Activity of osimeRTInib in non-small-cell lung Cancer with UNcommon epidermal growth factor receptor mutations: retrospective Observational multicenter study (ARTICUNO).

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib represents the standard of care for the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring classical epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations, constituting 80%-90% of all EGFR alterations. In the remaining cases, an assorted group of uncommon alterations of EGFR (uEGFR) can be detected, which confer variable sensitivity to previous generations of EGFR inhibitors, overall with lower therapeutic activity. Data on osimertinib in this setting are limited and strongly warranted. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The ARTICUNO study retrospectively evaluated data on osimertinib activity from patients with advanced NSCLC harboring uEGFR treated in 21 clinical centers between August 2017 and March 2023. Data analysis was carried out with a descriptive aim. Investigators collected response data according to RECIST version 1.1 criteria. The median duration of response, progression-free survival (mPFS), and overall survival were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients harboring uEGFR and treated with osimertinib were identified. Patients with 'major' uEGFR, that is, G719X, L861X, and S768I mutations (n = 51), had an overall response rate (ORR) and mPFS of 50% and 9 months, respectively. Variable outcomes were registered in cases with rarer 'minor' mutations (n = 27), with ORR and mPFS of 31% and 4 months, respectively. Among seven patients with exon 20 insertions, ORR was 14%, while the best outcome was registered among patients with compound mutations including at least one classical EGFR mutation (n = 13). Thirty patients presented brain metastases (BMs) and intracranial ORR and mPFS were 58% and 9 months, respectively. Amplification of EGFR or MET, TP53 mutations, and EGFR E709K emerged after osimertinib failure in a dataset of 18 patients with available rebiopsy. CONCLUSION: The ARTICUNO study confirms the activity of osimertinib in patients with uEGFR, especially in those with compound uncommon-common mutations, or major uEGFR, even in the presence of BMs. Alterations at the E709 residue of EGFR are associated with resistance to osimertinib.

The lung immuno-oncology prognostic score (LIPS-3): a prognostic classification of patients receiving first-line pembrolizumab for PD-L1 ≥ 50% advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: To stratify the prognosis of patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥ 50% advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) treated with first-line immunotherapy. METHODS: Baseline clinical prognostic factors, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), PD-L1 tumour cell expression level, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and their combination were investigated by a retrospective analysis of 784 patients divided between statistically powered training (n = 201) and validation (n = 583) cohorts. Cut-offs were explored by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and a risk model built with validated independent factors by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: NLR < 4 was a significant prognostic factor in both cohorts (P < 0.001). It represented 53% of patients in the validation cohort, with 1-year overall survival (OS) of 76.6% versus 44.8% with NLR > 4, in the validation series. The addition of PD-L1 ≥ 80% (21% of patients) or LDH < 252 U/l (25%) to NLR < 4 did not result in better 1-year OS (of 72.6% and 74.1%, respectively, in the validation cohort). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 2 [P < 0.001, hazard ratio (HR) 2.04], pretreatment steroids (P < 0.001, HR 1.67) and NLR < 4 (P < 0.001, HR 2.29) resulted in independent prognostic factors. A risk model with these three factors, namely, the lung immuno-oncology prognostic score (LIPS)-3, accurately stratified three OS risk-validated categories of patients: favourable (0 risk factors, 40%, 1-year OS of 78.2% in the whole series), intermediate (1 or 2 risk factors, 54%, 1-year OS 53.8%) and poor (>2 risk factors, 5%, 1-year OS 10.7%) prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: We advocate the use of LIPS-3 as an easy-to-assess and inexpensive adjuvant prognostic tool for patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% aNSCLC.

