A cross-sectional study evaluating the exercise discussion with oncologist during cancer consultation: the CONNECT study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence demonstrates that physical exercise confers several psycho-physical benefits on patients with cancer. This study aims to investigate the role of oncologists in exercise promotion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicenter, cross-sectional study was conducted by distributing an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire to patients with cancer. The questionnaire enclosed demographic, health, and exercise variables. The exercise-related questions included in the study used the Godin-Shephard Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire to measure the amount of physical exercise. In addition, the survey gathered information on whether exercise was discussed with patients, and whether oncologists followed the assess, advise, reinforce, and refer (AARR) process regarding exercise. The survey also asked if patients preferred that exercise be discussed during their consultations. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were applied. RESULTS: With a response rate of 75%, a total of 549 patients completed the survey. Regarding the exercise discussion, 38% of patients stated that their oncologist initiated an exercise discussion, 14% started the discussion themselves, and 48% said that the issue was not considered. Overall, 35% of patients reported that the oncologist assessed their exercise level, 22% and 42% received advice or reinforcement to increase their exercise, respectively, and 10% were referred to a dedicated service. Regarding preferences, 72% of patients thought that the oncologists should initiate an exercise discussion, 2% that only patients should start the discussion, and 26% thought that the issue should not be discussed. Similarly, 74% of patients are willing to receive the exercise assessment, 59% and 75% the advice and reinforcement to increase their exercise, and 46% to be referred to an exercise service. CONCLUSIONS: Although exercise promotion rates are low, patients are willing to receive exercise information. Dedicated strategies should be developed to support oncologists in promoting exercise to their patients.

PD-1 receptor outside the main paradigm: tumour-intrinsic role and clinical implications for checkpoint blockade.

Blocking the inhibitory receptor PD-1 on antitumour T lymphocytes is the main rationale underlying the clinical successes of cancer immunotherapies with checkpoint inhibitor (CI) antibodies (Abs). Besides this main paradigm, there is recent evidence of unconventional and "ectopic" signalling pathways of PD-1, found to be expressed not only by lymphocytes but also by peculiar subsets of cancer cells. Several groups reported on the tumour-intrinsic role of PD-1 in multiple settings, including melanoma, hepatocellular, thyroid, lung, pancreatic and colorectal cancer. Its functional activity appears intriguing but is not yet conclusively clarified. The initial studies are, in fact, supporting either a pro-tumourigenic role involved in chemoresistance and disease relapse or, oppositely, tumour-suppressive functions. The implications connected to the therapeutic administration of PD-1 blocking Abs are, of course, potentially relevant, respectively inferring an anti-tumour activity contrasting PD-1+ tumourigenic cells or a pro-tumoural effect by tackling PD-1 tumour suppressive signalling. The progressive exploration and consideration of this new paradigm of tumour-intrinsic PD-1 signalling may improve the interpretation of the observed clinical effects by anti-PD-1 Abs, likely resulting from multiple cumulative activities, and might provide important bases for dedicated clinical studies that take into account such composite roles of PD-1.

Ramucirumab plus erlotinib versus placebo plus erlotinib in previously untreated EGFR-mutated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (RELAY): exploratory analysis of next-generation sequencing results.

BACKGROUND: Ramucirumab plus erlotinib (RAM + ERL) demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) over placebo + ERL (PBO + ERL) in the phase III RELAY study of patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (EGFR+ mNSCLC; NCT02411448). Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was used to identify clinically relevant alterations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and explore their impact on treatment outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with EGFR+ mNSCLC were randomized 1 : 1 to ERL (150 mg/day) plus RAM (10 mg/kg)/PBO every 2 weeks. Liquid biopsies were to be prospectively collected at baseline, cycle 4 (C4), and postdiscontinuation follow-up. EGFR and co-occurring/treatment-emergent (TE) genomic alterations in ctDNA were analyzed using Guardant360 NGS platform. RESULTS: In those with valid baseline samples, detectable activating EGFR alterations in ctDNA (aEGFR+) were associated with shorter PFS [aEGFR+: 12.7 months (n = 255) versus aEGFR-: 22.0 months (n = 131); hazard ratio (HR) = 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42-2.51]. Irrespective of detectable/undetectable baseline aEGFR, RAM + ERL was associated with longer PFS versus PBO + ERL [aEGFR+: median PFS (mPFS) = 15.2 versus 11.1 months, HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.85; aEGFR-: mPFS = 22.1 versus 19.2 months, HR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.49-1.30]. Baseline alterations co-occurring with aEGFR were identified in 69 genes, most commonly TP53 (43%), EGFR (other than aEGFR; 25%), and PIK3CA (10%). PFS was longer in RAM + ERL, irrespective of baseline co-occurring alterations. Clearance of baseline aEGFR by C4 was associated with longer PFS (mPFS = 14.1 versus 7.0 months, HR = 0.481, 95% CI 0.33-0.71). RAM + ERL improved PFS outcomes, irrespective of aEGFR mutation clearance. TE gene alterations were most commonly in EGFR [T790M (29%), other (19%)] and TP53 (16%). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline aEGFR alterations in ctDNA were associated with shorter mPFS. RAM + ERL was associated with improved PFS outcomes, irrespective of detectable/undetectable aEGFR, co-occurring baseline alterations, or aEGFR+ clearance by C4. aEGFR+ clearance by C4 was associated with improved PFS outcomes. Monitoring co-occurring alterations and aEGFR+ clearance may provide insights into mechanisms of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance and the patients who may benefit from intensified treatment schedules.

