Atezolizumab for First-Line Treatment of PD-L1-Selected Patients with NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of the anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody atezolizumab, as compared with those of platinum-based chemotherapy, as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with PD-L1 expression are not known. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial involving patients with metastatic nonsquamous or squamous NSCLC who had not previously received chemotherapy and who had PD-L1 expression on at least 1% of tumor cells or at least 1% of tumor-infiltrating immune cells as assessed by the SP142 immunohistochemical assay. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive atezolizumab or chemotherapy. Overall survival (primary end point) was tested hierarchically according to PD-L1 expression status among patients in the intention-to-treat population whose tumors were wild-type with respect to EGFR mutations or ALK translocations. Within the population with EGFR and ALK wild-type tumors, overall survival and progression-free survival were also prospectively assessed in subgroups defined according to findings on two PD-L1 assays as well as by blood-based tumor mutational burden. RESULTS: Overall, 572 patients were enrolled. In the subgroup of patients with EGFR and ALK wild-type tumors who had the highest expression of PD-L1 (205 patients), the median overall survival was longer by 7.1 months in the atezolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (20.2 months vs. 13.1 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.59; P = 0.01). Among all the patients who could be evaluated for safety, adverse events occurred in 90.2% of the patients in the atezolizumab group and in 94.7% of those in the chemotherapy group; grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 30.1% and 52.5% of the patients in the respective groups. Overall and progression-free survival favored atezolizumab in the subgroups with a high blood-based tumor mutational burden. CONCLUSIONS: Atezolizumab treatment resulted in significantly longer overall survival than platinum-based chemotherapy among patients with NSCLC with high PD-L1 expression, regardless of histologic type. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; IMpower110 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02409342.).

Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In an early-phase study involving patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the response rate was better with nivolumab plus ipilimumab than with nivolumab monotherapy, particularly among patients with tumors that expressed programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1). Data are needed to assess the long-term benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with NSCLC. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with stage IV or recurrent NSCLC and a PD-L1 expression level of 1% or more in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab alone, or chemotherapy. The patients who had a PD-L1 expression level of less than 1% were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy alone. All the patients had received no previous chemotherapy. The primary end point reported here was overall survival with nivolumab plus ipilimumab as compared with chemotherapy in patients with a PD-L1 expression level of 1% or more. RESULTS: Among the patients with a PD-L1 expression level of 1% or more, the median duration of overall survival was 17.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.0 to 20.1) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 14.9 months (95% CI, 12.7 to 16.7) with chemotherapy (P = 0.007), with 2-year overall survival rates of 40.0% and 32.8%, respectively. The median duration of response was 23.2 months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 6.2 months with chemotherapy. The overall survival benefit was also observed in patients with a PD-L1 expression level of less than 1%, with a median duration of 17.2 months (95% CI, 12.8 to 22.0) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 12.2 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 14.3) with chemotherapy. Among all the patients in the trial, the median duration of overall survival was 17.1 months (95% CI, 15.2 to 19.9) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 13.9 months (95% CI, 12.2 to 15.1) with chemotherapy. The percentage of patients with grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events in the overall population was 32.8% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 36.0% with chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: First-line treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab resulted in a longer duration of overall survival than did chemotherapy in patients with NSCLC, independent of the PD-L1 expression level. No new safety concerns emerged with longer follow-up. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 227 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02477826.).

