Custom scoring based on ecological topology of gut microbiota associated with cancer immunotherapy outcome.

The gut microbiota influences the clinical responses of cancer patients to immunecheckpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, there is no consensus definition of detrimental dysbiosis. Based on metagenomics (MG) sequencing of 245 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient feces, we constructed species-level co-abundance networks that were clustered into species-interacting groups (SIGs) correlating with overall survival. Thirty-seven and forty-five MG species (MGSs) were associated with resistance (SIG1) and response (SIG2) to ICIs, respectively. When combined with the quantification of Akkermansia species, this procedure allowed a person-based calculation of a topological score (TOPOSCORE) that was validated in an additional 254 NSCLC patients and in 216 genitourinary cancer patients. Finally, this TOPOSCORE was translated into a 21-bacterial probe set-based qPCR scoring that was validated in a prospective cohort of NSCLC patients as well as in colorectal and melanoma patients. This approach could represent a dynamic diagnosis tool for intestinal dysbiosis to guide personalized microbiota-centered interventions.

Repotrectinib in ROS1 Fusion-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The early-generation ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that are approved for the treatment of ROS1 fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have antitumor activity, but resistance develops in tumors, and intracranial activity is suboptimal. Repotrectinib is a next-generation ROS1 TKI with preclinical activity against ROS1 fusion-positive cancers, including those with resistance mutations such as ROS1 G2032R. METHODS: In this registrational phase 1-2 trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of repotrectinib in patients with advanced solid tumors, including ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC. The primary efficacy end point in the phase 2 trial was confirmed objective response; efficacy analyses included patients from phase 1 and phase 2. Duration of response, progression-free survival, and safety were secondary end points in phase 2. RESULTS: On the basis of results from the phase 1 trial, the recommended phase 2 dose of repotrectinib was 160 mg daily for 14 days, followed by 160 mg twice daily. Response occurred in 56 of the 71 patients (79%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 68 to 88) with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC who had not previously received a ROS1 TKI; the median duration of response was 34.1 months (95% CI, 25.6 to could not be estimated), and median progression-free survival was 35.7 months (95% CI, 27.4 to could not be estimated). Response occurred in 21 of the 56 patients (38%; 95% CI, 25 to 52) with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received one ROS1 TKI and had never received chemotherapy; the median duration of response was 14.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to could not be estimated), and median progression-free survival was 9.0 months (95% CI, 6.8 to 19.6). Ten of the 17 patients (59%; 95% CI, 33 to 82) with the ROS1 G2032R mutation had a response. A total of 426 patients received the phase 2 dose; the most common treatment-related adverse events were dizziness (in 58% of the patients), dysgeusia (in 50%), and paresthesia (in 30%), and 3% discontinued repotrectinib owing to treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Repotrectinib had durable clinical activity in patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC, regardless of whether they had previously received a ROS1 TKI. Adverse events were mainly of low grade and compatible with long-term administration. (Funded by Turning Point Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Bristol Myers Squibb; TRIDENT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03093116.).

Amivantamab plus Lazertinib in Previously Untreated EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Amivantamab plus lazertinib (amivantamab-lazertinib) has shown clinically meaningful and durable antitumor activity in patients with previously untreated or osimertinib-pretreated EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor)-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In a phase 3, international, randomized trial, we assigned, in a 2:2:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R), locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC to receive amivantamab-lazertinib (in an open-label fashion), osimertinib (in a blinded fashion), or lazertinib (in a blinded fashion, to assess the contribution of treatment components). The primary end point was progression-free survival in the amivantamab-lazertinib group as compared with the osimertinib group, as assessed by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: Overall, 1074 patients underwent randomization (429 to amivantamab-lazertinib, 429 to osimertinib, and 216 to lazertinib). The median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the amivantamab-lazertinib group than in the osimertinib group (23.7 vs. 16.6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.85; P<0.001). An objective response was observed in 86% of the patients (95% CI, 83 to 89) in the amivantamab-lazertinib group and in 85% of those (95% CI, 81 to 88) in the osimertinib group; among patients with a confirmed response (336 in the amivantamab-lazertinib group and 314 in the osimertinib group), the median response duration was 25.8 months (95% CI, 20.1 to could not be estimated) and 16.8 months (95% CI, 14.8 to 18.5), respectively. In a planned interim overall survival analysis of amivantamab-lazertinib as compared with osimertinib, the hazard ratio for death was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.05). Predominant adverse events were EGFR-related toxic effects. The incidence of discontinuation of all agents due to treatment-related adverse events was 10% with amivantamab-lazertinib and 3% with osimertinib. CONCLUSIONS: Amivantamab-lazertinib showed superior efficacy to osimertinib as first-line treatment in EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MARIPOSA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04487080.).

