A phase Ib study of the combination of naporafenib with rineterkib or trametinib in patients with advanced and metastatic KRAS- or BRAF-mutant non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Genetic alterations activating the MAPK pathway are common in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with NSCLC may benefit from treatment with the pan-RAF inhibitor naporafenib (LXH254) plus the ERK1/2 inhibitor rineterkib (LTT462) or MEK1/2 inhibitor trametinib. METHODS: This first-in-human phase 1b dose-escalation/dose-expansion study investigated the combinations of naporafenib (50-350 mg once daily [QD] or 300-600 mg twice daily [BID]) with rineterkib (100-300 mg QD) in patients with KRAS-/BRAF-mutant NSCLC and naporafenib (200 mg BID or 400 mg BID) with trametinib (0.5 mg QD, 1 mg QD or 1 mg QD 2 weeks on/2 weeks off) in patients with KRAS-/BRAF-mutant NSCLC and NRAS-mutant melanoma. The primary objectives were to identify the recommended dose for expansion (RDE) and evaluate tolerability and safety. Secondary objectives included antitumor activity and pharmacodynamics. RESULTS: Overall, 216 patients were treated with naporafenib plus rineterkib (NSCLC: n = 101) or naporafenib plus trametinib (NSCLC: n = 79; melanoma: n = 36). In total, 10 of 62 (16%) patients experienced at least one dose-limiting toxicity. The RDEs were established as naporafenib 400 mg BID plus rineterkib 200 mg QD, naporafenib 200 mg BID plus trametinib 1 mg QD and naporafenib 400 mg BID plus trametinib 0.5 mg QD. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse event was increased lipase (8/101 [7.9%] patients) for naporafenib plus rineterkib and rash (22/115 [19.1%] patients) for naporafenib plus trametinib. Among patients with NSCLC, partial response was observed in three patients (one with KRAS-mutant, two with BRAFnon-V600-mutant NSCLC) treated with naporafenib plus rineterkib and two patients (both with KRAS-mutant NSCLC) treated with naporafenib plus trametinib. On-treatment median reductions in DUSP6 mRNA levels from baseline were 45.5% and 76.1% with naporafenib plus rineterkib or trametinib, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both naporafenib combinations had acceptable safety profiles. Antitumor activity was limited in patients with NSCLC, despite the observed on-target pharmacodynamic effect. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT02974725.

Capmatinib in MET exon 14-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer: final results from the open-label, phase 2 GEOMETRY mono-1 trial.