Consensus clustering methodology to improve molecular stratification of non-small cell lung cancer.

Recent advances in machine learning research, combined with the reduced sequencing costs enabled by modern next-generation sequencing, paved the way to the implementation of precision medicine through routine multi-omics molecular profiling of tumours. Thus, there is an emerging need of reliable models exploiting such data to retrieve clinically useful information. Here, we introduce an original consensus clustering approach, overcoming the intrinsic instability of common clustering methods based on molecular data. This approach is applied to the case of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), integrating data of an ongoing clinical study (PROMOLE) with those made available by The Cancer Genome Atlas, to define a molecular-based stratification of the patients beyond, but still preserving, histological subtyping. The resulting subgroups are biologically characterized by well-defined mutational and gene-expression profiles and are significantly related to disease-free survival (DFS). Interestingly, it was observed that (1) cluster B, characterized by a short DFS, is enriched in KEAP1 and SKP2 mutations, that makes it an ideal candidate for further studies with inhibitors, and (2) over- and under-representation of inflammation and immune systems pathways in squamous-cell carcinomas subgroups could be potentially exploited to stratify patients treated with immunotherapy.

Results of screening in early and advanced thoracic malignancies in the EORTC pan-European SPECTAlung platform.

Access to a comprehensive molecular alteration screening is patchy in Europe and quality of the molecular analysis varies. SPECTAlung was created in 2015 as a pan-European screening platform for patients with thoracic malignancies. Here we report the results of almost 4 years of prospective molecular screening of patients with thoracic malignancies, in terms of quality of the program and molecular alterations identified. Patients with thoracic malignancies at any stage of disease were recruited in SPECTAlung, from June 2015 to May 2019, in 7 different countries. Molecular tumour boards were organised monthly to discuss patients' molecular and clinical profile and possible biomarker-driven treatments, including clinical trial options. FFPE material was collected and analysed for 576 patients with diagnosis of pleural, lung, or thymic malignancies. Ultimately, 539 patients were eligible (93.6%) and 528 patients were assessable (91.7%). The turn-around time for report generation and molecular tumour board was 214 days (median). Targetable molecular alterations were observed in almost 20% of cases, but treatment adaptation was low (3% of patients). SPECTAlung showed the feasibility of a pan-European screening platform. One fifth of the patients had a targetable molecular alteration. Some operational issues were discovered and adapted to improve efficiency.

Final efficacy and safety data, and exploratory molecular profiling from the phase III ALUR study of alectinib versus chemotherapy in crizotinib-pretreated ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: At the primary data cut-off, the ALUR study demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and central nervous system (CNS) objective response rate (ORR) with alectinib versus chemotherapy in pretreated, advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. We report final efficacy and safety data, and exploratory molecular profiling. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who received prior platinum-doublet chemotherapy and crizotinib were randomized 2 : 1 to receive alectinib 600 mg twice daily (n = 79) or chemotherapy (pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 or docetaxel 75 mg/m2, every 3 weeks; n = 40) until progressive disease, death or withdrawal. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary endpoints included ORR, CNS ORR and safety. Plasma samples were collected at baseline, then every 6 weeks until progressive disease; molecular factors detected by next-generation sequencing were correlated with outcomes. RESULTS: Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly longer with alectinib than chemotherapy (median 10.9 versus 1.4 months; hazard ratio 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.33; P < 0.001). ORR was 50.6% with alectinib versus 2.5% with chemotherapy (P < 0.001). In patients with measurable CNS metastases at baseline, CNS ORR was 66.7% with alectinib versus 0% with chemotherapy (P < 0.001). No new safety signals were seen. ALK rearrangement was identified in 69.5% (n = 41/59) of baseline plasma samples. Confirmed partial responses were observed with alectinib in 6/11 patients with a secondary ALK mutation and 4/6 patients with a non-EML4-ALK (where EML4 is echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4) fusion. Detection of mutant TP53 in baseline plasma resulted in numerically shorter PFS with alectinib (hazard ratio 1.88, 95% confidence interval 0.9-3.93). CONCLUSIONS: Final efficacy data from ALUR confirmed the superior PFS, ORR and CNS ORR of alectinib versus chemotherapy in pretreated, advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Alectinib prolonged PFS versus chemotherapy in patients with wild-type or mutant TP53; however, alectinib activity was considerably decreased in patients with mutant TP53.

