Comparative Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy versus Conventional Comparator Treatments in Resectable Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to estimate the relative efficacy of neoadjuvant nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy (neoNIVO + CT) compared to relevant treatments amongst resectable non-metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (rNSCLC) patients. METHODS: Treatment comparisons were based on a network meta-analysis (NMA) using randomized clinical trial data identified via systematic literature review (SLR). The outcomes of interest were event-free survival (EFS) and pathological complete response (pCR). NeoNIVO + CT was compared to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (neoCT), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neoCRT), adjuvant chemotherapy (adjCT), and surgery alone (S). Due to the potential for effect modification by stage, all-stage and stage-specific networks were considered. Fixed-effect (FE) and random-effects Bayesian NMA models were run (EFS = hazard ratios [HR]; pCR = odds ratios [OR]; 95% credible intervals [CrI]). RESULTS: Sixty-one RCTs were identified (base case = 9 RCTs [n = 1978 patients]). In the all-stages FE model, neoNIVO + CT had statistically significant EFS improvements relative to neoCT (HR = 0.68 [95% CrI: 0.49, 0.94]), S (0.59 [0.42, 0.82]), adjCT (0.66 [0.45, 0.96]), but not relative to neoCRT (HR = 0.77 [0.52, 1.16]). NeoNIVO + CT (5 RCTs) had statistically significant higher odds of pCR relative to neoCT (OR = 12.53 [5.60, 33.82]) and neoCRT (7.15 [2.31, 24.34]). Stage-specific model findings were consistent. CONCLUSIONS: This NMA signals improved EFS and/or pCR of neoNIVO + CT relative to comparators among patients with rNSCLC.

Pathophysiology and Management of Chest Wall Pain after Surgical and Non-Surgical Local Therapies for Lung Cancer.

Chest wall pain syndromes can emerge following local therapies for lung cancer and can adversely affect patients' quality-of-life. This can occur after lung surgery, radiation therapy, or percutaneous image-guided thermal ablation. This review describes the multifactorial pathophysiology of chest wall pain syndromes that develop following surgical and non-surgical local therapies for lung cancer and summarizes evidence-based management strategies for inflammatory, neuropathic, myofascial, and osseous pain. It discusses a step-wise approach to treating chest wall pain that begins with non-opioid oral analgesics and includes additional pharmacologic treatments as clinically indicated, such as anticonvulsants, serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, tricyclic antidepressants, and various topical treatments. For myofascial pain, physical medicine techniques, such as acupuncture, trigger point injections, deep tissue massage, and intercostal myofascial release can also offer pain relief. For severe or refractory cases, opioid analgesics, intercostal nerve blocks, or intercostal nerve ablations may be indicated. Fortunately, palliation of treatment-related chest wall pain syndromes can be managed by most clinical providers, regardless of the type of local therapy utilized for a patient's lung cancer treatment. In cases where a patient's pain fails to respond to initial medical management, clinicians can consider referring to a pain specialist who can tailor a more specific pharmacologic approach or perform a procedural intervention to relieve pain.

Clinical and economic outcomes associated with lymph node examination status in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a real-world US study using the SEER-Medicare linked database.

