International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Study of Reproducibility in Assessment of Pathologic Response in Resected Lung Cancers After Neoadjuvant Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Pathologic response has been proposed as an early clinical trial end point of survival after neoadjuvant treatment in clinical trials of NSCLC. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) published recommendations for pathologic evaluation of resected lung cancers after neoadjuvant therapy. The aim of this study was to assess pathologic response interobserver reproducibility using IASLC criteria. METHODS: An international panel of 11 pulmonary pathologists reviewed hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides from the lung tumors of resected NSCLC from 84 patients who received neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors in six clinical trials. Pathologic response was assessed for percent viable tumor, necrosis, and stroma. For each slide, tumor bed area was measured microscopically, and pre-embedded formulas calculated unweighted and weighted major pathologic response (MPR) averages to reflect variable tumor bed proportion. RESULTS: Unanimous agreement among pathologists for MPR was observed in 68 patients (81%), and inter-rater agreement (IRA) was 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-0.92) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.79-0.93) for unweighted and weighted averages, respectively. Overall, unweighted and weighted methods did not reveal significant differences in the classification of MPR. The highest concordance by both methods was observed for cases with more than 95% viable tumor (IRA = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.96-1) and 0% viable tumor (IRA = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.89-0.98). The most common reasons for discrepancies included interpretations of tumor bed, presence of prominent stromal inflammation, distinction between reactive and neoplastic pneumocytes, and assessment of invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed excellent reliability in cases with no residual viable tumor and good reliability for MPR with the IASLC recommended less than or equal to 10% cutoff for viable tumor after neoadjuvant therapy.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, including patients with ECOG performance status 2 and other special populations: CheckMate 817.

BACKGROUND: CheckMate 817, a phase 3B study, evaluated flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, in this research, we report on first-line treatment in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0-1 (cohort A) and special populations (cohort A1: ECOG PS 2; or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases, renal impairment, hepatic impairment, or controlled HIV infection). METHODS: Cohorts A and A1 received nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 3-4 and grade 5 immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs; adverse events (AEs) deemed potentially immune-related, occurring <100 days of last dose, and treated with immune-modulating medication (except endocrine events)) and treatment-related select AEs (treatment-related AEs with potential immunological etiology requiring frequent monitoring/intervention, reported between first dose and 30 days after the last dose) in cohort A; efficacy endpoints were secondary/exploratory. In cohort A1, safety/efficacy assessment was exploratory. RESULTS: The most common grade 3-4 IMAEs were pneumonitis (5.1%), diarrhea/colitis (4.9%), and hepatitis (4.6%) in cohort A (N=391) and diarrhea/colitis (3.5%), hepatitis (3.5%), and rash (3.0%) in cohort A1 (N=198). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related select AEs were hepatic (5.9%), gastrointestinal (4.9%), and pulmonary (4.6%) events in cohort A and gastrointestinal (4.0%), skin (3.5%), and endocrine (3.0%) events in cohort A1. No grade 5 IMAEs or treatment-related select AEs occurred. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 4 (1.0%) and 3 (1.5%) patients in cohorts A and A1, respectively. Three-year overall survival (OS) rates were 33.7% and 20.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab was associated with manageable safety and durable efficacy in cohort A, consistent with data from phase 3 metastatic NSCLC studies. Special populations of cohort A1 including patients with ECOG PS 2 or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases had manageable treatment-related toxicity and clinically meaningful 3-year OS rate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02869789.

Combination IFNß and Membrane-Stable CD40L Maximize Tumor Dendritic Cell Activation and Lymph Node Trafficking to Elicit Systemic T-cell Immunity.

Oncolytic virus therapies induce the direct killing of tumor cells and activation of conventional dendritic cells (cDC); however, cDC activation has not been optimized with current therapies. We evaluated the adenoviral delivery of engineered membrane-stable CD40L (MEM40) and IFNß to locally activate cDCs in mouse tumor models. Combined tumor MEM40 and IFNß expression induced the highest cDC activation coupled with increased lymph node migration, increased systemic antitumor CD8+ T-cell responses, and regression of established tumors in a cDC1-dependent manner. MEM40 + IFNß combined with checkpoint inhibitors led to effective control of distant tumors and lung metastases. An oncolytic adenovirus (MEM-288) expressing MEM40 + IFNß  in phase I clinical testing induced cancer cell loss concomitant with enhanced T-cell infiltration and increased systemic presence of tumor T-cell clonotypes in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. This approach to simultaneously target two major DC-activating pathways has the potential to significantly affect the solid tumor immunotherapy landscape.

