Immune evasion before tumour invasion in early lung squamous carcinogenesis.

Early detection and treatment are critical for improving the outcome of patients with cancer1. Understanding the largely uncharted biology of carcinogenesis requires deciphering molecular processes in premalignant lesions, and revealing the determinants of the intralesional immune reaction during cancer development. The adaptive immune response within tumours has previously been shown to be strongest at the earliest stage of carcinoma2,3. Here we show that immune activation and immune escape occur before tumour invasion, and reveal the relevant immune biomarkers of the pre-invasive stages of carcinogenesis in the lung. We used gene-expression profiling and multispectral imaging to analyse a dataset of 9 morphological stages of the development of lung squamous cell carcinoma, which includes 122 well-annotated biopsies from 77 patients. We identified evolutionary trajectories of cancer and immune pathways that comprise (1) a linear increase in proliferation and DNA repair from normal to cancerous tissue; (2) a transitory increase of metabolism and early immune sensing, through the activation of resident immune cells, in low-grade pre-invasive lesions; (3) the activation of immune responses and immune escape through immune checkpoints and suppressive interleukins from high-grade pre-invasive lesions; and, ultimately, (4) the activation of the epithelial-mesenchymal transition in the invasive stage of cancer. We propose that carcinogenesis in the lung involves a dynamic co-evolution of pre-invasive bronchial cells and the immune response. These findings highlight the need to develop immune biomarkers for early detection as well as immunotherapy-based chemopreventive approaches for individuals who are at high risk of developing lung cancer.

Prognostic and Predictive Biomarkers in the Era of Immunotherapy for Lung Cancer.

The therapeutic algorithm of lung cancer has recently been revolutionized by the emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, an objective and durable response rate remains low with those recent therapies and some patients even experience severe adverse events. Prognostic and predictive biomarkers are therefore needed in order to select patients who will respond. Nowadays, the only validated biomarker is the PD-L1 expression, but its predictive value remains imperfect, and it does not offer any certainty of a sustained response to treatment. With recent progresses in molecular biology, genome sequencing techniques, and the understanding of the immune microenvironment of the tumor and its host, new molecular features have been highlighted. There are evidence in favor of the positive predictive value of the tumor mutational burden, as an example. From the expression of molecular interactions within tumor cells to biomarkers circulating in peripheral blood, many markers have been identified as associated with the response to immunotherapy. In this review, we would like to summarize the latest knowledge about predictive and prognostic biomarkers of immune checkpoint inhibitors efficacy in order to go further in the field of precision immuno-oncology.

Immune-Desert Tumor Microenvironment in Thoracic SMARCA4-Deficient Undifferentiated Tumors with Limited Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic SMARCA4-deficient undifferentiated tumors (SMARCA4-UT) are aggressive neoplasms. Data linking BAF alterations with tumor microenvironment (TME) and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are contradictory. The TME of SMARCA4-UT and their response to ICI are unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with SMARCA4-UT in our institution were included. Immunostainings for tertiary lymphoid structures (TLS), immune cell markers, and checkpoints were assessed. Validation was performed using an independent transcriptome dataset including SMARCA4-UT, non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) with/without SMARCA4 mutations, and unclassified thoracic sarcomas (UTS). CXCL9 and PD-L1 expressions were assessed in NSCLC and thoracic fibroblast cell lines, with/without SMARCA4 knockdown, treated with/without interferon gamma. RESULTS: Nine patients were identified. All samples but one showed no TLS, consistent with an immune desert TME phenotype. Four patients received ICI as part of their treatment, but the only one who responded, had a tumor with a TLS and immune-rich TME. Unsupervised clustering of the validation cohort using immune cell scores identified 2 clusters associated with cell ontogeny and immunity (cluster 1 enriched for NSCLC independently of SMARCA4 status (n = 9/10; P = .001); cluster 2 enriched for SMARCA4-UT (n = 11/12; P = .005) and UTS (n = 5/5; P = .0005). SMARCA4 loss-of-function experiments revealed interferon-induced upregulation of CXCL9 and PD-L1 expression in the NSCLC cell line with no effect on the thoracic fibroblast cell line. CONCLUSION: SMARCA4-UT mainly have an immune desert TME with limited efficacy to ICI. TME of SMARCA4-driven tumors varies according to the cell of origin questioning the interplay between BAF alterations, cell ontogeny and immunity.

Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Activity in Patients with NSCLC Harboring Uncommon EGFR Mutations: A Retrospective International Cohort Study (UpSwinG).

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) are standard of care for patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with common mutations (Del19 or L858R); however, 7%-23% of NSCLC tumors harbor uncommon EGFR mutations. These mutations are highly heterogeneous, and developments in detection techniques are helping to identify mutations with little or no clinical data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, global, multi-center study (NCT04179890), existing health records were identified for consecutive EGFR TKI-naïve patients with uncommon EGFR mutations (T790M, ex20ins, major uncommon [G719X, L861Q, or S768I], or "other" mutations; compound mutations) treated with erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib, or osimertinib in first or second line. Endpoints included time-to-treatment failure (TTF), objective response rate (ORR), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 246 patients (median age: 69.5 years; Asian: 84%) were included from 9 countries. Most patients (92%) received an EGFR TKI as first-line therapy; 54%, 43% and 3% received afatinib, first-generation TKIs, and osimertinib, respectively. Median TTF and OS with EGFR TKIs were 9.9 and 24.4 months; ORR was 43%. In patients treated with first-line chemotherapy (n = 20), median TTF and ORR were 6.6 months and 41%. Outcomes were most favorable in patients with major uncommon or compound mutations. Overall, TTF was 11.3 months with afatinib and 8.8 months with first-generation EGFR TKIs across mutation categories. In most mutation categories, median OS was >2 years. CONCLUSION: In a real-world setting, EGFR TKIs were the preferred treatment option in patients with uncommon EGFR mutations; strongest outcomes were seen in patients with major uncommon and compound mutations.

Helicase-like transcription factor expression is associated with a poor prognosis in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).

BACKGROUND: The relapse rate in early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after surgical resection is high. Prognostic biomarkers may help identify patients who may benefit from additional therapy. The Helicase-like Transcription Factor (HLTF) is a tumor suppressor, altered in cancer either by gene hypermethylation or mRNA alternative splicing. This study assessed the expression and the clinical relevance of wild-type (WT) and variant forms of HLTF RNAs in NSCLC. METHODS: We analyzed online databases (TCGA, COSMIC) for HLTF alterations in NSCLC and assessed WT and spliced HLTF mRNAs expression by RT-ddPCR in 39 lung cancer cell lines and 171 patients with resected stage I-II NSCLC. RESULTS: In silico analyses identified HLTF gene alterations more frequently in lung squamous cell carcinoma than in adenocarcinoma. In cell lines and in patients, WT and I21R HLTF mRNAs were detected, but the latter at lower level. The subgroup of 25 patients presenting a combined low WT HLTF expression and a high I21R HLTF expression had a significantly worse disease-free survival than the other 146 patients in univariate (HR 1.96, CI 1.17-3.30; p = 0.011) and multivariate analyses (HR 1.98, CI 1.15-3.40; p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: A low WT HLTF expression with a high I21R HLTF expression is associated with a poor DFS.

Genomic Testing in Lung Cancer: Past, Present, and Future.

Precision medicine commonly refers to the selection of the most effective cancer treatments based on the presence of specific biomarkers (eg, genomic abnormalities) in a patient's tumor. Therefore, genomic testing is used to identify patients whose tumors harbor the vulnerability that is sensitive to corresponding targeted therapies. This approach allows for the selection of patients who have the greatest chance of deriving benefit from the treatments, reduces toxicity, and significantly improves outcome; precision medicine is recommended for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. This article reviews the evolution of genomic testing in lung cancer, from its development, including first success and failures, to its current use in the care of patients with lung cancer, and addresses future considerations, such as the expected increase of targetable abnormalities, the need to follow the genomic profile over time, and tumor heterogeneity.

The helicase-like transcription factor (HLTF) in cancer: loss of function or oncomorphic conversion of a tumor suppressor?