Background: Clinical practice guidelines recommend adjuvant therapy for patients with early non-small cell lung cancer (eNSCLC), especially those with lymph node metastasis. This study evaluated the prevalence of lymph node examination and its association with adjuvant treatment rates, overall survival (OS), and healthcare costs among United States (US) Medicare patients with resected eNSCLC. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry data linked with Medicare claims data. Eligible patients were aged ≥65 years with newly diagnosed non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stages IA to IIIB [the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Cancer Staging Manual, 7th edition] between January 2010 and December 2017 with surgery ≤1 month prior to or ≤12 months after diagnosis. Patients were grouped by lymph node examination status: no examination (pNX), examination and no metastasis (pN0), or metastasis staging in N1 (pN1) or N2 (pN2). OS and costs were evaluated by examination status and number of lymph node examined. OS was analyzed using extended Cox proportional hazards models for specific time periods and time interaction with examination status, and adjusted for patient characteristics. Adjusted post-surgical healthcare costs per patient per month (PPPM) were analyzed using gamma-log regression models. Results: Among the 14,648 patients included in the study, approximately 11% were pNX, whereas most were pN0 (68%), followed by pN1 (11%) and pN2 (10%). Adjuvant treatment rates were higher for pNX (35%) than pN0 (18%), but lower than pN1 (68%) and pN2 (74%) patients (P<0.001). Unadjusted OS for pNX patients was nearly identical to pN2, and significantly worse compared to pN0 and pN1 (P<0.0001). After adjusting for patient characteristics, pNX patients had higher risk of death relative to pN0 patients (P<0.001). Marginal mean adjusted total costs were comparable across pNX ($15,827 PPPM), pN0 ($12,712 PPPM) and pN1 ($17,089 PPPM), but significantly less for pN0 compared to pN2 ($23,566 PPPM) (P=0.002). Conclusions: Inadequate lymph node examination is associated with underutilization of adjuvant treatment and poor OS in resected NSCLC. In the current era of targeted and immunotherapies, lymph node examination is more important than ever, implicating the need for Quality Improvement practices and multidisciplinary coordination.

Accelerated Hypofractionated Chemoradiation Followed by Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy Boost for Locally Advanced, Unresectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

Importance: Intrathoracic progression remains the predominant pattern of failure in patients treated with concurrent chemoradiation followed by a consolidation immune checkpoint inhibitor for locally advanced, unresectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Objective: To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and use of hypofractionated concurrent chemoradiation with an adaptive stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) boost. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was an early-phase, single-institution, radiation dose-escalation nonrandomized controlled trial with concurrent chemotherapy among patients with clinical stage II (inoperable/patient refusal of surgery) or III NSCLC (American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, seventh edition). Patients were enrolled and treated from May 2011 to May 2018, with a median patient follow-up of 18.2 months. Patients advanced to a higher SABR boost dose if dose-limiting toxic effects (any grade 3 or higher pulmonary, gastrointestinal, or cardiac toxic effects, or any nonhematologic grade 4 or higher toxic effects) occurred in fewer than 33% of the boost cohort within 90 days of follow-up. The current analyses were conducted from January to September 2023. Intervention: All patients first received 4 Gy × 10 fractions followed by an adaptive SABR boost to residual metabolically active disease, consisting of an additional 25 Gy (low, 5 Gy × 5 fractions), 30 Gy (intermediate, 6 Gy × 5 fractions), or 35 Gy (high, 7 Gy × 5 fractions) with concurrent weekly carboplatin/paclitaxel. Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was to determine the MTD. Results: Data from 28 patients (median [range] age, 70 [51-88] years; 16 [57%] male; 24 [86%] with stage III disease) enrolled across the low- (n = 10), intermediate- (n = 9), and high- (n = 9) dose cohorts were evaluated. The protocol-specified MTD was not exceeded. The incidences of nonhematologic acute and late (>90 days) grade 3 or higher toxic effects were 11% and 7%, respectively. No grade 3 toxic effects were observed in the intermediate-dose boost cohort. Two deaths occurred in the high-dose cohort. Two-year local control was 74.1%, 85.7%, and 100.0% for the low-, intermediate-, and high-dose cohorts, respectively. Two-year overall survival was 30.0%, 76.2%, and 55.6% for the low-, intermediate-, and high-dose cohorts, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: This early-phase, dose-escalation nonrandomized controlled trial showed that concurrent chemoradiation with an adaptive SABR boost to 70 Gy in 15 fractions with concurrent chemotherapy is a safe and effective regimen for patients with locally advanced, unresectable NSCLC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01345851.

Artificial Intelligence-Powered Assessment of Pathologic Response to Neoadjuvant Atezolizumab in Patients With NSCLC: Results From the LCMC3 Study.

