Safety and clinical activity of atezolizumab plus erlotinib in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Acquired resistance limits long-term epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) efficacy in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in whom anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) efficacy is also limited. We hypothesized that combining atezolizumab with erlotinib could enhance antitumor immunity and extend efficacy in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label phase Ib trial was conducted in adults aged ≥18 years who had advanced, unresectable NSCLC. Stage 1 (safety evaluation) enrolled EGFR TKI-naive patients regardless of EGFR status. Stage 2 (expansion) enrolled patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC treated with ≤1 prior non-EGFR TKI therapy. Patients received 150 mg erlotinib orally once daily. After a 7-day erlotinib run-in, atezolizumab 1200 mg was administered intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was the safety and tolerability of the combination in all patients; secondary endpoints included antitumor activity per RECIST 1.1 in stage 2 patients. RESULTS: At the data cut-off on 7 May 2020, 28 patients (8 in stage 1, 20 in stage 2) were assessable for safety. No dose-limiting toxicities or grade 4 or 5 treatment-related adverse events occurred. Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 46% of patients; the most common were increased alanine aminotransferase, diarrhea, pyrexia, and rash (each in 7% of patients). Serious adverse events occurred in 50% of patients. Pneumonitis (grade 1) was reported in a single patient (4%). The objective response rate was 75% [95% confidence interval (CI) 50.9% to 91.3%]), median response duration was 18.9 months (95% CI 9.5-40.5 months), median progression-free survival was 15.4 months (95% CI 8.4-39.0 months), and median overall survival was not estimable (NE) (95% CI 34.6-NE). CONCLUSIONS: Atezolizumab combined with erlotinib demonstrated a tolerable safety profile and encouraging, durable clinical activity in patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC.

COVID-19 in patients with lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with lung cancers may have disproportionately severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. Understanding the patient-specific and cancer-specific features that impact the severity of COVID-19 may inform optimal cancer care during this pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined consecutive patients with lung cancer and confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 (n = 102) at a single center from 12 March 2020 to 6 May 2020. Thresholds of severity were defined a priori as hospitalization, intensive care unit/intubation/do not intubate ([ICU/intubation/DNI] a composite metric of severe disease), or death. Recovery was defined as >14 days from COVID-19 test and >3 days since symptom resolution. Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) alleles were inferred from MSK-IMPACT (n = 46) and compared with controls with lung cancer and no known non-COVID-19 (n = 5166). RESULTS: COVID-19 was severe in patients with lung cancer (62% hospitalized, 25% died). Although severe, COVID-19 accounted for a minority of overall lung cancer deaths during the pandemic (11% overall). Determinants of COVID-19 severity were largely patient-specific features, including smoking status and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [odds ratio for severe COVID-19 2.9, 95% confidence interval 1.07-9.44 comparing the median (23.5 pack-years) to never-smoker and 3.87, 95% confidence interval 1.35-9.68, respectively]. Cancer-specific features, including prior thoracic surgery/radiation and recent systemic therapies did not impact severity. Human leukocyte antigen supertypes were generally similar in mild or severe cases of COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19 controls. Most patients recovered from COVID-19, including 25% patients initially requiring intubation. Among hospitalized patients, hydroxychloroquine did not improve COVID-19 outcomes. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 is associated with high burden of severity in patients with lung cancer. Patient-specific features, rather than cancer-specific features or treatments, are the greatest determinants of severity.

Clinical and molecular correlates of PD-L1 expression in patients with lung adenocarcinomas.