International Tailored Chemotherapy Adjuvant (ITACA) trial, a phase III multicenter randomized trial comparing adjuvant pharmacogenomic-driven chemotherapy versus standard adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Several strategies have been investigated to improve the 4% survival advantage of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this investigator-initiated study we aimed to evaluate the predictive utility of the messenger RNA (mRNA) expression levels of excision repair cross complementation group 1 (ERCC1) and thymidylate synthase (TS) as assessed in resected tumor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred and seventy-three completely resected stage II-III NSCLC patients were enrolled and randomly assigned in each of the four genomic subgroups to investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy (C, n = 389) or tailored chemotherapy (T, n = 384). All anticancer drugs were administered according to standard doses and schedules. Stratification factors included stage and smoking status. The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Six hundred and ninety patients were included in the primary analysis. At a median follow-up of 45.9 months, 85 (24.6%) and 70 (20.3%) patients died in arms C and T, respectively. Five-year survival for patients in arms C and T was of 65.4% (95% CI (confidence interval): 58.5% to 71.4%) and 72.9% (95% CI: 66.5% to 78.3%), respectively. The estimated hazard ratio (HR) was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.56-1.06, P value: 0.109) for arm T versus arm C. HR for recurrence-free survival was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.69-1.14, P value: 0.341) for arm T versus arm C. Grade 3-5 toxicities were more frequently reported in arm C than in arm T. CONCLUSION: In completely resected stage II-III NSCLC tailoring adjuvant chemotherapy conferred a non-statistically significant trend for OS favoring the T arm. In terms of safety, the T arm was associated with better efficacy/toxicity ratio related to the different therapeutic choices in the experimental arm.

RELAY, ramucirumab plus erlotinib versus placebo plus erlotinib in patients with untreated, EGFR-mutated, metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: Europe/United States subset analysis.

BACKGROUND: In EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC, dual EGFR/VEGFR inhibition compared to EGFR alone increases anti-tumor efficacy. The Phase III RELAY trial demonstrated superior PFS for ramucirumab plus erlotinib (RAM + ERL) over placebo plus erlotinib (PBO + ERL) (HR 0.591 [95% CI 0.461-0.760], p<0.0001). EGFR mutated NSCLC is less prevalent in Western versus Asian patients. This prespecified analysis evaluates efficacy and safety of RAM + ERL in EU and US patients enrolled in RELAY. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to ERL + RAM (10 mg/kg IV) or PBO Q2W. Treatment continued until unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease. Patients were stratified by geographic region (East Asia vs "other" [EU/US and Canada (EU/US)]). Objectives included PFS, ORR, DoR, OS, PFS2, safety and biomarker analysis. RESULTS: EU/US subset included 113/449 (25.9%) patients (58 RAM + ERL, 55 PBO + ERL). RAM + ERL improved PFS (20.6 vs 10.9 months, HR 0.605 [95% CI: 0.362-1.010]). ORR and DCR were similar, but median DoR was longer with RAM + ERL (18.0 vs 10.1 months, HR 0.527 [95% CI: 0.296-0.939]). OS and PFS2 were immature at data cut-off (censoring rates 81.0-81.8% and 67.3-79.3%, respectively). Most commonly reported Grade ≥3 TEAE for RAM + ERL was hypertension (17 [29.8%]) and for PBO + ERL, dermatitis acneiform (5 [9.1%]). CONCLUSION: EU/US subset analysis showed improved efficacy outcomes for RAM + ERL and a safety profile consistent with the overall population. Ramucirumab is a safe and effective addition to standard-of-care EGFR-TKI for EGFR mutation-positive metastatic NSCLC.

