Efficacy and safety of tepotinib in Asian patients with advanced NSCLC with MET exon 14 skipping enrolled in VISION.

BACKGROUND: Tepotinib, a MET inhibitor approved for the treatment of MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping NSCLC, demonstrated durable clinical activity in VISION (Cohort A + C; N = 313): objective response rate (ORR) 51.4% (95% CI: 45.8, 57.1); median duration of response (mDOR) 18.0 months (95% CI: 12.4, 46.4). We report outcomes in Asian patients from VISION (Cohort A + C) (cut-off: November 20, 2022). METHODS: Patients with advanced METex14 skipping NSCLC, detected by liquid or tissue biopsy, received tepotinib 500 mg (450 mg active moiety) once daily. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: objective response (RECIST 1.1) by independent review. Secondary endpoints included: DOR, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). RESULTS: Across treatment lines in 106 Asian patients (39.6% female, 43.4% smoking history, 79.2% adenocarcinoma, 47.2% treatment-naive), ORR was 56.6% (95% CI: 46.6, 66.2), mDOR 18.5 months (10.4, ne), mPFS 13.8 months (10.8, 22.0), and mOS 25.5 months (19.3, 36.4). Consistent efficacy observed, regardless of baseline characteristics. HRQoL remained stable during treatment. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 95.3% of patients (39.6% Grade ≥3). Most common TRAEs: peripheral edema (62.3%), creatinine increase (38.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Tepotinib demonstrated robust and durable efficacy, with a manageable safety profile, in Asian patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02864992.

RESILIENT Part 2: A Randomized, Open-Label Phase III Study of Liposomal Irinotecan Versus Topotecan in Adults With Relapsed Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: The phase III RESILIENT trial compared second-line liposomal irinotecan with topotecan in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with SCLC and progression on or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous (IV) liposomal irinotecan (70 mg/m2 every 2 weeks in a 6-week cycle) or IV topotecan (1.5 mg/m2 daily for 5 consecutive days, every 3 weeks in a 6-week cycle). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Key secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Among 461 randomly assigned patients, 229 received liposomal irinotecan and 232 received topotecan. The median follow-up was 18.4 months. The median OS was 7.9 months with liposomal irinotecan versus 8.3 months with topotecan (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.37]; P = .31). The median PFS per blinded independent central review (BICR) was 4.0 months with liposomal irinotecan and 3.3 months with topotecan (HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.20]; nominal P = .71); ORR per BICR was 44.1% (95% CI, 37.6 to 50.8) and 21.6% (16.4 to 27.4), respectively. Overall, 42.0% and 83.4% of patients receiving liposomal irinotecan and topotecan, respectively, experienced grade ≥3 related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The most common grade ≥3 related TEAEs were diarrhea (13.7%), neutropenia (8.0%), and decreased neutrophil count (4.4%) with liposomal irinotecan and neutropenia (51.6%), anemia (30.9%), and leukopenia (29.1%) with topotecan. CONCLUSION: Liposomal irinotecan and topotecan demonstrated similar median OS and PFS in patients with relapsed SCLC. Although the primary end point of OS was not met, liposomal irinotecan demonstrated a higher ORR than topotecan. The safety profile of liposomal irinotecan was consistent with its known safety profile; no new safety concerns emerged.

Re-inventing a better wheel? Serplulimab for squamous cell lung cancer.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have reshaped the treatment landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, chemoimmunotherapy trials dedicated to squamous NSCLC are limited. In this issue of Cancer Cell, Zhou et al. demonstrate serplulimab plus chemotherapy as an effective first-line regimen to treat patients with advanced squamous NSCLC.

Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy in Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutated Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Disease Progression on Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: Final Results of CheckMate 722.