DNA methylation as a new tool for the differential diagnosis between T-LBL and lymphocyte-rich thymoma.

T-lymphoblastic lymphoma (T-LBL) and thymoma are two rare primary tumors of the thymus deriving either from T-cell precursors or from thymic epithelial cells, respectively. Some thymoma subtypes (AB, B1, and B2) display numerous reactive terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-positive (TdT+) T-cell precursors masking epithelial tumor cells. Therefore, the differential diagnosis between T-LBL and TdT+ T-lymphocyte-rich thymoma could be challenging, especially in the case of needle biopsy. To distinguish between T-LBL and thymoma-associated lymphoid proliferations, we analyzed the global DNA methylation using two different technologies, namely MeDIP array and EPIC array, in independent samples series [17 T-LBLs compared with one TdT+ lymphocyte-rich thymoma (B1 subtype) and three normal thymi, and seven lymphocyte-rich thymomas compared with 24 T-LBLs, respectively]. In unsupervised principal component analysis (PCA), T-LBL and thymoma samples clustered separately. We identified differentially methylated regions (DMRs) using MeDIP-array and EPIC-array datasets and nine overlapping genes between the two datasets considering the top 100 DMRs including ZIC1, TSHZ2, CDC42BPB, RBM24, C10orf53, and MACROD2. In order to explore the DNA methylation profiles in larger series, we defined a classifier based on these six differentially methylated gene promoters, developed an MS-MLPA assay, and demonstrated a significant differential methylation between thymomas (hypomethylated; n = 48) and T-LBLs (hypermethylated; n = 54) (methylation ratio median 0.03 versus 0.66, respectively; p < 0.0001), with MACROD2 methylation status the most discriminating. Using a machine learning strategy, we built a prediction model trained with the EPIC-array dataset and defined a cumulative score taking into account the weight of each feature. A score above or equal to 0.4 was predictive of T-LBL and conversely. Applied to the MS-MLPA dataset, this prediction model accurately predicted diagnoses of T-LBL and thymoma. © 2024 The Author(s). The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Deciphering resistance mechanisms in cancer: final report of MATCH-R study with a focus on molecular drivers and PDX development.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the resistance mechanisms of tumor is crucial for advancing cancer therapies. The prospective MATCH-R trial (NCT02517892), led by Gustave Roussy, aimed to characterize resistance mechanisms to cancer treatments through molecular analysis of fresh tumor biopsies. This report presents the genomic data analysis of the MATCH-R study conducted from 2015 to 2022 and focuses on targeted therapies. METHODS: The study included resistant metastatic patients (pts) who accepted an image-guided tumor biopsy. After evaluation of tumor content (TC) in frozen tissue biopsies, targeted NGS (10 < TC < 30%) or Whole Exome Sequencing and RNA sequencing (TC > 30%) were performed before and/or after the anticancer therapy. Patient-derived xenografts (PDX) were established by implanting tumor fragments into NOD scid gamma mice and amplified up to five passages. RESULTS: A total of 1,120 biopsies were collected from 857 pts with the most frequent tumor types being lung (38.8%), digestive (16.3%) and prostate (14.1%) cancer. Molecular targetable driver were identified in 30.9% (n = 265/857) of the patients, with EGFR (41.5%), FGFR2/3 (15.5%), ALK (11.7%), BRAF (6.8%), and KRAS (5.7%) being the most common altered genes. Furthermore, 66.0% (n = 175/265) had a biopsy at progression on targeted therapy. Among resistant cases, 41.1% (n = 72/175) had no identified molecular mechanism, 32.0% (n = 56/175) showed on-target resistance, and 25.1% (n = 44/175) exhibited a by-pass resistance mechanism. Molecular profiling of the 44 patients with by-pass resistance identified 51 variants, with KRAS (13.7%), PIK3CA (11.8%), PTEN (11.8%), NF2 (7.8%), AKT1 (5.9%), and NF1 (5.9%) being the most altered genes. Treatment was tailored for 45% of the patients with a resistance mechanism identified leading to an 11 months median extension of clinical benefit. A total of 341 biopsies were implanted in mice, successfully establishing 136 PDX models achieving a 39.9% success rate. PDX models are available for EGFR (n = 31), FGFR2/3 (n = 26), KRAS (n = 18), ALK (n = 16), BRAF (n = 6) and NTRK (n = 2) driven cancers. These models closely recapitulate the biology of the original tumors in term of molecular alterations and pharmacological status, and served as valuable models to validate overcoming treatment strategies. CONCLUSION: The MATCH-R study highlights the feasibility of on purpose image guided tumor biopsies and PDX establishment to characterize resistance mechanisms and guide personalized therapies to improve outcomes in pre-treated metastatic patients.