The Helicase-like Transcription Factor (HLTF) belongs to the SWI/SNF family of proteins involved in chromatin remodeling. In addition to its role in gene transcription, HLTF has been implicated in DNA repair, which suggests that this protein acts as a tumor suppressor. Accumulating evidence indicates that HLTF expression is altered in various cancers via two mechanisms: gene silencing through promoter hypermethylation or alternative mRNA splicing, which leads to the expression of truncated proteins that lack DNA repair domains. In either case, the alteration of HLTF expression in cancer has a poor prognosis. In this review, we gathered published clinical and molecular data on HLTF. Our purposes are (a) to address whether HLTF alterations could be considered as cancer drivers or passengers and (b) to determine whether its different functions (transcription or DNA repair) could be diverted in clonal selection during cancer progression.

EGFR and KRAS Mutations Predict the Incidence and Outcome of Brain Metastases in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the leading cause of brain metastases (BM). The identification of driver oncogenes and matched targeted therapies has improved outcome in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients; however, a better understanding of BM molecular biology is needed to further drive the process in this field. METHODS: In this observational study, stage IV NSCLC patients tested for EGFR and KRAS mutations were selected, and BM incidence, recurrence and patients' outcome were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 144 patients (142 Caucasian and two Asian) were selected, including 11.27% with EGFR-mutant and 33.10% with KRAS-mutant tumors, and 57.04% patients had developed BM. BM incidence was more frequent in patients with EGFR mutation according to multivariate analyses (MVA) (Odds ratio OR = 8.745 [1.743-43.881], p = 0.008). Among patients with treated BM, recurrence after local treatment was less frequent in patients with KRAS mutation (OR = 0.234 [0.078-0.699], p = 0.009). Among patients with untreated BM, overall survival (OS) was shorter for patients with KRAS mutation according to univariate analysis (OR = 7.130 [1.240-41.012], p = 0.028), but not MVA. CONCLUSIONS: EGFR and KRAS mutations have a predictive role on BM incidence, recurrence and outcome in Caucasian NSCLC patients. These results may impact the routine management of disease in these patients. Further studies are required to assess the influence of other biomarkers on NSCLC BM.

Bridging the clinical gaps: genetic, epigenetic and transcriptomic biomarkers for the early detection of lung cancer in the post-National Lung Screening Trial era.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide in part due to our inability to identify which smokers are at highest risk and the lack of effective tools to detect the disease at its earliest and potentially curable stage. Recent results from the National Lung Screening Trial have shown that annual screening of high-risk smokers with low-dose helical computed tomography of the chest can reduce lung cancer mortality. However, molecular biomarkers are needed to identify which current and former smokers would benefit most from annual computed tomography scan screening in order to reduce the costs and morbidity associated with this procedure. Additionally, there is an urgent clinical need to develop biomarkers that can distinguish benign from malignant lesions found on computed tomography of the chest given its very high false positive rate. This review highlights recent genetic, transcriptomic and epigenomic biomarkers that are emerging as tools for the early detection of lung cancer both in the diagnostic and screening setting.

Do proton pump inhibitors alter the response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients? A meta-analysis.

Introduction: Gut microbiota can significantly affect the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in cancer patients. Recently, antibiotics were shown to decrease survival rate of patients treated by ICIs. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) can indeed modulate microbiota's diversity, therefore altering ICIs response. A meta-analysis was performed based on published data to verify this hypothesis. Methods: In this study, over 41 publications, exploring the impact of concomitant PPI treatment on outcomes of ICI-treated patients, were analyzed. Evaluated endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported in ICIs in PPI users versus non-PPI users. Subgroup analyses were performed to minimize the impact of study heterogeneity and to investigate the influence of PPI on the different groups of interest. There was no evidence of publication bias for OS and PFS analysis in subgroup analysis. Results: Forty-one studies were included in the meta-analysis, including a total of 20,042 patients. OS of patients receiving ICIs was negatively correlated in patients concomitantly treated with PPI (HR=1.37; 95%CI, 1.23-1.52). PFS of cancer patients receiving ICIs was also negatively correlated with PPI treatment (HR=1.28; 95%CI, 1.15-1.42). PPI and ICI use was associated with worst OS and PFS not only for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or urothelial cancer patients but also for patients treated with anti PD-1 (OS) and anti PD-L1 (OS and PFS) immunotherapies when administered in non-first line and when PPI was received as baseline treatment or in 60 days before ICI initiation. PPI and ICI use also showed the worst OS and PFS for patients from Europe and Asia. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that PPI treatment leads to significantly worse outcomes in advanced cancer patients treated by ICIs in terms of PFS and OS.

