Characterization of Incidental Pathogenic Germline Findings Detected via ctDNA among Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in a Predominantly Hispanic/Latinx Population.

Pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) may be under-detected as causative etiologies in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The prevalence of PGVs has been reported between 1 and 15% of patients, depending on the patient population. The rate within Hispanic/Latinx populations remains unknown. We retrospectively analyzed the genomic results (Guardant360, Redwood City, CA, USA) of 878 patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC at five centers in South Florida, USA, from 2019 to 2022 to analyze the rate of incidental PGVs (iPGVs) identified via circulating cell-free tumor DNA (ctDNA). We then stratified the results by tumor histology, age, gender, race, ethnicity, genetic pathway, and co-mutations. Twenty-one iPGVs were identified (21/878 = 2.4%). Among the 21 iPGVs identified, 14 patients were female (66.7%) and 7 were male (33.3%), with a median age of 67 years and tobacco history of 2.5 pack-years. In total, 52.4% of patients identified as Hispanic/Latinx (n = 11) of any race; 19.0% as Ashkenazi Jewish (n = 4), 9.5% as non-Hispanic/Latinx black (n = 2), and 19.0% as non-Hispanic/Latinx white (n = 4). iPGVs in the homologous recombination repair pathway were solely expressed in this cohort (10 ATM, 8 BRCA2, and 3 BRCA1). In total, 76% (16/21) of patients with iPGVs co-expressed somatic alterations, with 56% (9/16) demonstrating alterations in targetable genes. Overall, our real-world findings offer a point prevalence of iPGVs in patients with NSCLC of diverse populations, such as patients who report Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.

Drug Shortages in Oncology: ASCO Clinical Guidance for Alternative Treatments.

PURPOSE: To increase awareness, outline strategies, and offer clinical guidance on navigating the complexities of treatment planning amid antineoplastic drug shortages. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of oncologists, ethicists, and patient advocates was assembled to provide rapid clinical guidance to help providers navigate appropriate patient care in cases where rationing or alternative therapies must be considered. The groups of content experts developed general principles for resource allocation during shortages and clinical guidance on alternative therapies for specific disease sites. The recommendations are supported by evidence when available. RESULTS: A total of 44 volunteers with content expertise formed the Advisory Group that developed general guidance on the prioritization of antineoplastic agents in limited supply. Disease site-specific clinical guidance was then produced by subgroups on the basis of members' specialties and expertise. The majority of alternative treatment options were developed in consideration of cisplatin and carboplatin shortages. All guidance is posted on ASCO's website. RECOMMENDATIONS: The prioritization of antineoplastic agents in limited supply should be based on specific goals of the therapy where evidence-based medicine has shown survival outcome and life-extending benefit in both early and advanced stages. Recommendations for specific disease sites are presented. While management options vary according to the disease site, alternatives are presented. For settings in which there are no alternatives with comparable efficacy and safety, it is recommended that patients are referred to an area where the necessary drug is available or can be obtained.Additional information is available at asco.org/drug-shortages.

Liquid Biopsy Versus Tissue Biopsy to Determine Front Line Therapy in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).

In the last decade, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment has improved with the approval of multiple therapies to target specific genetic alterations. Though, next generation sequencing (NGS) has traditionally been conducted from tissue biopsy samples, developing data supports the use of plasma-based circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), also known as "liquid biopsy," to complement tissue biopsy approaches in guiding front-line therapy. This study is a retrospective analysis of 170 new NSCLC patients treated at 2 cancer centers within a 5-year period who received both tissue and liquid biopsy NGS as standard of care. Based on a treatment schema defined by testing sufficiency, biomarker detection, and turnaround time (TAT), physicians based the majority of their treatments on liquid biopsy results (73.5%) versus tissue biopsy (25.9%). Liquid biopsy NGS returned results on average 26.8 days faster than tissue and reported higher testing success. For guideline-recommended biomarkers, liquid biopsy was 94.8% to 100% concordant with tissue. In comparing testing modalities, a liquid-first approach identified guideline-recommended biomarkers in 76.5% of patients versus 54.9% in a tissue-first approach. There was no significant difference in time-to-treatment, or survival outcomes (overall survival and progression free survival) based on liquid versus tissue biopsy findings. This research demonstrates that liquid biopsy NGS is an effective tool to capture actionable genetic alterations in NSCLC. Due to its high concordance to tissue, faster TAT, and similarity in outcomes and time-to-treatment, liquid biopsy can be used either as a first-line test or concordantly with tissue biopsy to guide treatment decisions in NSCLC.

The Armed Conflict and the Impact on Patients With Cancer in Ukraine: Urgent Considerations.