PURPOSE: The phase III CheckMate 722 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02864251) evaluated nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after disease progression on EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). METHODS: Patients with disease progression after first- or second-generation EGFR TKI therapy (without EGFR T790M mutation) or osimertinib (with/without T790M mutation) were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab (360 mg once every 3 weeks) plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy (once every 3 weeks) or platinum-doublet chemotherapy alone (once every 3 weeks) for four cycles. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included 9- and 12-month PFS rates, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and duration of response (DOR). RESULTS: Overall, 294 patients were randomly assigned. At final analysis (median follow-up, 38.1 months), PFS was not significantly improved with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy (median, 5.6 v 5.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.56 to 1.00]; P = .0528), with 9- and 12-month PFS rates of 25.9% versus 19.8%, and 21.2% versus 15.9%, respectively. Post hoc PFS subgroup analyses showed a trend favoring nivolumab plus chemotherapy in patients with tumors harboring sensitizing EGFR mutations (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.97]), one line of previous EGFR TKI (0.72 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.97]), or both (0.64 [95% CI, 0.47 to 0.88]). Median OS was 19.4 months with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus 15.9 months with chemotherapy, while ORR was 31.3% versus 26.7%, and median DOR was 6.7 versus 5.6 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 44.7% and 29.4% of patients treated with nivolumab plus chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone, respectively. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab plus chemotherapy did not significantly improve PFS versus chemotherapy in patients with EGFR-mutated metastatic NSCLC previously treated with EGFR TKIs. No new safety signals were identified.

Avelumab Versus Platinum-Based Doublet Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Patients With High-Expression Programmed Death-Ligand 1-Positive Metastatic NSCLC: Primary Analysis From the Phase 3 JAVELIN Lung 100 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: We report the primary analysis from JAVELIN Lung 100, a phase 3 trial comparing avelumab (anti⁠-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) versus platinum-based doublet chemotherapy as first-line treatment for PD-L1-positive (+) advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Adults with PD-L1+ (≥1% of tumor cells; PD-L1 immunohistochemistry 73-10 pharmDx), EGFR and ALK wild-type, previously untreated, stage IV NSCLC were randomized to avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W), avelumab 10 mg/kg once weekly (QW) for 12 weeks and Q2W thereafter, or platinum-based doublet chemotherapy every 3 weeks. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) per independent review committee. The primary analysis population was patients with high-expression PD-L1+ tumors (≥80% of tumor cells). RESULTS: A total of 1214 patients were randomized to avelumab Q2W (n = 366), avelumab QW (n = 322), or chemotherapy (n = 526). In the primary analysis population, hazard ratios (HRs) for OS and PFS with avelumab Q2W (n = 151) versus chemotherapy (n = 216) were 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67-1.09; one-sided p = 0.1032; median OS, 20.1 versus 14.9 mo) and 0.71 (95% CI: 0.54-0.93; one-sided p = 0.0070; median PFS, 8.4 versus 5.6 mo), respectively. With avelumab QW (n = 130) versus chemotherapy (n = 129), HRs were 0.79 (95% CI: 0.59-1.07; one-sided p = 0.0630; median OS, 19.3 versus 15.3 mo) and 0.72 (95% CI: 0.52-0.98; one-sided p = 0.0196; median PFS, 7.5 versus 5.6 mo), respectively. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Longer median OS and PFS were observed with avelumab versus platinum-based doublet chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC, but differences in OS and PFS were not statistically significant, and the trial did not meet its primary objective. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT02576574.

Effects of Early Short-Course Corticosteroids on Immune-Related Adverse Events in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: In real-world practice, most non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving combined immunochemotherapy are exposed to short-course corticosteroids following immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) infusion to prevent chemotherapy-related adverse events. However, whether this early short-course corticosteroid use prevents immune-related adverse events (irAEs) remains unknown. METHODS: Between January 1st, 2015, and December 31st, 2020, NSCLC patients who received at least one cycle of ICI with or without chemotherapy were enrolled. Early short-course corticosteroids were defined as corticosteroids administered following ICI injection and before chemotherapy on the same day and no longer than 3 days afterward. The patients were categorized as either "corticosteroid group" or "non-corticosteroid group" depending on their exposure to early short-course corticosteroid. The frequencies of irAEs requiring systemic corticosteroid use and irAEs leading to ICI discontinuation were compared between the two groups, and exploratory survival analyses were performed. RESULTS: Among 252 eligible patients, 137 patients were categorized as "corticosteroid group" and 115 patients as "non-corticosteroid group." The corticosteroid group enriched patients in the first-line setting (n = 75, 54.7%), compared to the non-corticosteroid group (n = 28, 24.3%). Thirty patients (21.9%) in the corticosteroid group and 35 patients (30.4%) in the non-corticosteroid group developed irAEs requiring systemic corticosteroid use (odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-1.18; p = 0.15). Eight patients (5.8%) in the corticosteroid group, as compared with 18 patients (15.7%) in the non-corticosteroid group, permanently discontinued ICI due to irAEs (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.12-0.85; p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Early short-course corticosteroids following each ICI injection may reduce the rate of irAEs that lead to ICIs discontinuation, warranting further investigation of its prophylactic use to mitigate clinically significant irAEs.