Patient-Reported Distress and Clinical Outcomes with Immuno-Oncology Agents in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (mNSCLC): A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: There are limited real-world data about patient-reported outcomes with immunotherapies (IO) in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). We describe patient-reported distress and clinical outcomes with IO-based treatments or cytotoxic chemotherapies (Chemo). METHODS: We conducted a single-institution retrospective chart review of adults with mNSCLC treated at Duke from 03/2015 to 06/2020. At each visit, patients self-reported their distress level and sources of distress using the NCCN Distress Thermometer (DT) and its 39-item Problem List. We abstracted demographic, clinical, distress, and investigator assessed-clinical response data, then analyzed these using descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Data from 152 patients were analyzed in four groups: Chemo alone, IO + Chemo, single agent IO, dual agent IO. Distress was worse before treatment start in all groups, and the odds of actionable distress (DT score > 4) decreased by 10 % per month. The most frequent sources of distress were physical symptoms (e.g., fatigue, pain), which remained high longitudinally. Patients receiving IO had higher clinical response rates and a lower rate of unplanned healthcare encounters compared to patients treated with Chemo alone. Only one-third of all patients were seen by palliative care. CONCLUSIONS: This single-center, real-world evidence study demonstrates that patients with mNSCLC experience significant distress prior to starting first-line treatment. IO treatment was associated with higher clinical benefit rates and lower healthcare utilization compared to chemotherapy. Symptom distress persists over time, highlighting potential unmet palliative and supportive care needs in mNSCLC care in the IO treatment era.

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.

Challenges associated with the integration of immuno-oncology agents in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: The availability of new immuno-oncology therapeutics markedly impacts oncology clinicians' treatment decision-making. To effectively support healthcare professionals (HCPs) in their practice, it is important to better understand the challenges and barriers that can accompany the introduction of these agents. This study aimed to establish the types and causes of clinical challenges posed by the introduction of new immuno-oncology agents. METHODS: The mixed-methods design included qualitative in-depth interviews and group discussions with HCPs, in which participants discussed clinical challenges and potential underlying reasons for these challenges. Qualitative findings informed a quantitative survey. This survey investigated the extent and distribution of challenges using HCPs' self-rating of knowledge, skill, confidence, and exposure to system-level effects. These two phases were conducted sequentially with distinctly stratified samples of oncologists, nurse practitioners (NPs), physician assistants (PAs), pathologists, clinical pharmacists, interventional radiologists, rheumatologists, pulmonologists, and emergency department physicians. Participants were from the United States and had various levels of clinical experience and represented both academic and community-based settings. RESULTS: The final sample included 107 HCPs in the qualitative phase and 554 in the quantitative phase. Analyses revealed clinical challenges related to the use of pharmacodiagnostics. For example, 47% of pathologists and 42% of oncologists reported skill gaps in identifying the appropriate marker and 46% of oncologists, 61% of PAs, 66% of NPs, 74% of pulmonologists and 81% of clinical pharmacists reported skill gaps in selecting treatment based on test results. Challenges also emerged regarding the integration of immuno-oncology agents, as oncologists, rheumatologists, pulmonologists, clinical pharmacists, PAs, and NPs reported knowledge gaps (74-81%) of the safety profiles of recently approved agents. In addition, 90% of clinical pharmacists reported skill gaps weighing the risks and benefits of treating patients with immuno-oncology agents while affected by lupus. Finally, patient communication challenges were identified: HCPs reported difficulties discussing essential aspects of immunotherapy to patients as well as how they might compare to other types of therapies. CONCLUSION: The challenges highlighted in this study reveal substantial educational gaps related to the integration of immuno-oncology agents into practice for various groups of HCPs. These findings provide a strong base of evidence for future educational initiatives.

BMS-986012, an Anti-Fucosyl-GM1 Monoclonal Antibody as Monotherapy or in Combination With Nivolumab in Relapsed/Refractory SCLC: Results From a First-in-Human Phase 1/2 Study.