On February 24, 2022, a war began within the Ukrainian borders. At least 3.0 million Ukrainian inhabitants have already fled the country. Critical infrastructure, including hospitals, has been damaged. Children with cancer were urgently transported to foreign countries, in an effort to minimize interruption of their life-saving treatments. Most adults did not have that option. War breeds cancer-delaying diagnosis, preventing treatment, and increasing risk. We project that a modest delay in care of only 4 months for five prevalent types of cancer will lead to an excess of over 3,600 cancer deaths in the subsequent years. It is critical that we establish plans to mitigate that risk as soon as possible.

Treatment Considerations for Patients With Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Lung.

Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung has a markedly different molecular profile to adenocarcinoma of the lung and remains difficult to treat because of the lack of targeted therapies for this type of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). With immune checkpoint inhibitors moving from second-line treatment to first-line in NSCLC, effective second-line options following immunotherapy is an urgent unmet need. Appropriate treatment decisions are currently hindered by a lack of prospective clinical data. However, available real-world data suggest that ramucirumab plus docetaxel warrants prospective evaluation in this setting. Also, afatinib is approved in the second line in patients with SCC progressing on first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and may also be an option following immunochemotherapy combinations. Afatinib has the advantage of oral administration with a well-defined tolerability profile. Docetaxel, gemcitabine and platinum-based chemotherapy may be options for some patients, but overall, there are very few options for patients requiring second-line treatment after immunotherapy. This lack of options has prompted efforts to further define the molecular profile of lung SCC to match patients with relevant targeted therapies and to elucidate additional genomic targets. In order to ensure patients with SCC of the lung receive optimal treatment, genomic testing is essential to identify those patients who might benefit from existing targeted agents or clinical trials, and further prospective data are urgently required to assess potential second-line regimens following immunotherapy.

STARBOARD: encorafenib + binimetinib + pembrolizumab for first-line metastatic/unresectable BRAF V600-mutant melanoma.

Despite the significant progress in the treatment of unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma, there remains two primary treatment options: targeted therapy and immunotherapy. Targeted therapy or immunotherapy alone is associated with efficacy limitations including efficacy limited to select patient subsets. With separate mechanisms of action and different response patterns, the combination of targeted agents and immunotherapy to treat patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma may further improve patient outcomes. Current treatment guidelines recommend treatment with targeted agents alone, immunotherapy, or the combination of targeted agents and immunotherapy. The randomized, double-blind STARBOARD trial aims to evaluate efficacy and safety of encorafenib, binimetinib and pembrolizumab in treatment-naive patients with metastatic or unresectable locally advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma in comparison to pembrolizumab.

Targeted therapy, including BRAF- and MEK-inhibitors, and immunotherapies have greatly contributed to advances in the treatment of BRAF-mutant melanoma. Additionally, immunotherapy in combination with targeted therapy has been shown to improve patient outcomes. In this study, the authors assess the efficacy and safety of a combination of a BRAF-inhibitor (encorafenib), an MEK-inhibitor (binimetinib) and an anti-PD-1 (pembrolizumab) in patients with metastatic BRAF-mutant melanoma. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04657991 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Treatment considerations for patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the lung: a plain language summary.

What is this article about?: This plain language summary reports the key points of a recent review article that discussed current treatment options for a type of cancer called squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung. What is SCC of the lung?: SCC of the lung is a type of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC for short) that is usually linked with smoking. It can be difficult to treat because it is often diagnosed after it has spread to other parts of the body. What first-line treatment options are available for people with SCC of the lung?: Most patients receive a combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy as their first-line treatment (the first treatment they receive after their diagnosis). Immunotherapy drugs have improved how long people with SCC of the lung can live for. However, for most patients, they eventually stop working. At this point, other second-line treatments are considered, meaning treatments patients receive after their first-line treatment is stopped due to side effects or because it no longer works. What second-line treatment options are available to people with SCC of the lung?: Immunotherapy drugs were originally developed as second-line options after chemotherapy. However, immunotherapy drugs are now used with chemotherapies as first-line treatments. This has left a gap for second-line treatment options. There are some drugs available for second-line treatment, such as afatinib, which comes as a tablet, and docetaxel with or without ramucirumab, which is given as an infusion. Other potential treatments are being developed. What emerging treatment options are being developed?: Some early clinical trials of potential treatments have shown promise, but more results are needed. Research into the genetic mutations linked with the development of SCC of the lung is also ongoing. It is hoped that this will help identify patients who might benefit from specific treatments. Who should read this article?: People with SCC of the lung and their caregivers, patient advocates, and healthcare professionals, including those who are helping people learn about scientific discoveries and potential new therapeutic strategies.