Canakinumab as Adjuvant Therapy in Patients With Completely Resected Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From the CANOPY-A Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: Effective treatments for resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are limited and relapse rates are high. The interleukin (IL)-1ß pathway has been linked with tumor development and progression, including in the Canakinumab Anti-Inflammatory Thrombosis Outcomes cardiovascular study in which IL-1ß pathway inhibition with canakinumab reduced lung cancer incidence and mortality in an exploratory analysis. METHODS: CANOPY-A (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03447769) is a phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study of canakinumab versus placebo for adult patients with stage II-IIIA or IIIB (T >5 cm, N2-positives II-IIIB; American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control version 8), completely resected NSCLC who had received adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS) and the key secondary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In total, 1,382 patients were randomized to 200 mg canakinumab (n = 693) or placebo (n = 689) once every 3 weeks for 18 cycles. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 20.8% and 19.6% of patients receiving canakinumab and placebo, respectively; AEs led to discontinuation in 4.3% and 4.1% of patients in these groups, respectively. This study did not meet its primary end point. Median DFS was 35.0 months (canakinumab arm) and 29.7 months (placebo arm; hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.14; one-sided P = .258). DFS subgroup analyses did not show any meaningful differences between arms. As expected, because of canakinumab-driven IL-1ß pathway inhibition, C-reactive protein and IL-6 levels decreased in the canakinumab arm versus placebo arm, but had no correlation with differential clinical outcomes. OS was not formally tested as DFS was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: CANOPY-A did not show a DFS benefit of adding canakinumab after surgery and adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with resected, stage II-III NSCLC. No new safety signals were identified with canakinumab.

CNS Efficacy of Osimertinib With or Without Chemotherapy in Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutated Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: We report CNS efficacy of first-line osimertinib plus chemotherapy versus osimertinib monotherapy in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the phase III FLAURA2 study according to baseline CNS metastasis status. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to osimertinib plus platinum-pemetrexed (combination) or osimertinib monotherapy until disease progression or discontinuation. Brain scans were performed in all patients at baseline and progression and at scheduled assessments until progression for patients with baseline CNS metastases; scans were assessed by neuroradiologist CNS blinded independent central review (BICR). RESULTS: On the basis of baseline CNS BICR, 118 of 279 (combination) and 104 of 278 (monotherapy) randomly assigned patients had ≥one measurable and/or nonmeasurable CNS lesion and were included in the CNS full analysis set (cFAS); 40 of 118 and 38 of 104 had ≥one measurable target CNS lesion and were included in the post hoc CNS evaluable-for-response set (cEFR). In the cFAS, the hazard ratio (HR) for CNS progression or death was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.33 to 1.01). In patients without baseline CNS metastases, the HR for CNS progression or death was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.43 to 1.04). In the cFAS, CNS objective response rates (ORRs; 95% CI) were 73% (combination; 64 to 81) versus 69% (monotherapy; 59 to 78); 59% versus 43% had CNS complete response (CR). In the cEFR, CNS ORRs (95% CI) were 88% (73 to 96) versus 87% (72 to 96); 48% versus 16% had CNS CR. CONCLUSION: Osimertinib plus platinum-pemetrexed demonstrated improved CNS efficacy compared with osimertinib monotherapy, including delaying CNS progression, irrespective of baseline CNS metastasis status. These data support this combination as a new first-line treatment for patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC, including those with CNS metastases.

