Neoadjuvant Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy Followed By Response-Adaptive Therapy for HPV+ Oropharyngeal Cancer: OPTIMA II Phase 2 Open-Label Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors improve survival in recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck cancer, yet their role in curative human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal cancer (HPV+ OPC) remains undefined. Neoadjuvant nivolumab and chemotherapy followed by response-adaptive treatment in HPV+ OPC may increase efficacy while reducing toxicity. Objective: To determine the deep response rate and tolerability of the addition of neoadjuvant nivolumab to chemotherapy followed by response-adapted locoregional therapy (LRT) in patients with HPV+ OPC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 2 nonrandomized clinical trial conducted at a single academic center enrolled 77 patients with locoregionally advanced HPV+ OPC from 2017 to 2020. Data analyses were performed from February 10, 2021, to January 9, 2023. Interventions: Addition of nivolumab to neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin (studied in the first OPTIMA trial) followed by response-adapted LRT in patients with HPV+ OPC stages III to IV. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was deep response rate to neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy, defined as the proportion of tumors with 50% or greater shrinkage per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Swallowing function, quality of life, and tissue- and blood-based biomarkers, including programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and circulating tumor HPV-DNA (ctHPV-DNA), were also evaluated. Results: The 73 eligible patients (median [range] age, 61 [37-82] years; 6 [8.2%] female; 67 [91.8%] male) started neoadjuvant nivolumab and chemotherapy. Deep responses were observed in 51 patients (70.8%; 95% CI, 0.59-0.81). Subsequent risk- and response-adaptive therapy was assigned as follows: group A, single-modality radiotherapy alone or transoral robotic surgery (28 patients); group B, intermediate-dose chemoradiotherapy of 45 to 50 Gray (34 patients); and group C, regular-dose chemoradiotherapy of 70 to 75 Gray (10 patients). Two-year PFS and OS were 90.0% (95% CI, 0.80-0.95) and 91.4% (95% CI, 0.82-0.96), respectively. By response-adapted group, 2-year PFS and OS for group A were 96.4% and 96.4%, and group B, 88.0% and 91.0%, respectively. Lower enteral feeding rates and changes in weight, as well as improved swallowing, were observed among patients who received response-adapted LRT. Pathologic complete response rate among patients who underwent transoral robotic surgery was 67.0%. PD-L1 expression was nonsignificantly higher for deeper responses and improved PFS, and ctHPV-DNA clearance was significantly associated with improved PFS. Conclusions and Relevance: This phase 2 nonrandomized clinical trial found that neoadjuvant nivolumab and chemotherapy followed by response-adapted LRT is feasible and has favorable tolerability, excellent OS, and improved functional outcomes in HPV+ OPC, including among patients with high-risk disease. Moreover, addition of nivolumab may benefit high PD-L1 expressors, and sensitive dynamic biomarkers (eg, ctHPV-DNA) are useful for patient selection. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03107182.

Unification of Efforts to Improve Global Access to Cancer Therapeutics: Report From the 2022/2023 Access to Essential Cancer Medicines Stakeholder Summit.

PURPOSE: There is an urgent need to improve access to cancer therapy globally. Several independent initiatives have been undertaken to improve access to cancer medicines, and additional new initiatives are in development. Improved sharing of experiences and increased collaboration are needed to achieve substantial improvements in global access to essential oncology medicines. METHODS: The inaugural Access to Essential Cancer Medicines Stakeholder Meeting was organized by ASCO and convened at the June 2022 ASCO Annual Meeting in Chicago, IL, with two subsequent meetings, Union for International Cancer Control World Cancer Congress held in Geneva, Switzerland, in October 2022 and at the ASCO Annual Meeting in June of 2023. Invited stakeholders included representatives from cancer institutes, physicians, researchers, professional societies, the pharmaceutical industry, patient advocacy organizations, funders, cancer organizations and foundations, policy makers, and regulatory bodies. The session was moderated by ASCO. Past efforts and current and upcoming initiatives were initially discussed (2022), updates on progress were provided (2023), and broad agreement on resulting action steps was achieved with participants. RESULTS: Summit participants recognized that while much work was ongoing to enhance access to cancer therapeutics globally, communication and synergy across projects and organizations could be enhanced by providing a platform for collaboration and shared expertise. CONCLUSION: The summit resulted in new cross-stakeholder insights and planned collaboration addressing barriers to accessing cancer medications. Specific actions and timelines for implementation and reporting were established.

