First-line pembrolizumab with or without platinum doublet chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50.

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy is currently used in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements, regardless of PD-L1 expression status. A study comparing chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab alone has never been performed in patients with PD-L1 ≥50%. The aim of this trial is to perform such a comparison as first-line treatment in patients not eligible for locally advanced treatment who have expression of PD-L1 on ≥50% of tumor cells. The expected results are a reduction in the risk of early progression. A higher objective tumor response is also expected with the combination of chemotherapy and pembrolizumab compared with pembrolizumab alone. The study will allow a direct comparison of the proportion of patients who derive long-term benefit from the treatment. Clinical trial number: EudraCT (2020-002626-86); ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04547504).

Lay abstract Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most frequent type of lung cancer. Most NSCLC patients are diagnosed with advanced disease and only 10­15% of them are alive after 5 years. In the absence of specific tumor mutations, the currently recommended treatment is a combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy with the monoclonal antibody pembrolizumab. The goal of immunotherapy is to prevent cancer from evading the immune system by interacting with molecules expressed at the surface of tumor cells (PD-L1) or immune cells (PD-1). A study comparing chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab alone has never been performed in patients with a high level of PD-L1 expression on tumor cells. Therefore we designed the PERSEE study to compare these treatments in advanced-stage NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression on ≥50% of tumor cells.

Open-label Phase II trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of second-line metronomic oral vinorelbine-atezolizumab combination for stage-IV non-small-cell lung cancer - VinMetAtezo trial, (GFPC‡ 04-2017).

Metronomic chemotherapy is defined as frequent low-dose administration without prolonged drug-free breaks. Combining immune-checkpoint inhibitors and metronomic chemotherapy is a new approach to improve responses and delay onset of resistance to immune-checkpoint inhibitors. This multicenter, Phase II, open-label, single-arm study was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of metronomic oral vinorelbine in combination with immune-checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small-cell lung cancers progressing after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The recommended metronomic oral vinorelbine dose will be determined during a safety run-in period including 12 patients; the main study will include 59 additional patients. The primary outcome is progression-free survival at 4 months. Secondary outcomes are safety of the combination, median overall survival, objective response rate, disease-control rate at 4 months and quality of life (NCT03801304).

Mutational status of synchronous and metachronous tumor samples in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUNDS: Despite reported discordance between the mutational status of primary lung cancers and their metastases, metastatic sites are rarely biopsied and targeted therapy is guided by genetic biomarkers detected in the primary tumor. This situation is mostly explained by the apparent stability of EGFR-activating mutations. Given the dramatic increase in the range of candidate drugs and high rates of drug resistance, rebiopsy or liquid biopsy may become widespread. The purpose of this study was to test genetic biomarkers used in clinical practice (EGFR, ALK) and candidate biomarkers identified by the French National Cancer Institute (KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, HER2) in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer for whom two tumor samples were available. METHODS: A retrospective study identified 88 tumor samples collected synchronously or metachronously, from the same or two different sites, in 44 patients. Mutation analysis used SNaPshot (EGFR, KRAS, BRAF missense mutations), pyrosequencing (EGFR and PIK3CA missense mutations), sizing assays (EGFR and HER2 indels) and IHC and/or FISH (ALK rearrangements). RESULTS: About half the patients (52%) harbored at least one mutation. Five patients had an activating mutation of EGFR in both the primary tumor and the metastasis. The T790M resistance mutation was detected in metastases in 3 patients with acquired resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. FISH showed discordance in ALK status between a small biopsy sample and the surgical specimen. KRAS mutations were observed in 36% of samples, six patients (14%) having discordant genotypes; all discordances concerned sampling from different sites. Two patients (5%) showed PI3KCA mutations. One metastasis harbored both PI3KCA and KRAS mutations, while the synchronously sampled primary tumor was mutation free. No mutations were detected in BRAF and HER2. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlighted noteworthy intra-individual discordance in KRAS mutational status, whereas EGFR status was stable. Intratumoral heterogeneity for ALK rearrangement suggests a limitation of single-biopsy analysis for therapeutic strategy with crizotinib.

Uncommon MET mutational landscape in a non-small cell lung cancer patient treated with crizotinib: Case report.