BACKGROUND: Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression is the only FDA-approved biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with lung adenocarcinoma, but sensitivity is modest. Understanding the impact of molecular phenotype, clinical characteristics, and tumor features on PD-L1 expression is largely unknown and may improve prediction of response to ICI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated patients with lung adenocarcinoma for whom PD-L1 testing and targeted next-generation sequencing (using MSK-IMPACT) was performed on the same tissue sample. Clinical and molecular features were compared across PD-L1 subgroups to examine how molecular phenotype associated with tumor PD-L1 expression. In patients treated with anti-PD-(L)1 blockade, we assessed how these interactions impacted efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 1586 patients with lung adenocarcinoma had paired PD-L1 testing and targeted next-generation sequencing. PD-L1 negativity was more common in primary compared to metastatic samples (P < 0.001). The distribution of PD-L1 expression (lymph nodes enriched for PD-L1 high; bones predominantly PD-L1 negative) and predictiveness of PD-L1 expression on ICI response varied by organ. Mutations in KRAS, TP53, and MET significantly associated with PD-L1 high expression (each P < 0.001, Q < 0.001) and EGFR and STK11 mutations associated with PD-L1 negativity (P < 0.001, Q = 0.01; P = 0.001, Q < 0.001, respectively). WNT pathway alterations also associated with PD-L1 negativity (P = 0.005). EGFR and STK11 mutants abrogated the predictive value of PD-L1 expression on ICI response. CONCLUSION: PD-L1 expression and association with ICI response vary across tissue sample sites. Specific molecular features are associated with differential expression of PD-L1 and may impact the predictive capacity of PD-L1 for response to ICIs.

EGFR mutation subtypes and response to immune checkpoint blockade treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although EGFR mutant tumors exhibit low response rates to immune checkpoint blockade overall, some EGFR mutant tumors do respond to these therapies; however, there is a lack of understanding of the characteristics of EGFR mutant lung tumors responsive to immune checkpoint blockade. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed de-identified clinical and molecular data on 171 cases of EGFR mutant lung tumors treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors from the Yale Cancer Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, and Dana Farber Cancer Institute. A separate cohort of 383 EGFR mutant lung cancer cases with sequencing data available from the Yale Cancer Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and The Cancer Genome Atlas was compiled to assess the relationship between tumor mutation burden and specific EGFR alterations. RESULTS: Compared with 212 EGFR wild-type lung cancers, outcomes with programmed cell death 1 or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-(L)1) blockade were worse in patients with lung tumors harboring alterations in exon 19 of EGFR (EGFRΔ19) but similar for EGFRL858R lung tumors. EGFRT790M status and PD-L1 expression did not impact response or survival outcomes to immune checkpoint blockade. PD-L1 expression was similar across EGFR alleles. Lung tumors with EGFRΔ19 alterations harbored a lower tumor mutation burden compared with EGFRL858R lung tumors despite similar smoking history. CONCLUSIONS: EGFR mutant tumors have generally low response to immune checkpoint inhibitors, but outcomes vary by allele. Understanding the heterogeneity of EGFR mutant tumors may be informative for establishing the benefits and uses of PD-(L)1 therapies for patients with this disease.

Crizotinib in ROS1-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): updated results, including overall survival, from PROFILE 1001.

BACKGROUND: In the ongoing phase I PROFILE 1001 study, crizotinib showed antitumor activity in patients with ROS1-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we present updated antitumor activity, overall survival (OS) and safety data (additional 46.2 months follow-up) for patients with ROS1-rearranged advanced NSCLC from PROFILE 1001. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ROS1 status was determined by FISH or reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. All patients received crizotinib at a starting dose of 250 mg twice daily. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients received crizotinib, with a median duration of treatment of 22.4 months. At data cut-off, treatment was ongoing in 12 patients (23%). The objective response rate (ORR) was 72% [95% confidence interval (CI), 58% to 83%], including six confirmed complete responses and 32 confirmed partial responses; 10 patients had stable disease. Responses were durable (median duration of response 24.7 months; 95% CI, 15.2-45.3). ORRs were consistent across different patient subgroups. Median progression-free survival was 19.3 months (95% CI, 15.2-39.1). A total of 26 deaths (49%) occurred (median follow-up period of 62.6 months), and of the remaining 27 patients (51%), 14 (26%) were in follow-up at data cut-off. Median OS was 51.4 months (95% CI, 29.3 to not reached) and survival probabilities at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months were 79%, 67%, 53%, and 51%, respectively. No correlation was observed between OS and specific ROS1 fusion partner. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were mainly grade 1 or 2, per CTCAE v3.0. There were no grade ≥4 TRAEs and no TRAEs associated with permanent discontinuation. No new safety signals were reported with long-term crizotinib treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These findings serve as a new benchmark for OS in ROS1-rearranged advanced NSCLC, and continue to show the clinically meaningful benefit and safety of crizotinib in this molecular subgroup. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00585195.