Clinical and molecular features of early onset pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a major health burden and may become the second cause of death by cancer in developed countries. The incidence of early-onset pancreatic cancer (EOPC, defined by an age at diagnosis <50 years old) is increasing. Here, we conducted a study of all PDAC patients followed at our institution. Patients were classified as EOPC or non-early onset (nEOPC, >50). Eight hundred and seventy eight patients were included, of which 113 EOPC, exhibiting a comparable performance status. EOPC were more often diagnosed at the metastatic stage (70.0% vs 58.3%) and liver metastases were more prevalent at diagnosis (60.2% vs. 43.9%). The median overall survival (OS) from diagnosis was 18.1 months, similar between EOPC and nEOPC. Among patients who underwent surgery, recurrence-free survival was similar between age groups. Among metastatic patients, first line progression free survival was similar but EOPC received more treatment lines (72.3% vs. 58.1% received ≥2 lines). Regarding molecular alterations, the mean tumor mutational burden (TMB) was lower in EOPC (1.42 vs. 2.95 mut/Mb). The prevalence of KRAS and BRCA1/2 mutations was similar, but EOPC displayed fewer alterations in CNKN2A/B. Fifty eight patients (18.6%) had actionable alterations (ESCAT I-III) and 31 of them received molecularly matched treatments. On the transcriptomic level, despite its clinical aggressiveness, EOPC was less likely to display a basal-like phenotype. To conclude, EOPC were diagnosed more frequently at the metastatic stage. OS and 1st line PFS were similar to nEOPC. EOPC displayed specific molecular features, such as a lower TMB and fewer alterations in CDKN2A/B.

Resistance to BRAF inhibition explored through single circulating tumour cell molecular profiling in BRAF-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Resistance mechanisms to combination therapy with dabrafenib plus trametinib remain poorly understood in patients with BRAFV600E-mutant advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We examined resistance to BRAF inhibition by single CTC sequencing in BRAFV600E-mutant NSCLC. METHODS: CTCs and cfDNA were examined in seven BRAFV600E-mutant NSCLC patients at failure to treatment. Matched tumour tissue was available for four patients. Single CTCs were isolated by fluorescence-activated cell sorting following enrichment and immunofluorescence (Hoechst 33342/CD45/pan-cytokeratins) and sequenced for mutation and copy number-alteration (CNA) analyses. RESULTS: BRAFV600E was found in 4/4 tumour biopsies and 5/7 cfDNA samples. CTC mutations were mostly found in MAPK-independent pathways and only 1/26 CTCs were BRAFV600E mutated. CTC profiles encompassed the majority of matched tumour biopsy CNAs but 72.5% to 84.5% of CTC CNAs were exclusive to CTCs. Extensive diversity, involving MAPK, MAPK-related, cell cycle, DNA repair and immune response pathways, was observed in CTCs and missed by analyses on tumour biopsies and cfDNA. Driver alterations in clinically relevant genes were recurrent in CTCs. CONCLUSIONS: Resistance was not driven by BRAFV600E-mutant CTCs. Extensive tumour genomic heterogeneity was found in CTCs compared to tumour biopsies and cfDNA at failure to BRAF inhibition, in BRAFV600E-mutant NSCLC, including relevant alterations that may represent potential treatment opportunities.