Real-world performance of blood-based proteomic profiling in first-line immunotherapy treatment in advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) therapy has improved patient outcomes in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but better biomarkers are needed. A clinically validated, blood-based proteomic test, or host immune classifier (HIC), was assessed for its ability to predict ICI therapy outcomes in this real-world, prospectively designed, observational study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prospectively designed, observational registry study INSIGHT (Clinical Effectiveness Assessment of VeriStrat® Testing and Validation of Immunotherapy Tests in NSCLC Subjects) (NCT03289780) includes 35 US sites having enrolled over 3570 NSCLC patients at any stage and line of therapy. After enrolment and prior to therapy initiation, all patients are tested and designated HIC-Hot (HIC-H) or HIC-Cold (HIC-C). A prespecified interim analysis was performed after 1-year follow-up with the first 2000 enrolled patients. We report the overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced stage (IIIB and IV) NSCLC treated in the first-line (ICI-containing therapies n=284; all first-line therapies n=877), by treatment type and in HIC-defined subgroups. RESULTS: OS for HIC-H patients was longer than OS for HIC-C patients across treatment regimens, including ICI. For patients treated with all ICI regimens, median OS was not reached (95% CI 15.4 to undefined months) for HIC-H (n=196) vs 5.0 months (95% CI 2.9 to 6.4) for HIC-C patients (n=88); HR=0.38 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.53), p<0.0001. For ICI monotherapy, OS was 16.8 vs 2.8 months (HR=0.36 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.58), p<0.0001) and for ICI with chemotherapy OS was unreached vs 6.4 months (HR=0.41 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.67), p=0.0003). HIC results were independent of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1). In a subgroup with PD-L1 ≥50% and performance status 0-1, HIC stratified survival significantly for ICI monotherapy but not ICI with chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Blood-based HIC proteomic testing provides clinically meaningful information for immunotherapy treatment decision in NSCLC independent of PD-L1. The data suggest that HIC-C patients should not be treated with ICI alone regardless of their PD-L1 expression.

Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Lung: Current Treatment Approaches and the Role of Afatinib.

Options for the treatment of squamous cell lung carcinoma expanded in recent years with the introduction of the immune checkpoint inhibitors into routine clinical practice in both the first- and second-line settings but are still limited. As a result, pembrolizumab, given either alone or in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy, is now a standard first-line treatment for squamous cell lung cancer. However, few options exist once patients have progressed on immune checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy. In this setting, the irreversible ErbB family blocker, afatinib, has a potential role as second or subsequent therapy for some patients. The Phase III LUX-Lung 8 study demonstrated that afatinib significantly prolonged progression-free and overall survival compared with erlotinib in patients with squamous cell lung carcinoma. Notably, retrospective, ad-hoc biomarker analyses of a subset of patients from LUX-Lung 8 suggested that patients with ErbB family mutations derived particular benefit from afatinib, especially those with ErbB2 (HER2) mutations. Afatinib has a manageable and predictable safety profile, and adverse events can be managed with the use of a tolerability-guided dose modification protocol. Until more data are available, afatinib could be considered as a potential second-line treatment option for patients who have progressed on combined pembrolizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy and are ineligible for more established second-line options, or as a third-line option in patients who have received first-line immunotherapy, and second-line chemotherapy or chemotherapy and antiangiogenesis therapy. However, further data are required to support the use of afatinib following immunotherapy. Given that treatment options are limited in both of these settings, investigating an agent with an entirely new mechanism of action is warranted. If available, molecular analysis to identify ErbB family mutations or the use of proteomic profiling could help to further isolate patients who are likely to derive the most benefit from afatinib.

Treatment options after first-line immunotherapy in metastatic NSCLC.

Introduction: The recent approvals of checkpoint inhibitors as single agents or in combination with chemotherapy with programmed death ligand 1 expression of < or ≥1% have challenged clinicians when it is time to begin a metastatic lung cancer patient in second-line therapy. The advantages given by immunotherapy over conventional chemotherapy such as improved overall survival and a better toxicity profile make the second-line clinical scenario more difficult for a patient who faces a likely inferior regimen as well as toxicity which may significantly impact the quality of life.Areas covered: Options given today by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network are very limited, and essentially, we go back to conventional cytotoxic agents alone or in combination with biological agents if possible. In this article, we discuss the actual treatment available for this difficult scenario and some of the ongoing trials which aim to address this dilemma.Expert commentary: This is an unmet need in lung cancer management; we need a better understanding of the mechanism of resistance to immunotherapy so we can target them once the patient moves to second-line treatment.