Severe immune-related adverse events are common with sequential PD-(L)1 blockade and osimertinib.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent programmed death-ligand-1 (PD-(L)1) plus osimertinib is associated with severe immune related adverse events (irAE) in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Now that PD-(L)1 inhibitors are routinely used as adjuvant and first-line treatments, sequential PD-(L)1 inhibition followed by osimertinib use may become more frequent and have unforeseen serious toxicity. METHODS: We identified patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC who were treated with PD-(L)1 blockade and EGFR- tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), irrespective of drug or sequence of administration (total n = 126). Patient records were reviewed to identify severe (NCI-CTCAE v5.0 grades 3-4) toxicity. RESULTS: Fifteen percent [6 of 41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 7% to 29%] of all patients treated with sequential PD-(L)1 blockade followed later by osimertinib developed a severe irAE. Severe irAEs were most common among those who began osimertinib within 3 months of prior PD-(L)1 blockade (5 of 21, 24%, 95% CI 10% to 45%), as compared with >3-12 months (1 of 8, 13%, 95% CI 0% to 50%), >12 months (0 of 12, 0%, 95% CI 0% to 28%). By contrast, no severe irAEs were identified among patients treated with osimertinib followed by PD-(L)1 (0 of 29, 95% CI 0% to 14%) or PD-(L)1 followed by other EGFR-TKIs (afatinib or erlotinib, 0 of 27, 95% CI 0% to 15%). IrAEs occurred at a median onset of 20 days after osimertinib (range 14-167 days). All patients with irAEs required steroids and most required hospitalization. CONCLUSION: PD-(L)1 blockade followed by osimertinib is associated with severe irAE and is most frequent among patients who recently received PD-(L)1 blockade. No irAEs were observed when osimertinib preceded PD-(L)1 blockade or when PD-(L)1 was followed by other EGFR-TKIs. This association appears to be specific to osimertinib, as no severe irAEs occurred with administration of other EGFR-TKIs.

Ultra-deep next-generation sequencing of plasma cell-free DNA in patients with advanced lung cancers: results from the Actionable Genome Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive genotyping using plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) has the potential to obviate the need for some invasive biopsies in cancer patients while also elucidating disease heterogeneity. We sought to develop an ultra-deep plasma next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay for patients with non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC) that could detect targetable oncogenic drivers and resistance mutations in patients where tissue biopsy failed to identify an actionable alteration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Plasma was prospectively collected from patients with advanced, progressive NSCLC. We carried out ultra-deep NGS using cfDNA extracted from plasma and matched white blood cells using a hybrid capture panel covering 37 lung cancer-related genes sequenced to 50 000× raw target coverage filtering somatic mutations attributable to clonal hematopoiesis. Clinical sensitivity and specificity for plasma detection of known oncogenic drivers were calculated and compared with tissue genotyping results. Orthogonal ddPCR validation was carried out in a subset of cases. RESULTS: In 127 assessable patients, plasma NGS detected driver mutations with variant allele fractions ranging from 0.14% to 52%. Plasma ddPCR for EGFR or KRAS mutations revealed findings nearly identical to those of plasma NGS in 21 of 22 patients, with high concordance of variant allele fraction (r = 0.98). Blinded to tissue genotype, plasma NGS sensitivity for de novo plasma detection of known oncogenic drivers was 75% (68/91). Specificity of plasma NGS in those who were driver-negative by tissue NGS was 100% (19/19). In 17 patients with tumor tissue deemed insufficient for genotyping, plasma NGS identified four KRAS mutations. In 23 EGFR mutant cases with acquired resistance to targeted therapy, plasma NGS detected potential resistance mechanisms, including EGFR T790M and C797S mutations and ERBB2 amplification. CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-deep plasma NGS with clonal hematopoiesis filtering resulted in de novo detection of targetable oncogenic drivers and resistance mechanisms in patients with NSCLC, including when tissue biopsy was inadequate for genotyping.

PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden, and response to immunotherapy in patients with MET exon 14 altered lung cancers.

Background: MET exon 14 alterations are actionable oncogenic drivers. Durable responses to MET inhibitors are observed in patients with advanced MET exon 14-altered lung cancers in prospective trials. In contrast, the activity of immunotherapy, PD-L1 expression and tumor mutational burden (TMB) of these tumors and are not well characterized. Patients and methods: Patients with MET exon 14-altered lung cancers of any stage treated at two academic institutions were identified. A review of clinicopathologic and molecular features, and an analysis of response to single-agent or combination immune checkpoint inhibition were conducted. PD-L1 immunohistochemistry was carried out and TMB was calculated by estimation from targeted next-generation sequencing panels. Results: We identified 147 patients with MET exon 14-altered lung cancers. PD-L1 expression of 0%, 1%-49%, and ≥50% were 37%, 22%, and 41%, respectively, in 111 evaluable tumor samples. The median TMB of MET exon 14-altered lung cancers was lower than that of unselected non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) in both independently evaluated cohorts: 3.8 versus 5.7 mutations/megabase (P < 0.001, n = 78 versus 1769, cohort A), and 7.3 versus 11.8 mutations/megabase (P < 0.001, n = 62 versus 1100, cohort B). There was no association between PD-L1 expression and TMB (Spearman's rho=0.18, P = 0.069). In response-evaluable patients (n = 24), the objective response rate was 17% (95% CI 6% to 36%) and the median progression-free survival was 1.9 months (95% CI 1.7-2.7). Responses were not enriched in tumors with PD-L1 expression ≥50% nor high TMB. Conclusion: A substantial proportion of MET exon 14-altered lung cancers express PD-L1, but the median TMB is lower compared with unselected NSCLCs. Occasional responses to PD-1 blockade can be achieved, but overall clinical efficacy is modest.

Investigation of patterns of nodal metastases in BRAF mutant lung cancer.

Axillary lymph nodes (axLN) are a rare site of nodal metastases in patients with lung cancer. BRAF mutated lung cancer is a genetically distinct subtype that occurs in 2-5% of non-small cell lung carcinomas (NSCLC). A recent study identified a highly unusual pattern of metastatic spread to axLN in patients with BRAF mutated colorectal cancer (CRC). The purpose of the study is to assess the incidence of axLN metastases in BRAF mutated NSCLC. Baseline computed tomography (CT) imaging at diagnosis and all follow up CTs of patients with BRAF mutated NSCLC treated at our institution were retrospectively reviewed by two radiologists for evidence of axLN metastases. Positron emission tomography (PET)/CT was reviewed when available. A control group of patients with non-BRAF mutated NSCLC was assessed. Three criteria were used for the diagnosis of a metastatic node; pathologic confirmation, radiologic size greater ≥1.5cm in short axis diameter or fluorodeoxyglucose avidity on PET/CT and radiologic size ≥1.0cm in short axis diameter. Forty-six patients with BRAF mutated NSCLC and CT images on the institutional PACS were identified. 7 (15%) patients with BRAF mutated NSCLC had axLN metastases using the proposed diagnostic criteria. One patient had a pathologic proven axLN metastasis, 3 had axLNs measuring ≥1.5cm in short axis, and 3 had nodes which were FDG avid on PET/CT and measured ≥1.0cm in short axis. By comparison, 1 of 46 (2%) control patients with non-BRAF mutated NSCLC had axLN metastases. Previous series have reported the prevalence of axLN metastases in patients with NSCLC as 0.61-0.75%. We have found a higher incidence of axLN metastases in BRAF mutated NSCLC patients than described in non-BRAF mutated NSCLC patients. Examination of the axilla should be a routine part of physical examination in this genetically distinct subgroup of lung cancer patients.

