SAPPHIRE: phase III study of sitravatinib plus nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy revolutionized treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, most patients progress due to primary or acquired resistance. Sitravatinib is a receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that can shift the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment toward an immunostimulatory state. Combining sitravatinib with nivolumab (sitra + nivo) may potentially overcome initial CPI resistance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the phase III SAPPHIRE study, patients with advanced non-oncogenic driven, nonsquamous NSCLC who initially benefited from (≥4 months on CPI without progression) and subsequently experienced disease progression on or after CPI combined with or following platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1 : 1 to sitra (100 mg once daily administered orally) + nivo (240 mg every 2 weeks or 480 mg every 4 weeks administered intravenously) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks administered intravenously). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of response (DOR; all assessed by blinded independent central review), and safety. RESULTS: A total of 577 patients included randomized: sitra + nivo, n = 284; docetaxel, n = 293 (median follow-up, 17.1 months). Sitra + nivo did not significantly improve OS versus docetaxel [median, 12.2 versus 10.6 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-1.05; P = 0.144]. The median PFS was 4.4 versus 5.4 months, respectively (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.32; P = 0.452). The ORR was 15.6% for sitra + nivo and 17.2% for docetaxel (P = 0.597); CBR was 75.5% and 64.5%, respectively (P = 0.004); median DOR was 7.4 versus 7.1 months, respectively (P = 0.924). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 53.0% versus 66.7% of patients receiving sitra + nivo versus docetaxel, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although median OS was numerically longer with sitra + nivo, the primary endpoint was not met in patients with previously treated advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. The safety profiles demonstrated were consistent with previous reports.

Overall survival with adjuvant atezolizumab after chemotherapy in resected stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (IMpower010): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: IMpower010 (NCT02486718) demonstrated significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) with adjuvant atezolizumab versus best supportive care (BSC) following platinum-based chemotherapy in the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive and all stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) populations, at the DFS interim analysis. Results of the first interim analysis of overall survival (OS) are reported here. PATIENT AND METHODS: The design, participants, and primary-endpoint DFS outcomes have been reported for this phase III, open-label, 1 : 1 randomised study of atezolizumab (1200 mg q3w; 16 cycles) versus BSC after adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy (1-4 cycles) in adults with completely resected stage IB (≥4 cm)-IIIA NSCLC (per the Union Internationale Contre le Cancer and American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system, 7th edition). Key secondary endpoints included OS in the stage IB-IIIA intent-to-treat (ITT) population and safety in randomised treated patients. The first pre-specified interim analysis of OS was conducted after 251 deaths in the ITT population. Exploratory analyses included OS by baseline PD-L1 expression level (SP263 assay). RESULTS: At a median of 45.3 months' follow-up on 18 April 2022, 127 of 507 patients (25%) in the atezolizumab arm and 124 of 498 (24.9%) in the BSC arm had died. The median OS in the ITT population was not estimable; the stratified hazard ratio (HR) was 0.995 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.28]. The stratified OS HRs (95% CI) were 0.95 (0.74-1.24) in the stage II-IIIA (n = 882), 0.71 (0.49-1.03) in the stage II-IIIA PD-L1 tumour cell (TC) ≥1% (n = 476), and 0.43 (95% CI 0.24-0.78) in the stage II-IIIA PD-L1 TC ≥50% (n = 229) populations. Atezolizumab-related adverse event incidences remained unchanged since the previous analysis [grade 3/4 in 53 (10.7%) and grade 5 in 4 (0.8%) of 495 patients, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Although OS remains immature for the ITT population, these data indicate a positive trend favouring atezolizumab in PD-L1 subgroup analyses, primarily driven by the PD-L1 TC ≥50% stage II-IIIA subgroup. No new safety signals were observed after 13 months' additional follow-up. Together, these findings support the positive benefit-risk profile of adjuvant atezolizumab in this setting.