Carboplatin plus etoposide versus topotecan as second-line treatment for patients with sensitive relapsed small-cell lung cancer: an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Topotecan is currently the only drug approved in Europe in a second-line setting for the treatment of small-cell lung cancer. This study investigated whether the doublet of carboplatin plus etoposide was superior to topotecan as a second-line treatment in patients with sensitive relapsed small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done in 38 hospitals in France, we enrolled patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced stage IV or locally relapsed small-cell lung cancer, who responded to first-line platinum plus etoposide treatment, but who had disease relapse or progression at least 90 days after completion of first-line treatment. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive combination carboplatin plus etoposide (six cycles of intravenous carboplatin [area under the curve 5 mg/mL per min] on day 1 plus intravenous etoposide [100 mg/m2 from day 1 to day 3]) or oral topotecan (2·3 mg/m2 from day 1 to day 5, for six cycles). Randomisation was done using the minimisation method with biased-coin balancing for ECOG performance status, response to the first-line chemotherapy, and treatment centre. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which was centrally reviewed and analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02738346. FINDINGS: Between July 18, 2013, and July 2, 2018, we enrolled and randomly assigned 164 patients (82 in each study group). One patient from each group withdrew consent, therefore 162 patients (81 in each group) were included in the intention-to-treat population. With a median follow-up of 22·7 months (IQR 20·0-37·3), median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the combination chemotherapy group than in the topotecan group (4·7 months, 90% CI 3·9-5·5 vs 2·7 months, 2·3-3·2; stratified hazard ratio 0·57, 90% CI 0·41-0·73; p=0·0041). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (18 [22%] of 81 patients in the topotecan group vs 11 [14%] of 81 patients in the combination chemotherapy group), thrombocytopenia (29 [36%] vs 25 [31%]), anaemia (17 [21%] vs 20 [25%]), febrile neutropenia (nine [11%] vs five [6%]), and asthenia (eight [10%] vs seven [9%]). Two treatment-related deaths occurred in the topotecan group (both were febrile neutropenia with sepsis) and no treatment-related deaths occurred in the combination group. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that carboplatin plus etoposide rechallenge can be considered as a reasonable second-line chemotherapy option for patients with sensitive relapsed small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Amgen and the French Lung Cancer Group (Groupe Français de Pneumo-Cancérologie).

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).

Combinatory effect of BRCA1 and HERC2 expression on outcome in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: BRCA1 is a main component of homologous recombination and induces resistance to platinum in preclinical models. It has been studied as a potential predictive marker in lung cancer. Several proteins modulate the function of BRCA1. The E3 ubiquitin ligase HERC2 facilitates the assembly of the RNF8-UBC13 complex to recruit BRCA1 to DNA damage sites. The combined analysis of multiple components of the pathway leading to the recruitment of BRCA1 at DNA damage sites has the potentiality to improve the BRCA1 predictive model. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 71 paraffin-embedded tumor samples from advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with first-line platinum based chemotherapy and measured the mRNA expression levels of BRCA1, RNF8, UBC13 and HERC2 using real-time PCR. The mRNA expression was categorized using median value as cut-off point. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival of all 71 patients was 7.2 months whereas the median overall survival of the study population was 10.7 months. Among patients with low BRCA1 expression, the median PFS was 7.4 months in the presence of low HERC2 levels and 5.9 months for patients expressing high HERC2 levels (p = 0.01). The median OS was 15.3 months for patients expressing low levels of both genes and 7.4 months for those with low BRCA1 but high HERC2 (p = 0.008). The multivariate analysis showed that among patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, the combined low expression of both BRCA1 and HERC2 clearly reduced the risk of progression (p = 0.03) and of death (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm the potentiality of integrated DNA repair components analysis in predicting the sensitivity to platinum in lung cancer. The study indicates a predictive role for HERC2 mRNA expression and paves the way for further refinement of the BRCA1 predictive model.

Doxycycline for prevention of erlotinib-induced rash in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of first-line chemotherapy: A randomized, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Rash is a common epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-induced toxicity that can impair quality of life and treatment compliance. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the efficacy of doxycycline in preventing erlotinib-induced rash (folliculitis) in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: This open-label, randomized, prospective, phase II trial was conducted in 147 patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer progressing after first-line chemotherapy, randomized for 4 months with erlotinib alone 150 mg/d per os (control arm) or combined with doxycycline 100 mg/d (doxycycline arm). Incidence and severity of rash, compliance, survival, and safety were assessed. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the 147 patients were well balanced in the intent-to-treat population. Folliculitis occurred in 71% of patients in the doxycycline arm and 81% in the control arm (P = .175). The severity of folliculitis and other skin lesions was lower in the doxycycline arm compared with the control arm. Other adverse events were reported at a similar frequency across arms. There was no significant difference in survival between treatment arms. LIMITATIONS: The open-label design of the study and the duration of the treatment with doxycycline are limitations. CONCLUSION: Doxycycline did not reduce the incidence of erlotinib-induced folliculitis, but significantly reduced its severity.

Cost savings of home bortezomib injection in patients with multiple myeloma treated by a combination care in Outpatient Hospital and Hospital care at Home.