INTRODUCTION: Pathologic response (PathR) by histopathologic assessment of resected specimens may be an early clinical end point associated with long-term outcomes with neoadjuvant therapy. Digital pathology may improve the efficiency and precision of PathR assessment. LCMC3 (NCT02927301) evaluated neoadjuvant atezolizumab in patients with resectable NSCLC and reported a 20% major PathR rate. METHODS: We determined PathR in primary tumor resection specimens using guidelines-based visual techniques and developed a convolutional neural network model using the same criteria to digitally measure the percent viable tumor on whole-slide images. Concordance was evaluated between visual determination of percent viable tumor (n = 151) performed by one of the 47 local pathologists and three central pathologists. RESULTS: For concordance among visual determination of percent viable tumor, the interclass correlation coefficient was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84-0.90). Agreement for visually assessed 10% or less viable tumor (major PathR [MPR]) in the primary tumor was 92.1% (Fleiss kappa = 0.83). Digitally assessed percent viable tumor (n = 136) correlated with visual assessment (Pearson r = 0.73; digital/visual slope = 0.28). Digitally assessed MPR predicted visually assessed MPR with outstanding discrimination (area under receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.98) and was associated with longer disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.30; 95% CI: 0.09-0.97, p = 0.033) and overall survival (HR = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.02-1.06, p = 0.027) versus no MPR. Digitally assessed PathR strongly correlated with visual measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial intelligence-powered digital pathology exhibits promise in assisting pathologic assessments in neoadjuvant NSCLC clinical trials. The development of artificial intelligence-powered approaches in clinical settings may aid pathologists in clinical operations, including routine PathR assessments, and subsequently support improved patient care and long-term outcomes.

Neoadjuvant Targeted Therapy in Resectable NSCLC: Current and Future Perspectives.

The standard of care (SoC) for medically operable patients with early-stage (stages I-IIIB) NSCLC is surgery combined with (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy for patients with stages II to IIIB disease and some stage IB or, rarely, chemoradiation (stage III disease with mediastinal lymph node metastases). Despite these treatments, metastatic recurrence is common and associated with poor survival, highlighting the need for systemic therapies that are more effective than the current SoC. After the success of targeted therapy (TT) in patients with advanced NSCLC harboring oncogenic drivers, these agents are being investigated for the perioperative (neoadjuvant and adjuvant) treatment of patients with early-stage NSCLC. Adjuvant osimertinib is the only TT approved for use in the early-stage setting, and there are no approved neoadjuvant TTs. We discuss the importance of comprehensive biomarker testing at diagnosis to identify individuals who may benefit from neoadjuvant targeted treatments and review emerging data from neoadjuvant TT trials. We also address the potential challenges for establishing neoadjuvant TTs as SoC in the early-stage setting, including the identification and validation of early response markers to guide care and accelerate drug development, and discuss safety considerations in the perioperative setting. Initial data indicate that neoadjuvant TTs are effective and well tolerated in patients with EGFR- or ALK-positive early-stage NSCLC. Data from ongoing trials will determine whether neoadjuvant targeted agents will become a new SoC for individuals with oncogene-addicted resectable NSCLC.

Economic Burden of Recurrence Among Resected Medicare Patients With Early Stage NSCLC.

Introduction: Patients with early NSCLC (eNSCLC) who experience recurrence are associated with worse survival outcomes, but the economic burden of recurrence is not well characterized. This study evaluated the incremental health care resource utilization and costs of recurrence in Medicare patients with resected eNSCLC. Methods: This retrospective observational study used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry data linked with Medicare claims. Eligible patients were 65 years and older with newly diagnosed NSCLC stages IB to IIIA (American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, seventh edition) and surgery between January 2010 and December 2017. Continuous enrollment criteria were applied to ensure appropriate data capture. Per patient per month (PPPM) health care resource utilization and all-cause direct costs were compared for patients with versus without recurrence, which was identified from claims data using diagnosis, procedure, or drug codes. Patients were matched (1:1) using exact matching on cancer stage and treatment, and propensity score matching on other characteristics. Results: In total, 2035 (44%) out of 4595 patients had evidence of recurrence. After matching, 1494 patients were included in each cohort. Patients with recurrence had a significantly higher number of inpatient visits (+0.25 PPPM), outpatient visits (+1.10 PPPM), physician services (+3.70 PPPM), and emergency department (ED) visits (+0.25 PPPM; all p < 0.001). The average follow-up PPPM cost in the recurrence cohort was U.S. dollars $7437 and $1118 in the no-recurrence cohort, resulting in a difference of $6319 PPPM (p < 0.001) with inpatient costs as the largest contributor. Conclusions: On the basis of a real-world population, the recurrence among patients with resected eNSCLC is associated with increased health care resource utilization and costs.