Background: MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping mutations are oncogenic drivers observed in approximately 3-4% of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). Several distinct genetic alterations leading to METex14 have been reported but clinical significances of rare mutations are not well defined as well as outcomes of patients upon MET inhibitors (METi). Case presentation: This report presents the case of a patient with metastatic NSCLC harboring an uncommon MET mutational landscape including notably a novel METex14 mutation (R1022L). Dramatic but transient efficacy was observed under crizotinib, due to early occurrence of acquired both on- and off-target mechanisms of resistance such as MET D1246H mutation and wild-type KRAS amplification. Conclusion: Our case provides additional data on MET rare oncogenic variants and their sensitivity to METi. Systematic assessment of post-tyrosine kinase inhibitor tumor sample remains critical to identify on- and off-target mechanisms that may represent therapeutically targetable drivers in resistant patients.

Overall Survival From the EORTC LCG-1613 APPLE Trial of Osimertinib Versus Gefitinib Followed by Osimertinib in Advanced EGFR-Mutant Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Osimertinib has been established as a standard of care for patients with common sensitizing EGFR-mutant advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) although the sequential approach (first-generation inhibitor gefitinib followed by osimertinib) has not been formally compared. The phase II APPLE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02856893) enrolled 156 treatment-naïve patients, and two treatment strategies were evaluated: osimertinib up front or the sequential treatment approach with gefitinib up front followed by osimertinib at the time of progression, either molecular progression (detection of plasma T790M resistance mutation) regardless of the radiologic status or just at the time of radiologic progression. Patients' characteristics were well balanced, except for the higher proportion of baseline brain metastases in the sequential approach (29% v 19%). Per protocol, 73% of patients switched to osimertinib in the sequential arm. Up-front treatment with osimertinib was associated with a lower risk of brain progression versus the sequential approach (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54 [90% CI, 0.34 to 0.86]), but a comparable overall survival was observed between both strategies (HR, 1.01 [90% CI, 0.61 to 1.68]), with the 18-month survival probability of 84% and 82.3%, respectively. The APPLE trial suggests that a sequential treatment approach is associated with more frequent progression in the brain but a similar survival in advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC.

Erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for European patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (EURTAC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Erlotinib has been shown to improve progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy when given as first-line treatment for Asian patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with activating EGFR mutations. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of erlotinib compared with standard chemotherapy for first-line treatment of European patients with advanced EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC. METHODS: We undertook the open-label, randomised phase 3 EURTAC trial at 42 hospitals in France, Italy, and Spain. Eligible participants were adults (> 18 years) with NSCLC and EGFR mutations (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation in exon 21) with no history of chemotherapy for metastatic disease (neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy ending ≥ 6 months before study entry was allowed). We randomly allocated participants (1:1) according to a computer-generated allocation schedule to receive oral erlotinib 150 mg per day or 3 week cycles of standard intravenous chemotherapy of cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) on day 1) or gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8). Carboplatin (AUC 6 with docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) or AUC 5 with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2)) was allowed in patients unable to have cisplatin. Patients were stratified by EGFR mutation type and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0 vs 1 vs 2). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received study drug (≥ 1 dose). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00446225. FINDINGS: Between Feb 15, 2007, and Jan 4, 2011, 174 patients with EGFR mutations were enrolled. One patient received treatment before randomisation and was thus withdrawn from the study; of the remaining patients, 86 were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib and 87 to receive standard chemotherapy. The preplanned interim analysis showed that the study met its primary endpoint; enrolment was halted, and full evaluation of the results was recommended. At data cutoff (Jan 26, 2011), median PFS was 9·7 months (95% CI 8·4-12·3) in the erlotinib group, compared with 5·2 months (4·5-5·8) in the standard chemotherapy group (hazard ratio 0·37, 95% CI 0·25-0·54; p < 0·0001). Main grade 3 or 4 toxicities were rash (11 [13%] of 84 patients given erlotinib vs none of 82 patients in the chemotherapy group), neutropenia (none vs 18 [22%]), anaemia (one [1%] vs three [4%]), and increased amino-transferase concentrations (two [2%] vs 0). Five (6%) patients on erlotinib had treatment-related severe adverse events compared with 16 patients (20%) on chemotherapy. One patient in the erlotinib group and two in the standard chemotherapy group died from treatment-related causes. INTERPRETATION: Our findings strengthen the rationale for routine baseline tissue-based assessment of EGFR mutations in patients with NSCLC and for treatment of mutation-positive patients with EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. FUNDING: Spanish Lung Cancer Group, Roche Farma, Hoffmann-La Roche, and Red Temática de Investigacion Cooperativa en Cancer.

Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-carboplatin combination in first-line treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter real-life study (CAP29).

Background: Pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy is now first-line standard of care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. This real-life study aimed to assess efficacy and safety of carboplatin-pemetrexed plus pembrolizumab in advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer. Methods: CAP29 is a retrospective, observational, multicenter real-life study conducted in 6 French centers. We evaluated efficacy of first-line setting chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab (November 2019 to September 2020) in advanced (stage III-IV) non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer patients without targetable alterations. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, objective response rate and safety. Results: With a median follow-up of 4.5 months (0 to 22 months), a total of 121 patients were included. Baseline characteristics were: median age of 59.8 years with 7.4% ≥75 years, 58.7% of males, 91.8% PS 0-1, 87.6% of stage IV with ≥3 metastatic sites in 62% of cases. Patients had brain and liver metastases in 24% and 15.7% of cases, respectively. PD-L1 was <1% (44.6%), 1-49% (28.1%) and ≥50% (21.5%). Median progression-free survival and overall survival achieved 9 and 20.6 months, respectively. Objective response rate was 63.7% with 7 prolonged complete responses. Survival benefit seemed to be correlated with PD-L1 expression. Brain and liver metastases were not statistically associated with decreased overall survival. Most common adverse events were asthenia (76%), anemia (61.2%), nausea (53.7%), decreased appetite (37.2%) and liver cytolysis (34.7%). Renal and hepatic disorders were the main causes of pemetrexed discontinuation. Grade 3-4 adverse events concerned 17.5% of patients. Two treatment-related deaths were reported. Conclusions: First-line pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy confirmed real-life efficacy for patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer. With median progression-free survival and overall survival of 9.0 and 20.6 months, respectively and no new safety signal, our real-life data are very close to results provided by clinical trials, confirming the benefit and the manageable toxicity profile of this combination.

Safety and efficacy of second-line metronomic oral vinorelbine-atezolizumab combination in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer: An open-label phase II trial (VinMetAtezo).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of second-line metronomic oral vinorelbine-atezolizumab combination for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm Phase II study performed in patients with advanced NSCLC without activating EGFR mutation or ALK rearrangement who progressed after first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Combination treatment was atezolizumab (1200 mg IV day 1, every 3 weeks) and oral vinorelbine (40 mg, 3 times by week). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) during the 4-month follow-up from the first dose of treatment. Statistical analysis was based on the exact single-stage Phase II design defined by A'Hern. Based on literature data, the Phase III trial threshold was set at 36 successes in 71 patients. RESULTS: 71 patients were analyzed (median age, 64 years; male, 66.2%; ex-smokers/active smokers, 85.9%; ECOG performance status 0-1, 90.2%; non-squamous NSCLC, 83.1%; PD-L1 ≥ 50%, 4.4%). After a median follow-up of 8.1 months from treatment initiation, 4-month PFS rate was 32% (95% CI, 22-44), i.e. 23 successes out 71 patients. OS rate was 73.2% at 4 months and 24.3% at 24 months. Median PFS and OS were 2.2 (95% CI, 1.5-3.0) months and 7.9 (95% CI, 4.8-11.4) months, respectively. Overall response rate and disease control rate at 4 months were 11% (95% CI, 5-21) and 32% (95% CI, 22-44), respectively. No safety signal was evidenced. CONCLUSION: Metronomic oral vinorelbine-atezolizumab in the second-line setting did not achieve the predefined PFS threshold. No new safety signal was reported for vinorelbine-atezolizumab combination.

Real-life second-line epirubicin-paclitaxel regimen as treatment of relapsed small-cell lung cancer: EpiTax study.

