Analysis of Response and Progression Patterns of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Recurrent or Metastatic Adenoid Cystic Carcinoma: A Post Hoc Analysis of Two KCSG Phase II Trials.

Purpose: In this study, we evaluated 66 patients diagnosed with adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) enrolled in two Korean Cancer Study Group trials to investigate the response and progression patterns in recurrent and/or metastatic ACC treated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs). Materials and Methods: We evaluated 66 patients diagnosed with ACC who were enrolled in the Korean Cancer Study Group trials. The tumor measurements, clinical data, treatment outcomes, and progression patterns of therapy were analyzed. Results: In the 66 patients (53 receiving axitinib and 13 receiving nintedanib), the disease control rate was 61%, and 3 patients achieved partial response. The median follow-up, median progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and 6-month PFS rate were 27.6, 12.4, and 18.1 months and 62.1%, respectively. Among 42 patients who experienced progression, 27 (64.3%) showed target lesion progression. Bone metastasis was an independent poor prognostic factor. Conclusion: Overall, most patients demonstrated stable disease with prolonged PFS; however, prominent target lesion progression occurred in some patients. Thus, PFS may capture VEGFR-TKI efficacy better than the objective response rate.

Summary of Research: Overall Survival with Osimertinib in Resected EGFR-Mutated NSCLC.

This is a summary of the original article ?Overall survival with osimertinib in resected EGFR-mutated NSCLC.Ë® Osimertinib blocks the activity of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) on cancer cells, causing cancer cell death and tumor shrinkage, and is an effective treatment for EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The ADAURA study assessed the effects of osimertinib versus placebo in patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R) early stage (IB-IIIA) NSCLC removed by surgery (resected). Previous results from ADAURA demonstrated that patients treated with osimertinib stayed alive and cancer-free (disease-free survival) significantly longer than patients who received placebo. Recent data showed the overall length of time patients were alive after starting treatment (overall survival). In both the primary stage II-IIIA and overall stage IB-IIIA populations, patients in the osimertinib group had a significant 51% reduction in the risk of death compared with the placebo group. The data demonstrated that osimertinib after surgery significantly improved overall survival in patients with resected, EGFR-mutated, stage IB-IIIA NSCLC.

Symptomatic Pneumonitis With Durvalumab After Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Unresectable Stage III NSCLC.

Introduction: In the placebo-controlled, phase 3 PACIFIC trial, durvalumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) (p < 0.0001) and overall survival (OS) (p = 0.00251) in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC and no progression after platinum-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT). Pneumonitis or radiation pneumonitis (PRP) was common in both arms. We report exploratory analyses evaluating the association of symptomatic (grade ≥2) PRP (G2+PRP) with baseline factors and clinical outcomes. Methods: Patients with WHO performance status of 0 or 1 were randomized (2:1) to 12 months of durvalumab or placebo, 1 to 42 days after cCRT. Associations between baseline factors and on-study G2+PRP in durvalumab-treated patients were investigated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. PFS and OS were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for time-dependent G2+PRP plus covariates for randomization stratification factors without and with additional baseline factors. Results: On-study G2+PRP occurred in 94 of 475 (19.8%) and 33 of 234 patients (14.1%) on durvalumab and placebo, respectively (median follow-up, 25.2 mo); grade greater than or equal to 3 PRP was uncommon (4.6% and 4.7%, respectively). Time to onset and resolution of G2+PRP was similar with durvalumab and placebo. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified patients treated in Asia, those with stage IIIA disease, those with performance status of 1, and those who had not received induction chemotherapy as having a higher risk of G2+PRP. PFS and OS benefit favoring durvalumab versus placebo was maintained regardless of time-dependent G2+PRP. Conclusions: Factors associated with higher risk of G2+PRP with durvalumab after cCRT were identified. Clinical benefit was maintained regardless of on-study G2+PRP, suggesting the risk of this event should not deter the use of durvalumab in eligible patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC.