Olaparib maintenance versus placebo in platinum-sensitive non-small cell lung cancer: the Phase 2 randomized PIPSeN trial.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-sensitivity is a phenotypic biomarker of Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) sensitivity in histotypes where PARPi are approved. Approximately one-third of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are platinum-sensitive. The double-blind, randomized phase II PIPSeN (NCT02679963) study evaluated olaparib, a PARPi, as maintenance therapy for patients with platinum-sensitive advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Chemonaïve patients with ECOG performance status of 0-1, platinum-sensitive, EGFR- and ALK-wild-type, stage IIIB-IV NSCLC were randomized (R) to receive either olaparib (O) maintenance or a placebo (P). The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS) from R. Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS) and safety. With an anticipated hazard ratio of 0.65, 144 patients were required to be randomized, and approximately 500 patients enrolled. RESULTS: The trial was prematurely terminated because anti-PD(L)1 therapy was approved during the trial recruitment. A total of 182 patients were enrolled, with 60 patients randomized: 33 and 27 in the O and P arms, respectively. Patient and tumor characteristics were well-balanced between arms, except for alcohol intake (33% vs 11% in the O and P arms, respectively, p = 0.043). The median PFS was 2.9 and 2.0 months in the O and P arms, respectively (logrank p = 0.99). The median OS was 9.4 and 9.5 months in the O and P arms, respectively (p = 0.28). Grade ≥3 toxicities occurred in 15 and 8 patients in O and P arms, with no new safety concerns. CONCLUSION: PIPSeN was terminated early after enrollment of only 50% of the pre-planned population, thus being statistically underpowered. Olaparib maintenance did neither improve median PFS nor OS in this patient population.

Sotorasib for Lung Cancers with KRAS p.G12C Mutation.

BACKGROUND: Sotorasib showed anticancer activity in patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated advanced solid tumors in a phase 1 study, and particularly promising anticancer activity was observed in a subgroup of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In a single-group, phase 2 trial, we investigated the activity of sotorasib, administered orally at a dose of 960 mg once daily, in patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC previously treated with standard therapies. The primary end point was objective response (complete or partial response) according to independent central review. Key secondary end points included duration of response, disease control (defined as complete response, partial response, or stable disease), progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Exploratory biomarkers were evaluated for their association with response to sotorasib therapy. RESULTS: Among the 126 enrolled patients, the majority (81.0%) had previously received both platinum-based chemotherapy and inhibitors of programmed death 1 (PD-1) or programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1). According to central review, 124 patients had measurable disease at baseline and were evaluated for response. An objective response was observed in 46 patients (37.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 28.6 to 46.2), including in 4 (3.2%) who had a complete response and in 42 (33.9%) who had a partial response. The median duration of response was 11.1 months (95% CI, 6.9 to could not be evaluated). Disease control occurred in 100 patients (80.6%; 95% CI, 72.6 to 87.2). The median progression-free survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.1 to 8.2), and the median overall survival was 12.5 months (95% CI, 10.0 to could not be evaluated). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 88 of 126 patients (69.8%), including grade 3 events in 25 patients (19.8%) and a grade 4 event in 1 (0.8%). Responses were observed in subgroups defined according to PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden, and co-occurring mutations in STK11, KEAP1, or TP53. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2 trial, sotorasib therapy led to a durable clinical benefit without new safety signals in patients with previously treated KRAS p.G12C-mutated NSCLC. (Funded by Amgen and the National Institutes of Health; CodeBreaK100 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03600883.).