Long-term survival with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolongs survival versus chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We further characterized clinical benefit with this regimen in a large pooled patient population and assessed the effect of response on survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were pooled from four studies of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced NSCLC (CheckMate 227 Part 1, 817 cohort A, 568 Part 1, and 012). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, duration of response, and safety were assessed. Landmark analyses of OS by response status at 6 months and by tumor burden reduction in responders to nivolumab plus ipilimumab were also assessed. RESULTS: In the pooled population (N = 1332) with a minimum follow-up of 29.1-58.9 months, median OS was 18.6 months, with a 3-year OS rate of 35%; median PFS was 5.4 months (3-year PFS rate, 17%). Objective response rate was 36%; median duration of response was 23.7 months, with 38% of responders having an ongoing response at 3 years. In patients with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) <1%, ≥1%, 1%-49%, or ≥50%, 3-year OS rates were 30%, 38%, 30%, and 48%. Three-year OS rates were 30% and 38% in patients with squamous or non-squamous histology. Efficacy outcomes in patients aged ≥75 years were similar to the overall pooled population (median OS, 20.1 months; 3-year OS rate, 34%). In the pooled population, responders to nivolumab plus ipilimumab at 6 months had longer post-landmark OS than those with stable or progressive disease; 3-year OS rates were 66%, 22%, and 14%, respectively. Greater depth of response was associated with prolonged survival; in patients with tumor burden reduction ≥80%, 50% to <80%, or 30% to <50%, 3-year OS rates were 85%, 72%, and 44%, respectively. No new safety signals were identified in the pooled population. CONCLUSION: Long-term survival benefit and durable response with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in this large patient population further support this first-line treatment option for advanced NSCLC.

Treatment outcome of atypical EGFR mutations in the German National Network Genomic Medicine Lung Cancer (nNGM).

BACKGROUND: Atypical EGFR mutations occur in 10%-30% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with EGFR mutations and their sensitivity to classical epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) is highly heterogeneous. Patients harboring one group of uncommon, recurrent EGFR mutations (G719X, S768I, L861Q) respond to EGFR-TKI. Exon 20 insertions are mostly insensitive to EGFR-TKI but display sensitivity to exon 20 inhibitors. Clinical outcome data of patients with very rare point and compound mutations upon systemic treatments are still sparse to date. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, multicenter study of the national Network Genomic Medicine (nNGM) in Germany, 856 NSCLC cases with atypical EGFR mutations including co-occurring mutations were reported from 12 centers. Clinical follow-up data after treatment with different EGFR-TKIs, chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors were available from 260 patients. Response to treatment was analyzed in three major groups: (i) uncommon mutations (G719X, S7681, L861Q and combinations), (ii) exon 20 insertions and (iii) very rare EGFR mutations (very rare single point mutations, compound mutations, exon 18 deletions, exon 19 insertions). RESULTS: Our study comprises the largest thus far reported real-world cohort of very rare EGFR single point and compound mutations treated with different systemic treatments. We validated higher efficacy of EGFR-TKI in comparison to chemotherapy in group 1 (uncommon), while most exon 20 insertions (group 2) were not EGFR-TKI responsive. In addition, we found TKI sensitivity of very rare point mutations (group 3) and of complex EGFR mutations containing exon 19 deletions or L858R mutations independent of the combination partner. Notably, treatment responses in group 3 (very rare) were highly heterogeneous. Co-occurring TP53 mutations exerted a non-significant trend for a detrimental effect on outcome in EGFR-TKI-treated patients in groups 2 and 3 but not in group 1. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we propose a novel nNGM classification of atypical EGFR mutations.