Evaluation of Major Pathologic Response and Pathologic Complete Response as Surrogate End Points for Survival in Randomized Controlled Trials of Neoadjuvant Immune Checkpoint Blockade in Resectable in NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Controversy remains as to whether pathologic complete response (pCR) and major pathologic response (MPR) represent surrogate end points for event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) in neoadjuvant trials for resectable NSCLC. METHODS: A search of PubMed and archives of international conference abstracts was performed from June 2017 through October 31, 2023. Studies incorporating a neoadjuvant arm with immune checkpoint blockade alone or in combination with chemotherapy were included. Those not providing information regarding pCR, MPR, EFS, or OS were excluded. For trial-level surrogacy, log ORs for pCR and MPR and log hazard ratios for EFS and OS were analyzed using a linear regression model weighted by sample size. The regression coefficient and R2 with 95% confidence interval were calculated by the bootstrapping approach. RESULTS: Seven randomized clinical trials were identified for a total of 2385 patients. At the patient level, the R2 of pCR and MPR with 2-year EFS were 0.82 (0.66-0.94) and 0.81 (0.63-0.93), respectively. The OR of 2-year EFS rates by response status was 0.12 (0.07-0.19) and 0.11 (0.05-0.22), respectively. For the 2-year OS, the R2 of pCR and MPR were 0.55 (0.09-0.98) and 0.52 (0.10-0.96), respectively. At the trial level, the R2 for the association of OR for response and HR for EFS was 0.58 (0.00-0.97) and 0.61 (0.00-0.97), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses reveal a robust correlation between pCR and MPR with 2-year EFS but not OS. Trial-level surrogacy was moderate but imprecise. More mature follow-up and data to assess the impact of study crossover are needed.

Radiotherapy Enhances Metastasis Through Immune Suppression by Inducing PD-L1 and MDSC in Distal Sites.

PURPOSE: Radiotherapy (RT) is a widely employed anticancer treatment. Emerging evidence suggests that RT can elicit both tumor-inhibiting and tumor-promoting immune effects. The purpose of this study is to investigate immune suppressive factors of radiotherapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We used a heterologous two-tumor model in which adaptive concomitant immunity was eliminated. RESULTS: Through analysis of PD-L1 expression and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) frequencies using patient peripheral blood mononuclear cells and murine two-tumor and metastasis models, we report that local irradiation can induce a systemic increase in MDSC, as well as PD-L1 expression on dendritic cells and myeloid cells, and thereby increase the potential for metastatic dissemination in distal, nonirradiated tissue. In a mouse model using two distinct tumors, we found that PD-L1 induction by ionizing radiation was dependent on elevated chemokine CXCL10 signaling. Inhibiting PD-L1 or MDSC can potentially abrogate RT-induced metastasis and improve clinical outcomes for patients receiving RT. CONCLUSIONS: Blockade of PD-L1/CXCL10 axis or MDSC infiltration during irradiation can enhance abscopal tumor control and reduce metastasis.

Bintrafusp Alfa With CCRT Followed by Bintrafusp Alfa Versus Placebo With CCRT Followed by Durvalumab in Patients With Unresectable Stage III NSCLC: A Phase 2 Randomized Study.