Tissue or liquid rebiopsy? A prospective study for simultaneous tissue and liquid NGS after first-line EGFR inhibitor resistance in lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: According to current International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer guideline, physicians may first use plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) methods to identify epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-resistant mechanisms (liquid rebiopsy) for lung cancer. Tissue rebiopsy is recommended if the plasma result is negative. However, this approach has not been evaluated prospectively using next-generation sequencing (NGS). METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients with lung cancer with first-line EGFR-TKI resistance who underwent tissue rebiopsy. The rebiopsied tissues and cfDNA were sequenced using targeted NGS, ACTDrug®+, and ACTMonitor®Lung simultaneously. The clinicopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Totally, 86 patients were enrolled. Twenty-six (30%) underwent tissue biopsy but the specimens were inadequate for NGS. Among the 60 patients with paired tissue and liquid rebiopsies, two-thirds (40/60) may still be targetable. T790M mutations were found in 29, including 14 (48%) only from tissue and 5 (17%) only from cfDNA. Twenty-four of them were treated with osimertinib, and progression-free survival was longer in patients without detectable T790M in cfDNA than in patients with detectable T790M in cfDNA (p = 0.02). For the 31 T790M-negative patients, there were six with mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) amplifications, four with ERBB2 amplifications, and one with CCDC6-RET fusion. One with MET amplification and one with ERBB2 amplification responded to subsequent MET and ERBB2 targeting agents respectively. CONCLUSIONS: NGS after EGFR-TKI resistance may detect targetable drivers besides T790M. To do either liquid or tissue NGS only could miss patients with T790M. To do tissue and liquid NGS in parallel after EGFR-TKI resistance may find more patients with targetable cancers.

Pembrolizumab With or Without Lenvatinib for First-Line Metastatic NSCLC With Programmed Cell Death-Ligand 1 Tumor Proportion Score of at least 1% (LEAP-007): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was found to have antitumor activity and acceptable safety in previously treated metastatic NSCLC. We evaluated first-line lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus placebo plus pembrolizumab in metastatic NSCLC in the LEAP-007 study (NCT03829332/NCT04676412). METHODS: Patients with previously untreated stage IV NSCLC with programmed cell death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score of at least 1% without targetable EGFR/ROS1/ALK aberrations were randomized 1:1 to lenvatinib 20 mg or placebo once daily; all patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and overall survival (OS). We report results from a prespecified nonbinding futility analysis of OS performed at the fourth independent data and safety monitoring committee review (futility bound: one-sided p < 0.4960). RESULTS: A total of 623 patients were randomized. At median follow-up of 15.9 months, median (95% confidence interval [CI]) OS was 14.1 (11.4‒19.0) months in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group versus 16.4 (12.6‒20.6) months in the placebo plus pembrolizumab group (hazard ratio = 1.10 [95% CI: 0.87‒1.39], p = 0.79744 [futility criterion met]). Median (95% CI) PFS was 6.6 (6.1‒8.2) months versus 4.2 (4.1‒6.2) months, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.78 [95% CI: 0.64‒0.95]). Grade 3 to 5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 57.9% of patients (179 of 309) versus 24.4% (76 of 312). Per data and safety monitoring committee recommendation, the study was unblinded and lenvatinib and placebo were discontinued. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab did not have a favorable benefit‒risk profile versus placebo plus pembrolizumab. Pembrolizumab monotherapy remains an approved treatment option in many regions for first-line metastatic NSCLC with programmed cell death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score of at least 1% without EGFR/ALK alterations.

Patient-Reported Health-Related Quality of Life in KEYNOTE-604: Pembrolizumab or Placebo Added to Etoposide and Platinum as First-Line Therapy for Extensive-Stage SCLC.