Circulating tumor DNA landscape and prognostic impact of acquired resistance to targeted therapies in cancer patients: a national center for precision medicine (PRISM) study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the effectiveness of the various targeted therapies currently approved for solid tumors, acquired resistance remains a persistent problem that limits the ultimate effectiveness of these treatments. Polyclonal resistance to targeted therapy has been described in multiple solid tumors through high-throughput analysis of multiple tumor tissue samples from a single patient. However, biopsies at the time of acquired resistance to targeted agents may not always be feasible and may not capture the genetic heterogeneity that could exist within a patient. METHODS: We analyzed circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) with a large next-generation sequencing panel to characterize the landscape of secondary resistance mechanisms in two independent prospective cohorts of patients (STING: n = 626; BIP: n = 437) with solid tumors who were treated with various types of targeted therapies: tyrosine kinase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies and hormonal therapies. RESULTS: Emerging alterations involved in secondary resistance were observed in the plasma of up 34% of patients regardless of the type of targeted therapy. Alterations were polyclonal in up to 14% of patients. Emerging ctDNA alterations were associated with significantly shorter overall survival for patients with some tumor types. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive landscape of genomic aberrations indicates that genetic alterations involved in secondary resistance to targeted therapy occur frequently and suggests that the detection of such alterations before disease progression may guide personalized treatment and improve patient outcome.

Efficacy of Selpercatinib in RET Fusion-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: RET fusions are oncogenic drivers in 1 to 2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). In patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, the efficacy and safety of selective RET inhibition are unknown. METHODS: We enrolled patients with advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy and those who were previously untreated separately in a phase 1-2 trial of selpercatinib. The primary end point was an objective response (a complete or partial response) as determined by an independent review committee. Secondary end points included the duration of response, progression-free survival, and safety. RESULTS: In the first 105 consecutively enrolled patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received at least platinum-based chemotherapy, the percentage with an objective response was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54 to 73). The median duration of response was 17.5 months (95% CI, 12.0 to could not be evaluated), and 63% of the responses were ongoing at a median follow-up of 12.1 months. Among 39 previously untreated patients, the percentage with an objective response was 85% (95% CI, 70 to 94), and 90% of the responses were ongoing at 6 months. Among 11 patients with measurable central nervous system metastasis at enrollment, the percentage with an objective intracranial response was 91% (95% CI, 59 to 100). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were hypertension (in 14% of the patients), an increased alanine aminotransferase level (in 12%), an increased aspartate aminotransferase level (in 10%), hyponatremia (in 6%), and lymphopenia (in 6%). A total of 12 of 531 patients (2%) discontinued selpercatinib because of a drug-related adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Selpercatinib had durable efficacy, including intracranial activity, with mainly low-grade toxic effects in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy and those who were previously untreated. (Funded by Loxo Oncology and others; LIBRETTO-001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03157128.).

TRUST-II: a global phase II study of taletrectinib in ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer and other solid tumors.

Crizotinib and entrectinib have been approved to treat ROS1 fusion-positive (ROS1+) non-small-cell lung cancer. However, unmet needs remain, including treatment of patients with resistance mutations, efficacy in brain metastasis and avoidance of neurological side effects. Taletrectinib was designed to: improve efficacy; overcome resistance to first-generation ROS1 inhibitors; and address brain metastasis while conferring fewer neurological adverse events. All of these features are demonstrated and supported by the interim data from the regional phase II TRUST-I clinical study. Here we describe the rationale and design of TRUST-II, a global phase II study of taletrectinib in patients with locally advanced/metastatic ROS1+ non-small-cell lung cancer and other ROS1+ solid tumors. The primary end point is confirmed objective response rate. Secondary end points include duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival and safety. This trial is enrolling patients in North America, Europe and Asia.