BACKGROUND: Capmatinib has previously shown activity in treatment-naive and previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a MET exon 14-skipping mutation (METex14). Here, we report the final outcomes from the phase 2 GEOMETRY mono-1 study with an aim to provide further evidence for the activity of capmatinib. METHODS: In this non-randomised, multi-cohort, open-label, phase 2 trial conducted in 152 centres and hospitals in 25 countries, with patients treated in 95 centres in 20 countries, eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) with MET-dysregulated, EGFR wild-type, and ALK rearrangement-negative advanced NSCLC (stage IIIB/IV) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were assigned to cohorts (1a, 1b, 2, 3, 4, 5a, 5b, 6 and 7) based on their MET status (METex14 or MET amplification) and previous therapy lines. Patients received capmatinib (400 mg orally twice daily) in 21-day treatment cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate by blinded independent central review per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 and was performed on the full analysis set (all patients who received at least one dose of capmatinib). Previous reports of this study had published interim or primary data for cohorts 1-7. Here, we report the final clinical outcomes from all METex14 cohorts (4, 5b, 6, and 7) and safety from all study cohorts (1-7). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02414139, and has been completed. FINDINGS: Of 373 treated patients enrolled from June 11, 2015, to March 12, 2020, 160 (97 [61%] female) patients had METex14 NSCLC and were enrolled in four cohorts: 60 treatment-naive (cohorts 5b and 7) and 100 previously treated (cohorts 4 and 6). The overall median study follow-up was 46·4 months (IQR 41·8-65·4) for the treatment-naïve patients and 66·9 months (56·7-73·9) for previously treated patients, respectively. Overall responses were recorded in 41 (68%; 95% CI 55·0-79·7) of 60 treatment-naive patients and 44 (44%; 95% CI 34·1-54·3) of 100 previously treated patients. In all 373 treated patients, the most common treatment-related adverse events were peripheral oedema (n=174; 47%), nausea (n=130; 35%), increased blood creatinine (n=78; 21%), and vomiting (n=74; 20%). Grade 3-4 serious adverse events occurred in 164 (44%) patients, dyspnoea being the most common (18 patients [5%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in four (1%) patients (one each of cardiac arrest, hepatitis, organising pneumonia, and pneumonitis). No new safety signals were reported. INTERPRETATION: These long-term results support METex14 as a targetable oncogenic driver in NSCLC and add to the evidence supporting capmatinib as a targeted treatment option for treatment-naive and previously treated patients with METex14 NSCLC. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Real-world response assessment of immune checkpoint inhibition: comparing iRECIST and RECIST 1.1 in melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: To compare immune response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (iRECIST) and response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) 1.1 for response assessment of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in a real-world setting in patients with melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Two-hundred fifty-two patients with melanoma and NSCLC who received CTLA-4 inhibitor ipilimumab or PD-1 inhibitors nivolumab or pembrolizumab and who underwent staging CT of the chest and abdomen were retrospectively included. Treatment response evaluation according to the RECIST 1.1 and iRECIST guidelines was performed for all patients. Response patterns, as well as overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and time to progression (TTP), were compared between RECIST 1.1 and iRECIST. RESULTS: Out of 143 patients with progressive disease (PD) according to RECIST 1.1, 48 (33.6%) did not attain confirmation of progression (iCPD) as per iRECIST and six patients who were treated beyond RECIST 1.1 progression reached PD at a later point in time in iRECIST, resulting in a significant difference in TTP between iRECIST and RECIST 1.1 (618.3 ± 626.9 days vs. 538.1 ± 617.9 days, respectively (p < 0.05)). The number of non-responders as per RECIST 1.1 was 79, whereas it was 60 when using iRECIST. ORR was 28.5% for RECIST 1.1 and 34.1% for iRECIST, and corresponding DCR of 67.4% for RECIST 1.1 and 74.6% for iRECIST. CONCLUSION: iRECIST was more suitable than RECIST 1.1 for capturing atypical response patterns to ICI therapy in patients with melanoma and NSCLC, resulting in differences in the assessment of treatment response. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Compared to RECIST 1.1, iRECIST may improve patient care and treatment decisions for patients with NSCLC or melanoma who are treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in clinical routine. KEY POINTS: RECIST 1.1 may incorrectly assess atypical treatment patterns to immune checkpoint inhibitors. iRECIST better captured atypical response patterns compared to RECIST 1.1. iRECIST was more suitable for assessing response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung carcinoma and melanoma.

Multicenter Real-World Analysis of Combined MET and EGFR Inhibition in Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Acquired MET Amplification or Polysomy After EGFR Inhibition.