Introduction: In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-604 study (NCT03066778), pembrolizumab plus etoposide and platinum chemotherapy (EP) significantly (p = 0.0023) improved progression-free survival versus placebo plus EP in previously untreated extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). We present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) results from KEYNOTE-604. Methods: Patients with stage IV SCLC were randomized 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks for 35 cycles plus four cycles of EP. Secondary end points included mean change from baseline to week 18 in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) scale and time to deterioration in the composite outcome of cough, chest pain, or dyspnea from QLQ-C30 and QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13. Two-sided, nominal p values are reported. Results: A total of 439 patients completed at least one QLQ-C30 and QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 assessment (pembrolizumab + EP, n = 221; placebo + EP, n = 218). GHS/QoL scores improved from baseline to week 18: least squares mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) changes were 8.7 (5.3-12.1) for pembrolizumab plus EP and 4.2 (0.9-7.5) for placebo plus EP. Between-group differences in least squares mean scores were improved for pembrolizumab plus EP (4.4 [95% CI: 0.2-8.7], p = 0.040]). Median time to deterioration for the composite end point was not reached and 8.7 (95% CI: 5.9-not reached) months, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.80 [95% CI: 0.56-1.14], p = 0.208). Conclusions: First-line pembrolizumab plus EP therapy maintained HRQoL in patients with ES-SCLC and may be associated with greater improvement than placebo plus EP. Together with the efficacy and safety findings in KEYNOTE-604, HRQoL data support the benefit of pembrolizumab in ES-SCLC.

A Phase II Study of Osimertinib in Patients with Advanced-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer following Prior Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor (EGFR TKI) Therapy with EGFR and T790M Mutations Detected in Plasma Circulating Tumour DNA (PLASMA Study).

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) T790M mutations drive resistance in 50% of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who progress on first/second generation (1G/2G) EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and are sensitive to Osimertinib. Tissue sampling is the gold-standard modality of T790M testing, but it is invasive. We evaluated the efficacy of Osimertinib in patients with EGFR mutant NSCLC and T790M in circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA). PLASMA is a prospective, open-label, multicentre single-arm Phase II study. Patients with advanced NSCLC harbouring sensitizing EGFR and T790M mutations in plasma at progression from ≥one 1G/2G TKI were treated with 80 mg of Osimertinib daily until progression. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR); the secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR) and toxicities. Plasma next-generation sequencing was performed to determine Osimertinib resistance mechanisms and assess serial ctDNA. A total of 110 patients from eight centres in five countries were enrolled from 2017 to 2019. The median follow-up duration was 2.64 (IQR 2.44-3.12) years. The ORR was 50.9% (95% CI 41.2-60.6) and the DCR was 84.5% (95% CI 76.4-90.7). Median PFS was 7.4 (95% CI 6.0-9.3) months; median OS was 1.63 (95% CI 1.35-2.16) years. Of all of the patients, 76% had treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), most commonly paronychia (22.7%); 11% experienced ≥ Grade 3 TRAEs. The ctDNA baseline load and dynamics were prognostic. Osimertinib is active in NSCLC harbouring sensitizing EGFR and T790M mutations in ctDNA testing post 1G/2G TKIs.

Central Nervous System Outcomes of Lazertinib Versus Gefitinib in EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC: A LASER301 Subset Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Lazertinib, a third-generation mutant-selective EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, improved progression-free survival compared with gefitinib in the phase 3 LASER301 study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04248829). Here, we report the efficacy of lazertinib and gefitinib in patients with baseline central nervous system (CNS) metastases. METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC were randomized one-to-one to lazertinib (240 mg/d) or gefitinib (250 mg/d). Patients with asymptomatic or stable CNS metastases were included if any planned radiation, surgery, or steroids were completed more than 2 weeks before randomization. For patients with CNS metastases confirmed at screening or subsequently suspected, CNS imaging was performed every 6 weeks for 18 months, then every 12 weeks. End points assessed by blinded independent central review and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 included intracranial progression-free survival, intracranial objective response rate, and intracranial duration of response. RESULTS: Of the 393 patients enrolled in LASER301, 86 (lazertinib, n = 45; gefitinib, n = 41) had measurable and or non-measurable baseline CNS metastases. The median intracranial progression-free survival in the lazertinib group was 28.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.8-28.2) versus 8.4 months (95% CI: 6.7-not reached [NR]) in the gefitinib group (hazard ratio = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20-0.89, p = 0.02). Among patients with measurable CNS lesions, the intracranial objective response rate was numerically higher with lazertinib (94%; n = 17) versus gefitinib (73%; n = 11, p = 0.124). The median intracranial duration of response with lazertinib was NR (8.3-NR) versus 6.3 months (2.8-NR) with gefitinib. Tolerability was similar to the overall LASER301 population. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CNS metastases, lazertinib significantly improved intracranial progression-free survival compared with gefitinib, with more durable responses.

Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in Patients With HER2-Mutant Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Primary Results From the Randomized, Phase II DESTINY-Lung02 Trial.

PURPOSE: Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) 5.4 and 6.4 mg/kg showed robust antitumor activity in multiple cancer indications; however, T-DXd 5.4 mg/kg has not been evaluated in patients with previously treated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-mutant (HER2m; defined as single-nucleotide variants and exon 20 insertions) metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). METHODS: DESTINY-Lung02, a blinded, multicenter, phase II study, investigated T-DXd 5.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for the first time in previously treated (platinum-containing therapy) patients with HER2m mNSCLC and further assessed T-DXd 6.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks in this population. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-two patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to T-DXd 5.4 or 6.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks. As of December 23, 2022, the median duration of follow-up was 11.5 months (range, 1.1-20.6) with 5.4 mg/kg and 11.8 months (range, 0.6-21.0) with 6.4 mg/kg. Confirmed ORR was 49.0% (95% CI, 39.0 to 59.1) and 56.0% (95% CI, 41.3 to 70.0) and median duration of response was 16.8 months (95% CI, 6.4 to not estimable [NE]) and NE (95% CI, 8.3 to NE) with 5.4 and 6.4 mg/kg, respectively. Median treatment duration was 7.7 months (range, 0.7-20.8) with 5.4 mg/kg and 8.3 months (range, 0.7-20.3) with 6.4 mg/kg. Grade ≥ 3 drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 39 of 101 (38.6%) and 29 of 50 (58.0%) patients with 5.4 and 6.4 mg/kg, respectively. 13 of 101 (12.9%) and 14 of 50 (28.0%) patients had adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease (2.0% grade ≥ 3 in each arm) with 5.4 and 6.4 mg/kg, respectively. CONCLUSION: T-DXd demonstrated clinically meaningful responses at both doses. Safety profile was acceptable and generally manageable, favoring T-DXd 5.4 mg/kg.

Upfront liquid next-generation sequencing in treatment-naïve advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients: A prospective randomised study in the Taiwanese health system.

BACKGROUND: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of plasma cell-free DNA identifies driver mutations in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and may complement routine molecular evaluation. The utility of liquid NGS at the start of tumour workup is undetermined. METHODS: This is a randomised study of patients with suspected advanced NSCLC. All patients received blood liquid NGS testing at their first clinic visit and underwent standard histological diagnosis and tissue genotyping, encompassing polymerase chain reaction based methods for EGFR mutation, immunohistochemical (IHC) staining for ALK fusion and BRAF V600E mutation, and an IHC screening followed by confirmation using fluorescence in situ hybridization confirmation for ROS1 fusion. They were then randomly assigned to receive NGS results either after tissue genotyping (Group A) or as soon as possible after histological diagnosis of advanced NSCLC (Group B). The study measured time to start of systemic treatment as the primary endpoint and secondary endpoints included biomarker discovery rate, objective response rate (ORR), and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: This study enroled 180 patients with suspected advanced NSCLC, randomised into two groups. 63 patients in Group A and 59 in Group B with advanced NSCLC were confirmed as advanced NSCLC and analysed. Most had adenocarcinoma (Group A: 77.8%, Group B: 79.7%). The prevalence of EGFR mutations in the two groups was similar (Group A: 57.1%; Group B: 56.6%). Other driver alterations were rare. The median time to treatment was shorter in Group B (20 days) than in Group A (28 days). ORR and PFS did not differ between groups significantly. Liquid NGS had high concordance with tissue testing and identified driver mutations in 42.6% (20/47) of tissue-negative cases. CONCLUSION: Performing liquid NGS at the initial clinic visit for suspected advanced NSCLC identifies more patients suitable for targeted therapies and shortens time to the start of treatment.