INTRODUCTION: Preclinical evaluation of bintrafusp alfa (BA) combined with radiotherapy revealed greater antitumor effects than BA or radiotherapy alone. In a phase 1 study, BA exhibited encouraging clinical activity in patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC who had received previous treatment. METHODS: This multicenter, double-blind, controlled phase 2 study (NCT03840902) evaluated the safety and efficacy of BA with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) followed by BA (BA group) versus placebo with cCRT followed by durvalumab (durvalumab group) in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC. The primary end point was progression-free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 as assessed by the investigator. On the basis of the recommendation of an independent data monitoring committee, the study was discontinued before the maturity of overall survival data (secondary end point). RESULTS: A total of 153 patients were randomized to either BA (n = 75) or durvalumab groups (n = 78). The median progression-free survival was 12.8 months versus 14.6 months (stratified hazard ratio = 1.48 [95% confidence interval: 0.69-3.17]), in the BA and durvalumab groups, respectively. Trends for overall response rate (29.3% versus 32.1%) and disease control rate (66.7% versus 70.5%) were similar between the two groups. Any-grade treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 94.6% versus 96.1% of patients in the BA versus durvalumab groups, respectively. Bleeding events in the BA group were mostly grade 1 (21.6%) or 2 (9.5%). CONCLUSIONS: BA with cCRT followed by BA exhibited no efficacy benefit over placebo with cCRT followed by durvalumab in patients with stage III unresectable NSCLC.

What is the ideal endpoint in early-stage immunotherapy neoadjuvant trials in lung cancer?

Numerous clinical trials investigating neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have been performed over the last 5 years. As the number of neoadjuvant trials increases, attention must be paid to identifying informative trial endpoints. Complete pathologic response has been shown to be an appropriate surrogate endpoint for clinical outcomes, such as event-free survival or overall survival, in breast cancer and bladder cancer, but it is less established for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The simultaneous advances reported with adjuvant ICI make the optimal strategy for early-stage disease debatable. Considering the long time required to conduct trials, it is important to identify optimal endpoints and discover surrogate endpoints for survival that can help guide ongoing clinical research. Endpoints can be grouped into two categories: medical and surgical. Medical endpoints are measures of survival and drug activity; surgical endpoints describe the feasibility of neoadjuvant approaches at a surgical level as well as perioperative attrition and complications. There are also several exploratory endpoints, including circulating tumor DNA clearance and radiomics. In this review, we outline the advantages and disadvantages of commonly reported endpoints for clinical trials of neoadjuvant regimens in NSCLC.

Bintrafusp Alfa Versus Pembrolizumab in Patients With Treatment-Naive, Programmed Death-Ligand 1-High Advanced NSCLC: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Bintrafusp alfa, a first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein composed of the extracellular domain of TGF-ßRII (a TGF-ß "trap") fused to a human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody blocking programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), has exhibited clinical activity in a phase 1 expansion cohort of patients with PD-L1-high advanced NSCLC. METHODS: This adaptive phase 3 trial (NCT03631706) compared the efficacy and safety of bintrafusp alfa versus pembrolizumab as first-line treatment in patients with PD-L1-high advanced NSCLC. Primary end points were progression-free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 per independent review committee and overall survival. RESULTS: Patients (N = 304) were randomized one-to-one to receive either bintrafusp alfa or pembrolizumab (n = 152 each). The median follow-up was 14.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 13.1-16.0 mo) for bintrafusp alfa and 14.5 months (95% CI: 13.1-15.9 mo) for pembrolizumab. Progression-free survival by independent review committee was not significantly different between bintrafusp alfa and pembrolizumab arms (median = 7.0 mo [95% CI: 4.2 mo-not reached (NR)] versus 11.1 mo [95% CI: 8.1 mo-NR]; hazard ratio = 1.232 [95% CI: 0.885-1.714]). The median overall survival was 21.1 months (95% CI: 21.1 mo-NR) for bintrafusp alfa and 22.1 months (95% CI: 20.4 mo-NR) for pembrolizumab (hazard ratio = 1.201 [95% CI: 0.796-1.811]). Treatment-related adverse events were higher with bintrafusp alfa versus pembrolizumab; grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 42.4% versus 13.2% of patients, respectively. The study was discontinued at an interim analysis as it was unlikely to meet the primary end point. CONCLUSIONS: First-line treatment with bintrafusp alfa did not exhibit superior efficacy compared with pembrolizumab in patients with PD-L1-high, advanced NSCLC.