PURPOSE: MET amplification is a common resistance mechanism to EGFR inhibition in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Several trials showed encouraging results with combined EGFR and MET inhibition (EGFRi/METi). However, MET amplification has been inconsistently defined and frequently included both polysomy and true amplification. METHODS: This is a multicenter, real-world analysis in patients with disease progression on EGFR inhibition and MET copy number gain (CNG), defined as either true amplification (MET to centromere of chromosome 7 ratio [MET-CEP7] ≥ 2) or polysomy (gene copy number ≥ 5, MET-CEP7 < 2). RESULTS: A total of 43 patients with MET CNG were included, 42 of whom were detected by FISH. Twenty-three, 7, and 14 received EGFRi/METi, METi, and SoC, respectively. Patients in the EGFRi/METi cohort exhibited a superior real-world clinical benefit rate, defined as stable disease or better, of 82% (95% confidence interval [CI], 60-95) compared to METi (29%, 4-71) and SoC (50%, 23-77). Median real-world progression-free survival was longer with EGFRi/METi with 9.8 vs. 4.3 months with METi (hazard ratio [HR], 0.19, 95% CI, 0.06-0.57) and 3.7 months with SoC (0.41, 0.18-0.91), respectively. Overall survival was numerically improved. Interaction analysis with treatment and type of CNG (amplification vs. polysomy) suggests that differences were exclusively driven by MET-amplified patients receiving EGFRi/METi (HR for OS, 0.09, 0.01-0.54). CONCLUSION: In this real-world study, EGFRi/METi showed clinical benefit over METi and SoC. Future studies should focus on the differential impact of the type of MET CNG with a focus on true MET amplification as predictor of response.

Capmatinib plus nazartinib in patients with EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase 1b/2 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of capmatinib plus nazartinib in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In phase 1b, patients with progression on first-/second-generation EGFR-TKIs received escalating doses of capmatinib 200-400 mg bid plus nazartinib 50-150 mg qd. Once the MTD/RP2D was declared, phase 2 commenced with patient enrollment into groups according to mutation status and prior lines of treatment: group 1 (fasted; EGFR-TKI resistant; 1-3 prior lines; EGFRL858R/ex19del; any T790M/MET); group 2 (fasted; EGFR-TKI naïve; 0-2 prior lines; de novo T790M+; any MET); group 3 (fasted; treatment-naïve; EGFRL858R/ex19del; T790M-; any MET); group 4 (with food; 0-2 prior lines; EGFRL858R/ex19del; any T790M/MET). Primary endpoints in phase 2 were investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 (groups 1-3), safety, and tolerability of the combination with food (group 4). Efficacy was assessed by T790M and MET status for a subgroup of patients. RESULTS: The RP2D was capmatinib 400 mg bid plus nazartinib 100 mg qd. In phase 2 (n = 144), the ORR was 28.8 %, 33.3 %, 61.7 %, and 42.9 % in groups 1 (n = 52), 2 (n = 3), 3 (n = 47), and 4 (n = 42), respectively. In group 1 +phase 1b RP2D, the ORR was 45.8 %, 26.2 %, 37.9 %, and 32.4 % in MET+ (n = 24), MET- (n = 42), T790M+ (n = 29), and T790M- (n = 34) patients. Most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (≥25 %; n = 144) were peripheral edema (54.9 %), nausea (41.7 %), diarrhea (34.0 %), and maculopapular rash (25.0 %). CONCLUSION: Capmatinib plus nazartinib showed antitumor activity in patients with EGFR-TKI-resistant, EGFR-mutated NSCLC. The overall safety profile was acceptable. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02335944.

Closing the RCT Gap-A Large Meta-Analysis on the Role of Surgery in Stage I-III Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Despite clear guideline recommendations, surgery is not consistently carried out as part of multimodal therapy in stage I small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients. The role of surgery in stages II and III is even more controversial. In the absence of current randomized control trials (RCT), we performed a meta-analysis comparing surgery versus non-surgical treatment in stage I to III SCLC patients. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted on 1 July 2023, focusing on studies pertaining to the impact of surgery on small cell lung cancer (SCLC). These studies were evaluated using the ROBINS-I tool. Statistical analyses, including I² tests, Q-statistics, DerSimonian-Laird tests, and Egger regression, were performed to assess the data. In addition, 5-year survival rates were analyzed. The meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA standards. RESULTS: Among the 6826 records identified, 10 original studies encompassing a collective cohort of 95,323 patients were incorporated into this meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was observed across the included studies, with no discernible indication of publication bias. Analysis of patient characteristics revealed no significant differences between the two groups (p-value > 0.05). The 5-year survival rates in a combined analysis of patients in stages I-III were 39.6 ± 15.3% for the 'surgery group' and 16.7 ± 12.7% for the 'non-surgery group' (p-value < 0.0001). SCLC patients in stages II and III treated outside the guideline with surgery had a significantly better 5-year survival compared to non-surgery controls (36.3 ± 20.2% vs. 20.2 ± 17.0%; p-value = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of current RCTs, this meta-analysis provides robust suggestions that surgery might significantly improve survival in all SCLC stages. Non-surgical therapy could lead to a shortening of life. The feasibility of surgery in non-metastatic SCLC should always be evaluated as part of a multimodal treatment.