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.).

Lazertinib versus Gefitinib as First-Line Treatment for EGFR-mutated Locally Advanced or Metastatic NSCLC: LASER301 Korean Subset.

PURPOSE: This subgroup analysis of the Korean subset of patients in the phase 3 LASER301 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of lazertinib versus gefitinib as first-line therapy for epidermal growth factor receptor mutated (EGFRm) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic EGFRm NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to lazertinib (240 mg/day) or gefitinib (250 mg/day). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: In total, 172 Korean patients were enrolled (lazertinib, n=87; gefitinib, n=85). Baseline characteristics were balanced between the treatment groups. One-third of patients had brain metastases (BM) at baseline. Median PFS was 20.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.7 to 26.1) for lazertinib and 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.2 to 12.3) for gefitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.60). This was supported by PFS analysis based on blinded independent central review. Significant PFS benefit with lazertinib was consistently observed across predefined subgroups, including patients with BM (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.53) and those with L858R mutations (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.63). Lazertinib safety data were consistent with its previously reported safety profile. Common adverse events (AEs) in both groups included rash, pruritus, and diarrhoea. Numerically fewer severe AEs and severe treatment-related AEs occurred with lazertinib than gefitinib. CONCLUSION: Consistent with results for the overall LASER301 population, this analysis showed significant PFS benefit with lazertinib versus gefitinib with comparable safety in Korean patients with untreated EGFRm NSCLC, supporting lazertinib as a new potential treatment option for this patient population.

Phase III, Randomized Study of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Chemotherapy in Patients With EGFR- or ALK-Mutated Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (ATTLAS, KCSG-LU19-04).

PURPOSE: In the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a driver mutation, the role of anti-PD-(L)1 antibody after tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) remains unclear. This randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase III study evaluates the efficacy of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin (ABCP ) in EGFR- or ALK-mutated NSCLC that progressed before TKI therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared the clinical efficacy of ABCP followed by maintenance therapy with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab with pemetrexed plus carboplatin or cisplatin (PC) followed by pemetrexed maintenance. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A total of 228 patients with activating EGFR mutation (n = 215) or ALK translocation (n = 13) were enrolled from 16 sites in the Republic of Korea and randomly assigned at 2:1 ratio to either ABCP (n = 154) or PC arm (n = 74). The median follow-up duration was 26.1 months (95% CI, 24.7 to 28.2). Objective response rates (69.5% v 41.9%, P < .001) and median PFS (8.48 v 5.62 months, hazard ratio [HR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.45 to 0.86]; P = .004) were significantly better in the ABCP than PC arm. PFS benefit increased as PD-L1 expression increased, with an HR of 0.47, 0.41, and 0.24 for PD-L1 ≥1%, ≥10%, and ≥50%, respectively. Overall survival was similar between ABCP and PC arm (20.63 v 20.27 months, HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.46]; P = .975). The safety profile of the ABCP arm was comparable with that previously reported, with no additional safety signals, but higher rates of treatment-related adverse events were observed compared with the PC arm. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this study is the first randomized phase III study to demonstrate the clinical benefit of anti-PD-L1 antibody in combination with bevacizumab and chemotherapy in patients with EGFR- or ALK-mutated NSCLC who have progressed on relevant targeted therapy.