The majority of patients with resectable incidental lung cancers are ineligible for lung cancer screening.

Objective: The study objective was to determine what proportion of asymptomatic patients had resectable lung cancer detected through lung cancer screening versus incidentally. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent resection for lung cancer between January 2015 and December 2020. We then assessed whether asymptomatic patients with incidentally found lung cancers were eligible for lung cancer screening using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, United States Preventive Services Task Force, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, American College of Chest Physicians, American Cancer Society, and American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines. Results: Of 539 patients who underwent resection for primary lung cancer, 437 (81%) were asymptomatic and 355 (66%) of these patients had lung cancer found discovered incidentally. Of the 355 patients with incidentally detected lung cancer, 10 were excluded for insufficient data. Of the remaining 345 patients, 110 (32%) would have been eligible for screening using National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, 65 (19%) using 2021 United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines, 53 (15%) using 2013 United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines, 64 (19%) using 2022 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services guidelines, 52 (15%) using 2015 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services/American College of Chest Physicians guidelines, and 45 (13%) using American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines. Of the 280 patients who were screen ineligible by 2021 United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria, 143 patients (51%) never smoked, 112 patients (40%) quit smoking more than 15 years ago, 89 patients (32%) did not smoke at least 20 pack-years, and 44 patients (16%) were ineligible due to age. Conclusions: The majority of asymptomatic patients with resectable lung cancers had lung cancer identified incidentally and not through lung cancer screening. Most of these patients were not eligible for screening under current guidelines. This study suggests a need for improved lung cancer screening implementation and further investigation in the identification and assessment of risk factors for lung cancer.

Safety of adjuvant atezolizumab after pneumonectomy/bilobectomy in stage II-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer in the randomized phase III IMpower010 trial.

OBJECTIVE: Adjuvant atezolizumab is a standard of care after chemotherapy in completely resected stage II-IIIA programmed death ligand-1 tumor cell 1% or greater non-small cell lung cancer based on results from the phase III IMpower010 study. We explored the safety and tolerability of adjuvant atezolizumab by surgery type in IMpower010. METHODS: Patients had completely resected stage IB-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (Union Internationale Contre le Cancer/American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th Ed), received up to four 21-day cycles of cisplatin-based chemotherapy, and were randomized 1:1 to receive atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks (≤16 cycles or 1 year) or best supportive care. Adverse events and clinical characteristics were investigated by surgery type (pneumonectomy/bilobectomy or lobectomy/sleeve lobectomy) in the randomized stage II-IIIA population who received 1 or more atezolizumab dose or with 1 or more postbaseline assessment (safety evaluable) for best supportive care. RESULTS: Overall, 871 patients comprised the safety-evaluable randomized stage II-IIIA population. In the atezolizumab arm, 23% (100/433) received pneumonectomy/bilobectomy and 77% (332/433) received lobectomy/sleeve lobectomy. Atezolizumab discontinuation occurred in 32% (n = 32) and 35% (n = 115) of the pneumonectomy/bilobectomy and lobectomy/sleeve lobectomy groups, respectively. Grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 21% (n = 21) and 23% (n = 76) of patients in the atezolizumab arms in the pneumonectomy/bilobectomy and lobectomy/sleeve lobectomy groups, respectively. In the atezolizumab arms of the surgery groups, 13% (n = 13) and 17% (n = 55) had an adverse event leading to hospitalization. Atezolizumab-related adverse events leading to hospitalization occurred in 5% (n = 5) and 7% (n = 23) of the surgery groups. CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory findings support use of adjuvant atezolizumab after platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with completely resected stage II-IIIA programmed death ligand-1 tumor cell 1% or more non-small cell lung cancer, regardless of surgery type.

Real-world adjuvant chemotherapy patterns and outcomes among elderly patients with resected early non-small-cell lung cancer in the USA.