Recommendations for reporting tissue and circulating tumour (ct)DNA next-generation sequencing results in non-small cell lung cancer.

Non-small cell lung cancer is a heterogeneous disease and molecular characterisation plays an important role in its clinical management. Next-generation sequencing-based panel testing enables many molecular alterations to be interrogated simultaneously, allowing for comprehensive identification of actionable oncogenic drivers (and co-mutations) and appropriate matching of patients with targeted therapies. Despite consensus in international guidelines on the importance of broad molecular profiling, adoption of next-generation sequencing varies globally. One of the barriers to its successful implementation is a lack of accepted standards and guidelines specifically for the reporting and clinical annotation of next-generation sequencing results. Based on roundtable discussions between pathologists and oncologists, we provide best practice recommendations for the reporting of next-generation sequencing results in non-small cell lung cancer to facilitate its use and enable easy interpretation for physicians. These are intended to complement existing guidelines related to the use of next-generation sequencing (solid and liquid). Here, we discuss next-generation sequencing workflows, the structure of next-generation sequencing reports, and our recommendations for best practice thereof. The aim of these recommendations and considerations is ultimately to ensure that reports are fully interpretable, and that the most appropriate treatment options are selected based on robust molecular profiles in well-defined reports.

Early Metabolic Response by PET Predicts Sensitivity to Next-Line Targeted Therapy in EGFR-Mutated Lung Cancer with Unknown Mechanism of Acquired Resistance.

Targeted therapy with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has established the precision oncology paradigm in lung cancer. Most patients with EGFR-mutated lung cancer respond but eventually acquire resistance. Methods: Patients exhibiting the EGFR p.T790M resistance biomarker benefit from sequenced targeted therapy with osimertinib. We hypothesized that metabolic response as detected by 18F-FDG PET after short-course osimertinib identifies additional patients susceptible to sequenced therapy. Results: Fourteen patients with EGFR-mutated lung cancer and resistance to first- or second-generation EGFR TKI testing negatively for EGFR p.T790M were enrolled in a phase II study. Five patients (36%) achieved a metabolic 18F-FDG PET response and continued osimertinib. In those, the median duration of treatment was not reached (95% CI, 24 mo to not estimable), median progression-free survival was 18.7 mo (95% CI, 14.6 mo to not estimable), and median overall survival was 41.5 mo. Conclusion: Connecting theranostic osimertinib treatment with early metabolic response assessment by PET enables early identification of patients with unknown mechanisms of TKI resistance who derive dramatic clinical benefit from sequenced osimertinib. This defines a novel paradigm for personalization of targeted therapies in patients with lung cancer dependent on a tractable driver oncogene.

Developments in predictive biomarker testing and targeted therapy in advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer and their application across European countries.

In the past two decades, the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), has undergone significant changes due to the introduction of targeted therapies and immunotherapy. These advancements have led to the need for predictive molecular tests to identify patients eligible for targeted therapy. This review provides an overview of the development and current application of targeted therapies and predictive biomarker testing in European patients with advanced stage NSCLC. Using data from eleven European countries, we conclude that recommendations for predictive testing are incorporated in national guidelines across Europe, although there are differences in their comprehensiveness. Moreover, the availability of recently EMA-approved targeted therapies varies between European countries. Unfortunately, routine assessment of national/regional molecular testing rates is limited. As a result, it remains uncertain which proportion of patients with metastatic NSCLC in Europe receive adequate predictive biomarker testing. Lastly, Molecular Tumor Boards (MTBs) for discussion of molecular test results are widely implemented, but national guidelines for their composition and functioning are lacking. The establishment of MTB guidelines can provide a framework for interpreting rare or complex mutations, facilitating appropriate treatment decision-making, and ensuring quality control.