Central Nervous System Outcomes of Lazertinib Versus Gefitinib in EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC: A LASER301 Subset Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Lazertinib, a third-generation mutant-selective EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, improved progression-free survival compared with gefitinib in the phase 3 LASER301 study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04248829). Here, we report the efficacy of lazertinib and gefitinib in patients with baseline central nervous system (CNS) metastases. METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC were randomized one-to-one to lazertinib (240 mg/d) or gefitinib (250 mg/d). Patients with asymptomatic or stable CNS metastases were included if any planned radiation, surgery, or steroids were completed more than 2 weeks before randomization. For patients with CNS metastases confirmed at screening or subsequently suspected, CNS imaging was performed every 6 weeks for 18 months, then every 12 weeks. End points assessed by blinded independent central review and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 included intracranial progression-free survival, intracranial objective response rate, and intracranial duration of response. RESULTS: Of the 393 patients enrolled in LASER301, 86 (lazertinib, n = 45; gefitinib, n = 41) had measurable and or non-measurable baseline CNS metastases. The median intracranial progression-free survival in the lazertinib group was 28.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.8-28.2) versus 8.4 months (95% CI: 6.7-not reached [NR]) in the gefitinib group (hazard ratio = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20-0.89, p = 0.02). Among patients with measurable CNS lesions, the intracranial objective response rate was numerically higher with lazertinib (94%; n = 17) versus gefitinib (73%; n = 11, p = 0.124). The median intracranial duration of response with lazertinib was NR (8.3-NR) versus 6.3 months (2.8-NR) with gefitinib. Tolerability was similar to the overall LASER301 population. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CNS metastases, lazertinib significantly improved intracranial progression-free survival compared with gefitinib, with more durable responses.

Amivantamab plus lazertinib in osimertinib-relapsed EGFR-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a phase 1 trial.

Patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) often develop resistance to current standard third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs); no targeted treatments are approved in the osimertinib-relapsed setting. In this open-label, dose-escalation and dose-expansion phase 1 trial, the potential for improved anti-tumor activity by combining amivantamab, an EGFR-MET bispecific antibody, with lazertinib, a third-generation EGFR TKI, was evaluated in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC whose disease progressed on third-generation TKI monotherapy but were chemotherapy naive (CHRYSALIS cohort E). In the dose-escalation phase, the recommended phase 2 combination dose was established; in the dose-expansion phase, the primary endpoints were safety and overall response rate, and key secondary endpoints included progression-free survival and overall survival. The safety profile of amivantamab and lazertinib was generally consistent with previous experience of each agent alone, with 4% experiencing grade ≥3 events; no new safety signals were identified. In an exploratory cohort of 45 patients who were enrolled without biomarker selection, the primary endpoint of investigator-assessed overall response rate was 36% (95% confidence interval, 22-51). The median duration of response was 9.6 months, and the median progression-free survival was 4.9 months. Next-generation sequencing and immunohistochemistry analyses identified high EGFR and/or MET expression as potential predictive biomarkers of response, which will need to be validated with prospective assessment. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02609776 .

Lazertinib Versus Gefitinib Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Treatment-Naíve Patients With EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC: Analysis of the Asian Subpopulation in LASER301.

INTRODUCTION: Lazertinib is a third-generation central nervous system-penetrant tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting mutant EGFR in NSCLC. Lazertinib exhibited improved efficacy versus gefitinib in the LASER301 study; this subset analysis compared lazertinib with gefitinib among Asian patients. METHODS: The phase 3 LASER301 study evaluated lazertinib efficacy and safety in treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R) locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Patients were randomized one-to-one and received either lazertinib or gefitinib. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate, duration of response, and safety. RESULTS: Between February 13, 2020, and July 29, 2022, among 258 patients of Asian descent, the median progression-free survival was significantly longer with lazertinib than gefitinib (20.6 versus 9.7 mo; hazard ratio: 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34-0.63, p < 0.001), and the benefit was consistent across predefined subgroups (exon 19 deletion, L858R, baseline central nervous system metastases). Objective response rate and disease control rates were similar between treatment groups. The median duration of response was 19.4 months (95% CI: 16.6-24.9) versus 9.6 months (95% CI: 6.9-12.4) in the lazertinib versus gefitinib group. Adverse event rates in Asian patients were comparable with the overall LASER301 population. Adverse events leading to discontinuation in the lazertinib and gefitinib groups were 13% and 12%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In LASER301, efficacy and safety results in Asian patients were consistent with the overall population. Lazertinib exhibited better efficacy than gefitinib in Asian patients with a tolerable safety profile.

