the lack of psychoactive side effects and the potential molecular mechanisms of action associated with this cannabinoid. Many cannabinoid products are easily available in the community, and more countries are legalizing or allowing over the counter products. Studies show that CBD is generally well tolerated, but there are many potential drug interactions that have not been well studied. Few studies have specifically looked at the role of CBD in treating cancer symptoms, with most focusing on combination cannabinoid products. There are currently many unknowns associated with CBD, including which symptoms it might be best for, appropriate dosing, and route of administration. This is especially important in advanced cancer where patients often have significant organ dysfunction and frailty that could impact on the pharmacology of CBD. A small pilot study has shown promise for a role of CBD in the psychological symptoms associated with advanced cancer. Further research is currently underway to further clarify the role of CBD in this setting and to understand how best it might help our patients. Currently we advocate that CBD be used in supervised clinical trials, so that efficacy and adverse effects can be closely monitored.

Cost-Effectiveness of PET/CT Surveillance Schedules to Detect Distant Recurrence of Resected Stage III Melanoma.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of three surveillance imaging strategies using whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) with computed tomography (CT) (PET/CT) in a follow-up program for adults with resected stage III melanoma. METHODS: An analytic decision model was constructed to estimate the costs and benefits of PET/CT surveillance imaging performed 3-monthly, 6-monthly, or 12-monthly compared with no surveillance imaging. RESULTS: At 5 years, 3-monthly PET/CT surveillance imaging incurred a total cost of AUD 88,387 per patient, versus AUD 77,998 for 6-monthly, AUD 52,560 for 12-monthly imaging, and AUD 51,149 for no surveillance imaging. When compared with no surveillance imaging, 12-monthly PET/CT imaging was associated with a 4% increase in correctly diagnosed and treated distant disease; a 0.5% increase with 6-monthly imaging and 1% increase with 3-monthly imaging. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 12-monthly PET/CT surveillance imaging was AUD 34,362 for each additional distant recurrence correctly diagnosed and treated, compared with no surveillance imaging. For the outcome of cost per diagnostic error avoided, the no surveillance imaging strategy was the least costly and most effective. CONCLUSION: With the ICER for this strategy less than AUD 50,000 per unit of health benefit, the 12-monthly surveillance imaging strategy is considered good value for money.

The Impact of Surveillance Imaging Frequency on the Detection of Distant Disease for Patients with Resected Stage III Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: It is not known whether there is a survival benefit associated with more frequent surveillance imaging in patients with resected American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III melanoma. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate distant disease-free survival (DDFS), melanoma-specific survival (MSS), post distant recurrence MSS (dMSS), and overall survival for patients with resected stage III melanoma undergoing regular computed tomography (CT) or positron emission tomography (PET)/CT surveillance imaging at different intervals. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A closely followed longitudinal cohort of patients with resected stage IIIA-D disease treated at a tertiary referral center underwent 3- to 4-monthly, 6-monthly, or 12-monthly surveillance imaging between 2000 and 2017. Survival outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and log-rank tests assessed the significance of survival differences between imaging frequency groups. RESULTS: Of 473 patients (IIIA, 19%; IIIB, 31%; IIIC, 49%; IIID, 1%) 30% underwent 3- to 4-monthly imaging, 10% underwent 6-monthly imaging, and 60% underwent 12-monthly imaging. After a median follow-up of 6.2 years, distant recurrence was recorded in 252 patients (53%), with 40% detected by surveillance CT or PET/CT, 43% detected clinically, and 17% with another imaging modality. Median DDFS was 5.1 years (95% confidence interval 3.9-6.6). Among 139 IIIC patients who developed distant disease, the median dMSS was 4.4 months shorter in those who underwent 3- to 4-monthly imaging than those who underwent 12-monthly imaging. CONCLUSION: Selecting patients at higher risk of distant recurrence for more frequent surveillance imaging yields a higher proportion of imaging-detected distant recurrences but is not associated with improved survival. A randomized comparison of low versus high frequency imaging is needed.

PD-L1 expression as a prognostic marker in patients treated with chemotherapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

Background: In metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), PD-L1 expression is associated with benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. However, the significance of PD-L1 expression in chemotherapy-treated patients is uncertain. Methods: Using the chemotherapy control arm of first-line randomized trials, a meta-analysis of the association between efficacy outcomes and PD-L1 status was performed, stratified by assay due to inter-assay differences. Results: Across 12 trials and 4378 patients, overall survival (OS) was superior in high PD-L1 versus negative tumors and low versus negative according to 22C3/28-8 assays. When classified by SP142 assay, no significant difference in response or survival was seen between PD-L1 groups. Conclusion: In mNSCLC, high PD-L1-expressing tumors are associated with longer OS and improved objective rate when treated with chemotherapy. Inter-assay variability impacts outcome results.

Biomarkers are naturally occurring cancer traits that can predict certain events. PD-L1 expression is a biomarker used in advanced lung cancer to predict benefit from immunotherapy. However, the association between PD-L1expression and chemotherapy is unclear. The authors analyzed data from 14 large clinical trials and found that PD-L1 expression could also be used to define a type of lung cancer that responds better to chemotherapy.