Primary resistance to osimertinib due to SCLC transformation: Issue of T790M determination on liquid re-biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: EGFR T790M mutation is the most common mechanism of resistance to first-/second-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and could be overcome by third-generation EGFR-TKIs, such as osimertinib. Liquid biopsy, a non-invasive technique used to test the presence of the resistant mutation, may help avoiding tissue re-biopsy. However, analysing only circulating-free DNA, information about other less frequent and coexisting resistance mechanisms may remain unrevealed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients reported in this series participated in the ASTRIS trial, a real world treatment study testing the efficacy of osimertinib (80mg os die) in advanced T790M-positive NSCLC progressed to prior EGFR-TKI. Patients were considered eligible to osimertinib if T790M positive on tissue or plasma samples. In our patients, EGFR molecular testing on blood sample was conducted with digital droplet PCR (ddPCR). RESULTS: We report our experience of five patients treated with osimertinib after T790M detection on liquid biopsy that presented a disease progression at first tumor assessment mediated by SCLC transformation, as evidenced at tissue re-biopsies. All patients showed low ratio T790M/activating mutation in the blood before osimertinib (lower than 0.03). For three patients, EGFR mutational analysis was T790M-negative when re-assessed by using a less sensitive method (therascreen®) on the same liquid biopsy sample analysed by ddPCR before osimertinib therapy. CONCLUSION: Although liquid biopsy is a relevant tool to diagnose T790M presence in NSCLC patients resistant to EGFR-TKI, in case of a low ratio T790M/activating mutation, tissue biopsy should be considered to exclude the presence of SCLC transformation and/or other concomitant resistance mechanisms.

Phase II trial of single-agent oral vinorelbine in elderly (> or =70 years) patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and poor performance status.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with poor performance status (PS) are a special population requiring particular attention. Single-agent oral vinorelbine could be an attractive option. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 43 patients with stage IIIB-IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS of two or more with good functional status were prospectively recruited. Oral vinorelbine was administered at the dose of 60 mg/m(2) on days 1-8 every 3 weeks. Primary end points were response rate and safety. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 18.6% with 8 partial responses; 18 of 43 (41.8%) experienced stable disease lasting >12 weeks and 17 of 43 (39.6%) disease progression for an overall clinical benefit of 60.4%. Median time to progression was 4.0 (range 2-22) months and median overall survival 8.0 (range 3-35) months. Treatment was well tolerated. Of 187 cycles, we did not observe any grade 3/4 toxicity with the exception of a single not-febrile G3 neutropenia. Regardless of severity, main toxic effects observed were nausea in 48.1% and vomiting in 22.9% of patients, anemia in 43.2%, fatigue in 32.6% and leukopenia in 23.2%. CONCLUSION: Single-agent oral vinorelbine is extremely safe in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC and ECOG PS of two or more and may represent a valid option in this very special population.

Primary cardiac angiosarcoma: a fatal disease.

A 42-year-old man with a cardiac tamponade underwent an urgent pericardiotomy that showed tumoral tissue, covering the surface of the right atrium. The tumor was then partially excised, and the histological examination revealed the presence of a moderately-differentiated angiosarcoma. The patient was then referred to the oncology unit and scheduled for a chemotherapy schedule including Epirubicin (60 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 2) plus Ifosfamide (2000 mg/m(2), on days 1 to 3) and Uromitexan (2000 mg/m(2) at hours 0, 4, 8 after IFO). All drugs were administered every three weeks. After two cycles, a restaging work-up revealed a partial remission. The treatment was continued for another two cycles. A new evaluation by cardiac MRI evidenced a local and distant (lung) progression of disease. The patient died after three months. This paper confirms that cardiac angiosarcoma is a fatal disease, and the prognosis is usually 6-11 months from time of diagnosis.

Weekly paclitaxel plus capecitabine in advanced breast cancer patients: dose-finding trial of GOIRC and GOL.

BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel and capecitabine have demonstrated a synergic effect and significant antitumor activity in patients with advanced breast cancer. A weekly schedule of paclitaxel obtained a response rate of 50-68% in advanced breast cancer and less serious side-effects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-two patients with advanced breast cancer pretreated with chemotherapy were enrolled in a dose-finding trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of paclitaxel given on days 1, 8 and 15 of each cycle combined with capecitabine given twice daily from day 1 through day 14, every 21 days. Three patients were recruited at one of six dose levels (paclitaxel 70-100 mg/m2, capecitabine 1650-2500 mg/m2). RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were accrued and 31 were evaluated for toxicity. One DLT has been experienced at level VI as diarrhea grade 3. We determined dose level V as the MTD, but we recommend dose level IV for phase II studies (capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 orally twice daily plus paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 intravenously weekly), owing to cumulative toxicity at level V. The objective response rate was 43%. CONCLUSIONS: Weekly paclitaxel plus capecitabine is a safety and active chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic breast cancer.