Using a Clinically Interpretable End Point Composed of Multiple Outcomes to Evaluate Totality of Treatment Effect in Comparative Oncology Studies.

This cohort study demonstrates how to use cumulative event count curves to create a clinically meaningful end point by simultaneously considering recurrence, progression, and survival times from the individual patient.

Lobar or Sublobar Resection for Peripheral Stage IA Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The increased detection of small-sized peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has renewed interest in sublobar resection in lieu of lobectomy. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, noninferiority, phase 3 trial in which patients with NSCLC clinically staged as T1aN0 (tumor size, ≤2 cm) were randomly assigned to undergo sublobar resection or lobar resection after intraoperative confirmation of node-negative disease. The primary end point was disease-free survival, defined as the time between randomization and disease recurrence or death from any cause. Secondary end points were overall survival, locoregional and systemic recurrence, and pulmonary functions. RESULTS: From June 2007 through March 2017, a total of 697 patients were assigned to undergo sublobar resection (340 patients) or lobar resection (357 patients). After a median follow-up of 7 years, sublobar resection was noninferior to lobar resection for disease-free survival (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 1.01; 90% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.24). In addition, overall survival after sublobar resection was similar to that after lobar resection (hazard ratio for death, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.26). The 5-year disease-free survival was 63.6% (95% CI, 57.9 to 68.8) after sublobar resection and 64.1% (95% CI, 58.5 to 69.0) after lobar resection. The 5-year overall survival was 80.3% (95% CI, 75.5 to 84.3) after sublobar resection and 78.9% (95% CI, 74.1 to 82.9) after lobar resection. No substantial difference was seen between the two groups in the incidence of locoregional or distant recurrence. At 6 months postoperatively, a between-group difference of 2 percentage points was measured in the median percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, favoring the sublobar-resection group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with peripheral NSCLC with a tumor size of 2 cm or less and pathologically confirmed node-negative disease in the hilar and mediastinal lymph nodes, sublobar resection was not inferior to lobectomy with respect to disease-free survival. Overall survival was similar with the two procedures. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; CALGB 140503 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00499330.).

New reporting items and recommendations for randomized trials impacted by COVID-19 and force majeure events: a targeted approach.

Background: Appropriate analyses and reporting are essential to the reproducibility and interpretation of clinical trials. However, the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic and other force majeure events, like the war in Ukraine, have impacted the conduct of clinical trials. Methods: The number of clinical trials potentially impacted were estimated from clinicaltrials.gov. To identify reporting items considered vital for assessing the impact of COVID-19, we reviewed 35 randomized phase III trials from three top oncology journals published between July and December 2020. For validation, we reviewed 29 phase III trials published between January and December 2021. Results: Our results show that the number of clinical trials being potentially impacted in cancer, cardiovascular diseases, and diabetes is at least 1,484, 535, and 145, respectively. The magnitude of disruption is most significant in oncology trials. Based on the review of 35 trials, a modified checklist with ten new and four modified items covering pandemic's impact on trial conduct, protocol changes, delays, data capture, analysis and interpretation was developed to ensure comprehensive and transparent reporting. Our validation shows that six out of seven applicable reporting items were reported in less than 21% of the articles. Conclusions: Our recommendations were proposed to improve the reporting of randomized clinical trials impacted by COVID-19 and force majeure events that are broadly applicable to different areas of medical research.

