First-line chemoimmunotherapy and immunotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer and brain metastases: a registry study.

Introduction: Brain metastases commonly occur in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Standard first-line treatment for NSCLC, without an EGFR, ALK or ROS1 mutation, is either chemoimmunotherapy or anti-PD-1 monotherapy. Traditionally, patients with symptomatic or untreated brain metastases were excluded from the pivotal clinical trials that established first-line treatment recommendations. The intracranial effectiveness of these treatment protocols has only recently been elucidated in small-scale prospective trials. Methods: Patients with NSCLC and brain metastases, treated with first-line chemoimmunotherapy or anti-PD-1 monotherapy were selected from the Australian Registry and biObank of thoracic cancers (AURORA) clinical database covering seven institutions. The primary outcome was a composite time-to-event (TTE) outcome, including extracranial and intracranial progression, death, or need for local intracranial therapy, which served as a surrogate for disease progression. The secondary outcome included overall survival (OS), intracranial objective response rate (iORR) and objective response rate (ORR). Results: 116 patients were included. 63% received combination chemoimmunotherapy and 37% received anti-PD-1 monotherapy. 69% of patients received upfront local therapy either with surgery, radiotherapy or both. The median TTE was 7.1 months (95% CI 5 - 9) with extracranial progression being the most common progression event. Neither type of systemic therapy or upfront local therapy were predictive of TTE in a multivariate analysis. The median OS was 17 months (95% CI 13-27). Treatment with chemoimmunotherapy was predictive of longer OS in multivariate analysis (HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.14 - 0.86; p=0.01). The iORR was 46.6%. The iORR was higher in patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy compared to immunotherapy (58% versus 31%, p=0.01). The use of chemoimmunotherapy being predictive of iORR in a multivariate analysis (OR 2.88; 95% CI 1.68 - 9.98; p=0.04). Conclusion: The results of this study of real-world data demonstrate the promising intracranial efficacy of chemoimmunotherapy in the first-line setting, potentially surpassing that of immunotherapy alone. No demonstrable difference in survival or TTE was seen between receipt of upfront local therapy. Prospective studies are required to assist clinical decision making regarding optimal sequencing of local and systemic therapies.

A Phase II trial of alternating osimertinib and gefitinib therapy in advanced EGFR-T790M positive non-small cell lung cancer: OSCILLATE.

In this phase II, single arm trial (ACTRN12617000720314), we investigate if alternating osimertinib and gefitinib would delay the development of resistance to osimertinib in advanced, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) T790M mutation (n = 47) by modulating selective pressure on resistant clones. The primary endpoint is progression free-survival (PFS) rate at 12 months, and secondary endpoints include: feasibility of alternating therapy, overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety. The 12-month PFS rate is 38% (95% CI 27.5-55), not meeting the pre-specified primary endpoint. Serial circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis reveals decrease and clearance of the original activating EGFR and EGFR-T790M mutations which are prognostic of clinical outcomes. In 73% of participants, loss of T790M ctDNA is observed at progression and no participants have evidence of the EGFR C797S resistance mutation following the alternating regimen. These findings highlight the challenges of treatment strategies designed to modulate clonal evolution and the clinical importance of resistance mechanisms beyond suppression of selected genetic mutations in driving therapeutic escape to highly potent targeted therapies.

Oral Cannabis Extract for Secondary Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Final Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase II/III Trial.

PURPOSE: The aim of this randomized, placebo-controlled, two-stage, phase II/III trial was to determine the efficacy of an oral cannabis extract in adults with refractory nausea and/or vomiting during moderately or highly emetogenic, intravenous chemotherapy despite guideline-consistent antiemetic prophylaxis. Here, we report results of the prespecified combined analysis including the initial phase II and subsequent phase III components. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Study treatment consisted of oral capsules containing either tetrahydrocannabinol 2.5 mg plus cannabidiol 2.5 mg capsules (THC:CBD) or matching placebo, taken three times a day from days -1 to 5, in addition to guideline-consistent antiemetics. The primary measure of effect was the difference in the proportions of participants with no vomiting or retching and no use of rescue medications (a complete response) during hours 0-120 after the first cycle of chemotherapy on study (cycle A). RESULTS: We recruited 147 evaluable of a planned 250 participants from 2016 to 2022. Background antiemetic prophylaxis included a corticosteroid and 5-hydroxytryptamine antagonist in 97%, a neurokinin-1 antagonist in 80%, and olanzapine in 10%. THC:CBD compared with placebo improved the complete response rate from 8% to 24% (absolute difference 16%, 95% CI, 4 to 28, P = .01), with similar effects for absence of significant nausea, use of rescue medications, daily vomits, and the nausea scale on the Functional Living Index-Emesis quality-of-life questionnaire. More frequent bothersome adverse events of special interest included sedation (18% v 7%), dizziness (10% v 0%), and transient anxiety (4% v 1%). There were no serious adverse events attributed to THC:CBD. CONCLUSION: THC:CBD is an effective adjunct for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting despite standard antiemetic prophylaxis, but was associated with additional adverse events. Drug availability, cultural attitudes, legal status, and preferences may affect implementation. Future analyses will evaluate the cost-effectiveness of THC:CBD.