BACKGROUND: Few therapeutic options are approved as second-line treatment after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Topotecan widespread use remains challenged by the risk of severe toxicities in a pretreated population. Little is known about the efficacy and safety of epirubicin-paclitaxel doublet in second-line and beyond and especially cerebral outcomes. METHODS: EpiTax is a retrospective multicenter observational real-life study. We evaluated the efficacy of epirubicin 90 mg/m2 combined with paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 3 weeks in SCLC patients after failure of at least one line of platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), intracranial control rate (ICR), and safety. RESULTS: A total of 29 patients were included. The median of previous systemic therapy lines was 2 (1-4). Eleven patients received the treatment in the second line. Characteristics of patients were a median age of 60 years (45-77), 65.5% of males with 72.4% of PS 0-1. Fifteen patients had a history of brain metastases. Median PFS and OS achieved 11.0 (95% CI, 8.1-16.3) and 23 (95% CI, 14.1-29.6) weeks, respectively. ORR was 34.5% and DCR was 55.2%. ICR was 3/15 (20%). Grade 3-4 adverse events were mainly hematological and concerned 7 patients. No case of febrile neutropenia or toxic death was reported. CONCLUSION: Epirubicin-paclitaxel association highlighted promising efficacy with PFS and OS of 11 and 23 weeks, respectively, ORR of 34.5%, and a tolerable safety profile. This doublet could represent another valuable therapeutic option for ES-SCLC patients treated in the second line and beyond.

Management of patients with synchronous head-and-neck and lung cancers: SYNCHRON GFPC 15-01 study.

Purpose: Few data have been published on the management of patients with synchronous head-and-neck cancer (HNC) and lung cancer (LC). This observational study was undertaken to describe the management of these patients in multiple centers. Materials and Methods: All patients consecutively diagnosed with synchronous HNC and LC in 26 French centers were included. Information was collected on patients' clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes. Those characteristics and treatments were analyzed descriptively. Kaplan-Meier progression-free and overall survival probabilities were estimated. Results: The study included 132 patients: 83% male; median age: 63.7 (range: 62.1-65.4) years; all current or former smokers; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status: 0 or 1 for 21.9% or 65.9% of the patients, respectively; cardiovascular comorbidities: 63%; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: 33%; and previous cancer: 11%. HNC histology was 98% squamous: 23.5% oral cavity, 26.5% oropharyngeal, 22.0% hypopharyngeal, and 28.0% laryngeal. LCs were mainly localized (47.7% Stage I and 9.9% Stage II): 38% squamous, 49% adenocarcinomas, and 13% others. LC diagnosis impacted HNC management for 38% of the patients, with a median time from HNC diagnosis to first HNC treatment of 40 days. HNC impacted LC management for 48% of the patients, with a median time from LC diagnosis-to-LC treatment interval of 41 days. Conclusions: Synchronous LC at HNC diagnosis impacted management and outcomes of both cancers. Specific recommendations should be elaborated to improve the management of these patients.

Vascular Acrosyndromes Associated With Prolonged Tumor Response in Advanced Lung Cancer Patients During Treatment With Antimetabolites: A Report of Two Cases.

BACKGROUND: Pemetrexed and gemcitabine are both antimetabolites drugs approved in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Their toxicity profile is well known. However, rare vascular side effects can occur such as vascular acrosyndromes and especially digital ischemia. The cause of this disfiguring and painful event is still controversial. Amputation is frequently required and has been described as a predictor of poor survival outcomes. CASE PRESENTATION: This report presents two cases of vascular acrosyndrome in NSCLC patients during treatment with antimetabolites (pemetrexed and gemcitabine). Patients presented severe digital ischemia having required prostacyclin analog and chemotherapy discontinuation. In one case, symptoms improved while in the other case symptoms persisted. Both patients experienced prolonged tumor response. These findings suggest a multifactorial mechanism behind digital necrosis including an autoimmune process, which could lead to prolonged tumor control as described with immune checkpoint inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Severe vascular acrosyndrome such as digital ischemia can occur in lung cancer patients treated with antimetabolites. Awareness needs to be raised when using these drugs in patients with predisposing factors. Whether occurrence of chemotherapy-induced immune vascular side effects might explain prolonged tumor response deserves further investigations.

Henoch-Schönlein Purpura Associated with Lung Cancer: When Paraneoplastic Manifestations Impede Oncological Management.

BACKGROUND: Henoch-Schönlein purpura (HSP) is an uncommon syndrome that mostly occurs in children, in whom it is frequently triggered by infections. In contrast, HSP in adults is more frequently of neoplastic origin. Case Presentation. We report HSP associated with a locally advanced lung squamous cell carcinoma that was considered a paraneoplastic syndrome. Systemic corticosteroids were given because a kidney biopsy revealed active glomerulonephritis. Concomitant chemoradiotherapy achieved a partial response of the lung tumor. Consolidation immunotherapy (programmed death protein-1-ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitor) was cancelled because HSP is known to be an autoimmune vasculitis, and long-term corticosteroid therapy was pursued. CONCLUSION: Further prospective studies are needed to evaluate the effect of anti-PD-(L) 1 immunotherapies on autoimmune manifestations.