Plain language summary of the CheckMate 816 study results: nivolumab plus chemotherapy given before surgery for non-small-cell lung cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: In this article, we summarize results from the ongoing phase 3 CheckMate 816 clinical study that were published in The New England Journal of Medicine in 2022. The goal of CheckMate 816 was to find out if nivolumab, an immunotherapy that activates a person's immune system (the body's natural defense system) to fight cancer, plus chemotherapy works better than chemotherapy alone when given before surgery in people with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that can be removed surgically (resectable NSCLC). WHAT HAPPENED IN THE STUDY?: Adults who had not previously taken medications to treat NSCLC and whose cancer could be removed with surgery were included in CheckMate 816. During this study, a computer randomly assigned the treatment each person would receive before surgery for NSCLC. In total, 179 people were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab plus chemotherapy, and 179 people were randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy alone. The researchers assessed whether people who received nivolumab plus chemotherapy lived longer without the cancer geting worse or coming back and whether there were any cancer cells left in the tumor and lymph nodes removed by surgery. The researchers also assessed how adding nivolumab to chemotherapy affected the timing and outcomes of surgery and whether the combination of these drugs was safe. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Researchers found that people who took nivolumab plus chemotherapy lived longer without the cancer getting worse or coming back compared with those who took chemotherapy alone. More people in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group had no cancer cells left in the tumor and lymph nodes removed by surgery. Most people went on to have surgery in both treatment groups; the people who took nivolumab plus chemotherapy instead of chemotherapy alone had less extensive surgeries and were more likely to have good outcomes after less extensive surgeries. Adding nivolumab to chemotherapy did not lead to an increase in the rate of side effects compared with chemotherapy alone, and side effects were generally mild and manageable. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: Results from CheckMate 816 support the benefit of using nivolumab plus chemotherapy before surgery for people with resectable NSCLC. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02998528 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

High-Dose Once-Daily Thoracic Radiotherapy in Limited-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: CALGB 30610 (Alliance)/RTOG 0538.

PURPOSE: Although level 1 evidence supports 45-Gy twice-daily radiotherapy as standard for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer, most patients receive higher-dose once-daily regimens in clinical practice. Whether increasing radiotherapy dose improves outcomes remains to be prospectively demonstrated. METHODS: This phase III trial, CALGB 30610/RTOG 0538 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00632853), was conducted in two stages. In the first stage, patients with limited-stage disease were randomly assigned to receive 45-Gy twice-daily, 70-Gy once-daily, or 61.2-Gy concomitant-boost radiotherapy, starting with either the first or second (of four total) chemotherapy cycles. In the second stage, allocation to the 61.2-Gy arm was discontinued following planned interim toxicity analysis, and the study continued with two remaining arms. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Trial accrual opened on March 15, 2008, and closed on December 1, 2019. All patients randomly assigned to 45-Gy twice-daily (n = 313) or 70-Gy once-daily radiotherapy (n = 325) are included in this analysis. After a median follow-up of 4.7 years, OS was not improved on the once-daily arm (hazard ratio for death, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.17; P = .594). Median survival is 28.5 months for twice-daily treatment, and 30.1 months for once-daily treatment, with 5-year OS of 29% and 32%, respectively. Treatment was tolerable, and the frequency of severe adverse events, including esophageal and pulmonary toxicity, was similar on both arms. CONCLUSION: Although 45-Gy twice-daily radiotherapy remains the standard of care, this study provides the most robust information available to help guide the choice of thoracic radiotherapy regimen for patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer.