Introduction: Fucosyl-GM1 is a monosialoganglioside with limited expression in healthy tissues and high expression on SCLC cells. BMS-986012 is a nonfucosylated, first-in-class, fully human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that binds to fucosyl-GM1. Methods: CA001-030 is a phase 1/2, first-in-human study of BMS-986012 as monotherapy or in combination with nivolumab for adults with relapsed or refractory SCLC. Safety is the primary end point. Additional end points include objective response rate, duration of response, progression-free survival, pharmacokinetics, and overall survival. Results: Patients (BMS-986012 monotherapy, n = 77; BMS-986012 + nivolumab, n = 29) were predominantly of male sex (58%), 63 years old (mean), current or past tobacco users (97%), and treated previously with first-line systemic therapy (99%). The most common treatment-related adverse event was pruritus (n = 95 [90%]). Grade 4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 2% (n = 2) of patients. The objective response rate (95% confidence interval [CI]) was higher with BMS-986012 plus nivolumab (38% [20.7%-57.7%]) than with monotherapy (4% [0.8%-11.0%]). Median (95% CI) duration of response with BMS-986012 plus nivolumab was 26.4 (4.4-not reached) months. Progression-free survival (95% CI) at 24 weeks with monotherapy and BMS-986012 plus nivolumab was 12.2% (6.0%-20.7%) and 39.3% (21.7%-56.5%), respectively. The pharmacokinetics profile of monotherapy and BMS-986012 plus nivolumab suggested dose proportionality across the tested dose range. Median overall survival (95% CI) with monotherapy and BMS-986012 plus nivolumab was 5.4 (4.0-7.3) and 18.7 (8.2-37.3) months, respectively. Conclusions: BMS-986012 in combination with nivolumab represents a well-tolerated, potential new therapy for relapsed or refractory SCLC. BMS-986012 is currently being explored in combination with carboplatin, etoposide, and nivolumab as a first-line therapy in extensive-stage SCLC (NCT04702880).

A Phase 2 Clinical Trial of Combination Nivolumab, Ipilimumab, and Paclitaxel in Patients With Untreated Metastatic NSCLC: The OPTIMAL Trial.

Introduction: Most patients with advanced NSCLC will experience disease progression and death within 2 years. Novel approaches are needed to improve outcomes. Methods: We conducted an open-label, nonrandomized, phase 2 trial in patients with treatment-naive, advanced NSCLC to assess the safety and efficacy of nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks, ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks, and four to six cycles of paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of every 21-day treatment. The primary end point of the study was median progression-free survival (PFS), with secondary end points of safety, objective response rate, and median overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 46 patients underwent consent and received treatment. The median age was 66 (range: 48-82) years, most had adenocarcinoma (63%), and 50% (23) had programmed death-ligand 1 greater than or equal to 1%. The median follow-up on the study as of October 2021 was 19 months. The primary end point of median PFS was 9.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.9-16.6) in all patients regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 expression. The objective response rate for patients in the study was 47.8% (95% CI: 33.4-62.3). The 12-month OS rate was 69.5% (95% CI: 53%-81%), and median OS was not yet reached. Treatment-related grade greater than or equal to 3 adverse events was found in 54.3% of the patients. Conclusions: The toxicity observed was consistent with other reported chemo-immunotherapeutic combinations and was manageable. The primary end point of exceeding median PFS of 9 months was achieved with nivolumab, ipilimumab, and weekly paclitaxel and should be evaluated further in a randomized trial.