Palliation for catastrophic nonlocalizing epilepsy: a retrospective case series of complete corpus callosotomy at a single institution.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, the authors describe their 10-year single-institution experience with single-step complete corpus callosotomy (CCC) for seizure management in pediatric and adult patients with catastrophic, medically refractory, nonlocalizing epilepsy at Advent Health Orlando. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective observational study of patients aged 6 months to 49 years who underwent clinically indicated CCC for drug-resistant nonlocalizing epilepsy at Advent Health Orlando between July 2011 and July 2021. Follow-up ranged from 12 months to 10 years. RESULTS: Of the 101 patients (57% of whom were male) who met eligibility criteria, 81 were pediatric patients and 20 were ≥ 18 years. All patients had seizures that appeared poorly lateralized on both electroencephalograms and clinical semiological studies. Of 54 patients with drop seizures before CCC, 29 (54%) achieved stable freedom from drop seizures after CCC. Of the 101 patients, 14 (13.9%) experienced stable resolution of all types of clinical seizures (International League Against Epilepsy classes 1 and 2). The most common postoperative neurological complication was a transient disconnection syndrome, observed in 50% of patients; of those patients, 73% experienced syndrome resolution within 2 months after surgery, and all resolved by the 2-year follow-up. Formal neuropsychological test results were stable in 13 patients assessed after CCC. CONCLUSIONS: CCC is an effective and well-tolerated palliative surgical technique. In this study, drop attacks were reduced after CCC but could recur for the first time as late as 44 months after surgery. Other seizure types were also reduced postoperatively but could recur for the first time as late as 28 months after surgery. Nearly 14% of patients achieved stable and complete freedom from seizures after CCC. Re-evaluation after CCC can reveal lateralized seizure onset in some patients.

First-line nivolumab, paclitaxel, carboplatin, and bevacizumab for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: Updated survival analysis of the ONO-4538-52/TASUKI-52 randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: ONO-4538-52/TASUKI-52 was performed in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan to determine the oncological effectiveness and safety of combining nivolumab or placebo with bevacizumab plus platinum chemotherapy for the initial (first-line) treatment of patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (nsNSCLC). At the interim analysis (minimum follow-up, 7.4 months), the independent radiology review committee-assessed progression-free survival was significantly longer in the nivolumab arm, but overall survival (OS) data were immature. METHODS: Here, we present the updated OS data. Patients with treatment-naïve stage IIIB/IV or recurrent nsNSCLC without driver mutations in ALK, EGFR, or ROS1, were randomized 1:1 to receive either nivolumab or placebo. Patients in both arms received paclitaxel, carboplatin, and bevacizumab, administered 3-weekly for a maximum of 6 cycles. Nivolumab/placebo and bevacizumab were subsequently continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Overall, 550 patients were randomized. At the time of the analysis (minimum follow-up: 19.4 months), the median OS was longer in the nivolumab arm than in the placebo arm (30.8 vs. 24.7 months; hazard ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.58-0.94). The 12-month OS rates were 81.3% vs. 76.3% in the nivolumab vs. placebo arms, respectively. The respective 18-month OS rates were 69.0% vs. 61.9%. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab plus platinum chemotherapy and bevacizumab demonstrated longer OS vs. the placebo combination. We believe this regimen is viable as a standard, first-line treatment for patients with advanced nsNSCLC without driver mutations in ALK, EGFR, or ROS1.