Multicentric phase II trial of gemcitabine plus epirubicin plus paclitaxel as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer.

In this phase II, multicentre trial, patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) were treated with a combination of gemcitabine, epirubicin and paclitaxel (GET). The primary objective of this study was to determine the tolerability and activity in terms of complete responce (CR) and overall response rate of the GET combination in this patient population. Patients with no prior treatment for MBC, and at least one bidimensionally measurable lesion received gemcitabine 1000 mg m(-2) intravenously (i.v.) over 30 min on days 1 and 4, followed by epirubicin i.v. at 90 mg m(-2) on day 1, and paclitaxel 175 mg m(-2) over 3 h on day 1, every 21 days, up to eight courses. From May 1999 to June 2000, 48 patients were enrolled from seven Italian institutions. A total of 297 chemotherapy courses were administered with a median of six cycles patient(-1) (range 1-8). Seven patients (15%) obtained CR and 27 patients (56%) had partial responce, for an overall response rate of 71% (95% CI: 58.3-83.7). After a median follow-up of 23.7 months (range 7.0-34.4), median progression-free survival was 10.5 months (95% CI: 9.2-11.7), and median overall survival 25.9 months. The main haematological toxicity consisted of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia that occurred in 62% of cycles (22% grade 4 and 40% grade 3). The GET combination is active and well tolerated as first-line chemotherapy for MBC.

The gemcitabine/epirubicin/paclitaxel trials in advanced breast cancer.

Numerous trials have shown that the pharmacokinetic interferences of epirubicin (Ellence)/paclitaxel (Taxol) combinations produce less pharmacodynamic effect than doxorubicin/paclitaxel regimens. Paclitaxel is more easily combined when infused over 3 (as compared to 24) hours; the administration of optimal doses of both agents is important. Based on these findings, a phase II study was performed to evaluate the feasibility and activity of the combination of gemcitabine (Gemzar), epirubicin, and paclitaxel as first-line therapy in advanced breast cancer. Patients received gemcitabine at 1,000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 4, plus epirubicin at 90 mg/m2 on day 1, plus paclitaxel at 175 mg/m2/d on day 1 every 21 days. After six courses, patients less than 60 years old and in complete or partial remission or stable disease were treated with high-dose chemotherapy as consolidation treatment. The overall response rate was 92%, with 31% complete responses; 25 patients received high-dose chemotherapy, achieving a final overall response rate of 97%, with 47% complete responses. At a median follow-up of 25 months, median progression-free survival is 21 months. Grade 4 neutropenia was observed in 64% of patients. Other hematologic toxicities were mild. Mild to moderate peripheral neuropathy was experienced by 39% of patients; grade 2 or 3 mucositis occurred in 25% and 17% of patients, respectively. Based on these results, a multicenter trial has been started in seven Italian centers to confirm the feasibility of this regimen.

Medical treatment of brain metastases from solid tumours.

Brain metastases (BrM) are estimated to occur in 20% to 40% of cancer patients, and two-thirds of them become symptomatic during their lifetime. Although every solid tumour may spread to the brain, the risk of developing BrM is higher in lung cancer, breast cancer and melanoma patients. Several findings suggest that the incidence of BrM is rising as a result of advances in imaging procedures and improvements in therapy, which leaves more cancer patients at risk as survival increases. The prognosis of patients with BrM is dependent on the type of the primary tumour. Breast cancer patients have better prognosis than those with BrM from lung, melanoma or colorectal cancer. Patients with BrM from renal cell carcinoma tend to have a poor prognosis. The optimal treatment of patients with BrM continues to evolve. Several factors interfere with the therapeutic strategy, such as histology of primary tumour, patient compliance, localisation, size and number of BrM, and outcome of extracranial disease. Generally, surgery or stereotactic radiotherapy followed by whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) are indicated in patients with controlled extracranial disease and good performance status presenting an isolated BrM. Adding chemotherapy in this subset of patients is controversial. Supportive care associated with WBRT remains the standard treatment for all patients with multiple symptomatic BrM or with isolated symptomatic BrM in the presence of uncontrolled extracranial disease. For potentially chemosensitive patients with asymptomatic multiple or isolated BrM with disseminated disease, chemotherapy represents the optimal starting therapy.