Future perspective for the application of predictive biomarker testing in advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer.

For patients with advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), treatment strategies have changed significantly due to the introduction of targeted therapies and immunotherapy. In the last few years, we have seen an explosive growth of newly introduced targeted therapies in oncology and this development is expected to continue in the future. Besides primary targetable aberrations, emerging diagnostic biomarkers also include relevant co-occurring mutations and resistance mechanisms involved in disease progression, that have impact on optimal treatment management. To accommodate testing of pending biomarkers, it is necessary to establish routine large-panel next-generation sequencing (NGS) for all patients with advanced stage NSCLC. For cost-effectiveness and accessibility, it is recommended to implement predictive molecular testing using large-panel NGS in a dedicated, centralized expert laboratory within a regional oncology network. The central molecular testing center should host a regional Molecular Tumor Board and function as a hub for interpretation of rare and complex testing results and clinical decision-making.

[Advances in the targeted treatment of non-small cell lung cancer]. / Fortschritte in der zielgerichteten Behandlung des nicht-kleinzelligen Lungenkarzinoms.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) paradigmatically shows the potential of personalized and therefore precise cancer treatment. For around one third of the patients, predominantly suffering from adenocarcinoma, targetable driver mutations could be characterized in the meantime. Targeted therapies, mostly with kinase inhibitors, achieve impressive advances in the prolongation of overall survival often over many years and excellent quality of life in patients with advanced NSCLC. Targeted treatment is also increasingly evaluated as adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment in early inoperable stages of NSCLC. An absolute prerequisite for the use of personalized treatment is upfront broad molecular diagnostics before the decision on first line treatment. The limitations of personalized treatment are the so far unavoidable development of resistance mutations and increasing clonal heterogeneity during the course of the treatment. Approaches to further improve treatment results comprise the development of next-generation inhibitors, the combination of targeted substances, also with chemotherapy and the use of new immunoconjugates.

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.).

Frequency and functional characterization of fusion genes in squamous cell carcinoma of the lung.

INTRODUCTION: In contrast to lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD), targetable genetic alterations are less frequently detected in squamous cell carcinoma of the lung (LUSC). Over the last years, gene fusions have become promising targets in many solid cancers. Here, we analysed a cohort of LUSC, identified recurrent fusion genes and functionally characterised these tumour genomes. METHODS: A subset of 1608 squamous cell carcinomas of the lung was analysed by means of the FusionPlex® Lung Panel to identify potentially targetable gene fusions using targeted next-generation sequencing. Cases harbouring recurrent gene fusions were further analysed using FISH, Cytoscan HD arrays and cell culture experiments. RESULTS: We found both, known and novel gene fusions in about 3 % of the cases. Known fusions occurring in lung cancer included ALK::EML4, EGFRvIII, EZR::ROS1 and FGFR3::TACC. We further identified recurrent gene fusions of currently unknown biological function, involving EGFR::VSTM2A and NSD3::FGFR1 and showed that the occurrence of the EGFR::VSTM2A fusion is accompanied by high-level amplification of EGFR. Our analyses further revealed that the genomes of these LUSC patients are chromosomally unstable, which leads us to believe that such non-actionable genomic rearrangements may be a result of "chromosomal chaos" most probably not representing exclusive cancer-driving genes in this cancer entity. CONCLUSIONS: We emphasise that caution should be taken when novel fusions are found and that the appearance of new gene fusions should always be interpreted in the molecular context of the respective disease.