Consolidation nivolumab and ipilimumab versus observation in limited-disease small-cell lung cancer after chemo-radiotherapy - results from the randomised phase II ETOP/IFCT 4-12 STIMULI trial.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) is the standard treatment in limited-disease small-cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC), with 5-year overall survival (OS) of only 25% to 33%. PATIENTS AND METHODS: STIMULI is a 1:1 randomised phase II trial aiming to demonstrate superiority of consolidation combination immunotherapy versus observation after chemo-radiotherapy plus PCI (protocol amendment-1). Consolidation immunotherapy consisted of four cycles of nivolumab [1 mg/kg, every three weeks (Q3W)] plus ipilimumab (3 mg/kg, Q3W), followed by nivolumab monotherapy (240 mg, Q2W) for up to 12 months. Patient recruitment closed prematurely due to slow accrual and the statistical analyses plan was updated to address progression-free survival (PFS) as the only primary endpoint. RESULTS: Of the 222 patients enrolled, 153 were randomised (78: experimental; 75: observation). Among the randomised patients, median age was 62 years, 60% males, 34%/65% current/former smokers, 31%/66% performance status (PS) 0/1. Up to 25 May 2020 (median follow-up 22.4 months), 40 PFS events were observed in the experimental arm, with median PFS 10.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.0-not estimable (NE)] versus 42 events and median 14.5 months (8.2-NE) in the observation, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02 (0.66-1.58), two-sided P = 0.93. With updated follow-up (03 June 2021; median: 35 months), median OS was not reached in the experimental arm, while it was 32.1 months (26.1-NE) in observation, with HR = 0.95 (0.59-1.52), P = 0.82. In the experimental arm, median time-to-treatment-discontinuation was only 1.7 months. CTCAE v4 grade ≥3 adverse events were experienced by 62% of patients in the experimental and 25% in the observation arm, with 4 and 1 fatal, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The STIMULI trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improving PFS with nivolumab-ipilimumab consolidation after chemo-radiotherapy in LD-SCLC. A short period on active treatment related to toxicity and treatment discontinuation likely affected the efficacy results.

International Tailored Chemotherapy Adjuvant (ITACA) trial, a phase III multicenter randomized trial comparing adjuvant pharmacogenomic-driven chemotherapy versus standard adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Several strategies have been investigated to improve the 4% survival advantage of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this investigator-initiated study we aimed to evaluate the predictive utility of the messenger RNA (mRNA) expression levels of excision repair cross complementation group 1 (ERCC1) and thymidylate synthase (TS) as assessed in resected tumor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred and seventy-three completely resected stage II-III NSCLC patients were enrolled and randomly assigned in each of the four genomic subgroups to investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy (C, n = 389) or tailored chemotherapy (T, n = 384). All anticancer drugs were administered according to standard doses and schedules. Stratification factors included stage and smoking status. The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Six hundred and ninety patients were included in the primary analysis. At a median follow-up of 45.9 months, 85 (24.6%) and 70 (20.3%) patients died in arms C and T, respectively. Five-year survival for patients in arms C and T was of 65.4% (95% CI (confidence interval): 58.5% to 71.4%) and 72.9% (95% CI: 66.5% to 78.3%), respectively. The estimated hazard ratio (HR) was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.56-1.06, P value: 0.109) for arm T versus arm C. HR for recurrence-free survival was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.69-1.14, P value: 0.341) for arm T versus arm C. Grade 3-5 toxicities were more frequently reported in arm C than in arm T. CONCLUSION: In completely resected stage II-III NSCLC tailoring adjuvant chemotherapy conferred a non-statistically significant trend for OS favoring the T arm. In terms of safety, the T arm was associated with better efficacy/toxicity ratio related to the different therapeutic choices in the experimental arm.

Targeting KRAS in non-small-cell lung cancer: recent progress and new approaches.

Rat sarcoma (RAS) is the most frequently mutated oncogene in human cancer, with Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) being the most commonly mutated RAS isoform. Overall, KRAS accounts for 85% of RAS mutations observed in human cancers and is present in 35% of lung adenocarcinomas (LUADs). While the use of targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) has drastically changed the treatment landscape of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in recent years, historic attempts to target KRAS (both direct and indirect approaches) have had little success, and no KRAS-specific targeted therapies have been approved to date for patients in this molecular subset of NSCLC. With the discovery by Ostrem, Shokat, and colleagues of the switch II pocket on the surface of the active and inactive forms of KRAS, we now have an improved understanding of the complex interactions involved in the RAS family of signaling proteins which has led to the development of a number of promising direct KRASG12C inhibitors, such as sotorasib and adagrasib. In previously treated patients with KRASG12C-mutant NSCLC, clinical activity has been shown for both sotorasib and adagrasib monotherapy; these data suggest promising new treatment options are on the horizon. With the stage now set for a new era in the treatment of KRASG12C-mutated NSCLC, many questions remain to be answered in order to further elucidate the mechanisms of resistance, how best to use combination strategies, and if KRASG12C inhibitors will have suitable activity in earlier lines of therapy for patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC.