Brief Report on the Efficacy of Nivolumab in Patients With Previously Treated Advanced Large-Cell Neuroendocrine Cancer of the Lung.

INTRODUCTION: The optimal management of large cell neuroendocrine cancer of the lung (LCNEC) is unclear, and data regarding anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) antibodies are scarce. This study reports the clinical efficacy of a PD-1 inhibitor in patients with advanced LCNEC. METHODS: All patients with stage III to IV LCNEC treated with at least one previous cycle of chemotherapy between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups depending on their exposure to nivolumab as second-line treatment or beyond. The primary objective was to assess nivolumab's efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 51 patients with advanced LCNEC from eight centers were analyzed, including 17 who received nivolumab. The PD-1 inhibitor was used as second-line treatment in 77% of cases, with a median number of eight doses (range: 1-62). After nivolumab treatment, the median overall survival was 12.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.10-14.20). The objective response rate was 29.4% (95% CI: 10.3-56.0), and median progression-free survival was 3.9 months (95% CI: 1.68-7.17). The programmed death-ligand 1 status was unknown. There was no difference in the efficacy of first-line chemotherapy; the objective response rate was 23.5% (n = four of 17) in the nivolumab group versus 32.4% (n = 11 of 34) in the conventional treatment group, and progression-free survival was 3.5 months (95% CI: 1.7-4.4) versus 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.4-4.2), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world setting, nivolumab seems to be an effective second-line treatment in patients with advanced LCNEC. Large prospective studies in this setting are still required.

A Phase 1-2 Study of Rovalpituzumab Tesirine in Combination With Nivolumab Plus or Minus Ipilimumab in Patients With Previously Treated Extensive-Stage SCLC.

INTRODUCTION: This open-label, phase 1-2 study evaluated the safety and efficacy of rovalpituzumab tesirine (Rova-T), an antibody-drug conjugate targeting DLL3, plus immune checkpoint inhibitors nivolumab plus or minus ipilimumab in previously treated extensive-stage SCLC (ES SCLC). METHODS: Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed, previously treated (two or more lines of therapy) ES SCLC were enrolled into two cohorts. Cohort 1 received 0.3 mg/kg Rova-T (once every 6 wk for two cycles) plus 360 mg nivolumab (two 3-wk cycles beginning on week 4). Cohort 2 received the same dosage of Rova-T as cohort 1 plus 1 mg/kg nivolumab (four 3-wk cycles) and 1 mg/kg ipilimumab (beginning week 4). Both cohorts received 480 mg nivolumab every 4 weeks starting at week 10. Key objectives were to evaluate safety and tolerability and efficacy (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1). The response-related results are based on centrally read data. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients received therapy: cohort 1, n = 30; cohort 2, n = 12. Overall, 43% received two or more previous lines of therapy. All patients experienced one or more treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE); 41 patients reported AEs considered related to the study drug by the investigator. The most frequent TEAE was pleural effusion (n = 20, 48%); most common grade greater than or equal to 3 was anemia (n = 9, 21%). Three grade 5 TEAEs considered related to the study drug were reported (cohort 1): pneumonitis (n = 2), acute kidney injury (n = 1). The objective response rate was 30% (12 of 40): cohort 1, 27.6% (8 of 29); cohort 2, 36.4% (4 of 11); all partial responses. CONCLUSIONS: Despite encouraging antitumor activity in previously treated ES SCLC, combination therapy with Rova-T and nivolumab plus or minus ipilimumab was not well tolerated at the dose levels and administration schedules evaluated.

Phase III randomized study of carboplatin pemetrexed with or without bevacizumab with initial versus "at progression" cerebral radiotherapy in advanced non squamous non-small cell lung cancer with asymptomatic brain metastasis.