Brigatinib Versus Alectinib in ALK-Positive NSCLC After Disease Progression on Crizotinib: Results of Phase 3 ALTA-3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: This open-label, phase 3 trial (ALTA-3; NCT03596866) compared efficacy and safety of brigatinib versus alectinib for ALK+ NSCLC after disease progression on crizotinib. METHODS: Patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC that progressed on crizotinib were randomized 1:1 to brigatinib 180 mg once daily (7-d lead-in, 90 mg) or alectinib 600 mg twice daily, aiming to test superiority. The primary end point was blinded independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Interim analysis for efficacy and futility was planned at approximately 70% of 164 expected PFS events. RESULTS: The population (N = 248; brigatinib, n = 125; alectinib, n = 123) was notable for long median duration of prior crizotinib (16.0-16.8 mo) and low rate of ALK fusion in baseline circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA; 78 of 232 [34%]). Median blinded independent review committee-assessed PFS was 19.3 months with brigatinib and 19.2 months with alectinib (hazard ratio = 0.97 [95% confidence interval: 0.66-1.42], p = 0.8672]). The study met futility criterion. Overall survival was immature (41 events [17%]). Exploratory analyses pooled across the treatment groups revealed median PFS of 11.1 versus 22.5 months in patients with versus without ctDNA-detectable ALK fusion at baseline (hazard ratio: 0.48 [95% confidence interval: 0.32-0.71]). Treatment-related adverse events in more than 30% of patients (brigatinib, alectinib) were elevated levels of blood creatine phosphokinase (70%, 29%), aspartate aminotransferase (53%, 38%), and alanine aminotransferase (40%, 36%). CONCLUSIONS: Brigatinib was not superior to alectinib for PFS in crizotinib-pretreated ALK+ NSCLC. Safety was consistent with the well-established and unique profiles of each drug. The low proportion of patients with ctDNA-detectable ALK fusion may account for prolonged PFS with both drugs in ALTA-3.

Biomarker-directed, pembrolizumab-based combination therapy in non-small cell lung cancer: phase 2 KEYNOTE-495/KeyImPaCT trial interim results.

Although pembrolizumab confers clinical benefit in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), only a subset of patients will respond due to a heterogenous tumor microenvironment. KEYNOTE-495/KeyImPaCT is an ongoing biomarker-directed, adaptively randomized phase 2 study investigating first-line pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) + lenvatinib (20 mg daily), anti-CTLA-4 quavonlimab (25 mg every 6 weeks) or anti-LAG-3 favezelimab (200 mg or 800 mg every 3 weeks) in advanced NSCLC. Patients were categorized by T-cell-inflamed gene expression profile (TcellinfGEP) and tumor mutational burden (TMB) status and randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive pembrolizumab + lenvatinib, pembrolizumab + quavonlimab or pembrolizumab + favezelimab. The primary outcome was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 using pre-specified efficacy thresholds for each biomarker-defined subgroup (>5% (TcellinfGEPlowTMBnon-high (group I)), >20% (TcellinfGEPlowTMBhigh (group II) and TcellinfGEPnon-lowTMBnon-high (group III)) and >45% (TcellinfGEPnon-lowTMBhigh (group IV))). Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival, overall survival and safety. At data cutoff, ORR ranges were 0-12.0% in group I, 27.3-33.3% in group II, 13.6-40.9% in group III and 50.0-60.0% in group IV. ORR with pembrolizumab + lenvatinib in group III met the pre-specified efficacy threshold. The safety profile of each treatment arm was consistent with the known safety profile of each combination. These data demonstrate the feasibility of prospective TcellinfGEP and TMB assessment to study the clinical activity of first-line pembrolizumab-based combination therapies in advanced NSCLC. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03516981 .

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer without tumor PD-L1 expression in Asia.