Small cell lung cancer: a slightly less orphan disease after immunotherapy.

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive malignancy accounting for 15% of all diagnosed cases of lung cancer. After >15 years without any clinically relevant therapeutic advances, extensive-disease SCLC has become the second thoracic malignancy for which immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shifted the treatment paradigm to improve overall survival. Today, atezolizumab or durvalumab in combination with platinum-etoposide chemotherapy is considered the new standard of care in the first-line setting in SCLC. However, the magnitude of benefit with this immune-chemotherapy strategy in SCLC is more modest than that observed in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer patients. The immunosuppressive phenotype of SCLC plays an important role in hampering ICI efficacy and may explain the differences in outcomes between these two types of lung cancer. In this review, we provide a summary of recent therapeutic advances in SCLC in light of ICIs, as well as current challenges of this strategy in patients who are elderly, have poor performance status or brain metastases. We also address future perspectives of immunotherapeutic strategies currently in clinical development for these patients.

Second-line nivolumab in relapsed small-cell lung cancer: CheckMate 331☆.

BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) have few treatment options and dismal survival. Phase I/II data show activity of nivolumab in previously treated SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CheckMate 331 is a randomized, open-label, phase III trial of nivolumab versus standard chemotherapy in relapsed SCLC. Patients with relapse after first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks or chemotherapy (topotecan or amrubicin) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 284 patients were randomized to nivolumab and 285 to chemotherapy. Minimum follow-up was 15.8 months. No significant improvement in OS was seen with nivolumab versus chemotherapy [median OS, 7.5 versus 8.4 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-1.04; P = 0.11]. A survival benefit with nivolumab was suggested in patients with baseline lactate dehydrogenase ≤ upper limit of normal and in those without baseline liver metastases. OS (nivolumab versus chemotherapy) was similar in patients with programmed death-ligand 1 combined positive score ≥1% versus <1%. Median progression-free survival was 1.4 versus 3.8 months (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.18-1.69). Objective response rate was 13.7% versus 16.5% (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.50-1.27); median duration of response was 8.3 versus 4.5 months. Rates of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were 13.8% versus 73.2%. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab did not improve survival versus chemotherapy in relapsed SCLC. No new safety signals were seen. In exploratory analyses, select baseline characteristics were associated with improved OS for nivolumab.

Clinical definition of acquired resistance to immunotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

Acquired resistance (AR) to programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-(L)1] blockade is frequent in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), occurring in a majority of initial responders. Patients with AR may have unique properties of persistent antitumor immunity that could be re-harnessed by investigational immunotherapies. The absence of a consistent clinical definition of AR to PD-(L)1 blockade and lack of uniform criteria for ensuing enrollment in clinical trials remains a major barrier to progress; such clinical definitions have advanced biologic and therapeutic discovery. We examine the considerations and potential controversies in developing a patient-level definition of AR in NSCLC treated with PD-(L)1 blockade. Taking into account the specifics of NSCLC biology and corresponding treatment strategies, we propose a practical, clinical definition of AR to PD-(L)1 blockade for use in clinical reports and prospective clinical trials. Patients should meet the following criteria: received treatment that includes PD-(L)1 blockade; experienced objective response on PD-(L)1 blockade (inclusion of a subset of stable disease will require future investigation); have progressive disease occurring within 6 months of last anti-PD-(L)1 antibody treatment or rechallenge with anti-PD-(L)1 antibody in patients not exposed to anti-PD-(L)1 in 6 months.