Background: This study investigated real-world treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) in early non-small-cell lung cancer patients and the association between OS and time-to-adjuvant-treatment. Materials & methods: This retrospective study using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results data linked with Medicare claims included resected early non-small-cell lung cancer patients between 2010 and 2015. Unadjusted OS analyses used Kaplan-Meier curves; adjusted OS analyses used extended Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Only 54-71% of stage II-IIIA patients received any adjuvant treatment. Adjusted risk of death was higher when starting treatment outside 6-8 weeks after surgery (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Improved systemic therapy in the adjuvant chemotherapy setting is needed.

Lung cancer is one of the deadliest cancers in the USA. Most lung cancers are a type called non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with NSCLC that has not spread to other parts of the body generally have surgery and may receive treatment before surgery, after surgery or both to help fight the cancer. It is not clear how often people receive treatment before or after surgery. It is important to know how patients are being treated because it helps clinicians decide how to use the new treatments that are becoming available. This study used a large database of more than 7000 people aged 65 years and older with lung cancer in the USA to understand how they are treated. More than a third of patients had stage IA NSCLC (39%), followed by stage IB (24%), stage II (20%), stage IIIA (15%) and stage IIIB (2%). Most people had surgery (64%) and some received another treatment after surgery (27%). That treatment was most often about 2 months of chemotherapy, on average. The study also tried to understand how the timing of treatment may have been important for their survival. People who received treatment after surgery lived the longest if they received that treatment about 6­8 weeks after the surgery. Overall, the study showed that a substantial proportion of people do not receive treatment for their NSCLC after surgery, even though treatment after surgery is recommended by medical guidelines. There is a need for more effective treatments for these patients, and when those treatments are given may be important for their survival.

Surgical results of the Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium 3 trial: A phase II multicenter single-arm study to investigate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab as neoadjuvant therapy in patients with stages IB-select IIIB resectable non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Multimodality treatment for resectable non-small cell lung cancer has long remained at a therapeutic plateau. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are highly effective in advanced non-small cell lung cancer and promising preoperatively in small clinical trials for resectable non-small cell lung cancer. This large multicenter trial tested the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant atezolizumab and surgery. METHODS: Patients with stage IB to select IIIB resectable non-small cell lung cancer and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1 were eligible. Patients received atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for 2 cycles or less followed by resection. The primary end point was major pathological response in patients without EGFR/ALK+ alterations. Pre- and post-treatment computed tomography, positron emission tomography, pulmonary function tests, and biospecimens were obtained. Adverse events were recorded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.4.0. RESULTS: From April 2017 to February 2020, 181 patients were entered in the study. Baseline characteristics were mean age, 65.1 years; female, 93 of 181 (51%); nonsquamous histology, 112 of 181 (62%); and clinical stages IIB to IIIB, 147 of 181 (81%). In patients without EGFR/ALK alterations who underwent surgery, the major pathological response rate was 20% (29/143; 95% confidence interval, 14-28) and the pathological complete response rate was 6% (8/143; 95% confidence interval, 2-11). There were no grade 4/5 treatment-related adverse events preoperatively. Of 159 patients (87.8%) undergoing surgery, 145 (91%) had pathologic complete resection. There were 5 (3%) intraoperative complications, no intraoperative deaths, and 2 postoperative deaths within 90 days, 1 treatment related. Median disease-free and overall survival have not been reached. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant atezolizumab in resectable stage IB to IIIB non-small cell lung cancer was well tolerated, yielded a 20% major pathological response rate, and allowed safe, complete surgical resection. These results strongly support the further development of immune checkpoint inhibitors as preoperative therapy in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Neoadjuvant atezolizumab for resectable non-small cell lung cancer: an open-label, single-arm phase II trial.