STK11 Inactivation Predicts Rapid Recurrence in Inoperable Early-Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Molecular factors predicting relapse in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (ES-NSCLC) are poorly understood, especially in inoperable patients receiving radiotherapy (RT). In this study, we compared the genomic profiles of inoperable and operable ES-NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 53 patients with nonsquamous ES-NSCLC (stage I-II) treated at a single institution (University of Chicago) with surgery (ie, operable; n = 30) or RT (ie, inoperable; n = 23) who underwent tumor genomic profiling. A second cohort of ES-NSCLC treated with RT (Stanford, n = 39) was included to power clinical analyses. Prognostic gene alterations were identified and correlated with clinical variables. The primary clinical end point was the correlation of prognostic genes with the cumulative incidence of relapse, disease-free survival, and overall survival (OS) in a pooled RT cohort from the two institutions (N = 62). RESULTS: Although the surgery cohort exhibited lower rates of relapse, the RT cohort was highly enriched for somatic STK11 mutations (43% v 6.7%). Receiving supplemental oxygen (odds ratio [OR] = 5.5), 20+ pack-years of tobacco smoking (OR = 6.1), and Black race (OR = 4.3) were associated with increased frequency of STK11 mutations. In the pooled RT cohort (N = 62), STK11 mutation was strongly associated with inferior oncologic outcomes: 2-year incidence of relapse was 62% versus 20% and 2-year OS was 52% versus 85%, remaining independently prognostic on multivariable analyses (relapse: subdistribution hazard ratio = 4.0, P = .0041; disease-free survival: hazard ratio, 6.8, P = .0002; OS: hazard ratio, 6.0, P = .022). STK11 mutations were predominantly associated with distant failure, rather than local. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of ES-NSCLC, STK11 inactivation was associated with poor oncologic outcomes after RT and demonstrated a novel association with clinical hypoxia, which may underlie its correlation with medical inoperability. Further validation in larger cohorts and investigation of effective adjuvant systemic therapies may be warranted.

Phase Ib Study of Telisotuzumab Vedotin in Combination With Erlotinib in Patients With c-Met Protein-Expressing Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Overexpression of c-Met protein and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations can co-occur in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), providing strong rationale for dual targeting. Telisotuzumab vedotin (Teliso-V), a first-in-class antibody-drug conjugate targeting c-Met, has shown a tolerable safety profile and antitumor activity as monotherapy. Herein, we report the results of a phase Ib study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02099058) evaluating Teliso-V plus erlotinib, an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), in patients with c-Met-positive (+) NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study evaluated Teliso-V (2.7 mg/kg once every 21 days) plus erlotinib (150 mg once daily) in adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with c-Met+ NSCLC. Later enrollment required presence of an EGFR-activating mutation (EGFR-M+) and progression on a prior EGFR TKI. End points included safety, pharmacokinetics, objective response rate (ORR), and progression-free survival (PFS). The efficacy-evaluable population consisted of c-Met+ patients (confirmed histology [H]-score ≥ 150) who had at least one postbaseline scan; c-Met+ patients with H-scores ≥ 225 were classified as c-Met high. RESULTS: As of January 2020, 42 patients were enrolled (N = 36 efficacy-evaluable). Neuropathies were the most common any-grade adverse events reported, with 24 of 42 patients (57%) experiencing at least one event. The pharmacokinetic profile of Teliso-V plus erlotinib was similar to Teliso-V monotherapy. Median PFS for all efficacy-evaluable patients was 5.9 months (95% CI, 2.8 to not reached). ORR for EGFR-M+ patients (n = 28) was 32.1%. Of EGFR-M+ patients, those who were c-Met high (n = 15) had an ORR of 52.6%. Median PFS was 6.8 months for non-T790M+ and for those whose T790M status was unknown, versus 3.7 months for T790M+. CONCLUSION: Teliso-V plus erlotinib showed encouraging antitumor activity and acceptable toxicity in EGFR TKI-pretreated patients with EGFR-M+, c-Met+ NSCLC.

Epstein-Barr Virus DNA Screening in Asymptomatic People without Known Nasopharyngeal Cancer.

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma is an uncommon head and neck malignancy in most parts of the world but is endemic in Southeast Asia and North Africa.1 Over 130,000 new cases were recorded globally and 80,000 patients succumbed to nasopharyngeal carcinoma in 2020.2 Owing to relatively mild symptoms during early stages, most patients are diagnosed with clinically advanced disease, and the 5-year overall survival for these patients remains approximately 50%.3 Hence, early detection when the disease is most treatable may improve clinical outcomes.