BACKGROUND: The role and timing of whole or stereotaxic brain radiotherapy (BR) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) and asymptomatic brain metastases (aBMs) are not well established. This study investigates whether deferring BR until cerebral progression was superior to upfront BR for patients with aNSCLC and aBM. METHODS: This open-label, multicenter, phase III trial, randomized (1:1) aNSCLC patients with aBMs to receive upfront BR and chemotherapy: platin-pemetrexed and bevacizumab in eligible patients, followed by maintenance pemetrexed with or without bevacizumab, BR arm, or the same chemotherapy with BR only at cerebral progression, chemotherapy (ChT) arm. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), global, extra-cerebral and cerebral objective response rate (ORR), toxicity, and quality of life [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02162537]. RESULTS: The trial was stopped early because of slow recruitment. Among 95 included patients, 91 were randomized in 24 centers: 45 to BR and 46 to ChT arms (age: 60 ± 8.1, men: 79%, PS 0/1: 51.7%/48.3%; adenocarcinomas: 92.2%, extra-cerebral metastases: 57.8%, without differences between arms.) Significantly more patients in the BR-arm received BR compare with those in the ChT arm (87% versus 20%; p < 0.001); there were no significant differences between BR and ChT arms for median PFS: 4.7, 95% confidence interval (CI):3.4-7.5 versus 4.8, 95% CI: 2.4-6.5 months, for median OS: 8.5, 95% CI:.6-11.1 versus 8.3, 95% CI:4.5-11.5 months, cerebral and extra-cerebral ORR (27% versus 13%, p = 0.064, and 30% versus 41%, p = 0.245, respectively). The ChT arm had more grade 3/4 neutropenia than the BR arm (13% versus 6%, p = 0.045); others toxicities were comparable. CONCLUSION: The significant BR rate difference between the two arms suggests that upfront BR is not mandatory in aNSCLC with aBM but this trial failed to show that deferring BR for aBM is superior in terms of PFS from upfront BR.

Patient-Reported Outcomes with Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab Versus Standard Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (MYSTIC).

BACKGROUND: The phase 3 MYSTIC study of durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus chemotherapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with tumor cell (TC) programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥ 25% did not meet its primary endpoints. We report patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment-naïve patients were randomized (1:1:1) to durvalumab, durvalumab + tremelimumab, or chemotherapy. PROs were assessed in patients with PD-L1 TC ≥ 25% using EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30/LC13. Changes from baseline (12 months) for prespecified PRO endpoints of interest were analyzed by mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) and time to deterioration (TTD) by stratified log-rank tests. RESULTS: There were no between-arm differences in baseline PROs (N = 488). Between-arm differences in MMRM-adjusted mean changes from baseline favored at least one of the durvalumab-containing arms versus chemotherapy (nominal P < .01) for C30 fatigue: durvalumab (-9.5; 99% confidence interval [CI], -17.0 to -2.0), durvalumab + tremelimumab (-11.7; 99% CI, -19.4 to -4.1); and for C30 appetite loss: durvalumab (-11.9; 99% CI, -21.1 to -2.7). TTD was longer with at least one of the durvalumab-containing arms versus chemotherapy (nominal P < .01) for global health status/quality of life: durvalumab (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-1.0), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-1.0); and for physical functioning: durvalumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.8), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9) (both C30); as well as for the key symptoms of dyspnea: durvalumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-1.0) (both LC13); fatigue: durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.8); and appetite loss: durvalumab (HR = 0.5; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9) (both C30). CONCLUSION: Durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus chemotherapy reduced symptom burden and improved TTD of PROs, suggesting it had no detrimental effects on quality of life in metastatic NSCLC patients.

A 60-Year-Old Woman With Recurrent Hemoptysis.

CASE PRESENTATION: A 60-year-old non-smoker white woman presented with a new episode of hemoptysis. She reported recurrent hemoptoic sputum in the past month. She had no relevant medical history, except presumed resolved bacterial pneumonia 1 year ago. She denied taking immunosuppressive treatment and was not exposed to lung irritants. She had not traveled recently. General health status was good. She denied fever, dyspnea, chest pain, and extra-pulmonary symptoms.