Long-term benefit of sotorasib in patients with KRAS G12C-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer: plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a plain language summary of a study called CodeBreaK 100. The CodeBreaK 100 study included patients with non-small-cell lung cancer that had spread outside the lung (advanced). Lung cancer is one of the most common forms of cancer. CodeBreaK 100 specifically looked at patients with a particular change(mutation) in the KRAS gene resulting in the mutated protein called KRAS G12C. The KRAS G12C mutation can lead to development and growth of lung cancer. Patients received a treatment called sotorasib, which has accelerated approval or full approval in over 50 countries for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with the KRAS G12C mutation. The CodeBreaK 100 study looked at whether sotorasib is a safe and effective treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Sotorasib is designed to specifically target and lock the mutated KRAS protein in the inactive state to treat non-small-cell lung cancer. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: In total, 174 adults were treated with sotorasib. Treatment-related side effects were seen in 70% of patients and were severe in 21% of patients. The most common side effects included diarrhea, increased liver enzymes, nausea and tiredness. 70 (41%) patients responded to sotorasib and 144 (84%) patients had tumors that either remained stable or shrunk in size. 29 (41%) patients who responded to sotorasib responded for over 12 months. After 2 years, 9 patients with a response remained on sotorasib; there were no notable increases in tumor size or development of new tumors over this time. There were 5patients who received sotorasib for more than 2 years and continued to respond. Long-term benefit was seen for some patients. Patients also benefitted from treatment when the tumor expressed different amounts of a protein called PD-L1.In total, 33% of patients were still alive after 2 years. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Results show the long-term benefit of sotorasib therapy for people with advanced KRAS G12C-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03600883 (CodeBreaK 100) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

MET Fusions in NSCLC: Clinicopathologic Features and Response to MET Inhibition.

INTRODUCTION: MET fusions have been described only rarely in NSCLC. Thus, data on patient characteristics and treatment response are limited. We here report histopathologic data, patient demographics, and treatment outcome including response to MET tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy in MET fusion-positive NSCLC. METHODS: Patients with NSCLC and MET fusions were identified mostly by RNA sequencing within the routine molecular screening program of the national Network Genomic Medicine, Germany. RESULTS: We describe a cohort of nine patients harboring MET fusions. Among these nine patients, two patients had been reported earlier. The overall frequency was 0.29% (95% confidence interval: 0.15-0.55). The tumors were exclusively adenocarcinoma. The cohort was heterogeneous in terms of age, sex, or smoking status. We saw five different fusion partner genes (KIF5B, TRIM4, ST7, PRKAR2B, and CAPZA2) and several different breakpoints. Four patients were treated with a MET TKI leading to two partial responses, one stable disease, and one progressive disease. One patient had a BRAF V600E mutation as acquired resistance mechanism. CONCLUSIONS: MET fusions are very rare oncogenic driver events in NSCLC and predominantly seem in adenocarcinomas. They are heterogeneous in terms of fusion partners and breakpoints. Patients with MET fusion can benefit from MET TKI therapy.