At home injectable chemotherapy for patients receiving treatment for hematological diseases is still in debate. Given the expense of new innovative medicines, at home treatment has been proposed as a suitable option for improving patient quality of life and decreasing treatment costs. We decided to assess the cost of bortezomib administration in France among multiple myeloma patients from an economic standpoint. Patients in this study were treated within a regional hematological network combining outpatient hospital care and Hospital care at Home administration. To make the cost comparison, our team simulated outpatient hospital care expenses. Fifty-four consecutive multiple myeloma patients who received at least one injection of bortezomib in Hospital care at Home from January 2009 to December 2011 were included in the study. The median number of injections was 12 (range 1-44) at home and 6 (range 0-30) in the outpatient care unit. When compared with the cost simulation of outpatient hospital care alone, bortezomib administration with combined care was significantly less expensive for the National Health Insurance (NHI) budget. The mean total cost per patient and per injection was 954.20 € for combined outpatient and Hospital care at Home vs 1143.42 € for outpatient hospital care alone. This resulted in an estimated 16.5 % cost saving (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, p < 0.0001). The greatest savings were observed in administration costs (37.5 % less) and transportation costs (68.1 % less). This study reflects results for a regionally implemented program for multiple myeloma patients treated with bortezomib in routine practice in a large rural area.

Erlotinib-associated rash in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer treated in the EURTAC trial.

AIM: This analysis investigates incidence and time course of rash in the EURTAC study. MATERIALS & METHODS: Patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer were randomized 1:1 to receive once daily erlotinib or 3-weekly cycles of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Of the 86 erlotinib-treated patients, 71 reported rash. Median time to first rash appearance was 0.7 months. Most patients (n = 65) had the same or lower grade rash at final assessment compared with initial assessment. Of the 21 patients with decreased rash grade between initial and final assessments, 61.9% received no erlotinib dose modification, 42.8% had no concomitant rash treatment. CONCLUSION: Most rash cases were mild, occurred within 1 month of erlotinib treatment, and rapidly improved without the need for erlotinib dose alterations.

Cost-utility analysis of maintenance therapy with gemcitabine or erlotinib vs observation with predefined second-line treatment after cisplatin-gemcitabine induction chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC: IFCT-GFPC 0502-Eco phase III study.

BACKGROUND: The IFCT-GFPC 0502 phase III study reported prolongation of progression-free survival with gemcitabine or erlotinib maintenance vs. observation after cisplatin-gemcitabine induction chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This analysis was undertaken to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of these strategies for the global population and pre-specified subgroups. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis evaluated the ICER of gemcitabine or erlotinib maintenance therapy vs. observation, from randomization until the end of follow-up. Direct medical costs (including drugs, hospitalization, follow-up examinations, second-line treatments and palliative care) were prospectively collected per patient during the trial, until death, from the primary health-insurance provider's perspective. Utility data were extracted from literature. Sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The ICERs for gemcitabine or erlotinib maintenance therapy were respectively 76,625 and 184,733 euros per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Gemcitabine continuation maintenance therapy had a favourable ICER in patients with PS = 0 (52,213 €/QALY), in responders to induction chemotherapy (64,296 €/QALY), regardless of histology (adenocarcinoma, 62,292 €/QALY, non adenocarcinoma, 83,291 €/QALY). Erlotinib maintenance showed a favourable ICER in patients with PS = 0 (94,908 €/QALY), in patients with adenocarcinoma (97,160 €/QALY) and in patient with objective response to induction (101,186 €/QALY), but it is not cost-effective in patients with PS =1, in patients with non-adenocarcinoma or with stable disease after induction chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine- or erlotinib-maintenance therapy had ICERs that varied as a function of histology, PS and response to first-line chemotherapy.

Safety and Patient-Reported outcomes of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in stage IIIB/IV non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation, ALK rearrangement or ROS1 fusion progressing after targeted therapies (GFPC 06-2018 study).