The targeted therapies crizotinib and entrectinib are the first options available to treat a type of lung cancer called ROS1 fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ROS1⁺ NSCLC). However, not all patients with ROS1⁺ NSCLC respond to these drugs. In addition, most patients who take these drugs find their cancer eventually develops resistance and begins to grow again. Patients with disease that has spread (metastasized) to the brain have worse outcomes. Taletrectinib is a new type of targeted therapy that is being developed to treat people who have metastatic ROS1⁺ NSCLC. Data from a regional phase II clinical trial showed that taletrectinib is well tolerated, effective for patients who have never taken a ROS1 targeted therapy and inhibits ROS1⁺ NSCLC for patients whose cancer has developed some types of resistance to these drugs. It has also been shown to treat ROS1⁺ NSCLC tumors that have spread to the brain. This article discusses the rationale and design of a new trial called TRUST-II, which is a global phase II clinical trial looking at how well taletrectinib works and how safe it is. TRUST-II is actively enrolling patients in North America, Europe and Asia. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04919811 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Pembrolizumab versus placebo as adjuvant therapy for completely resected stage IB-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091): an interim analysis of a randomised, triple-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab is a standard-of-care for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We assessed pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy for completely resected stage IB-IIIA NSCLC. METHODS: In this randomised, triple-blind, phase 3 trial (PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091), patients were recruited from 196 medical centres in 29 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with completely resected, pathologically confirmed stage IB (tumours of ≥4 cm in diameter), II, or IIIA NSCLC per the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system (7th edition) of any histology or PD-L1 expression level, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1; adjuvant chemotherapy was to be considered for stage IB disease and was strongly recommended for stage II and IIIA disease, according to national and local guidelines. Using a central interactive voice-response system, eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using a minimisation technique and stratified by disease stage, previous adjuvant chemotherapy, PD-L1 expression, and geographical region, to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo, both administered intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 18 cycles. Participants, investigators, and analysts were masked to treatment assignment. Dual primary endpoints were disease-free survival in the overall population and in the population with PD-L1 tumour proportion score (TPS) of 50% or greater. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group). Safety was assessed in all participants randomly assigned to treatment who received at least one dose of study treatment. Here we report results of the second interim analysis, prespecified to occur when approximately 118 disease-free survival events had occurred in the PD-L1 TPS of 50% or greater population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02504372, and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Jan 20, 2016, and May 6, 2020, 1177 (60%) of 1955 screened participants were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab (n=590, including n=168 with PD-L1 TPS of ≥50%) or placebo (n=587; including n=165 with PD-L1 TPS of ≥50%) and included in the ITT population. Median follow-up as of data cutoff (Sept 20, 2021) for this interim analysis was 35·6 months (IQR 27·1-45·5). In the overall population, median disease-free survival was 53·6 months (95% CI 39·2 to not reached) in the pembrolizumab group versus 42·0 months (31·3 to not reached) in the placebo group (HR 0·76 [95% CI 0·63-0·91], p=0·0014). In the PD-L1 TPS of 50% or greater population, median disease-free survival was not reached in either the pembrolizumab group (95% CI 44·3 to not reached) or the placebo group (95% CI 35·8 to not reached; HR 0·82 [95% CI 0·57-1·18]; p=0·14). Grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 198 (34%) of 580 participants who received pembrolizumab and 150 (26%) of 581 participants who received placebo. Grade 3 or worse events that occurred in at least ten participants in either treatment group were hypertension (35 [6%]) and pneumonia (12 [2%]) with pembrolizumab and hypertension (32 [6%]) with placebo. Serious adverse events occurred in 142 (24%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and 90 (15%) in the placebo group; serious adverse events that occurred in more than 1% of participants were pneumonia (13 [2%]), pneumonitis (12 [2%]), and diarrhoea (seven [1%]) with pembrolizumab and pneumonia (nine [2%]) with placebo. Treatment-related adverse events led to death in four (1%) participants treated with pembrolizumab (one due to both cardiogenic shock and myocarditis, one due to both septic shock and myocarditis, one due to pneumonia, and one due to sudden death) and in no participants treated with placebo. INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab significantly improved disease-free survival compared with placebo and was not associated with new safety signals in completely resected, PD-L1-unselected, stage IB-IIIA NSCLC. Pembrolizumab is potentially a new treatment option for stage IB-IIIA NSCLC after complete resection and, when recommended, adjuvant chemotherapy, regardless of PD-L1 expression. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co.