Overall Survival with Osimertinib in Resected EGFR-Mutated NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with resected, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated, stage IB to IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), adjuvant osimertinib therapy, with or without previous adjuvant chemotherapy, resulted in significantly longer disease-free survival than placebo in the ADAURA trial. We report the results of the planned final analysis of overall survival. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned eligible patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive osimertinib (80 mg once daily) or placebo until disease recurrence was observed, the trial regimen was completed (3 years), or a discontinuation criterion was met. The primary end point was investigator-assessed disease-free survival among patients with stage II to IIIA disease. Secondary end points included disease-free survival among patients with stage IB to IIIA disease, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Of 682 patients who underwent randomization, 339 received osimertinib and 343 received placebo. Among patients with stage II to IIIA disease, the 5-year overall survival was 85% in the osimertinib group and 73% in the placebo group (overall hazard ratio for death, 0.49; 95.03% confidence interval [CI], 0.33 to 0.73; P<0.001). In the overall population (patients with stage IB to IIIA disease), the 5-year overall survival was 88% in the osimertinib group and 78% in the placebo group (overall hazard ratio for death, 0.49; 95.03% CI, 0.34 to 0.70; P<0.001). One new serious adverse event, pneumonia related to coronavirus disease 2019, was reported after the previously published data-cutoff date (the event was not considered by the investigator to be related to the trial regimen, and the patient fully recovered). Adjuvant osimertinib had a safety profile consistent with that in the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant osimertinib provided a significant overall survival benefit among patients with completely resected, EGFR-mutated, stage IB to IIIA NSCLC. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ADAURA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02511106.).

Lazertinib Versus Gefitinib as First-Line Treatment in Patients With EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From LASER301.

PURPOSE: Lazertinib is a potent, CNS-penetrant, third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. This global, phase III study (LASER301) compared lazertinib versus gefitinib in treatment-naïve patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion [ex19del]/L858R) locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were 18 years and older with no previous systemic anticancer therapy. Neurologically stable patients with CNS metastases were allowed. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to lazertinib 240 mg once daily orally or gefitinib 250 mg once daily orally, stratified by mutation status and race. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Overall, 393 patients received double-blind study treatment across 96 sites in 13 countries. Median PFS was significantly longer with lazertinib than with gefitinib (20.6 v 9.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.58; P < .001). The PFS benefit of lazertinib over gefitinib was consistent across all predefined subgroups. The objective response rate was 76% in both groups (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.59). Median duration of response was 19.4 months (95% CI, 16.6 to 24.9) with lazertinib versus 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.9 to 10.9) with gefitinib. Overall survival data were immature at the interim analysis (29% maturity). The 18-month survival rate was 80% with lazertinib and 72% with gefitinib (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; P = .116). Observed safety of both treatments was consistent with their previously reported safety profiles. CONCLUSION: Lazertinib demonstrated significant efficacy improvement compared with gefitinib in the first-line treatment of EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC, with a manageable safety profile.

Effects of Uncertainty, Appraisal of Uncertainty, and Self-Efficacy on the Quality of Life of Elderly Patients with Lung Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy: Based on Mishel's Theory of Uncertainty.

Background and Objectives: The purpose of this study is to enhance the quality of life in elderly patients with lung cancer by understanding relations of uncertainty, appraisal of uncertainty, self-efficacy, and quality of life targeting elderly patients with lung cancer receiving anticancer therapy, and also analyzing the factors affecting the quality of life based on Mishel's theory. Materials and Methods: The subjects were a total of 112 lung cancer patients aged 65 or older receiving anticancer therapy. The data was collected by using self-report questionnaires targeting patients in hemato-oncology at Chungbuk National University Hospital. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, a t-test, an analysis of variance, Pearson's correlational coefficients, and hierarchical regression analysis. Results: In stage 1, anticancer therapy (chemotherapy) (ß = -0.34, p < 0.001), economic condition (low) (ß = -0.30, p < 0.001), the number of anticancer therapies (three times or more) (ß = -0.29, p < 0.001), and education (graduation from high school or higher) (ß = 0.18, p = 0.033) were influencing factors (F = 0.52, p < 0.001). In stage 2, self-efficacy (ß = 0.41, p < 0.001), appraisal of uncertainty: danger (ß = -0.29, p < 0.001), appraisal of uncertainty: opportunity (ß = 0.18, p = 0.018), the number of anticancer therapies (three times or more) (ß = -0.17, p = 0.006), and anticancer therapy (chemotherapy) (ß = -0.14, p = 0.031) were influencing factors, which showed 74.2% explanatory power (F = 26.17, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In order to improve the quality of life of subjects, it would be necessary to develop interventions for raising their self-efficacy by considering their degree of education, economic condition, the types and numbers of anticancer therapies, and understanding of the appraisal of uncertainty about the disease is assessed as an opportunity factor or a danger factor.