BACKGROUND: In an open-label multicenter non-randomized non-comparative phase II study in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), oncogenic addiction (EGFR mutation or ALK/ROS1 fusion), with disease progression after tyrosine-kinase inhibitor and no prior chemotherapy (NCT04042558), atezolizumab, carboplatin, pemetrexed with or without bevacizumab showed some promising result. Beyond the clinical evaluation, we assessed safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to provide additional information on the relative impact of adding atezolizumab to chemotherapy with and without bevacizumab in this population. MATERIALS: Patients received platinum-pemetrexed-atezolizumab-bevacizumab (PPAB cohort) or, if not eligible, platinum-pemetrexed-atezolizumab (PPA cohort). The incidence, nature, and severity of adverse events (AEs) were assessed. PROs were evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-Core 30 and EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer 13). RESULT: Overall, 68 (PPAB) and 72 (PPA) patients were evaluable for safety. Grade 3-4 AEs occurred in 83.8% (PPAB) and 63.9% (PPA). Grade 3-4 atezolizumab-related AEs occurred in 29.4% and 19.4%, respectively. Grade 3-4 bevacizumab-related AEs occurred in 36.8% (PPAB). Most frequent grade 3-4 AEs were neutropenia (19.1% in PPAB; 23.6% in PPA) and asthenia (16.2% in PPAB; 9.7% in PPA). In PPAB, we observed a global stability in global health security (GHS) score, fatigue and dyspnea with a constant tendency of improvement, and a significant improvement in cough. In PPA, we observed a significant improvement in GHS score with a significant improvement in fatigue, dyspnea and cough. At week 54, we observed an improvement from baseline in GHS score for 49.2% of patients. In both cohorts, patients reported on average no clinically significant worsening in their overall health or physical functioning scores. CONCLUSION: PPAB and PPA combinations seem tolerable and manageable in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-squamous NSCLC with oncogenic addiction (EGFR mutation or ALK/ROS1 fusion) after targeted therapies.

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.

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.

Clinical management of molecular alterations identified by high throughput sequencing in patients with advanced solid tumors in treatment failure: Real-world data from a French hospital.

Background: In the context of personalized medicine, screening patients to identify targetable molecular alterations is essential for therapeutic decisions such as inclusion in clinical trials, early access to therapies, or compassionate treatment. The objective of this study was to determine the real-world impact of routine incorporation of FoundationOne analysis in cancers with a poor prognosis and limited treatment options, or in those progressing after at least one course of standard therapy. Methods: A FoundationOneCDx panel for solid tumor or liquid biopsy samples was offered to 204 eligible patients. Results: Samples from 150 patients were processed for genomic testing, with a data acquisition success rate of 93%. The analysis identified 2419 gene alterations, with a median of 11 alterations per tumor (range, 0-86). The most common or likely pathogenic variants were on TP53, TERT, PI3KCA, CDKN2A/B, KRAS, CCDN1, FGF19, FGF3, and SMAD4. The median tumor mutation burden was three mutations/Mb (range, 0-117) in 143 patients with available data. Of 150 patients with known or likely pathogenic actionable alterations, 13 (8.6%) received matched targeted therapy. Sixty-nine patients underwent Molecular Tumor Board, which resulted in recommendations in 60 cases. Treatment with genotype-directed therapy had no impact on overall survival (13 months vs. 14 months; p = 0.95; hazard ratio = 1.04 (95% confidence interval, 0.48-2.26)]. Conclusions: This study highlights that an organized center with a Multidisciplinary Molecular Tumor Board and an NGS screening system can obtain satisfactory results comparable with those of large centers for including patients in clinical trials.

Cost effectivenes of erlotinib versus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in fit elderly patients participating in a prospective phase 2 study (GFPC 0504).

BACKGROUND: The median age of newly diagnosed patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is 67 years, and one-third of patients are older than 75 years. Elderly patients are more vulnerable to the adverse effects of chemotherapy, and targeted therapy might thus be a relevant alternative. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of erlotinib followed by chemotherapy after progression, compared to the reverse strategy, in fit elderly patients with advanced NSCLC participating in a prospective randomized phase 2 trial (GFPC0504). METHODS: Outcomes (PFS and overall survival) and costs (limited to direct medical costs, from the third-party payer perspective) were prospectively collected until second progression. Costs after progression and health utilities (based on disease states and grade 3-4 toxicities) were derived from the literature. RESULTS: Median overall survival, QALY and total costs for the erlotinib-first strategy were respectively 7.1 months, 0.51 and 27 734 €, compared to 9.4 months, 0.52 and 31 688 € for the chemotherapy-first strategy. The Monte Carlo simulation demonstrates that the two strategies do not differ statistically. CONCLUSION: In terms of cost effectiveness, in fit elderly patients with NSCLC, erlotinib followed by chemotherapy compares well with the reverse strategy.