Safety, Immunogenicity, and 1-Year Efficacy of Universal Cancer Peptide-Based Vaccine in Patients With Refractory Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase Ib/Phase IIa De-Escalation Study.

PURPOSE: Universal cancer peptide-based vaccine (UCPVax) is a therapeutic vaccine composed of two highly selected helper peptides to induce CD4+ T helper-1 response directed against telomerase. This phase Ib/IIa trial was designed to test the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of a three-dose schedule in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with refractory NSCLC were assigned to receive three vaccination doses of UCPVax (0.25 mg, 0.5 mg, and 1 mg) using a Bayesian-based phase Ib followed by phase IIa de-escalating design. The primary end points were dose-limiting toxicity and immune response after three first doses of vaccine. Secondary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients received UCPVax; 95% had three prior lines of systemic therapy. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed in 15 patients treated in phase Ib. The maximum tolerated dose was 1 mg. Fifty-one patients were eligible for phase IIa. The third and sixth dose of UCPVax induced specific CD4+ T helper 1 response in 56% and 87.2% of patients, respectively, with no difference between three dose levels. Twenty-one (39%) patients achieved disease control (stable disease, n = 20; complete response, n = 1). The 1-year OS was 34.1% (95% CI, 23.1 to 50.4), and the median OS was 9.7 months, with no significant difference between dose levels. The 1-year progression-free survival and the median OS were 17.2% (95% CI, 7.8 to 38.3) and 11.6 months (95% CI, 9.7 to 16.7) in immune responders (P = .015) and 4.5% (95% CI, 0.7 to 30.8) and 5.6 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 10) in nonresponders (P = .005), respectively. CONCLUSION: UCPVax was highly immunogenic and safe and provide interesting 1-year OS rate in heavily pretreated advanced NSCLC.

Brief Report: Severe Sotorasib-Related Hepatotoxicity and Non-Liver Adverse Events Associated With Sequential Anti-Programmed Cell Death (Ligand)1 and Sotorasib Therapy in KRASG12C-Mutant Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Sequential anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) followed by small targeted therapy use is associated with increased prevalence of adverse events (AEs) in NSCLC. KRASG12C inhibitor sotorasib may trigger severe immune-mediated hepatotoxicity when used in sequence or in combination with anti-PD-(L)1. This study was designed to address whether sequential anti-PD-(L)1 and sotorasib therapy increases the risk of hepatotoxicity and other AEs. METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective study of consecutive advanced KRASG12C-mutant NSCLC treated with sotorasib outside clinical trials in 16 French medical centers. Patient records were reviewed to identify sotorasib-related AEs (National Cancer Institute Common Classification Criteria for Adverse Events-Version 5.0). Grade 3 and higher AE was considered as severe. Sequence group was defined as patients who received an anti-PD-(L)1 as last line of treatment before sotorasib initiation and control group as patients who did not receive an anti-PD-(L)1 as last line of treatment before sotorasib initiation. RESULTS: We identified 102 patients who received sotorasib, including 48 (47%) in the sequence group and 54 (53%) in the control group. Patients in the control group received an anti-PD-(L)1 followed by at least one treatment regimen before sotorasib in 87% of the cases or did not receive an anti-PD-(L)1 at any time before sotorasib in 13% of the cases. Severe sotorasib-related AEs were significantly more frequent in the sequence group compared with those in the control group (50% versus 13%, p < 0.001). Severe sotorasib-related AEs occurred in 24 patients (24 of 48, 50%) in the sequence group, and among them 16 (67%) experienced a severe sotorasib-related hepatotoxicity. Severe sotorasib-related hepatotoxicity was threefold more frequent in the sequence group compared with that in the control group (33% versus 11%, p = 0.006). No fatal sotorasib-related hepatotoxicity was reported. Non-liver severe sotorasib-related AEs were significantly more frequent in the sequence group (27% versus 4%, p < 0.001). Severe sotorasib-related AEs typically occurred in patients who received last anti-PD-(L)1 infusion within 30 days before sotorasib initiation. CONCLUSIONS: Sequential anti-PD-(L)1 and sotorasib therapy are associated with a significantly increased risk of severe sotorasib-related hepatotoxicity and severe non-liver AEs. We suggest avoiding starting sotorasib within 30 days from the last anti-PD-(L)1 infusion.