Phase III Study of Afatinib or Cisplatin Plus Pemetrexed in Patients With Metastatic Lung Adenocarcinoma With EGFR Mutations.

PURPOSE: The LUX-Lung 3 study investigated the efficacy of chemotherapy compared with afatinib, a selective, orally bioavailable ErbB family blocker that irreversibly blocks signaling from epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR/ErbB1), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2/ErbB2), and ErbB4 and has wide-spectrum preclinical activity against EGFR mutations. A phase II study of afatinib in EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma demonstrated high response rates and progression-free survival (PFS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase III study, eligible patients with stage IIIB/IV lung adenocarcinoma were screened for EGFR mutations. Mutation-positive patients were stratified by mutation type (exon 19 deletion, L858R, or other) and race (Asian or non-Asian) before two-to-one random assignment to 40 mg afatinib per day or up to six cycles of cisplatin plus pemetrexed chemotherapy at standard doses every 21 days. The primary end point was PFS by independent review. Secondary end points included tumor response, overall survival, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS: A total of 1,269 patients were screened, and 345 were randomly assigned to treatment. Median PFS was 11.1 months for afatinib and 6.9 months for chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.78; P = .001). Median PFS among those with exon 19 deletions and L858R EGFR mutations (n = 308) was 13.6 months for afatinib and 6.9 months for chemotherapy (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.65; P = .001). The most common treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea, rash/acne, and stomatitis for afatinib and nausea, fatigue, and decreased appetite for chemotherapy. PROs favored afatinib, with better control of cough, dyspnea, and pain. CONCLUSION: Afatinib is associated with prolongation of PFS when compared with standard doublet chemotherapy in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma and EGFR mutations.

Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy in Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: 5-Year Update of the Phase III KEYNOTE-407 Study.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.We report 5-year efficacy and safety outcomes from the phase III KEYNOTE-407 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02775435). Eligible patients with previously untreated, metastatic squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomly assigned 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo plus carboplatin and paclitaxel/nab-paclitaxel once every 3 weeks for four cycles, followed by pembrolizumab or placebo for up to 35 cycles. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST version 1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR). Five hundred fifty-nine patients were randomly assigned in the intention-to-treat population (pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, n = 278; placebo plus chemotherapy, n = 281). The median time from random assignment to data cutoff was 56.9 (range, 49.9-66.2) months. OS and PFS were improved with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [95% CI], 0.71 [0.59 to 0.85] and 0.62 [0.52 to 0.74]), with 5-year OS rates of 18.4% versus 9.7%, respectively. Toxicity was manageable. Among 55 patients who completed 35 cycles of pembrolizumab, the objective response rate was 90.9% and the 3-year OS rate after completion of 35 cycles (approximately 5 years after random assignment) was 69.5%. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy maintained an OS and PFS benefit versus placebo plus chemotherapy in previously untreated, metastatic squamous NSCLC and is a standard-of-care first-line treatment option for metastatic squamous NSCLC regardless of programmed death ligand 1 expression.