Duration of nivolumab for pretreated, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: A standard of care for pretreated, advanced non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs), nivolumab has demonstrated long-term benefit when administered for 2 years. We aimed to better discern an optimized administration duration by retrospectively analyzing real-life long-term efficacy in a prospective cohort. METHODS: All nivolumab-treated adults with advanced NSCLCs (01/09/2015 to 30/09/2016) from nine French centers were eligible. On 31/12/2018, patients who are alive ≥ 2 years after starting nivolumab were defined as long-term survivors (LTSs) and were divided into three nivolumab treatment groups: <2, 2, or > 2 years. Co-primary endpoints were LTSs' progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The median follow-up was 32 months (95% CI, 31.0 to 34.0). The 3-year OS rate for the 259 cohort patients was 16.6%. Among them, 65 were LTSs: 47 treated < 2 years, 7 for 2 years, and 11 > 2 years. Their respective characteristics were: median age: 59, 52, and 58 years; smoking history: 92.9, 100, and 100%; adenocarcinomas: 66, 57.1, and 54.5%. LTSs' median (m)PFS was 28.4 months; mOS was not reached. LTSs' objective response rate was 61.6%. mOS was 32.7 months for those treated < 2 years and not reached for the others. The > 2-year group's 3-year OS was longer. Twenty-eight LTSs experienced no disease progression; 7 had durable complete responses. However, LTSs had more frequent and more severe adverse events. CONCLUSION: In real-life, prolonged nivolumab use provided long-term benefit with 16.6% 3-year OS and 25% LTSs. Survival tended to be prolonged with nivolumab continued beyond 2 years. Prospective randomized trials with adequate design are needed.

First-line pembrolizumab for non-small cell lung cancer patients with PD-L1 ≥50% in a multicenter real-life cohort: The PEMBREIZH study.

BACKGROUND: The KEYNOTE-024 trial demonstrated that pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, significantly improves progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in selected patients with previously untreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and without EGFR/ALK aberrations. The main aim of this study was to report the efficacy and safety profile of pembrolizumab in real-life conditions. METHOD: This was a French retrospective multicenter longitudinal study of 108 consecutive patients with advanced NSCLC, a PD-L1 TPS ≥50% and without EGFR/ALK aberrations who were treated by pembrolizumab, in first line. Patient data were obtained from medical files. RESULTS: The main characteristics of the cohort were: median age [range] 66.7 [37-87] years, 64.8% male, 23.1% with a performance status (PS) of 2, and 88.9% current or former smokers. Eighty-seven percent had stage IV NSCLC at diagnosis, 9.2% untreated brain metastases at inclusion,. With a median follow-up of 8.2 months, the median PFS was 10.1 months (95% CI, 8.8-11.4). The objective response rate was 57.3% (complete response 2.7%, partial response 54.6%). Disease control rate was 71.1%. At 6 months, the OS rate estimated was 86.2%. Treatment-related adverse events (AE) of grade 3 occurred in 8% of patients. There were no grade 4 or 5 AEs. CONCLUSION: In a real-life cohort of advanced NSCLC patients (including PS 2 and untreated brain metastases), with PD-L1 TPS ≥50%, pembrolizumab demonstrates similar PFS to the pivotal clinical trial.

Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Lung Sarcomatoid Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved cancer prognosis but have not been evaluated specifically in sarcomatoid carcinoma (SC), a rare lung cancer subtype with poor prognosis. As such, our study sought to retrospectively assess the efficacy of ICI in SC. METHODS: All consecutive patients with centrally confirmed SC treated using ICI as a second-line treatment or beyond between 2011 and 2017 were enrolled. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor expression was assessed using immunohistochemistry (SP263 clone) and the tumor mutational burden (TMB) with the Foundation One panel. TMB was considered high if it was greater than or equal to 10 mutations per megabase. RESULTS: Overall, 37 patients with SC were evaluated, predominantly men (73%) with a median age of 63.2 years (36.8-79.7) and who were current or former smokers (94.6%). Immunotherapy (nivolumab, 86.5% of cases) was given as a second-line treatment in 54% of the patients and as third-line treatment or beyond in 46% of the patients. The objective response rate was 40.5% and disease control rate was 64.8%, regardless of PD-L1 status. Median overall survival was 12.7 months (range: 0.3-45.7). One-third of patients exhibited early progression. The median PD-L1 expression was 70% (0-100). There was a trend toward higher PD-L1 expression in responsive diseases, with an objective response rate of 58.8% in patients with PD-L1+ and 0% in the one patient with PD-L1- (p = 0.44). The median TMB was 18 (4-39) mutations per megabase, with 87.5% of the cases displaying a high TMB. There was a trend toward higher TMB in responders versus stable or progressive diseases (p = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SC exhibited high response rates and prolonged overall survival under ICI treatment. These data support the prospective investigation of ICI in patients with SC who are under first-line treatment.