Randomized Phase II Study of Paclitaxel plus Alisertib versus Paclitaxel plus Placebo as Second-Line Therapy for SCLC: Primary and Correlative Biomarker Analyses.

INTRODUCTION: We assessed the Aurora A kinase inhibitor, alisertib, plus paclitaxel (henceforth referred to as alisertib/paclitaxel) as second-line treatment for SCLC. METHODS: In this double-blind study, patients with relapsed or refractory SCLC were stratified by relapse type (sensitive versus resistant or refractory) and brain metastases and randomized 1:1 to alisertib/paclitaxel or placebo plus paclitaxel (henceforth referred to as placebo/paclitaxel) in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Associations of c-Myc expression in tumor tissue (prespecified) and genetic alterations in circulating tumor DNA (retrospective) with clinical outcome were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 178 patients were enrolled (89 in each arm). The median PFS was 3.32 months with alisertib/paclitaxel versus 2.17 months with placebo/paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.77, 95% confidence limit [CI]: 0.557-1.067, p = 0.113 in the intent-to-treat population versus HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.509-0.985, p = 0.038 with corrected analysis applied). Among 140 patients with genetic alternations, patients with cell cycle regulator mutations (cyclin-dependent kinase 6 gene [CDK6], retinoblastoma-like 1 gene [RBL1], retinoblastoma-like 2 gene [RBL2], and retinoblastoma 1 gene [RB1]) had significantly improved PFS with alisertib/paclitaxel versus with placebo/paclitaxel (3.68 versus 1.80 months, respectively [HR = 0.395, 95% CI: 0.239-0.654, p = 0.0003]), and overall survival (7.20 versus 4.47 months, respectively [HR = 0.427, 95% CI: 0.259-0.704, p = 0.00085]). A subset of patients with c-Myc expression showed significantly improved PFS with alisertib/paclitaxel. The incidence of grade 3 or higher drug-related adverse events was 67% (58 patients) with alisertib/paclitaxel versus 22% (25 patients) with placebo/paclitaxel. Twelve patients (14%) versus 11 (12%) died on study, including four versus zero treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy signals were seen with alisertib/paclitaxel in relapsed or refractory SCLC. c-Myc expression and mutations in cell cycle regulators may be potential predictive biomarkers of alisertib efficacy; further prospective validations are warranted.

Lung Cancer Surveillance After Definitive Curative-Intent Therapy: ASCO Guideline.

PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing clinicians on radiographic imaging and biomarker surveillance strategies after definitive curative-intent therapy in patients with stage I-III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and SCLC. METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel of medical oncology, thoracic surgery, radiation oncology, pulmonary, radiology, primary care, and advocacy experts to conduct a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective comparative observational studies published from 2000 through 2019. Outcomes of interest included survival, disease-free or recurrence-free survival, and quality of life. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. RESULTS: The literature search identified 14 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. RECOMMENDATIONS: Patients should undergo surveillance imaging for recurrence every 6 months for 2 years and then annually for detection of new primary lung cancers. Chest computed tomography imaging is the optimal imaging modality for surveillance. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging should not be used as a surveillance tool. Surveillance imaging may not be offered to patients who are clinically unsuitable for or unwilling to accept further treatment. Age should not preclude surveillance imaging. Circulating biomarkers should not be used as a surveillance strategy for detection of recurrence. Brain magnetic resonance imaging should not be used for routine surveillance in stage I-III NSCLC but may be used every 3 months for the first year and every 6 months for the second year in patients with stage I-III small-cell lung cancer who have undergone curative-intent treatment.

Inhibitor of Differentiation-1 Sustains Mutant KRAS-Driven Progression, Maintenance, and Metastasis of Lung Adenocarcinoma via Regulation of a FOSL1 Network.

Because of the refractory nature of mutant KRAS lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) to current therapies, identification of new molecular targets is essential. Genes with a prognostic role in mutant KRAS LUAD have proven to be potential molecular targets for therapeutic development. Here we determine the clinical, functional, and mechanistic role of inhibitor of differentiation-1 (Id1) in mutant KRAS LUAD. Analysis of LUAD cohorts from TCGA and SPORE showed that high expression of Id1 was a marker of poor survival in patients harboring mutant, but not wild-type KRAS. Abrogation of Id1 induced G2-M arrest and apoptosis in mutant KRAS LUAD cells. In vivo, loss of Id1 strongly impaired tumor growth and maintenance as well as liver metastasis, resulting in improved survival. Mechanistically, Id1 was regulated by the KRAS oncogene through JNK, and loss of Id1 resulted in downregulation of elements of the mitotic machinery via inhibition of the transcription factor FOSL1 and of several kinases within the KRAS signaling network. Our study provides clinical, functional, and mechanistic evidence underscoring Id1 as a critical gene in mutant KRAS LUAD and warrants further studies of Id1 as a therapeutic target in patients with LUAD. SIGNIFICANCE: These findings highlight the prognostic significance of the transcriptional regulator Id1 in KRAS-mutant lung adenocarcinoma and provide mechanistic insight into how it controls tumor growth and metastasis.