Genomic testing among patients with newly diagnosed advanced non-small cell lung cancer in the United States: A contemporary clinical practice patterns study.

OBJECTIVES: According to 2018 United States and international lung cancer and pathology guidelines, testing of EGFR, ALK, ROS1 and BRAF genes is a minimum requirement to identify targeted therapy options in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). We describe real-world use and clinical features of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and other non-NGS testing technologies in these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were from the Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived de-identified database and were newly diagnosed with non-squamous aNSCLC between 1 January 2018 and 30 June 2019. We describe occurrence and patterns of NGS- (including comprehensive genomic profiling [CGP]) and non-NGS-based genomic testing before the start of first-line therapy, unsuccessful genotyping (<4 genes tested) and incidence of potentially missed targeted therapy options (<4 genes tested with no positive results). RESULTS: Among 3050 patients, 2356 received any type of genomic testing (NGS: 1406 [59.7%]). Unsuccessful genotyping occurred in 13.2% and 52.2% of NGS- and non-NGS-tested patients, respectively. Among NGS-tested patients, 10.0% had a potentially missed targeted therapy option (CGP: 2.9%), compared with 40.2% in the non-NGS tested group. While all four guideline-recommended genes were tested in ≥ 92% of patients who had NGS testing, when only non-NGS testing was used, although EGFR and ALK had similarly high testing proportions, BRAF and ROS1 (56.1% and 83.7%, respectively) were examined less often. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that in aNSCLC clinical practice, NGS testing may help to avoid potentially missed targeted therapy options and improve testing uptake for recently approved biomarkers. Results therefore support the use of guideline-recommended broad-panel NGS testing in clinical practice.

Direct Targeting KRAS Mutation in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Focus on Resistance.

KRAS is the most frequently mutated oncogene in non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC), with a frequency of around 30%, and encoding a GTPAse that cycles between active form (GTP-bound) to inactive form (GDP-bound). The KRAS mutations favor the active form with inhibition of GTPAse activity. KRAS mutations are often with poor response of EGFR targeted therapies. KRAS mutations are good predictive factor for immunotherapy. The lack of success with direct targeting of KRAS proteins, downstream inhibition of KRAS effector pathways, and other strategies contributed to a focus on developing mutation-specific KRAS inhibitors. KRAS p.G12C mutation is one of the most frequent KRAS mutation in NSCLC, especially in current and former smokers (over 40%), which occurs among approximately 12-14% of NSCLC tumors. The mutated cysteine resides next to a pocket (P2) of the switch II region, and P2 is present only in the inactive GDP-bound KRAS. Small molecules such as sotorasib are now the first targeted drugs for KRAS G12C mutation, preventing conversion of the mutant protein to GTP-bound active state. Little is known about primary or acquired resistance. Acquired resistance does occur and may be due to genetic alterations in the nucleotide exchange function or adaptative mechanisms in either downstream pathways or in newly expressed KRAS G12C mutation.

Combination of Trastuzumab, Pertuzumab, and Docetaxel in Patients With Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Harboring HER2 Mutations: Results From the IFCT-1703 R2D2 Trial.