A randomized Phase 2 study to compare erlotinib with or without bevacizumab in previously untreated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated whether an addition of bevacizumab to erlotinib improves clinical outcomes in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: This is an open-label, multicenter, randomized Phase 2 study in South Korea. Chemonaïve patients with Stage IIIB/IV NSCLC with EGFR 19 deletion or L858R mutation were eligible. Asymptomatic brain metastasis (BM) was enrolled without local treatment. Patients received either erlotinib plus bevacizumab or erlotinib. RESULTS: Between December 2016 and March 2019, 127 patients were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib plus bevacizumab (n = 64) or erlotinib (n = 63). Fifty-nine (46.5%) patients had baseline BM. Fewer patients in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab arm received radiotherapy for BM than in the erlotinib arm (10.3% vs. 40.0%). A trend toward longer progression-free survival (PFS) was observed in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab arm compared with the erlotinib alone arm; however, it was not statistically significant (median PFS, 17.5 months vs. 12.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51-1.08; p = .119). The unplanned subgroup analysis showed a longer PFS with erlotinib plus bevacizumab in patients with BM (median PFS, 18.6 months vs. 10.3 months; HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.31-0.95; p = .032). Grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 56.6% of the erlotinib plus bevacizumab arm and 20.6% of the erlotinib arm. CONCLUSIONS: Although it was not statistically significant, a trend to improvement in PFS was observed in patients with erlotinib plus bevacizumab compared to erlotinib alone. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: A randomized Phase 2 study compared erlotinib with or without bevacizumab in previously untreated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation. The erlotinib plus bevacizumab failed to improve median progression-free survival compared with the erlotinib alone. However, the progression-free survival benefit from erlotinib plus bevacizumab was found in patients with brain metastasis with no severe hemorrhagic adverse effects.

Safety of First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Patients With Metastatic NSCLC: A Pooled Analysis of CheckMate 227, CheckMate 568, and CheckMate 817.

INTRODUCTION: We characterized the safety of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) in a large patient population with metastatic NSCLC and efficacy outcomes after NIVO+IPI discontinuation owing to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). METHODS: We pooled data from three first-line NIVO+IPI studies (NIVO, 3 mg/kg or 240 mg every 2 wk; IPI, 1 mg/kg every 6 wk) in metastatic NSCLC (CheckMate 227 part 1, CheckMate 817 cohort A, CheckMate 568 part 1). Safety end points included TRAEs and immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs) in the pooled population and patients aged 75 years or older. RESULTS: In the pooled population (N = 1255), any-grade TRAEs occurred in 78% of the patients, grade 3 or 4 TRAEs in 34%, and discontinuation of any regimen component owing to TRAEs in 21%. The most frequent TRAE and IMAE were diarrhea (20%; grade 3 or 4, 2%) and rash (17%; grade 3 or 4, 3%), respectively. The most common grade 3 or 4 IMAEs were hepatitis (5%) and diarrhea/colitis and pneumonitis (4% each). Pneumonitis was the most common cause of treatment-related death (5 of 16). Safety in patients aged 75 years or older (n = 174) was generally similar to the overall population, but discontinuation of any regimen component owing to TRAEs was more common (29%). In patients discontinuing NIVO+IPI owing to TRAEs (n = 225), 3-year overall survival was 50% (95% confidence interval: 42.6-56.0), and 42% (31.2-52.4) of 130 responders remained in response 2 years after discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: First-line NIVO+IPI was well tolerated in this large population with metastatic NSCLC and in patients aged 75 years or older. Discontinuation owing to TRAEs did not reduce long-term survival.

The new diagnostic criteria for myelodysplasia-related acute myeloid leukemia is useful for predicting clinical outcome: comparison of the 4th and 5th World Health Organization classifications.

