Molecular classification and biomarkers of outcome with immunotherapy in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: analyses of the CASPIAN phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: We explored potential predictive biomarkers of immunotherapy response in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) treated with durvalumab (D) + tremelimumab (T) + etoposide-platinum (EP), D + EP, or EP in the randomized phase 3 CASPIAN trial. METHODS: 805 treatment-naïve patients with ES-SCLC were randomized (1:1:1) to receive D + T + EP, D + EP, or EP. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Patients were required to provide an archived tumor tissue block (or ≥ 15 newly cut unstained slides) at screening, if these samples existed. After assessment for programmed cell death ligand-1 expression and tissue tumor mutational burden, residual tissue was used for additional molecular profiling including by RNA sequencing and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: In 182 patients with transcriptional molecular subtyping, OS with D ± T + EP was numerically highest in the SCLC-inflamed subtype (n = 10, median 24.0 months). Patients derived benefit from immunotherapy across subtypes; thus, additional biomarkers were investigated. OS benefit with D ± T + EP versus EP was greater with high versus low CD8A expression/CD8 cell density by immunohistochemistry, but with no additional benefit with D + T + EP versus D + EP. OS benefit with D + T + EP versus D + EP was associated with high expression of CD4 (median 25.9 vs. 11.4 months) and antigen-presenting and processing machinery (25.9 vs. 14.6 months) and MHC I and II (23.6 vs. 17.3 months) gene signatures, and with higher MHC I expression by immunohistochemistry. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate the tumor microenvironment is important in mediating better outcomes with D ± T + EP in ES-SCLC, with canonical immune markers associated with hypothesized immunotherapy mechanisms of action defining patient subsets that respond to D ± T. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043872.

Atezolizumab Plus Carboplatin and Etoposide in Patients with Untreated Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Interim Results of the MAURIS Phase IIIb Trial.

BACKGROUND: MAURIS is an Italian multicenter, open-label, phase IIIb ongoing trial, aiming at evaluating the safety and effectiveness of atezolizumab + carboplatin/etoposide in patients with newly diagnosed, extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). The primary objective is the safety evaluation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received atezolizumab + carboplatin/etoposide Q3W for 4-6 cycles in the induction phase, followed by atezolizumab maintenance Q3W. We presented the interim analysis on safety (referring to the induction phase) and clinical effectiveness, in all patients (N = 154) and in subgroups that received ≤3 (N = 23), 4 (N = 43), and 5-6 cycles (N = 89) of induction. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 10.5 months, 139 patients (90.3%) discontinued treatment. Serious adverse events occurred in 29.9% of patients overall, and the rate was lower in patients with 5-6 cycles (19.1%) than in those with 4 (34.9%) or ≤3 (63.6%) cycles. Immune-mediated adverse events were reported in 14.9%, 15.7%, 11.6%, and 18.2% of patients, overall and by subgroup, respectively. The median overall survival and progression-free survival were 10.7 and 5.5 months, respectively. Overall, 111 patients (71.6%) had a tumor response. CONCLUSIONS: Interim results provide further evidences about safety and efficacy profile of atezolizumab + carboplatin/etoposide treatment in a ES-SCLC patient population closer to that observed in clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Eudract No. 2019-001146-17, NCT04028050.

Caloric restriction and metformin selectively improved LKB1-mutated NSCLC tumor response to chemo- and chemo-immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: About 10% of NSCLCs are mutated in KRAS and impaired in STK11/LKB1, a genetic background associated with poor prognosis, caused by an increase in metastatic burden and resistance to standard therapy. LKB1 is a protein involved in a number of biological processes and is particularly important for its role in the regulation of cell metabolism. LKB1 alterations lead to protein loss that causes mitochondria and metabolic dysfunction that makes cells unable to respond to metabolic stress. Different studies have shown how it is possible to interfere with cancer metabolism using metformin and caloric restriction (CR) and both modify the tumor microenvironment (TME), stimulating the switch from "cold" to "hot". Given the poor therapeutic response of KRASmut/LKB1mut patients, and the role of LKB1 in cell metabolism, we examined whether the addition of metformin and CR enhanced the response to chemo or chemo-immunotherapy in LKB1 impaired tumors. METHODS: Mouse cell lines were derived from lung nodules of transgenic mice carrying KRASG12D with either functional LKB1 (KRASG12D/LKB1wt) or mutated LKB1 (KRASG12D/LKB1mut). Once stabilized in vitro, these cell lines were inoculated subcutaneously and intramuscularly into immunocompetent mice. Additionally, a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) model was established by directly implanting tumor fragments from patient into immunocompromised mice. The mice bearing these tumor models were subjected to treatment with chemotherapy or chemo-immunotherapy, both as standalone regimens and in combination with metformin and CR. RESULTS: Our preclinical results indicate that in NSCLC KRASmut/LKB1mut tumors, metformin and CR do enhance the response to chemo and chemo-immunotherapy, inducing a metabolic stress condition that these tumors are not able to overcome. Analysis of immune infiltrating cells did not bring to light any strong correlation between the TME immune-modulation and the tumor response to metformin and CR. CONCLUSION: Our in vitro and in vivo preliminary studies confirm our hypothesis that the addition of metformin and CR is able to improve the antitumor activity of chemo and chemoimmunotherapy in LKB1 impaired tumors, exploiting their inability to overcome metabolic stress.