Aim: We pooled patient-level data from three randomized controlled studies to evaluate the combination of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with untreated advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score <1% in East Asia. Methods: The analysis included 107 patients from China, Japan, Korea, Thailand and Taiwan (pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, n = 56; chemotherapy alone, n = 51). Results: For pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, median overall survival was 21.3 versus 12.6 months (HR, 0.55 [95% CI: 0.35-0.87]) and median progression-free survival was 8.4 versus 6.0 months (HR, 0.64 [95% CI: 0.43-0.96]). Conclusion: The analysis supports the use of pembrolizumab in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy for East Asian patients with PD-L1-negative, advanced NSCLC.

This analysis evaluated outcomes for East Asian patients with a type of advanced lung cancer which does not express a protein called programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1). The patients received either an immunotherapy, called pembrolizumab, in combination with chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone. Overall survival (how long people live) and progression-free survival (how long people live without their disease getting worse) were longer for patients who received treatment with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus those who received chemotherapy alone. Side effects among East Asian patients were similar to those previously described for a global patient population. These results support the use of pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy for East Asian patients with lung cancer that does not express PD-L1. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02039674; NCT02578680; NCT03950674; NCT02775435; NCT03875092 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Safety, Tolerability, and Antitumor Activity of Zipalertinib Among Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Harboring Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Exon 20 Insertions.

PURPOSE: Although several agents targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertions (ex20ins) have recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, toxicities related to the inhibition of wild-type (WT) EGFR are common with these agents and affect overall tolerability. Zipalertinib (CLN-081, TAS6417) is an oral EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with a novel pyrrolopyrimidine scaffold leading to enhanced selectivity for EGFR ex20ins-mutant versus WT EGFR with potent inhibition of cell growth in EGFR ex20ins-positive cell lines. METHODS: This phase 1/2a study of zipalertinib enrolled patients with recurrent or metastatic EGFR ex20ins-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients were treated with zipalertinib at dose levels including 30, 45, 65, 100, and 150 mg orally twice a day. Patients were predominantly female (56%), had a median age of 64 years, and were heavily pretreated (median previous systemic therapies 2, range 1-9). Thirty six percent of patients had received previous non-ex20ins EGFR TKIs and 3/73 (4.1%) patients received previous EGFR ex20ins TKIs. The most frequently reported treatment-related adverse events of any grade included rash (80%), paronychia (32%), diarrhea (30%), and fatigue (21%). No cases of grade 3 or higher drug-related rash or diarrhea were observed at 100 mg twice a day or below. Objective responses occurred across all zipalertinib dose levels tested, with confirmed partial response (PR) observed in 28/73 (38.4%) response-evaluable patients. Confirmed PRs were seen in 16/39 (41%) response-evaluable patients at the dose of 100 mg twice a day. CONCLUSION: Zipalertinib has encouraging preliminary antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with EGFR ex20ins-mutant NSCLC, with an acceptable safety profile, including low frequency of high-grade diarrhea and rash.

Lazertinib Versus Gefitinib as First-Line Treatment in Patients With EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From LASER301.

PURPOSE: Lazertinib is a potent, CNS-penetrant, third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. This global, phase III study (LASER301) compared lazertinib versus gefitinib in treatment-naïve patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion [ex19del]/L858R) locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were 18 years and older with no previous systemic anticancer therapy. Neurologically stable patients with CNS metastases were allowed. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to lazertinib 240 mg once daily orally or gefitinib 250 mg once daily orally, stratified by mutation status and race. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Overall, 393 patients received double-blind study treatment across 96 sites in 13 countries. Median PFS was significantly longer with lazertinib than with gefitinib (20.6 v 9.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.58; P < .001). The PFS benefit of lazertinib over gefitinib was consistent across all predefined subgroups. The objective response rate was 76% in both groups (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.59). Median duration of response was 19.4 months (95% CI, 16.6 to 24.9) with lazertinib versus 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.9 to 10.9) with gefitinib. Overall survival data were immature at the interim analysis (29% maturity). The 18-month survival rate was 80% with lazertinib and 72% with gefitinib (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; P = .116). Observed safety of both treatments was consistent with their previously reported safety profiles. CONCLUSION: Lazertinib demonstrated significant efficacy improvement compared with gefitinib in the first-line treatment of EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC, with a manageable safety profile.