Perioperative outcomes of pulmonary resection after neoadjuvant pembrolizumab in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Pembrolizumab is a programmed death receptor-1 masking antibody approved for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. This Phase 2 study (NCT02818920) of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab in non-small cell lung cancer had a primary end point of safety and secondary end points of efficacy and correlative science. METHODS: Patients with untreated clinical stage IB to IIIA non-small cell lung cancer were enrolled. Two cycles of pembrolizumab (200 mg) were administered before surgery. Standard adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation were encouraged but not required. Four cycles of adjuvant pembrolizumab were provided. RESULTS: Of 35 patients enrolled, 30 received neoadjuvant pembrolizumab and 25 underwent lung resection. Only 1 patient had a delay before surgery attributed to pembrolizumab; this was due to thyroiditis. All patients underwent anatomic resection and mediastinal lymph node dissection; the majority (18/25%, 72%) of patients underwent lobectomy. Of the 25 patients, 23 had an initial minimally invasive approach (92%); 5 of these were converted to thoracotomy (21.7%). R0 resection was achieved in 22 patients (88%), and major pathologic response was observed in 7 of 25 patients (28%). The most common postoperative adverse event was atrial fibrillation, affecting 6 of 25 patients (24%). Median chest tube duration and length of stay were 3 and 4 days, respectively. One patient required readmission to the hospital within 30 days. There was no mortality within 90 days of surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, pembrolizumab was safe and well tolerated in the neoadjuvant setting, and its use was not associated with excess surgical morbidity or mortality. Minimally invasive approaches are feasible in this patient population, but may be more challenging than in cases without neoadjuvant immunotherapy. Pathologic response was higher than typically observed with standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Predictive Value of Combining Biomarkers for Clinical Outcomes in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: A high tumor mutational burden (TMB) (≥10 mut/Mb) has been associated with improved clinical benefit in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and is a tumor agnostic indication for pembrolizumab across tumor types. We explored whether combining TMB with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and pretreatment neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was associated with improved outcomes in ICI-treated NSCLC. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients treated with ICI with Foundation One genomic testing, including TMB. Optimal cutoff for prediction of response by TMB was determined by receiver operating characteristic analysis, and area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for all 3 biomarkers and combinations. Cox model was used to assess prognostic factors of overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP). Survival cutoffs calculated with Kaplan-Meier survival curves were TMB ≥10 mut/Mb, PD-L1 ≥50%, NLR <5, and combined biomarkers. RESULTS: Data from 88 patients treated were analyzed. The optimal TMB cutoff was 9.24 mut/Mb (AUC, 0.62), improving to 0.74 combining all 3 biomarkers. Adjusted Cox model showed that TMB ≥10 mut/Mb was an independent factor of OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% confidence interval; 0.14-0.69; P = .004) and TTP (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.27-0.77; P = .003). The combination of high TMB with positive PD-L1 and low NLR was significantly associated with OS (P = .038) but not TTP. CONCLUSIONS: TMB has modest predictive and prognostic power for clinical outcomes after ICI treatment. The combination of TMB, PD-L1, and NLR status improves this power.

Nivolumab and Ipilimumab as Maintenance Therapy in Extensive-Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer: CheckMate 451.

PURPOSE: In extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC), response rates to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy are robust, but responses lack durability. CheckMate 451, a double-blind phase III trial, evaluated nivolumab plus ipilimumab and nivolumab monotherapy as maintenance therapy following first-line chemotherapy for ED-SCLC. METHODS: Patients with ED-SCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, and no progression after ≤ 4 cycles of first-line chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 12 weeks followed by nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks, nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks, or placebo for ≤ 2 years or until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus placebo. Secondary end points were hierarchically tested. RESULTS: Overall, 834 patients were randomly assigned. The minimum follow-up was 8.9 months. OS was not significantly prolonged with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.12; P = .37; median, 9.2 v 9.6 months). The HR for OS with nivolumab versus placebo was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.69 to 1.02); the median OS for nivolumab was 10.4 months. Progression-free survival HRs versus placebo were 0.72 for nivolumab plus ipilimumab (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.87) and 0.67 for nivolumab (95% CI, 0.56 to 0.81). A trend toward OS benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab was observed in patients with tumor mutational burden ≥ 13 mutations per megabase. Rates of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were nivolumab plus ipilimumab (52.2%), nivolumab (11.5%), and placebo (8.4%). CONCLUSION: Maintenance therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab did not prolong OS for patients with ED-SCLC who did not progress on first-line chemotherapy. There were no new safety signals.

A Phase 1-2 Study of Rovalpituzumab Tesirine in Combination With Nivolumab Plus or Minus Ipilimumab in Patients With Previously Treated Extensive-Stage SCLC.