Choice of second-line systemic therapy in stage IV small cell lung cancer (SCLC) - A decision-making analysis amongst European lung cancer experts.

OBJECTIVES: Stage IV small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is associated with short survival and progression after first-line systemic therapy frequently occurs within months. Although topotecan is approved for second-line treatment, its efficacy is limited, and treatment heterogeneity exists. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The decision-making patterns for second line treatment of 13 European medical oncologists with expertise in SCLC were analyzed. RESULTS: The two criteria most relevant to decision-making were the performance status and the interval of recurrence since first-line treatment. With an interval of less than 3 months since the end of first-line chemotherapy, 62 % of the experts recommended cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and vincristine (CAV) for fit patients and 54 % recommended topotecan for unfit patients. For an interval of more than 6 months, a clear consensus for a re-challenge with a platinum doublet was achieved (92 %). However, there was no consensus on the second-line therapy with an interval of 3-6 months since the end of first-line therapy. CONCLUSION: Real world practice may differ from recommendations in general guidelines and cannot always be directly derived from trial results as other factor such as habits, patient's preference, convenience or costs have to be factored in.

Treatment of brain metastases in small cell lung cancer: Decision-making amongst a multidisciplinary panel of European experts.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases (BM) are common in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). In recent years, the role of whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) for brain metastases in lung cancer is being reevaluated, especially in the context of new systemic treatments available for SCLC. With this analysis, we investigate decision-making in SCLC patients with BM among European experts in medical oncology and radiation oncology. METHODS: We analyzed decision-making from 13 medical oncologists (selected by IASLC) and 13 radiation oncologists (selected by ESTRO) specialized in SCLC. Management strategies of individual experts were converted into decision trees and analyzed for consensus. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: In asymptomatic patients, chemotherapy alone is the most commonly recommended first line treatment. In asymptomatic patients with limited volume of brain metastases, a higher preference for chemotherapy without WBRT among medical oncologists compared to radiation oncologists was observed. For symptomatic patients, WBRT followed by chemotherapy was recommended most commonly. For limited extent of BM in symptomatic patients, some experts chose stereotactic radiotherapy as an alternative to WBRT. Significant variation in clinical decision-making was observed among European SCLC experts for the first line treatment of patients with SCLC and BM.

ARCTIC: durvalumab with or without tremelimumab as third-line or later treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) experience disease progression after first- and second-line treatment; more treatment options are required for these patients. ARCTIC, a phase III, randomized, open-label study, assessed durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus standard of care (SoC) as ≥ third-line treatment of mNSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ARCTIC comprised two independent sub-studies. Study A: 126 patients with ≥25% of tumor cells (TCs) expressing programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) were randomized (1 : 1) to durvalumab [up to 12 months 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (q2w)] or SoC. Study B: 469 patients with PD-L1 TC <25% were randomized (3 : 2 : 2 : 1) to durvalumab + tremelimumab (12 weeks durvalumab 20 mg/kg + tremelimumab 1 mg/kg q4w then 34 weeks durvalumab 10 mg/kg q2w), SoC, durvalumab (up to 12 months 10 mg/kg q2w), or tremelimumab (24 weeks 10 mg/kg q4w then 24 weeks q12w). Primary end points: overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for durvalumab versus SoC (study A; descriptive only) and durvalumab + tremelimumab versus SoC (study B). RESULTS: Study A: median OS 11.7 (durvalumab) versus 6.8 (SoC) months {hazard ratio (HR) 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.42-0.93]}; median PFS 3.8 (durvalumab) versus 2.2 (SoC) months [HR 0.71 (95% CI, 0.49-1.04)]. Study B: median OS 11.5 (durvalumab + tremelimumab) versus 8.7 (SoC) months [HR 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61-1.05); P = 0.109]. Median PFS of 3.5 months for both groups [HR 0.77 (95% CI, 0.59-1.01); P = 0.056]. Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events: 9.7% (durvalumab) and 44.4% (SoC; study A) and 22.0% (durvalumab + tremelimumab) and 36.4% (SoC; study B). CONCLUSIONS: In heavily pretreated patients with mNSCLC, durvalumab demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in OS and PFS versus SoC (patients with PD-L1 TC ≥25%); numerical improvements in OS and PFS for durvalumab + tremelimumab versus SoC were observed (patients with PD-L1 TC <25%). Safety profiles were consistent with previous studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02352948.

Diagnosis and treatment of early and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: The 2019 AIOM (Italian Association of Medical Oncology) clinical practice guidelines.