PURPOSE: HER2 exon 20 insertions and point mutations are oncogenic drivers found in 1%-2% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). No targeted therapy is approved for this subset of patients. We prospectively evaluated the effectiveness of the combination of two antibodies against human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2 [HER2] trastuzumab and pertuzumab with docetaxel; trastuzumab and pertuzumab) and docetaxel. METHODS: The IFCT 1703-R2D2 trial is a multicenter, nonrandomized phase II study. Patients with HER2-mutated, advanced NSCLC who progressed after ≥ 1 platinum-based treatment were enrolled. Patients received pertuzumab at a loading dose of 840 mg and 420 mg thereafter; trastuzumab at an 8 mg/kg loading dose and 6 mg/kg thereafter; and docetaxel at a dose of 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The primary outcome was the objective response rate (ORR). Other end points included the duration of response, progression-free survival, and safety (NCT03845270). RESULTS: Forty-five patients were enrolled and treated. The median age was 64.5 years (range, 31-84 years), 35% were smokers, 72% were females, 15% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2, and 30% had brain metastases. The objective response rate was 29% (n = 13), and 58% had stable disease (n = 26). The median progression-free survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 8.5). The median duration of response in patients with a confirmed response (n = 13) was 11 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 14.9). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 64% of the patients. No patient discontinued treatment because of toxicity. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (33%), diarrhea (13%), and anemia (9%). CONCLUSION: Triple therapy with trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and docetaxel is feasible and effective for HER2-mutated pretreated advanced NSCLC. These results highlight the effectiveness of the HER2 antibody-based strategy, which should be considered for these patients.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outcomes, Patient Vaccination Status, and Cancer-Related Delays During the Omicron Wave: A Brief Report From the TERAVOLT Analysis.

Introduction: The Thoracic Centers International coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Collaboration (TERAVOLT) registry found approximately 30% mortality in patients with thoracic malignancies during the initial COVID-19 surges. Data from South Africa suggested a decrease in severity and mortality with the Omicron wave. Our objective was to assess mortality of patients with thoracic malignancies with the Omicron-predominant wave and evaluate efficacy of vaccination. Methods: A prospective, multicenter observational study was conducted. A total of 28 institutions contributed data from January 14, 2022, to February 4, 2022. Inclusion criteria were any thoracic cancer and a COVID-19 diagnosis on or after November 1, 2021. End points included mortality, hospitalization, symptomatic COVID-19 infection, asymptomatic COVID-19 infection, and delay in cancer therapy. Analysis was done through contingency tables and a multivariable logistic model. Results: We enrolled a total of 346 patients. Median age was 65 years, 52.3% were female, 74.2% were current or former smokers, 86% had NSCLC, 72% had stage IV at time of COVID-19 diagnosis, and 66% were receiving cancer therapy. Variant was unknown for 70%; for those known, Omicron represented 82%. Overall mortality was 3.2%. Using multivariate analysis, COVID-19 vaccination with booster compared with no vaccination had a protective effect on hospitalization or death (OR = 0.30, confidence interval: 0.15-0.57, p = 0.0003), whereas vaccination without booster did not (OR = 0.64, confidence interval: 0.33-1.24, p = 0.1864). Cancer care was delayed in 56.4% of the patients. Conclusions: TERAVOLT found reduced patient mortality with the most recent COVID-19 surge. COVID-19 vaccination with booster improved outcomes of hospitalization or death. Delays in cancer therapy remain an issue, which has the potential to worsen cancer-related mortality.