INTRODUCTION: This open-label, phase 1-2 study evaluated the safety and efficacy of rovalpituzumab tesirine (Rova-T), an antibody-drug conjugate targeting DLL3, plus immune checkpoint inhibitors nivolumab plus or minus ipilimumab in previously treated extensive-stage SCLC (ES SCLC). METHODS: Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed, previously treated (two or more lines of therapy) ES SCLC were enrolled into two cohorts. Cohort 1 received 0.3 mg/kg Rova-T (once every 6 wk for two cycles) plus 360 mg nivolumab (two 3-wk cycles beginning on week 4). Cohort 2 received the same dosage of Rova-T as cohort 1 plus 1 mg/kg nivolumab (four 3-wk cycles) and 1 mg/kg ipilimumab (beginning week 4). Both cohorts received 480 mg nivolumab every 4 weeks starting at week 10. Key objectives were to evaluate safety and tolerability and efficacy (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1). The response-related results are based on centrally read data. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients received therapy: cohort 1, n = 30; cohort 2, n = 12. Overall, 43% received two or more previous lines of therapy. All patients experienced one or more treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE); 41 patients reported AEs considered related to the study drug by the investigator. The most frequent TEAE was pleural effusion (n = 20, 48%); most common grade greater than or equal to 3 was anemia (n = 9, 21%). Three grade 5 TEAEs considered related to the study drug were reported (cohort 1): pneumonitis (n = 2), acute kidney injury (n = 1). The objective response rate was 30% (12 of 40): cohort 1, 27.6% (8 of 29); cohort 2, 36.4% (4 of 11); all partial responses. CONCLUSIONS: Despite encouraging antitumor activity in previously treated ES SCLC, combination therapy with Rova-T and nivolumab plus or minus ipilimumab was not well tolerated at the dose levels and administration schedules evaluated.

Synergy between early-incorporation immunotherapy and extracranial radiotherapy in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Combining radiotherapy (RT) and immunotherapy (IT) may enhance outcomes for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). However, data on the immunomodulatory effects of extracranial RT remains limited. This retrospective database analysis examined real-world practice patterns, predictors of survival, and comparative effectiveness of extracranial radioimmunotherapy (RT + IT) versus early-incorporation immunotherapy (eIT) in patients with mNSCLC. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with mNSCLC between 2004-2016 treated with eIT or RT + IT were identified in the National Cancer Database. Practice patterns were assessed using Cochrane-Armitrage trend test. Cox proportional hazards and Kaplan-Meier method were used to analyze overall survival (OS). Propensity score matching was performed to account for baseline imbalances. Biologically effective doses (BED) were stratified based on the median (39 Gy10). Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) was defined as above median BED in ≤5 fractions. RESULTS: eIT utilization increased from 0.3% in 2010 to 13.2% in 2016 (P<0.0001). Rates of RT + eIT increased from 38.8% in 2010 to 49.1% in 2016 among those who received eIT (P<0.0001). Compared to eIT alone, RT + eIT demonstrated worse median OS (11.2 vs. 13.2 months) while SBRT + eIT demonstrated improved median OS (25 vs. 13.2 months) (P<0.0001). There were no significant differences in OS based on sequencing of eIT relative to RT (log-rank P=0.4415) or irradiated site (log-rank P=0.1606). On multivariate analysis, factors associated with improved OS included chemotherapy (HR 0.86, P=0.0058), treatment at academic facilities (HR 0.83, P<0.0001), and SBRT (HR 0.60, P=0.0009); after propensity-score multivariate analysis, SBRT alone showed improved OS (HR 0.28, P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of RT + eIT in mNSCLC is increasing. SBRT + eIT was associated with improved OS on propensity-score matched analysis. There were no significant differences in OS based on RT + eIT sequencing or site irradiated. Whether these observations reflect patient selection or possible immunomodulatory benefits of RT is unclear and warrants further study.

Targeting MET Amplification with Crizotinib in a Case of Sinonasal Undifferentiated Carcinoma.

Comprehensive molecular testing of individual tumors has led to the identification of novel molecularly defined cancer therapies and treatment indications. Given low frequencies of many molecular alterations, efficacy of therapies used to target them are often undefined, especially in the context of rare malignancies. Here we describe the first reported case of MET amplification in sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma (SNUC), a rare cancer with a poor prognosis. The patient was treated with crizotinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets c-MET, and experienced a complete response. Our report demonstrates the potential of employing precision oncology approaches in SNUC and other rare cancers.