MARIPOSA: phase 3 study of first-line amivantamab + lazertinib versus osimertinib in EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer.

Third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as osimertinib, have demonstrated efficacy in patients with EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer; however, almost all patients will eventually relapse. Amivantamab is an EGFR-MET bispecific antibody with immune cell-directing activity that targets activating and resistance EGFR mutations and MET mutations and amplifications. In the ongoing CHRYSALIS study (NCT02609776), amivantamab in combination with lazertinib, a potent, brain-penetrant third-generation EGFR TKI, demonstrated antitumor activity in the treatment-naive and osimertinib-relapsed setting. Here the authors present the methodology for the MARIPOSA study (NCT04487080), a phase 3, multicenter, randomized study designed to compare the efficacy and safety of amivantamab and lazertinib combination therapy versus single-agent osimertinib as first-line treatment for EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer.

Plain language summary Osimertinib is the standard-of-care treatment for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer caused by mutations in the EGFR. However, patients will eventually see their disease return because their tumors will develop new mutations that are resistant to osimertinib treatment. Amivantamab is a new antibody treatment that blocks the EGFR and another receptor called the MET receptor, to stop the growth of lung tumor cells. In an ongoing clinical trial, called the CHRYSALIS study, when amivantamab was given with lazertinib (another drug that blocks the EGFR), lung tumors shrank in patients whose lung cancer had not been previously treated. A new clinical trial called the MARIPOSA study (NCT04487080) aims to compare the antitumor activity and safety of the amivantamab + lazertinib combination versus osimertinib alone in patients with EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer who have not received treatment for their lung cancer. Trial registration number: NCT04487080 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

LIBRETTO-432, a phase III study of adjuvant selpercatinib or placebo in stage IB-IIIA RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

Selpercatinib, a first-in-class, highly selective and potent central nervous system-active RET kinase inhibitor demonstrated clinically meaningful activity with manageable toxicity in pretreated and treatment-naive advanced/metastatic RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). LIBRETTO-432 is a global, randomized, double-blind, phase III trial evaluating selpercatinib versus placebo in stage IB-IIIA, RET fusion-positive NSCLC, previously treated with definitive surgery or radiation; participants must have undergone available anti-cancer therapy (including chemotherapy or durvalumab) or not be suitable for it, per investigator's discretion. The primary end point is investigator-assessed event-free survival (EFS) in the primary analysis population (stage II-IIIA RET fusion-positive NSCLC). Key secondary end points include EFS in the overall population, overall survival, and time to distant disease recurrence in the central nervous system.

Selpercatinib is approved in multiple countries for the treatment of advanced or metastatic RET-altered lung cancers. Selpercatinib has shown promising efficacy and safety results in patients with advanced/metastatic RET fusion-positive NSCLC. This is a summary of the LIBRETTO-432 study which compares selpercatinib with placebo in patients with earlier stages (stage IB-IIIA) of RET fusion-positive NSCLC, who have already undergone surgery or radiotherapy and applicable adjuvant chemotherapy. This study is active and currently recruiting new participants. This trial will evaluate how long people live without evidence of cancer recurrence, both during and after treatment. Side effects will also be evaluated in this study. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04819100 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Safety of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with advanced solid tumors receiving anti-VEGF agents: a retrospective study.