Pemetrexed plus platinum with or without pembrolizumab in patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC: protocol-specified final analysis from KEYNOTE-189.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III KEYNOTE-189 study (NCT02578680), pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed and platinum-based chemotherapy (pemetrexed-platinum) significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) versus placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum. We report updated efficacy outcomes from the protocol-specified final analysis, including outcomes in patients who crossed over to pembrolizumab from pemetrexed-platinum and in patients who completed 35 cycles (∼2 years) of pembrolizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized 2 : 1 to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg (n = 410) or placebo (n = 206) every 3 weeks (for up to 35 cycles, ∼2 years) plus four cycles of pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and investigators' choice of cisplatin (75 mg/m2) or carboplatin (area under the curve 5 mg·min/ml) every 3 weeks, followed by pemetrexed until progression. Patients assigned to placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum could cross over to pembrolizumab upon progression if eligibility criteria were met. The primary endpoints were OS and PFS. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 31.0 months, pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum continued to improve OS [hazard ratio (HR), 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46-0.69] and PFS (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.41-0.59) over placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 expression. Objective response rate (ORR) (48.3% versus 19.9%) and time to second/subsequent tumor progression on next-line treatment (PFS2; HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.41-0.61) were improved in patients who received pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum. Eighty-four patients (40.8%) from the placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum group crossed over to pembrolizumab on-study. Grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 72.1% of patients receiving pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum and 66.8% of patients receiving placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum. Fifty-six patients completed 35 cycles (∼2 years) of pembrolizumab; ORR was 85.7% and 53 (94.6%) were alive at data cut-off. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum continued to show improved efficacy outcomes compared with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum, with manageable toxicity. These findings support first-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum in patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC.

Safety and patient-reported outcomes of atezolizumab, carboplatin, and etoposide in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (IMpower133): a randomized phase I/III trial.

BACKGROUND: The addition of atezolizumab to carboplatin and etoposide (CP/ET) significantly improved progression-free and overall survival for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in the IMpower133 study (NCT02763579). We have evaluated adverse events (AEs) and patient-reported outcomes in IMpower133 to assess the benefit-risk profile of this regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received four 21-day cycles of CP/ET plus intravenous atezolizumab 1200 mg or placebo (induction phase), followed by atezolizumab or placebo (maintenance phase) until progression or loss of benefit. AEs were assessed and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated every 3 weeks during treatment using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire - Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and QLQ-LC13. RESULTS: Overall, 394 patients were assessable for safety in the induction phase and 318 in the maintenance phase. The frequency of AEs, grade 3-4 AEs, and serious AEs was similar between arms in both phases. Immune-related AEs were more frequent in the atezolizumab arm during both induction (28% versus 17%; leading to atezolizumab/placebo interruption 9% versus 5%, leading to withdrawal 4% versus 0%) and maintenance (26% versus 15%; leading to atezolizumab/placebo interruption, 3% versus 2%, leading to withdrawal 1% versus 1%), most commonly rash (induction 11% versus 9%, maintenance 14% versus 4%), and hypothyroidism (induction 4.0% versus 0%, maintenance 10% versus 1%). Changes in patient-reported treatment-related symptoms commonly associated with quality of life impairment were generally similar during induction and most of the maintenance phase. Patient-reported function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) improved in both arms after initiating treatment, with more pronounced and persistent HRQoL improvements in the atezolizumab arm. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ES-SCLC, atezolizumab plus CP/ET has a comparable safety profile to placebo plus CP/ET, and the addition of atezolizumab did not adversely impact patient-reported HRQoL. These data demonstrate the positive benefit-risk profile of first-line atezolizumab plus CP/ET in ES-SCLC and further support this regimen as a new standard of care in this setting. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: NCT02763579.

How to make the best use of immunotherapy as first-line treatment of advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

Antibodies that target programmed death 1 (PD-1) or its ligand [programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)] have become a mainstay of first-line treatment of advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without targetable genetic alterations. In this review, we summarize results from recent clinical trials that have evaluated the anti-PD-1 antibodies pembrolizumab and nivolumab and the anti-PD-L1 antibodies atezolizumab and durvalumab as first-line treatment as monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy, other immunotherapies, and antiangiogenesis agents. We discuss factors that may influence treatment selection, including patient baseline clinical and demographic characteristics, tumor histology, and biomarkers such as PD-L1 expression and tumor mutation burden. While immunotherapy has become a central component of first-line treatment of most patients with advanced NSCLC, important questions remain about how treatment should be managed for individual patients.