Outcome of First-Line Treatment With Pembrolizumab According to KRAS/TP53 Mutational Status for Nonsquamous Programmed Death-Ligand 1-High (≥50%) NSCLC in the German National Network Genomic Medicine Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Programmed death-ligand 1 expression currently represents the only validated predictive biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibition in metastatic NSCLC in the clinical routine, but it has limited value in distinguishing responses. Assessment of KRAS and TP53 mutations (mut) as surrogate for an immunosupportive tumor microenvironment (TME) might help to close this gap. METHODS: A total of 696 consecutive patients with programmed death-ligand 1-high (≥50%), nonsquamous NSCLC, having received molecular testing within the German National Network Genomic Medicine Lung Cancer between 2017 and 2020, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status less than or equal to 1 and pembrolizumab as first-line palliative treatment, were included into this retrospective cohort analysis. Treatment efficacy and outcome according to KRAS/TP53 status were correlated with TME composition and gene expression analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas lung adenocarcinoma cohort. RESULTS: Proportion of KRASmut and TP53mut was 53% (G12C 25%, non-G12C 28%) and 51%, respectively. In KRASmut patients, TP53 comutations increased response rates (G12C: 69.7% versus 46.5% [TP53mut versus wild-type (wt)], p = 0.004; non-G12C: 55.4% versus 39.5%, p = 0.03), progression-free survival (G12C: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59, p = 0.009, non-G12C: HR = 0.7, p = 0.047), and overall survival (G12C: HR = 0.72, p = 0.16, non-G12C: HR = 0.56, p = 0.002), whereas no differences were observed in KRASwt patients. After a median follow-up of 41 months, G12C/TP53mut patients experienced the longest progression-free survival and overall survival (33.7 and 65.3 mo), which correlated with high tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte densities in the TME and up-regulation of interferon gamma target genes. Proinflammatory pathways according to TP53 status (mut versus wt) were less enhanced and not different in non-G12C and KRASwt, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: G12C/TP53 comutations identify a subset of patients with a very favorable long-term survival with immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy, mediated by highly active interferon gamma signaling in a proinflammatory TME.

First-Line Selpercatinib or Chemotherapy and Pembrolizumab in RET Fusion-Positive NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Selpercatinib, a highly selective potent and brain-penetrant RET inhibitor, was shown to have efficacy in patients with advanced RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a nonrandomized phase 1-2 study. METHODS: In a randomized phase 3 trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of first-line selpercatinib as compared with control treatment that consisted of platinum-based chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab at the investigator's discretion. The primary end point was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review in both the intention-to-treat-pembrolizumab population (i.e., patients whose physicians had planned to treat them with pembrolizumab in the event that they were assigned to the control group) and the overall intention-to-treat population. Crossover from the control group to the selpercatinib group was allowed if disease progression as assessed by blinded independent central review occurred during receipt of control treatment. RESULTS: In total, 212 patients underwent randomization in the intention-to-treat-pembrolizumab population. At the time of the preplanned interim efficacy analysis, median progression-free survival was 24.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.9 to not estimable) with selpercatinib and 11.2 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 16.8) with control treatment (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.70; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with an objective response was 84% (95% CI, 76 to 90) with selpercatinib and 65% (95% CI, 54 to 75) with control treatment. The cause-specific hazard ratio for the time to progression affecting the central nervous system was 0.28 (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.68). Efficacy results in the overall intention-to-treat population (261 patients) were similar to those in the intention-to-treat-pembrolizumab population. The adverse events that occurred with selpercatinib and control treatment were consistent with those previously reported. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with selpercatinib led to significantly longer progression-free survival than platinum-based chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab among patients with advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC. (Funded by Eli Lilly and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04194944.).

[Prevention, Diagnosis, Therapy, and Follow-up of Lung Cancer - Interdisciplinary Guideline of the German Respiratory Society and the German Cancer Society - Abridged Version]. / Prävention, Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Lungenkarzinoms.

The current S3 Lung Cancer Guidelines are edited with fundamental changes to the previous edition based on the dynamic influx of information to this field:The recommendations include de novo a mandatory case presentation for all patients with lung cancer in a multidisciplinary tumor board before initiation of treatment, furthermore CT-Screening for asymptomatic patients at risk (after federal approval), recommendations for incidental lung nodule management , molecular testing of all NSCLC independent of subtypes, EGFR-mutations in resectable early stage lung cancer in relapsed or recurrent disease, adjuvant TKI-therapy in the presence of common EGFR-mutations, adjuvant consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibitors in resected lung cancer with PD-L1 ≥ 50%, obligatory evaluation of PD-L1-status, consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibition after radiochemotherapy in patients with PD-L1-pos. tumor, adjuvant consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibition in patients withPD-L1 ≥ 50% stage IIIA and treatment options in PD-L1 ≥ 50% tumors independent of PD-L1status and targeted therapy and treatment option immune chemotherapy in first line SCLC patients.Based on the current dynamic status of information in this field and the turnaround time required to implement new options, a transformation to a "living guideline" was proposed.