Optimizing treatment for patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive lung cancer.

In the 9 years since the initial discovery of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), there has been tremendous progress, culminating in an ever-expanding repertoire of agents that have activity in this disease. This review article provides an overview of currently approved ALK inhibitors, other ALK inhibitors in development, and commonly described mechanisms of resistance to ALK inhibitors. We also discuss emerging controversies in treatment of patients with ALK-positive lung cancer, including the choice of first-line ALK inhibitor and the role of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the treatment of central nervous system metastases.

Phase 1 study of twice weekly pulse dose and daily low-dose erlotinib as initial treatment for patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancers.

Background: Patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancers treated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) develop clinical resistance, most commonly with acquisition of EGFR T790M. Evolutionary modeling suggests that a schedule of twice weekly pulse and daily low-dose erlotinib may delay emergence of EGFR T790M. Pulse dose erlotinib has superior central nervous system (CNS) penetration and may result in superior CNS disease control. Methods: We evaluated toxicity, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of twice weekly pulse and daily low-dose erlotinib. We assessed six escalating pulse doses of erlotinib. Results: We enrolled 34 patients; 11 patients (32%) had brain metastases at study entry. We observed 3 dose-limiting toxicities in dose escalation: transaminitis, mucositis, and rash. The MTD was erlotinib 1200 mg days 1-2 and 50 mg days 3-7 weekly. The most frequent toxicities (any grade) were rash, diarrhea, nausea, fatigue, and mucositis. 1 complete and 24 partial responses were observed (74%, 95% CI 60-84%). Median progression-free survival was 9.9 months (95% CI 5.8-15.4 months). No patient had progression of an untreated CNS metastasis or developed a new CNS lesion while on study (0%, 95% CI 0-13%). Of the 18 patients with biopsies at progression, EGFR T790M was identified in 78% (95% CI 54-91%). Conclusion: This is the first clinical implementation of an anti-cancer TKI regimen combining pulse and daily low-dose administration. This evolutionary modeling-based dosing schedule was well-tolerated but did not improve progression-free survival or prevent emergence of EGFR T790M, likely due to insufficient peak serum concentrations of erlotinib. This dosing schedule prevented progression of untreated or any new central nervous system metastases in all patients.

Clinical outcomes with pemetrexed-based systemic therapies in RET-rearranged lung cancers.

BACKGROUND: RET rearrangements are targetable, oncogenic lung cancer drivers. While previous series have shown durable clinical benefit with pemetrexed-based therapies in ALK- and ROS1-rearranged lung cancers, the benefits of pemetrexed-based treatments in patients with RET-rearranged lung cancers relative to other genomic subsets have not previously been explored. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with pathologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV lung adenocarcinomas and evidence of a RET, ROS1, or ALK rearrangement, or a KRAS mutation was conducted. Patients were eligible if they received treatment with pemetrexed alone or in combination. The primary outcome of progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary outcomes of overall response rate (ORR, RECIST v1.1), time to progression (TTP), and time to treatment discontinuation were compared between RET-rearranged and groups of ROS1-rearranged, ALK-rearranged, and KRAS-mutant lung cancers. RESULTS: We evaluated 104 patients. Patients with RET-rearranged lung cancers (n = 18) had a median PFS of 19 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 12-not reached (NR)] that was comparable with patients with ROS1- (23 months, 95% CI 14-NR, n = 10) and ALK-rearranged (19 months, 95% CI 15-36, n = 36) lung cancers, and significantly improved compared with patients with KRAS-mutant lung cancers (6 months, 95% CI 5-9, P < 0.001, n = 40). ORR (45%), median TTP (20 months, 95% CI 17-NR), and median time to treatment discontinuation (21 months, 95% CI 6-NR) in patients with RET-rearranged lung cancers were not significantly different compared with patients with ALK- and ROS1-rearranged lung cancers, and improved compared with patients with KRAS-mutant lung cancers. CONCLUSION: Durable benefits with pemetrexed-based therapies in RET-rearranged lung cancers are comparable with ALK- and ROS1-rearranged lung cancers. When selecting therapies for patients with RET-rearranged lung cancers, pemetrexed-containing regimens should be considered.