PURPOSE: Kinase inhibitors (KI) and antibodies targeting the VEGF pathway are approved in a broad spectrum of cancers and associated with an increased risk of bleeding and thromboembolic events (TE). The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) apixaban and rivaroxaban is increasing in cancer patients, but limited data are available for patients receiving anti-VEGF agents. METHODS: To assess safety of DOAC with concomitant anti-VEGF agents, a retrospective chart review of all patients receiving concomitantly DOAC and anti-VEGF agents was performed from 2013 to 2020 in our center. Data on demographics, safety, and time on treatment were collected. Main outcome was safety (bleeding and thromboembolic events). RESULTS: Of 92 patients (median age 66 years (IQR: 59-72)), 40 were treated with KI and 52 with bevacizumab. The most frequent primary tumor sites were colon/rectum (24%), kidney (21%), ovary (13%), lung (11%), soft tissue sarcoma (10%), and thyroid (9%); 2% had brain metastases. Apixaban 5 mg bid (n = 41) or rivaroxaban 20 mg daily (n = 51) were given for TE (65%), atrial fibrillation (32%), or other indications (3%). The median duration of concomitant treatment was 4.8 months (95%CI: 0.7-50.0) with bevacizumab and 11.7 months (95%CI: 0.1-53.8) with KI. Grade ≥ 3 bleeding events occurred in 5 patients (5%): 4 patients receiving bevacizumab (one grade 5 upper digestive tract bleeding and three grade 3 rectal or vaginal hemorrhages) and 1 patient under cabozantinib for kidney cancer with endobronchial metastasis (grade 3 hemoptysis). Grade ≥ 3 TE occurred in 8 patients (9%): 7 patients receiving bevacizumab (including one grade 5 pulmonary embolism), and one patient receiving sunitinib (grade 3 pulmonary embolism). Median time-to-event (bleeding or thrombotic event) was not reached (NR) (95%CI: 76.9-NR) for KI and 86.9 months (95%CI: 42.9-148.0) for bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In our experience, the use of DOAC was safe in selected patients treated with KI, but unclear with bevacizumab. More data are needed to endorse guidelines in this specific group of patients.

Late phase 1 studies: concepts and outcomes.

Over the past two decades, targeted therapies have become cornerstone treatments for numerous cancers with oncogene addiction. Unfortunately, their effectiveness reduces over time and most patients who receive targeted therapies relapse within 12 months. The emergence of drug-resistance mechanisms in tumours paved the way for next-generation inhibitors. However, insufficient concentration of targeted therapy is a frequent but poorly explored mechanism of treatment failure. Additionally, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) is not always reached in phase studies, and the recommended phase 2 dose is mostly based on benefit-risk ratio and pharmacokinetic considerations, which could result in a suboptimal dose. This scenario has led us to propose a new concept in clinical drug development: the late phase 1 study. The primary goal of this type of trial is to define an alternative MTD of a drug in patients who are chronically exposed and had an initial benefit from targeted therapy but subsequently progressed without an identified resistance alteration. Intrapatient dose escalation might increase drug concentration and restore drug activity or efficacy.

Pralsetinib for RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ARROW): a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Oncogenic alterations in RET have been identified in multiple tumour types, including 1-2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of pralsetinib, a highly potent, oral, selective RET inhibitor, in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC. METHODS: ARROW is a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study done at 71 sites (community and academic cancer centres) in 13 countries (Belgium, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours, including RET fusion-positive NSCLC, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 (later limited to 0-1 in a protocol amendment) were enrolled. In phase 2, patients received 400 mg once-daily oral pralsetinib, and could continue treatment until disease progression, intolerance, withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. Phase 2 primary endpoints were overall response rate (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1·1 and assessed by blinded independent central review) and safety. Tumour response was assessed in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC and centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease who had received platinum-based chemotherapy or were treatment-naive because they were ineligible for standard therapy. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03037385, and enrolment of patients with treatment-naive RET fusion-positive NSCLC was ongoing at the time of this interim analysis. FINDINGS: Of 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC enrolled between March 17, 2017, and May 22, 2020 (data cutoff), 92 with previous platinum-based chemotherapy and 29 who were treatment-naive received pralsetinib before July 11, 2019 (efficacy enrolment cutoff); 87 previously treated patients and 27 treatment-naive patients had centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease. Overall responses were recorded in 53 (61%; 95% CI 50-71) of 87 patients with previous platinum-based chemotherapy, including five (6%) patients with a complete response; and 19 (70%; 50-86) of 27 treatment-naive patients, including three (11%) with a complete response. In 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (43 patients [18%]), hypertension (26 [11%]), and anaemia (24 [10%]); there were no treatment-related deaths in this population. INTERPRETATION: Pralsetinib is a new, well-tolerated, promising, once-daily oral treatment option for patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC. FUNDING: Blueprint Medicines.