Mutations in myelodysplasia-related (MR) genes, rather than morphological features, have been included in the diagnostic criteria of the new 5th World Health Organization (WHO) classification for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)-associated acute myeloid leukemia (AML). This study compares the clinical relevance of the new criteria with those of the previous version. In a cohort of 135 patients with newly diagnosed AML, the MDS-related AML patients were classified according to the 5th and 4th edition of the WHO classification (AML, myelodysplasia-related [AML-MR5th] and AML with myelodysplasia-related changes [AML-MRC4th], respectively). The median age of the patients was 70.4 years. MR gene mutations were found in 48 patients (35.6%). Sixty-one patients (46.6%) were diagnosed with AML-MRC4th, while 71 patients (53.0%) were diagnosed with AML-MR5th. Patients with AML-MR5th were significantly older with significantly lower treatment response rate, higher recurrence rate, and shorter relapse-free survival after chemotherapy, whereas AML-MRC4th patients did not show any association with the treatment outcome. Overall, the following prognostic factors for survival were identified: age over 75 years, antecedent MDS or MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasm, chromosome 5 or 7 abnormalities, and KRAS and ZSZR2 mutations. The 5th WHO classification is more useful for predicting the treatment response of patients with AML-MR than the previous version. Among the MR genes, ZSZR2 mutations were found to be independent prognostic factors affecting survival.

Tiragolumab plus atezolizumab versus placebo plus atezolizumab as a first-line treatment for PD-L1-selected non-small-cell lung cancer (CITYSCAPE): primary and follow-up analyses of a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Targeted inhibition of the PD-L1-PD-1 pathway might be further amplified through combination of PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors with novel anti-TIGIT inhibitory immune checkpoint agents, such as tiragolumab. In the CITYSCAPE trial, we aimed to assess the preliminary efficacy and safety of tiragolumab plus atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) therapy as first-line treatment for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: CITYSCAPE is a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients with chemotherapy-naive, PD-L1-positive (defined as a tumour proportion score of ≥1% by 22C3 immunohistochemistry pharmDx assay; Dako, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) recurrent or metastatic NSCLC with measurable disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and no EGFR or ALK alterations were enrolled from 41 clinics in Europe, Asia, and the USA. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice or web-based response system, to receive tiragolumab (600 mg) plus atezolizumab (1200 mg) or placebo plus atezolizumab intravenously once every 3 weeks. Investigators and patients were masked to treatment assignment. The co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed objective response rate and progression-free survival as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 in the intention-to-treat population, analysed after approximately 80 progression-free survival events had been observed in the primary population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03563716, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Patients were enrolled between Aug 10, 2018, and March 20, 2019. At data cutoff for the primary analysis (June 30, 2019), 135 of 275 patients assessed for eligibility were randomly assigned to receive tiragolumab plus atezolizumab (67 [50%]) or placebo plus atezolizumab (68 [50%]). In this primary analysis, after a median follow-up of 5·9 months (4·6-7·6, in the intention-to-treat population, 21 patients (31·3% [95% CI 19·5-43·2]) in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab group versus 11 patients (16·2% [6·7-25·7]) in the placebo plus atezolizumab group had an objective response (p=0·031). Median progression-free survival was 5·4 months (95% CI 4·2-not estimable) in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab group versus 3·6 months (2·7-4·4) in the placebo plus atezolizumab group (stratified hazard ratio 0·57 [95% CI 0·37-0·90], p=0·015). 14 (21%) patients receiving tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and 12 (18%) patients receiving placebo plus atezolizumab had serious treatment-related adverse events. The most frequently reported grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse event was lipase increase (in six [9%] patients in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab group vs two [3%] in the placebo plus atezolizumab group). Two treatment-related deaths (of pyrexia and infection) occurred in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab group. INTERPRETATION: Tiragolumab plus atezolizumab showed a clinically meaningful improvement in objective response rate and progression-free survival compared with placebo plus atezolizumab in patients with chemotherapy-naive, PD-L1-positive, recurrent or metastatic NSCLC. Tiragolumab plus atezolizumab was well tolerated, with a safety profile generally similar to that of atezolizumab alone. These findings demonstrate that tiragolumab plus atezolizumab is a promising immunotherapy combination for the treatment of previously untreated, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic NSCLC. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.