Case Reports of Pembrolizumab-induced Acute Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy.

Pembrolizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that blocks the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) pathway, thereby enhancing antitumor immunity. As the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors becomes more prevalent, so do immune-related adverse events associated with their use. The immune-related adverse events linked with this class of drugs are commonly seen and most of the time are classified as mild adverse events. These are easily treated with steroids if recognition of symptomatology and treatment are promptly established. However, neurologic immune-related adverse events are less understood and have been infrequently cited in the medical literature, thus representing a challenge for clinicians.

Challenges in Lung Cancer Screening in Latin America.

Lung cancer is the deadliest cancer worldwide and is of particular concern for Latin America. Its rising incidence in this area of the world poses myriad challenges for the region's economies, which are already struggling with limited resources to meet the health care needs of low- and middle-income populations. In this environment, we are concerned that regional governments are relatively unaware of the pressing need to implement effective strategies for the near future. Low-dose chest computed tomography (LDCT) for screening, and routine use of minimally invasive techniques for diagnosis and staging remain uncommon. According to results of the National Lung Screening Trial, LDCT lung cancer screening provided a 20% relative reduction in mortality rates among at-risk individuals. Nevertheless, this issue is still a matter of debate, particularly in developing countries, and it is not fully embraced in developing countries. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of what the standard of care is for lung cancer computed tomography screening around the world and to aid understanding of the challenges and potential solutions that can help with the implementation of LDCT in Latin America.

nab-Paclitaxel-Based Therapy in Underserved Patient Populations: The ABOUND.PS2 Study in Patients With NSCLC and a Performance Status of 2.

INTRODUCTION: The phase II ABOUND.PS2 study (NCT02289456) assessed safety/tolerability of a first-line modified nab-paclitaxel/carboplatin regimen for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 2. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC and ECOG PS 2 received four cycles of nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 plus carboplatin area under the curve 5 day 1 q3w (induction). Patients without progression received nab-paclitaxel monotherapy (100 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 q3w) until progression/unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint: percentage of patients discontinuing induction due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: 11/40 treated patients (27.5%; 95% CI, 14.60-43.89) discontinued chemotherapy induction due to TEAEs; 16/40 (40.0%) continued nab-paclitaxel monotherapy. Median progression-free and overall survival were 4.4 (95% CI, 2.99-7.00) and 7.7 (95% CI, 4.93-13.17) months. Grade 3/4 TEAEs during induction included neutropenia (22.5%), anemia (17.5%), thrombocytopenia (5.0%), and peripheral neuropathy (2.5%). CONCLUSION: This nab-paclitaxel-based regimen was tolerable in patients with advanced NSCLC and ECOG PS 2, with efficacy comparable to historical chemotherapy data.

The burden of lung cancer in Latin-America and challenges in the access to genomic profiling, immunotherapy and targeted treatments.

Lung cancer is a public health problem worldwide and Latin America (LATAM) cannot escape this reality. This malignant disease has not only a high prevalence in the region, but is also the main cause of cancer related deaths, and in other emerging countries, the incidence rates are still on the rise. Interestingly in most LATAM countries, lung cancer mortality has been decreasing in men but not in women, reflecting smoking patterns in countries such as Chile, Bolivia, and Brazil. Despite the fact that these issues are well known to government agencies, physicians and patients in the region, current efforts still fall behind those needed in order to face this problem of epidemic proportions. Tobacco control and smoking cessation are the most important interventions against lung cancer, but even with their optimal implementation (which is far from reality at this time) the number of cases in the foreseeable future would still be significant. Beyond tobacco control, advances in our understanding of the molecular component of lung cancer have resulted in new targeted therapies and immune check point inhibitors, which have improved clinical outcomes but at a considerably higher financial cost. LATAM has not widely and speedily adopted these strategies, including new technology and approved novel drugs, due to a number of facts, and therefore only a dismal proportion of LATAMs patient population have benefited from these new advances. A keen focus on a heterogeneous education system for caregivers in lung cancer treatment would likely help standardize care and improve future potential gains from domestic research. In this review we discuss the challenges of treatment implementation, focusing on new technologies.