In an ongoing, open-label, single-arm phase II study ( NCT02927301 ), 181 patients with untreated, resectable, stage IB-IIIB non-small cell lung cancer received two doses of neoadjuvant atezolizumab monotherapy. The primary end point was major pathological response (MPR; ≤10% viable malignant cells) in resected tumors without EGFR or ALK alterations. Of the 143 patients in the primary end point analysis, the MPR was 20% (95% confidence interval, 14-28%). With a minimum duration of follow-up of 3 years, the 3-year survival rate of 80% was encouraging. The most common adverse events during the neoadjuvant phase were fatigue (39%, 71 of 181) and procedural pain (29%, 53 of 181), along with expected immune-related toxicities; there were no unexpected safety signals. In exploratory analyses, MPR was predicted using the pre-treatment peripheral blood immunophenotype based on 14 immune cell subsets. Immune cell subsets predictive of MPR in the peripheral blood were also identified in the tumor microenvironment and were associated with MPR. This study of neoadjuvant atezolizumab in a large cohort of patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer was safe and met its primary end point of MPR ≥ 15%. Data from this single-arm, non-randomized trial suggest that profiles of innate immune cells in pre-treatment peripheral blood may predict pathological response after neoadjuvant atezolizumab, but additional studies are needed to determine whether these profiles can inform patient selection and new therapeutic approaches.

Overcoming immunosuppression and pro-tumor inflammation in lung cancer with combined IL-1ß and PD-1 inhibition.

Inflammation in the tumor microenvironment is a complicit and known carcinogenesis driver. Inhibition of IL-1ß, one of the most abundant and influential cytokines in the tumor microenvironment, may enhance the efficacy of PD-1. In a post-hoc analysis of phase III cardiovascular CANTOS trial, canakinumab, a monoclonal anti-IL-1ß antibody, significantly reduced lung cancer incidence. Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) is the standard of care in non-small-cell lung cancer. However, ICI efficacy is heavily impacted by programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) status. Most patients with non-small-cell lung cancer have low PD-L1 expression levels. Thus, combinational strategies are needed to improve ICI efficacy and expand its use. Here, we describe the preclinical and clinical evidence to support the combination of IL-1ß and PD-1 under investigation in the CANOPY program. The perioperative use of canakinumab with or without PD-1 inhibition in the CANOPY-N trial is described as a potential chemotherapy-free immunotherapy strategy.

IL-1ß is a small molecule involved in the spreading of cancer cells and scouting for cells that work against the body's protective inflammatory response. In a follow-up analysis of the CANTOS study, people with atherosclerosis who received canakinumab, a drug which limits the activity of IL-1ß in the body, were diagnosed with lung cancer less often than people who received an inactive substance. Immunotherapy is a treatment that can boost the natural defenses of the immune system, but how well it works varies from patient to patient. Recent efforts aim to understand whether blocking unhealthy inflammation with canakinumab and stimulating the body's protective system with immunotherapy at the same time could be an efficacious treatment for patients with lung cancer. Currently there are limited data from experiments in cell and animal models; however, data from the ongoing CANOPY-N clinical trial, which is investigating this treatment combination prior to surgery for patients with lung cancer, are expected by the first half of this year.

Surgical Perspective on Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: With a 5% improvement in 5-year overall survival achieved with current neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, new treatments for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are urgently needed. The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is established in metastatic NSCLC and is being evaluated in resectable NSCLC. METHODS: Publications and conference databases and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for reports on clinical studies of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with early resectable NSCLC. RESULTS: Potential advantages of neoadjuvant ICIs include the following: earlier treatment of micrometastatic disease; activation of a broader, potentially durable immune response by the whole tumor and associated lymph nodes; and pathologic assessment of neoadjuvant treatment response, which may guide adjuvant therapy. Surgical considerations include delays to surgery, potential disease progression preventing curative resection, and perioperative morbidity and mortality. Surrogate end points of efficacy (pathologic complete response, major pathologic response) and biomarkers predictive of outcome (programmed death ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, and circulating tumor DNA) can accelerate clinical trial completion and early-stage treatment development; their application in neoadjuvant ICI studies in NSCLC is reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: Phase 2 trials of neoadjuvant ICIs alone or in combination with chemotherapy showed encouraging safety and efficacy in patients with resectable NSCLC, thus warranting the ongoing phase 3 studies of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy. Preoperative and intraoperative unresectability after neoadjuvant ICIs appears comparable to that observed with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. To help thoracic surgeons and medical oncologists to distinguish among ICIs beyond efficacy as phase 3 data emerge, surgery-related end points for perioperative morbidity, mortality, and complexity should be defined, standardized, incorporated into trial designs, and reported.