Five-Year Outcomes From the Randomized, Phase III Trials CheckMate 017 and 057: Nivolumab Versus Docetaxel in Previously Treated Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In two phase III trials (CheckMate 017 and CheckMate 057), nivolumab showed an improvement in overall survival (OS) and favorable safety versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated, advanced squamous and nonsquamous NSCLC, respectively. We report 5-year pooled efficacy and safety from these trials. METHODS: Patients (N = 854; CheckMate 017/057 pooled) with advanced NSCLC, ECOG PS ≤ 1, and progression during or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point for both trials was OS; secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Exploratory landmark analyses were investigated. RESULTS: After the minimum follow-up of 64.2 and 64.5 months for CheckMate 017 and 057, respectively, 50 nivolumab-treated patients and nine docetaxel-treated patients were alive. Five-year pooled OS rates were 13.4% versus 2.6%, respectively; 5-year PFS rates were 8.0% versus 0%, respectively. Nivolumab-treated patients without disease progression at 2 and 3 years had an 82.0% and 93.0% chance of survival, respectively, and a 59.6% and 78.3% chance of remaining progression-free at 5 years, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 8 of 31 (25.8%) nivolumab-treated patients between 3-5 years of follow-up, seven of whom experienced new events; one (3.2%) TRAE was grade 3, and there were no grade 4 TRAEs. CONCLUSION: At 5 years, nivolumab continued to demonstrate a survival benefit versus docetaxel, exhibiting a five-fold increase in OS rate, with no new safety signals. These data represent the first report of 5-year outcomes from randomized phase III trials of a programmed death-1 inhibitor in previously treated, advanced NSCLC.

Phase II Study of Arginine Deprivation Therapy With Pegargiminase in Patients With Relapsed Sensitive or Refractory Small-cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pre-clinical studies indicated that arginine-deprivation therapy using pegylated arginine deiminase (pegargiminase, ADI-PEG 20) may be effective in patients with argininosuccinate synthetase 1 (ASS1)-deficient small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled into either a 'sensitive' disease cohort (≥ 90 days response to first-line chemotherapy) or a 'refractory' disease cohort (progression while on chemotherapy or < 90 days afterwards or ≥ third-line treatment). Patients received weekly intramuscular pegargiminase, 320 IU/m2 (36.8 mg/m2), until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. The primary endpoint was tumor response assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 with secondary endpoints including tolerability, pharmacodynamics, and immunogenicity. RESULTS: Between January 2011 and January 2014, 22 patients were enrolled: 9 in the sensitive disease cohort and 13 in the refractory disease cohort. At a pre-planned interim analysis, the best overall response observed was stable disease in 2 patients in each cohort (18.2%). Owing to the lack of response and slow accrual in the sensitive disease cohort, the study was terminated early. Pegargiminase treatment was well-tolerated with no unexpected adverse events or discontinuations. CONCLUSION: Although pegargiminase monotherapy in SCLC failed to meet its primary endpoint of RECIST-confirmed responses, more recent molecular stratification, including MYC status, may provide new opportunities moving forward.

New Approaches to SCLC Therapy: From the Laboratory to the Clinic.

The outcomes of patients with SCLC have not yet been substantially impacted by the revolution in precision oncology, primarily owing to a paucity of genetic alterations in actionable driver oncogenes. Nevertheless, systemic therapies that include immunotherapy are beginning to show promise in the clinic. Although, these results are encouraging, many patients do not respond to, or rapidly recur after, current regimens, necessitating alternative or complementary therapeutic strategies. In this review, we discuss ongoing investigations into the pathobiology of this recalcitrant cancer and the therapeutic vulnerabilities that are exposed by the disease state. Included within this discussion, is a snapshot of the current biomarker and clinical trial landscapes for SCLC. Finally, we identify key knowledge gaps that should be addressed to advance the field in pursuit of reduced SCLC mortality. This review largely summarizes work presented at the Third Biennial International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer SCLC Meeting.

The immunotherapeutic landscape in non-small cell lung cancer and its surgical horizons.

Lung cancer continues to be a leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Despite tremendous advances in surgical technique, chemotherapy regimens, radiation, and targeted therapies, survival is <50% at 5 years. Immunotherapy, specifically immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), demonstrates promise as a solution to this clinical problem. Several agents have been Food and Drug Administration-approved for locally advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Further studies are now exploring the use of these agents in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings. Although ICIs have demonstrated meaningful efficacy in NSCLC and other advanced malignancies, they are not without adverse toxicities. Furthermore, there are minimal data on their use in the perioperative period. Here we discuss the current domain of ICIs and their surgical implications in NSCLC.