First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced NSCLC: 4-Year Outcomes From the Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 CheckMate 227 Part 1 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In CheckMate 227, nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in patients with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) greater than or equal to 1% (primary end point) or less than 1% (prespecified descriptive analysis). We report results with minimum 4 years' follow-up. METHODS: Adults with previously untreated stage IV or recurrent NSCLC were randomized (1:1:1) to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, or chemotherapy (PD-L1 ≥1%); or to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy (PD-L1 <1%). Efficacy included OS and other measures. Safety included timing and management of immune-mediated adverse events (AEs). A post hoc analysis evaluated efficacy in patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to treatment-related AEs (TRAEs). RESULTS: After 54.8 months' median follow-up, OS remained longer with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with PD-L1 greater than or equal to 1% (hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.90) and PD-L1 less than 1% (0.64; 0.51-0.81); 4-year OS rate with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy was 29% versus 18% (PD-L1 ≥1%); and 24% versus 10% (PD-L1 <1%). Benefits were observed in both squamous and nonsquamous histologies. In a descriptive analysis, efficacy was improved with nivolumab plus ipilimumab relative to nivolumab (PD-L1 ≥1%) and nivolumab plus chemotherapy (PD-L1 <1%). Safety was consistent with previous reports. The most common immune-mediated AE with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, and nivolumab plus chemotherapy was rash; most immune-mediated AEs (except endocrine events) occurred within 6 months from start of treatment and resolved within 3 months after, mainly with systemic corticosteroids. Patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to TRAEs had long-term OS benefits, as seen in the all randomized population. CONCLUSIONS: At more than 4 years' minimum follow-up, with all patients off immunotherapy treatment for at least 2 years, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate durable long-term efficacy in patients with advanced NSCLC. No new safety signals were identified. Immune-mediated AEs occurred early and resolved quickly with guideline-based management. Discontinuation of nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to TRAEs did not have a negative impact on the long-term benefits seen in all randomized patients.

Economic analyses of immune-checkpoint inhibitors to treat lung cancer.

Introduction: Total lung-cancer-management costs are increasing dramatically. The widespread use of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) explains this rise in large part and financially impacts healthcare systems. Economic assessment has been adapted to this new challenge.Areas covered: This review provides an overview of the economic literature on the use of ICIs to treat lung cancer. Numerous papers have been published over the last few years. Cancers analyzed were non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), squamous NSCLC, locally advanced NSCLC, or small-cell lung cancer.Expert commentary: For the majority of patients, ICIs are cost-effective for lung cancer management. However, these results are influenced by the threshold chosen by each of the different countries. Patient selection, treatment duration, and factors predictive of efficacy are mandatory to decrease costs.

Two-Stage Bronchoscopic Endobronchial Valve Treatment Can Lead to Progressive Lung Volume Reduction and May Decrease Pneumothorax Risk.

Background: Since successful development of endobronchial valves (EBV) as treatment for severe emphysema, its main complication, pneumothorax, remains an important concern. Objective: We hypothesized that a two-step EBV implantation, during two distinct iterative procedures could lead to a more progressive target lobe volume reduction (TLVR) and thus ipsilateral lobe re-expansion, resulting in a significant decrease in the pneumothorax rate. Methods: This retrospective bi-center study carried out by Limoges and Toulouse University Hospitals included patients following the inclusion criteria established by the BLVR expert panel. All patients were treated by two distinct procedures: first, EBVs were placed in all but the most proximal segment or sub-segment. The remaining segment was treated subsequently. All patients had a complete evaluation before treatment, and 3 months after the second procedure. Results: Out of 58 patients included, only 4 pneumothoraxes (7%) occurred during the study. The other complications were pneumonia and severe COPD exacerbation (8.6% and 13.7% of patients, respectively). Significant improvement was found for FEV1 (+19.6 ± 25%), RV (-468 ± 960mL), 6MWD (30 ± 85m), BODE Index (-1.4 ± 1.8 point) and TLVR (50.6 ± 35.1%). Significant TLVR (MCID) was obtained in 74.1% of patients (43/58). Conclusion: This new approach using EBV could reduce the incidence of pneumothorax without increasing other complication rates. Clinical and physiological outcomes are similar to those reported in studies using the conventional single-step treatment.