Epidermal growth factor receptor exon 20 insertions in advanced lung adenocarcinomas: Clinical outcomes and response to erlotinib.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertions (exon20ins) represent approximately 10% of EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinomas, and are associated with resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Clinical outcomes in comparison with patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations are not well established. METHODS: Patients with stage IV lung adenocarcinomas with EGFR exon20ins were identified through routine molecular testing. Clinicopathologic data were collected. Overall survival (OS) was measured from the diagnosis of stage IV disease, and in patients treated with EGFR TKIs, the time to progression (TTP) on erlotinib was measured. RESULTS: One thousand eight hundred and eighty-two patients with stage IV lung adenocarcinomas were identified: 46 patients had EGFR exon20ins (2%), and 258 patients had an EGFR exon 19 deletion (exon19del)/L858R point mutation (14%). Among 11 patients with lung adenocarcinomas with EGFR exon20ins who received erlotinib, 3 patients (27%) had a partial response (FQEA, 1; ASV, 1; and unknown variant, 1). TTP for patients with EGFR exon20ins and patients with EGFR exon19del/L858R on erlotinib were 3 and 12 months, respectively (P < .01). Responses to chemotherapy were similar for patients with lung adenocarcinomas with EGFR exon20ins and patients with lung adenocarcinomas with EGFR exon19del/L858R. Median OS from the diagnosis of stage IV disease for patients with EGFR exon20ins and patients with EGFR exon19del/L858R was 26 months (95% confidence interval, 19 months-not reached n = 46) and 31 months (95% confidence interval, 28-33 months; n = 258), respectively (P = .53). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with advanced lung adenocarcinomas harboring EGFR exon20ins do not respond to EGFR TKI therapy. Standard chemotherapy should be used as first-line therapy. These patients have an OS similar to that of patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations. Individuals with certain variants such as FQEA and ASV may respond to erlotinib.

Clinical benefit of continuing ALK inhibition with crizotinib beyond initial disease progression in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Crizotinib is approved to treat advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but most patients ultimately develop progressive disease (PD). We investigated whether continuing ALK inhibition with crizotinib beyond PD (CBPD) is clinically beneficial and attempted to identify clinicopathologic characteristics associated with patients who experience clinical benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC enrolled in two ongoing multicenter, single-arm trials who developed RECIST-defined PD were allowed to continue crizotinib if they were deriving ongoing clinical benefit. In the present retrospective analysis, continuation of CBPD was defined as >3 weeks of crizotinib treatment after PD documentation. Patients who had PD as best response to initial crizotinib treatment were excluded. Baseline and post-progression characteristics, sites of PD, and overall survival (OS) were compared in patients who continued CBPD versus those who did not. The impact of continuing CBPD on OS after adjusting for potential confounding factors was assessed. RESULTS: Among 194 crizotinib-treated patients with RECIST-defined PD, 120 (62%) continued CBPD. A significantly higher proportion of patients who continued CBPD than patients who did not had an ECOG performance status (PS) of 0/1 at PD (96% versus 82%; P=0.02). CBPD patients had significantly longer OS from the time of PD [median 16.4 versus 3.9 months; hazards ratio (HR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.17-0.42; P<0.0001] and from the time of initial crizotinib treatment (median 29.6 versus 10.8 months; HR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.19-0.46; P<0.0001). The multiple-covariate Cox regression analysis revealed that CBPD remained significantly associated with improved OS after adjusting for relevant factors. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who continued CBPD were more likely to have good ECOG PS (0/1) at the time of PD. Continuing ALK inhibition with crizotinib after PD may provide survival benefit to patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

Poor response to erlotinib in patients with tumors containing baseline EGFR T790M mutations found by routine clinical molecular testing.