Tarlatamab for Patients with Previously Treated Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tarlatamab, a bispecific T-cell engager immunotherapy targeting delta-like ligand 3 and CD3, showed promising antitumor activity in a phase 1 trial in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, we evaluated the antitumor activity and safety of tarlatamab, administered intravenously every 2 weeks at a dose of 10 mg or 100 mg, in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. The primary end point was objective response (complete or partial response), as assessed by blinded independent central review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. RESULTS: Overall, 220 patients received tarlatamab; patients had previously received a median of two lines of treatment. Among patients evaluated for antitumor activity and survival, the median follow-up was 10.6 months in the 10-mg group and 10.3 months in the 100-mg group. An objective response occurred in 40% (97.5% confidence interval [CI], 29 to 52) of the patients in the 10-mg group and in 32% (97.5% CI, 21 to 44) of those in the 100-mg group. Among patients with an objective response, the duration of response was at least 6 months in 59% (40 of 68 patients). Objective responses at the time of data cutoff were ongoing in 22 of 40 patients (55%) in the 10-mg group and in 16 of 28 patients (57%) in the 100-mg group. The median progression-free survival was 4.9 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 6.7) in the 10-mg group and 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 4.4) in the 100-mg group; the estimates of overall survival at 9 months were 68% and 66% of patients, respectively. The most common adverse events were cytokine-release syndrome (in 51% of the patients in the 10-mg group and in 61% of those in the 100-mg group), decreased appetite (in 29% and 44%, respectively), and pyrexia (in 35% and 33%). Cytokine-release syndrome occurred primarily during treatment cycle 1, and events in most of the patients were grade 1 or 2 in severity. Grade 3 cytokine-release syndrome occurred less frequently in the 10-mg group (in 1% of the patients) than in the 100-mg group (in 6%). A low percentage of patients (3%) discontinued tarlatamab because of treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Tarlatamab, administered as a 10-mg dose every 2 weeks, showed antitumor activity with durable objective responses and promising survival outcomes in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. No new safety signals were identified. (Funded by Amgen; DeLLphi-301 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05060016.).

Improved Survival Outcomes in Patients With MET-Dysregulated Advanced NSCLC Treated With MET Inhibitors: Results of a Multinational Retrospective Chart Review.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the disease and patient characteristics, treatment, and MET testing patterns, predictive biomarkers and survival outcomes in patients with MET-dysregulated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a real-world setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multinational, retrospective, noninterventional chart review study. Data from medical records of patients with advanced/metastatic EGFR wild-type, MET-dysregulated NSCLC (December 2017-September 2018) were abstracted into electronic data collection forms. RESULTS: Overall, 211 patient charts were included in this analysis; 157 patients had MET exon 14 skipping mutations (METex14; with or without concomitant MET amplification) and 54 had MET amplification only. All patients were tested for METex14, whereas MET amplification was evaluated in 168 patients. No overlap was reported between MET dysregulation and ALK, ROS1 or RET rearrangements, or HER2 exon 20 insertions. Overall, 56 of 211 patients (26.5%) received MET inhibitor (METi) therapy in any treatment-line setting (31.2% in the METex14 cohort; 13% in the MET-amplified only cohort). In the METex14 cohort, median OS in patients receiving METi was 25.4 months versus 10.7 months in patients who did not (HR [95% CI]: 0.532 [0.340-0.832]; P = .0055). In the MET-amplified only cohort, median OS was 20.6 months in patients treated with METi compared with 7.6 months in those without METi (HR [95% CI]: 0.388 [0.152-0.991]; P = .0479). CONCLUSIONS: MET alterations in NSCLC typically occur in the absence of other oncogenic driver mutations and are associated with poor survival outcomes. Notably, METi therapies are associated with improved survival outcomes in patients with MET-dysregulated NSCLC.