A Definitive Prognostication System for Patients With Thoracic Malignancies Diagnosed With Coronavirus Disease 2019: An Update From the TERAVOLT Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with thoracic malignancies are at increased risk for mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and a large number of intertwined prognostic variables have been identified so far. METHODS: Capitalizing data from the Thoracic Cancers International COVID-19 Collaboration (TERAVOLT) registry, a global study created with the aim of describing the impact of COVID-19 in patients with thoracic malignancies, we used a clustering approach, a fast-backward step-down selection procedure, and a tree-based model to screen and optimize a broad panel of demographics and clinical COVID-19 and cancer characteristics. RESULTS: As of April 15, 2021, a total of 1491 consecutive eligible patients from 18 countries were included in the analysis. With a mean observation period of 42 days, 361 events were reported with an all-cause case fatality rate of 24.2%. The clustering procedure screened 73 covariates in 13 clusters. A further multivariable logistic regression for the association between clusters and death was performed, resulting in five clusters significantly associated with the outcome. The fast-backward step-down selection procedure then identified the following seven major determinants of death: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-performance status (ECOG-PS) (OR = 2.47, 1.87-3.26), neutrophil count (OR = 2.46, 1.76-3.44), serum procalcitonin (OR = 2.37, 1.64-3.43), development of pneumonia (OR = 1.95, 1.48-2.58), C-reactive protein (OR = 1.90, 1.43-2.51), tumor stage at COVID-19 diagnosis (OR = 1.97, 1.46-2.66), and age (OR = 1.71, 1.29-2.26). The receiver operating characteristic analysis for death of the selected model confirmed its diagnostic ability (area under the receiver operating curve = 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.75-0.81). The nomogram was able to classify the COVID-19 mortality in an interval ranging from 8% to 90%, and the tree-based model recognized ECOG-PS, neutrophil count, and c-reactive protein as the major determinants of prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: From 73 variables analyzed, seven major determinants of death have been identified. Poor ECOG-PS was found to have the strongest association with poor outcome from COVID-19. With our analysis, we provide clinicians with a definitive prognostication system to help determine the risk of mortality for patients with thoracic malignancies and COVID-19.

Evasion before invasion: Pre-cancer immunosurveillance.

Early intervention and risk stratification solutions for lung cancer are limited by our understanding of how carcinogenesis transforms the pre-invasive epithelium and its microenvironment before the carcinoma stage. We describe the sequence of molecular and cellular changes leading to cancer formation and the co-evolution of the earliest immune response. We revealed that immune sensing, infiltration and activation of immune cells, immune escape, and microenvironment reorganization occur early in pre-cancer. These findings urge the need for broadening the scope of the established immunotherapy approaches toward prophylactic cancer treatment and preventive intervention. Leveraging the immune contexture and the mechanisms of immune modulation for individuals at risk of developing cancer and further to the general population will allow for early detection, chemoprevention, and risk stratification in the near future.

Molecular Mechanism of EGFR-TKI Resistance in EGFR-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Application to Biological Diagnostic and Monitoring.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most common cancer in the world. Activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene mutations are a positive predictive factor for EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). For common EGFR mutations (Del19, L858R), the standard first-line treatment is actually third-generation TKI, osimertinib. In the case of first-line treatment by first (erlotinib, gefitinib)- or second-generation (afatinib) TKIs, osimertinib is approved in second-line treatment for patients with T790M EGFR mutation. Despite the excellent disease control results with EGFR TKIs, acquired resistance inevitably occurs and remains a biological challenge. This leads to the discovery of novel biomarkers and possible drug targets, which vary among the generation/line of EGFR TKIs. Besides EGFR second/third mutations, alternative mechanisms could be involved, such as gene amplification or gene fusion, which could be detected by different molecular techniques on different types of biological samples. Histological transformation is another mechanism of resistance with some biological predictive factors that needs tumor biopsy. The place of liquid biopsy also depends on the generation/line of EGFR TKIs and should be a good candidate for molecular monitoring. This article is based on the literature and proposes actual and future directions in clinical and translational research.

Assessing therapy response in patient-derived xenografts.

Quantifying response to drug treatment in mouse models of human cancer is important for treatment development and assignment, yet remains a challenging task. To be able to translate the results of the experiments more readily, a preferred measure to quantify this response should take into account more of the available experimental data, including both tumor size over time and the variation among replicates. We propose a theoretically grounded measure, KuLGaP, to compute the difference between the treatment and control arms. We test and compare KuLGaP to four widely used response measures using 329 patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models. Our results show that KuLGaP is more selective than currently existing measures, reduces the risk of false-positive calls, and improves translation of the laboratory results to clinical practice. We also show that outcomes of human treatment better align with the results of the KuLGaP measure than other response measures. KuLGaP has the potential to become a measure of choice for quantifying drug treatment in mouse models as it can be easily used via the kulgap.ca website.