BACKGROUND: EGFR T790M is the most common mutation associated with acquired resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Baseline EGFR T790M mutations in EGFR TKI-naïve patients have been reported, but the frequency and their association with response to EGFR TKIs remain unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The frequency of baseline EGFR T790M as detected by routine molecular genotyping was determined by reviewing clinical results obtained at our institution from 2009 to 2013. We also collected outcome data for treatment with EGFR TKIs. RESULTS: To define the incidence of EGFR T790M, we reviewed 2774 sequentially tested patients with lung cancer who underwent molecular testing using a mass spectrometry-based assay, and 11 (0.5%) had baseline EGFR T790M. Compiling results from several molecular techniques, we observed EGFR T790M in tumors from 20 patients who had not previously been treated with an EGFR TKI. In all cases, EGFR T790M occurred concurrently with another EGFR mutation, L858R (80%, 16/20), or exon 19 deletion (20%, 4/20). Two percent of all pre-treatment EGFR-mutant lung cancers harbored an EGFR T790M mutation. Thirteen patients received erlotinib monotherapy as treatment for metastatic disease. The response rate was 8% (1/13, 95% confidence interval 0%-35%). For the patients who received erlotinib, the median progression-free survival was 2 months and the median overall survival was 16 months. CONCLUSIONS: De novo EGFR T790M mutations are rare (<1%) when identified by standard sensitivity methods. TKI therapy for patients with baseline EGFR T790M detected by standard molecular analysis has limited benefit.

Pemetrexed-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced, ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is highly responsive to crizotinib. To determine whether ALK-positive NSCLC is also sensitive to pemetrexed, we retrospectively evaluated progression-free survival (PFS) of ALK-positive versus ALK-negative patients who had been treated with pemetrexed-based chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 121 patients with advanced, ALK-positive NSCLC in the USA, Australia, and Italy. For comparison, we evaluated 266 patients with advanced, ALK-negative, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-wild-type NSCLC, including 79 with KRAS mutations and 187 with wild-type KRAS (WT/WT/WT). We determined PFS on different pemetrexed regimens. RESULTS: Among 70 ALK-positive patients treated with a platinum/pemetrexed regimen, the median PFS (mPFS) was 7.3 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.5-9.5). The mPFS of 51 ALK-positive patients treated with single-agent pemetrexed or nonplatinum/pemetrexed combinations was 5.5 months (2.8-9.0). For ALK-negative patients, PFS on all pemetrexed-based regimens was similar to that of ALK-positive patients, except in the specific setting of first-line platinum/pemetrexed where the mPFS was only 4.2 and 5.4 months in KRAS and WT/WT/WT patients, respectively. However, among patients with a never/light-smoking history (0-10 pack-year smoking history) treated with first-line platinum/pemetrexed, there was no difference in PFS between ALK-positive and ALK-negative patients. CONCLUSIONS: PFS on pemetrexed or nonplatinum/pemetrexed combinations was similar in ALK-positive and ALK-negative patients. PFS on first-line platinum/pemetrexed may be prolonged in never/light-smoking patients regardless of ALK status.

A rheostatic mechanism for T-cell inhibition based on elevation of activation thresholds.

The activation of discrete T-cell responses depends on the triggering of individualized threshold numbers of T-cell receptors (TCRs). The results of this study indicate that the lipocalin placental protein 14 (PP14), a T-cell inhibitor produced by cells of the reproductive and hematopoietic systems, mediates its anti-inflammatory activity by elevating the T-cell activation threshold, thereby rendering T cells less sensitive to stimulation. Significantly, the data demonstrate hierarchical sensitivity of selected cytokine responses to PP14-mediated inhibition, with the hierarchy reflecting their respective activation thresholds. These findings suggest a novel paradigm for immunoinhibition wherein negative regulators can finely tune, rather than inactivate, T-cell responses, and thereby skew the cytokine output of immunologic responses.