The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with early and locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. In the current paper a panel of AIOM experts in the field of thoracic malignancies discussed these topics, analyzing available scientific evidences, with the final aim of providing a summary of clinical recommendations, which may guide physicians in their current practice.

Treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: The 2019 AIOM (Italian Association of Medical Oncology) clinical practice guidelines.

The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the current paper a panel of AIOM experts in the field of thoracic malignancies discussed the available scientific evidences, with the final aim of providing a summary of clinical recommendations, which may guide physicians in their current practice.

Sequential blinded treatment decisions in ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancers in the era of precision medicine.

Next-generation ALK TKIs have become the new standard of care in first-line setting in advanced ALK-positive NSCLC patients. However, sequential strategies at progression are relevant, as may have an impact on patients' outcome. In this commentary we discuss whether genomic-tailored strategies at progression would be more suitable for improving outcome of ALK-positive NSCLC patients.

Real-world outcomes according to treatment strategies in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients: an Italian retrospective study.

PURPOSE: Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement confers sensitivity to ALK inhibitors (ALKis) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although several drugs provided an impressive outcome benefit, the most effective sequential strategy is still unknown. We describe outcomes of real-life patients according to the treatment strategy received. PATIENTS: We retrospectively collected 290 ALK rearranged advanced NSCLC diagnosed between 2011 and 2017 in 23 Italian institutions. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 26 months, PFS for crizotinib and a new generation ALKis were 9.4 [CI 95% 7.9-11.2] and 11.1 months [CI 95% 9.2-13.8], respectively, while TTF were 10.2 [CI 95% 8.5-12.6] and 11.9 months [CI 95% 9.7-17.4], respectively, being consistent across the different settings. The composed outcomes (the sum of PFS or TTF) in patients treated with crizotinib followed by a new generation ALKis were 27.8 months [CI 95% 24.3-33.7] in PFS and 30.4 months [CI 95% 24.7-34.9] in TTF. The median OS from the diagnosis of advanced disease was 39 months [CI 95% 31.8-54.5]. Patients receiving crizotinib followed by a new generation ALKis showed a higher median OS [57 months (CI 95% 42.0-73.8)] compared to those that did not receive crizotinib [38 months (CI 95% 18.6-NR)] and those who performed only crizotinib as target agent [15 months (CI 95% 11.3-34.0)] (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The sequential administration of crizotinib and a new generation ALKis provided a remarkable clinical benefit in this real-life population, being an interesting option to consider in selected patients.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors for patients with advanced lung cancer and oncogenic driver alterations: results from the IMMUNOTARGET registry.

BACKGROUND: Anti-PD1/PD-L1 directed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are widely used to treat patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The activity of ICI across NSCLC harboring oncogenic alterations is poorly characterized. The aim of our study was to address the efficacy of ICI in the context of oncogenic addiction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study for patients receiving ICI monotherapy for advanced NSCLC with at least one oncogenic driver alteration. Anonymized data were evaluated for clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes for ICI therapy: best response (RECIST 1.1), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) from ICI initiation. The primary end point was PFS under ICI. Secondary end points were best response (RECIST 1.1) and OS from ICI initiation. RESULTS: We studied 551 patients treated in 24 centers from 10 countries. The molecular alterations involved KRAS (n = 271), EGFR (n = 125), BRAF (n = 43), MET (n = 36), HER2 (n = 29), ALK (n = 23), RET (n = 16), ROS1 (n = 7), and multiple drivers (n = 1). Median age was 60 years, gender ratio was 1 : 1, never/former/current smokers were 28%/51%/21%, respectively, and the majority of tumors were adenocarcinoma. The objective response rate by driver alteration was: KRAS = 26%, BRAF = 24%, ROS1 = 17%, MET = 16%, EGFR = 12%, HER2 = 7%, RET = 6%, and ALK = 0%. In the entire cohort, median PFS was 2.8 months, OS 13.3 months, and the best response rate 19%. In a subgroup analysis, median PFS (in months) was 2.1 for EGFR, 3.2 for KRAS, 2.5 for ALK, 3.1 for BRAF, 2.5 for HER2, 2.1 for RET, and 3.4 for MET. In certain subgroups, PFS was positively associated with PD-L1 expression (KRAS, EGFR) and with smoking status (BRAF, HER2). CONCLUSIONS: : ICI induced regression in some tumors with actionable driver alterations, but clinical activity was lower compared with the KRAS group and the lack of response in the ALK group was notable. Patients with actionable tumor alterations should receive targeted therapies and chemotherapy before considering immunotherapy as a single agent.