Multicenter phase II trial of nintedanib plus docetaxel in second-line treatment in advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer patients refractory to first-line platin-based chemotherapy (REFRACT GFPC 02-15 study).

INTRODUCTION: Advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NsqNSCLC) progressing at the induction of a first-line of platin-based chemotherapy is a subgroup of patients with poor prognosis and few second-line treatment options. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-stage phase II prospective multicenter open-label trial performed in platin-based refractory (i.e. progressing during induction phase of first-line platin-based chemotherapy) advanced NsqNSCLC assessed the efficacy of the nintedanib-docetaxel combination in second-line treatment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) rates at 12 weeks with a cut-off at 30% for ineffectiveness and 50% for minimal efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients from 23 centers were included (mean age, 58.5 years; male gender, 73.6%; performance status 0-1, 100%; former/current smokers, 92.5%; adenocarcinoma, 92.5%, median platin-based first-line chemotherapy, 2). Nintedanib-docetaxel combination was administered for a median of 4 cycles. The rate of PFS at 12 weeks was 39.6% (95% CI, 28.2-56.8). Median PFS was 2.7 (95% CI, 1.4-4.1) months and one-year PFS was 11.8% (95% CI, 4.8-22.2). Median overall survival (OS) was 6.9 (95% CI, 4.3-8.2) months and 12-month OS was 32.1% (95% CI, 19.8-45.0); 18-month OS was 27.6% (95% CI, 16,1-40.4). Twenty-nine (53.7%) patients reported at least one serious treatment-related adverse events leading to permanent discontinuation of at least one study drug in 12 (22.2%) patients. CONCLUSION: The predefined minimal efficacy was not demonstrated. However, a number of NsqNSCLC patients refractory to first-line platin-based chemotherapy appeared to benefit from this combination.

Updated Overall Survival Analysis From IMpower110: Atezolizumab Versus Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Treatment-Naive Programmed Death-Ligand 1-Selected NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: IMpower110 previously revealed significant overall survival (OS) benefit with atezolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with treatment-naive EGFR- and ALK-negative (wild type [WT]) metastatic NSCLC with high programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (≥50% on tumor cells [TCs] or ≥10% on tumor-infiltrating immune cells [ICs], per SP142 immunohistochemistry assay; p = 0.0106). We present primary OS analyses in lower PD-L1 expression groups and an updated, exploratory analysis in the high PD-L1 expression group. METHODS: This open-label, phase 3 trial randomized patients with PD-L1 expression on greater than or equal to 1% of TC or IC to receive atezolizumab or platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary end point was OS, hierarchically tested in PD-L1 expression WT subgroups: first the high PD-L1 expression subgroup, then the high-or-intermediate PD-L1 expression subgroup (≥5% on TC or IC), and then the any PD-L1 expression subgroup (≥1% on TC or IC). RESULTS: The any PD-L1 expression WT population included 554 patients (excluded 18 EGFR- or ALK-positive patients). With 17 months' additional follow-up, OS improvement in the atezolizumab versus chemotherapy arm was not statistically significant in high-or-intermediate PD-L1 expression WT patients (n = 328; hazard ratio = 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.66-1.14, p = 0.3091; median = 19.9 versus 16.1 mo), precluding formal OS testing in any PD-L1 expression WT patients. Exploratory analysis in high PD-L1 expression WT patients (n = 205) revealed maintained OS benefit in the atezolizumab arm (hazard ratio = 0.76, 95% confidence interval: 0.54-1.09; median = 20.2 versus 14.7 mo). Updated safety data continued to favor atezolizumab. CONCLUSIONS: Statistical significance for OS was not revealed in the high-or-intermediate expression WT group, and, as a result, OS in the any PD-L1 expression WT group was not formally tested. No new safety signals were found. This updated analysis of IMpower110 supports using atezolizumab in treatment-naive, metastatic WT NSCLC with high PD-L1 expression.

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.