Randomized phase III study of docetaxel plus bavituximab in previously treated advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Background: Bavituximab is a monoclonal antibody that targets phosphatidylserine in the presence of ß2 glycoprotein 1 (ß2GP1) to exert an antitumor immune response. This phase III trial determined the efficacy of bavituximab combined with docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: Key eligibility criteria included advanced non-squamous NSCLC with disease progression after treatment with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy, evidence of disease control after at least two cycles of first-line therapy, presence of measurable disease, ECOG performance status 0 or 1, adequate bone marrow and organ function, and no recent history of clinically significant bleeding. Eligible patients were randomized 1 : 1 to receive up to six 21-day cycles of docetaxel plus either weekly bavituximab 3 mg/kg or placebo until progression or toxicity. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 597 patients were enrolled. Median OS was 10.5 months in the docetaxel + bavituximab arm and was 10.9 months in the docetaxel + placebo arm (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.88-1.29; P = 0.533). There was no difference in progression-free survival (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.82-1.22; P = 0.990). Toxicities were manageable and similar between arms. In subset analysis, among patients with high baseline serum ß2GP1 levels ≥200 µg/ml, a nonsignificant OS trend favored the bavituximab arm (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.63-1.06; P = 0.134). Among patients who received post-study immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, OS favored the bavituximab arm (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.26-0.81; P = 0.006). Conclusions: The combination of bavituximab plus docetaxel is not superior to docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC. The addition of bavituximab to docetaxel does not meaningfully increase toxicity. The potential benefit of bavituximab observed in patients with high ß2GP1 levels and in patients subsequently treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors requires further investigation. Clinical trial number: NCT01999673.

Predictive biomarkers for response to EGFR-directed monoclonal antibodies for advanced squamous cell lung cancer.

Background: Upregulated expression and aberrant activation of the epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR) are found in lung cancer, making EGFR a relevant target for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Treatment with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) is associated with modest improvement in overall survival in patients with squamous cell lung cancer (SqCLC) who have a significant unmet need for effective treatment options. While there is evidence that using EGFR gene copy number, EGFR mutation, and EGFR protein expression as biomarkers can help select patients who respond to treatment, it is important to consider biomarkers for response in patients treated with combination therapies that include EGFR mAbs. Design: Randomized trials of EGFR-directed mAbs cetuximab and necitumumab in combination with chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or antiangiogenic therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC, including SqCLC, were searched in the literature. Results of associations of potential biomarkers and outcomes were summarized. Results: Data from phase III clinical trials indicate that patients with NSCLC, including SqCLC, whose tumors express high levels of EGFR protein (H-score of ≥200) and/or gene copy numbers of EGFR (e.g. ≥40% cells with ≥4 EGFR copies as detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization; gene amplification in ≥10% of analyzed cells) derive greater therapeutic benefits from EGFR-directed mAbs. Biomarker data are limited for EGFR mAbs used in combination with immunotherapy and are absent when used in combination with antiangiogenic agents. Conclusions: Therapy with EGFR-directed mAbs in combination with chemotherapy is associated with greater clinical benefits in patients with NSCLC, including SqCLC, whose tumors express high levels of EGFR protein and/or have increased EGFR gene copy number. These data support validating the role of these as biomarkers to identify those patients who derive the greatest clinical benefit from EGFR mAb therapy. However, data on biomarkers for EGFR-directed mAbs combined with immunotherapy or antiangiogenic agents remain limited.

[Updated Recommendation for Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer]. / Aktualisierte Therapieempfehlung metastasiertes nicht kleinzelliges Lungenkarzinom.

Lung cancer accounts for the leading cause of cancer deaths in Germany and is characterized by early metastasis formation. The majority of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) will receive systemic therapy for treatment of their disease. Importantly together with the identification of targetable oncogenic alterations, systemic treatment of NSCLC has dramatically changed in recent years with the implementation of various new agents such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune modulating drugs. However, these new therapeutic options also challenge the treating physician since molecular, histologic, and clinical factors need to be considered for the clinical decisionmaking. Moreover, supportive therapy including bronchoscopic therapy has evolved. The following therapy recommendations will summarize the up-to date treatment strategies for metastatic NSCLC.