Sacituzumab Govitecan Versus Docetaxel for Previously Treated Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Randomized, Open-Label Phase III EVOKE-01 Study.

PURPOSE: The open-label, phase III EVOKE-01 study evaluated sacituzumab govitecan (SG) versus standard-of-care docetaxel in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) with progression on/after platinum-based chemotherapy, anti-PD-(L)1, and targeted treatment for actionable genomic alterations (AGAs). Primary analysis is reported. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 (stratified by histology, best response to last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen, and AGA treatment received or not) to SG (one 10 mg/kg intravenous infusion on days 1 and 8) or docetaxel (one 75 mg/m2 intravenous infusion on day 1) in 21-day cycles. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Key secondary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, patient-reported symptom assessment, and safety. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat population (SG, n = 299; docetaxel, n = 304), 55.4% had one previous line of therapy. Median follow-up was 12.7 months (range, 6.0-24.0). The primary end point was not met. There was a numerical OS improvement for SG versus docetaxel (median, 11.1 v 9.8 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.04]; one-sided P = .0534), consistent across squamous and nonsquamous histologies. Median PFS was 4.1 versus 3.9 months (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.11]). An OS benefit was observed for SG (n = 192) versus docetaxel (n = 191) in mNSCLC nonresponsive to last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen (3.5-month median OS increase; HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.97]); this was consistent across histologies. Among patients receiving SG and docetaxel, 6.8% and 14.2% discontinued because of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), respectively; 1.4% and 1.0%, respectively, had TRAEs leading to death. CONCLUSION: Although statistical significance was not met, OS numerically improved with SG versus docetaxel, which was consistent across histologies. Clinically meaningful improvement in OS was noted in mNSCLC nonresponsive to last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen. SG was better tolerated than docetaxel and consistent with its known safety profile, with no new safety signals.

Nivolumab in pretreated pleural mesothelioma: Results from an observational real-world study of patients treated within the AIFA 5% Fund.

BACKGROUND: Pleural mesothelioma is a rare cancer with a dismal prognosis and few therapeutic options, especially in the pretreated setting. Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors as single agents yielded interesting results in refractory pleural mesothelioma, achieving a response rate between 10-20%, median progression-free survival of 2-5 months and median overall survival of 7-13 months. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective, multi-institutional study of pleural mesothelioma patients treated with nivolumab in second and further line was performed. The endpoints of the study are response rate, disease control rate, progression free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients with pleural mesothelioma treated with nivolumab in second and further line were enrolled at seven Italian institutions. The response rate was 8%, disease control rate was 37%, median progression free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI: 2.9-9.0) and median overall survival was 11.1 (95% CI 6.2-19.9) months. A higher neutrophils and neutrophils to lymphocytes ratio at baseline were associated with worse prognosis. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab as a single agent is fairly active in a cohort of unselected pretreated pleural mesothelioma patients. Further investigations on clinical and translational factors are needed to define which patient might benefit most from nivolumab treatment in pleural mesothelioma.

The impact of decision tools during oncological consultation with lung cancer patients: A systematic review within the I3LUNG project.

INTRODUCTION: To date, lung cancer is one of the most lethal diagnoses worldwide. A variety of lung cancer treatments and modalities are available, which are generally presented during the patient and doctor consultation. The implementation of decision tools to facilitate patient's decision-making and the management of their healthcare process during medical consultation is fundamental. Studies have demonstrated that decision tools are helpful to promote health management and decision-making of lung cancer patients during consultations. The main aim of the present work within the I3LUNG project is to systematically review the implementation of decision tools to facilitate medical consultation about oncological treatments for lung cancer patients. METHODS: In the present study, we conducted a systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines. We used an electronic computer-based search involving three databases, as follows: Embase, PubMed, and Scopus. 10 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included. They explicitly refer to decision tools in the oncological context, with lung cancer patients. RESULTS: The discussion highlights the most encouraging results about the positive role of decision aids during medical consultations about oncological treatments, especially regarding anxiety, decision-making, and patient knowledge. However, no one main decision aid tool emerged as essential. Opting for a more recent timeframe to select eligible articles might shed light on the current array of decision aid tools available. CONCLUSION: Future review efforts could utilize alternative search strategies to explore other lung cancer-specific outcomes during medical consultations for treatment decisions and the implementation of decision aid tools. Engaging with experts in the fields of oncology, patient decision-making, or health communication could provide valuable insights and recommendations for relevant literature or research directions that may not be readily accessible through traditional search methods. The development of guidelines for future research were provided with the aim to promote decision aids focused on patients' needs.