Pre- and on-treatment lactate dehydrogenase as a prognostic and predictive biomarker in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The survival outcomes of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are variable. This study investigated whether pre- and on-treatment lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) could better prognosticate and select patients for ICI therapy. METHODS: Using data from the POPLAR and OAK trials of atezolizumab versus docetaxel in previously treated advanced NSCLC, the authors assessed the prognostic and predictive value of pretreatment LDH (less than or equal to vs greater than the upper limit of normal). They further examined changes in on-treatment LDH by performing landmark analyses and estimated overall survival (OS) distributions according to the LDH level stratified by the response category (complete response [CR]/partial response [PR] vs stable disease [SD]). They repeated pretreatment analyses in subgroups defined by the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status. RESULTS: This study included 1327 patients with available pretreatment LDH. Elevated pretreatment LDH was associated with an adverse prognosis regardless of treatment (hazard ratio [HR] for atezolizumab OS, 1.49; P = .0001; HR for docetaxel OS, 1.30; P = .004; P for treatment by LDH interaction = .28). Findings for elevated pretreatment LDH were similar for patients with positive PD-L1 expression treated with atezolizumab. Persistently elevated on-treatment LDH was associated with a 1.3- to 2.8-fold increased risk of death at weeks 6, 12, 18, and 24 regardless of treatment. Elevated LDH at 6 weeks was associated with significantly shorter OS regardless of radiological response (HR for CR/PR, 2.10; P = .04; HR for SD, 1.50; P < .01), with similar findings observed at 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: In previously treated advanced NSCLC, elevated pretreatment LDH is an independent adverse prognostic marker. There is no evidence that pretreatment LDH predicts ICI benefit. Persistently elevated on-treatment LDH is associated with worse OS despite radiologic response.

Prognostic nomogram for progression-free survival in patients with BRCA mutations and platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer on maintenance olaparib therapy following response to chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The impact of maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors (PARPi) on progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with BRCA mutations and platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC) varies widely. Individual prognostic factors do not reliably distinguish patients who progress early from those who have durable benefit. We developed and validated a prognostic nomogram to predict PFS in these patients. METHODS: The nomogram was developed using data from a training patient cohort with BRCA mutations and high-grade serous PSROC on the placebo arm of two maintenance therapy trials, Study 19 and SOLO2/ENGOT-ov21. We performed multivariable Cox regression analysis based on pre-treatment characteristics to develop a nomogram that predicts PFS. We assessed the discrimination and validation of the nomogram in independent validation patient cohorts treated with maintenance olaparib. RESULTS: The nomogram includes four PFS predictors: CA-125 at randomisation, platinum-free interval, presence of measurable disease and number of prior lines of platinum therapy. In the training (placebo) cohort (internal validation C-index 0.64), median PFS in the model-predicted good, intermediate and poor-risk groups was: 7.7 (95% CI 5.3-11.3), 5.4 (4.8-5.8) and 2.9 (2.8-4.4) months, respectively. In the validation (olaparib) cohort (C-index 0.71), median PFS in the model-predicted good, intermediate and poor-risk groups was: not reached, 16.6 (13.1-22.4) and 8.3 (7.1-10.8) months, respectively. The nomogram showed good calibration in the validation cohort (calibration plot). CONCLUSIONS: This nomogram can be used to predict PFS and counsel patients with BRCA mutations and PSROC prior to maintenance olaparib and for stratification of patients in trials of maintenance therapies.

Trastuzumab emtansine for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: Outcomes from a whole-of-population Australian cohort.

PURPOSE: We aim to describe the treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) outcomes in patients receiving trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (HER2+MBC) in routine clinical care. METHODS: Retrospective, whole-of-population cohort study of people initiating T-DM1 for HER2+MBC between October 2015 and May 2019 in Australia. We used dispensing claims to estimate time-to-T-DM1 initiation, duration of treatment, and treatments administered prior to and following T-DM1 therapy. We estimated OS from T-DM1 initiation and stratified results based on whether patients received first- or second-line T-DM1 treatment. We benchmarked outcomes to those reported in the pivotal, EMILIA trial. RESULTS: 345 patients initiated T-DM1: 309 as second-line therapy for HER2+MBC and 36 as first-line therapy. 51% of patients had received endocrine therapy and 98% of second-line patients received pertuzumab prior to starting T-DM1. The median age was 57 years (53 in EMILIA); median time-to-T-DM1 initiation from start of HER2-targeted therapy for HER2+MBC was 11.6 months (IQR: 7.9-16.6); median duration of T-DM1 treatment was 6.5 months (3.1-13.5; 7.6 months in EMILIA), and median OS was 19.3 months (7.9-29.5; 29.9 months in EMILIA). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight differences in patient characteristics (older, more previous pertuzumab therapy) and outcomes (shorter OS) from the T-DM1 pivotal trial and provide real-world estimates that can inform patient, clinician and policy, decisions around the use of HER2-targeted therapies in routine clinical care.