Uncertainty-informed deep learning models enable high-confidence predictions for digital histopathology.

A model's ability to express its own predictive uncertainty is an essential attribute for maintaining clinical user confidence as computational biomarkers are deployed into real-world medical settings. In the domain of cancer digital histopathology, we describe a clinically-oriented approach to uncertainty quantification for whole-slide images, estimating uncertainty using dropout and calculating thresholds on training data to establish cutoffs for low- and high-confidence predictions. We train models to identify lung adenocarcinoma vs. squamous cell carcinoma and show that high-confidence predictions outperform predictions without uncertainty, in both cross-validation and testing on two large external datasets spanning multiple institutions. Our testing strategy closely approximates real-world application, with predictions generated on unsupervised, unannotated slides using predetermined thresholds. Furthermore, we show that uncertainty thresholding remains reliable in the setting of domain shift, with accurate high-confidence predictions of adenocarcinoma vs. squamous cell carcinoma for out-of-distribution, non-lung cancer cohorts.

Highly aneuploid non-small cell lung cancer shows enhanced responsiveness to concurrent radiation and immune checkpoint blockade.

Over 500 clinical trials are investigating combination radiotherapy and immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) as cancer treatments; however, the majority of trials have found no positive interaction. Here we perform a comprehensive molecular analysis of a randomized phase I clinical trial of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with concurrent or sequential ablative radiotherapy and ICB. We show that concurrent treatment is superior to sequential treatment in augmenting local and distant tumor responses and in improving overall survival in a subset of patients with immunologically cold, highly aneuploid tumors, but not in those with less aneuploid tumors. In addition, radiotherapy alone decreases intratumoral cytotoxic T cell and adaptive immune signatures, whereas radiotherapy and ICB upregulates key immune pathways. Our findings challenge the prevailing paradigm that local ablative radiotherapy beneficially stimulates the immune response. We propose the use of tumor aneuploidy as a biomarker and therapeutic target in personalizing treatment approaches for patients with NSCLC treated with radiotherapy and ICB.

A Randomized Multi-institutional Phase II Trial of Everolimus as Adjuvant Therapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Squamous Cell Cancer of the Head and Neck.

PURPOSE: Investigate whether adjuvant everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, improves progression-free survival (PFS) in advanced-stage head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and provide outcomes related to correlative biological factors associated with disease control. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind phase II trial of patients with advanced-stage HNSCC from 13 institutions who were confirmed disease-free post-definitive therapy and enrolled between December 2010 and March 2015. Patients received adjuvant everolimus or placebo daily (10 mg, oral) for a maximum of 1 year. p16 IHC as a surrogate marker for human papillomavirus infection and whole-exome sequencing were performed. Cox proportional hazard models estimated hazard rates. Log-rank tests evaluated differences in survival. The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints and objectives included overall survival (OS) and toxicity assessment. RESULTS: 52 patients [median (range) age, 58 (37-76) years; 43 men (83%), 9 women (17%)] were randomized to placebo (n = 24) or everolimus (n = 28). PFS favored everolimus, but was not significant [log-rank P = 0.093; HR = 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.17-1.17]. There was no difference in OS (P = 0.29; HR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.20-16.2). Everolimus resulted in significant improvement in PFS for p16-negative patients (n = 31; P = 0.031; HR = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.07-0.97), although subgroup analysis showed no difference for p16-positive patients (n = 21; P = 0.93). Further, PFS was significantly higher in TP53-mutated (TP53mut) patients treated with everolimus compared with placebo (log-rank P = 0.027; HR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.06-0.95). No treatment difference was seen in patients with TP53 wild-type tumors (P = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: p16-negative and TP53mut patients may benefit from adjuvant treatment with everolimus.