Integration of Data and Predictive Models for the Evaluation of Air Quality and Noise in Urban Environments.

This work addresses assessing air quality and noise in urban environments by integrating predictive models and Internet of Things technologies. For this, a model generated heat maps for PM2.5 and noise levels, incorporating traffic data from open sources for precise contextualization. This approach reveals significant correlations between high pollutant/noise concentrations and their proximity to industrial zones and traffic routes. The predictive models, including convolutional neural networks and decision trees, demonstrated high accuracy in predicting pollution and noise levels, with correlation values such as R2 of 0.93 for PM2.5 and 0.90 for noise. These findings highlight the need to address environmental issues in urban planning comprehensively. Furthermore, the study suggests policies based on the quantitative results, such as implementing low-emission zones and promoting green spaces, to improve urban environmental management. This analysis offers a significant contribution to scientific understanding and practical applicability in the planning and management of urban environments, emphasizing the relevance of an integrated and data-driven approach to inform effective policy decisions in urban environmental management.

Olaparib maintenance versus placebo in platinum-sensitive non-small cell lung cancer: the Phase 2 randomized PIPSeN trial.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-sensitivity is a phenotypic biomarker of Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) sensitivity in histotypes where PARPi are approved. Approximately one-third of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are platinum-sensitive. The double-blind, randomized phase II PIPSeN (NCT02679963) study evaluated olaparib, a PARPi, as maintenance therapy for patients with platinum-sensitive advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Chemonaïve patients with ECOG performance status of 0-1, platinum-sensitive, EGFR- and ALK-wild-type, stage IIIB-IV NSCLC were randomized (R) to receive either olaparib (O) maintenance or a placebo (P). The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS) from R. Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS) and safety. With an anticipated hazard ratio of 0.65, 144 patients were required to be randomized, and approximately 500 patients enrolled. RESULTS: The trial was prematurely terminated because anti-PD(L)1 therapy was approved during the trial recruitment. A total of 182 patients were enrolled, with 60 patients randomized: 33 and 27 in the O and P arms, respectively. Patient and tumor characteristics were well-balanced between arms, except for alcohol intake (33% vs 11% in the O and P arms, respectively, p = 0.043). The median PFS was 2.9 and 2.0 months in the O and P arms, respectively (logrank p = 0.99). The median OS was 9.4 and 9.5 months in the O and P arms, respectively (p = 0.28). Grade ≥3 toxicities occurred in 15 and 8 patients in O and P arms, with no new safety concerns. CONCLUSION: PIPSeN was terminated early after enrollment of only 50% of the pre-planned population, thus being statistically underpowered. Olaparib maintenance did neither improve median PFS nor OS in this patient population.

Tepotinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer with high-level MET amplification detected by liquid biopsy: VISION Cohort B.

High-level MET amplification (METamp) is a primary driver in ∼1%-2% of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). Cohort B of the phase 2 VISION trial evaluates tepotinib, an oral MET inhibitor, in patients with advanced NSCLC with high-level METamp who were enrolled by liquid biopsy. While the study was halted before the enrollment of the planned 60 patients, the results of 24 enrolled patients are presented here. The objective response rate (ORR) is 41.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.1-63.4), and the median duration of response is 14.3 months (95% CI, 2.8-not estimable). In exploratory biomarker analyses, focal METamp, RB1 wild-type, MYC diploidy, low circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) burden at baseline, and early molecular response are associated with better outcomes. Adverse events include edema (composite term; any grade: 58.3%; grade 3: 12.5%) and constipation (any grade: 41.7%; grade 3: 4.2%). Tepotinib provides antitumor activity in high-level METamp NSCLC (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02864992).

ONCOS-102 plus pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a randomized phase 2 study investigating clinical outcomes and the tumor microenvironment.

BACKGROUND: ONCOS-102, an oncolytic adenovirus expressing granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, can alter the tumor microenvironment to an immunostimulatory state. Combining ONCOS-102 with standard-of-care chemotherapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) may improve treatment outcomes. METHODS: In this open-label, randomized study, patients with unresectable MPM received intratumoral ONCOS-102 (3×1011 virus particles on days 1, 4, 8, 36, 78, and 120) and pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin (from day 22), or pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin alone. The primary endpoint was safety. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, objective response rate, and tumor immunologic activation (baseline and day 36 biopsies) were also assessed. RESULTS: In total, 31 patients (safety lead-in: n=6, randomized: n=25) were enrolled. Anemia (15.0% and 27.3%) and neutropenia (40.0% and 45.5%) were the most frequent grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) in the ONCOS-102 (n=20) and chemotherapy-alone (n=11) cohorts. No patients discontinued ONCOS-102 due to AEs. No statistically significant difference in efficacy endpoints was observed. There was a numerical improvement in OS (30-month OS rate 34.1% vs 0; median OS 20.3 vs 13.5 months) with ONCOS-102 versus chemotherapy alone in chemotherapy-naïve patients (n=17). By day 36, ONCOS-102 was associated with increased T-cell infiltration and immune-related gene expression that was not observed in the control cohort. Substantial immune activation in the tumor microenvironment was associated with survival at month 18 in the ONCOS-102 cohort. CONCLUSIONS: ONCOS-102 plus pemetrexed and cisplatin/carboplatin was well tolerated by patients with MPM. In injected tumors, ONCOS-102 promoted a proinflammatory environment, including T-cell infiltration, which showed association with survival at month 18.

Tepotinib Treatment in Patients With MET Exon 14-Skipping Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Long-term Follow-up of the VISION Phase 2 Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: MET inhibitors have recently demonstrated clinical activity in patients with MET exon 14 (METex14)-skipping non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, data with longer follow-up and in larger populations are needed to further optimize therapeutic approaches. Objective: To assess the long-term efficacy and safety of tepotinib, a potent and highly selective MET inhibitor, in patients with METex14-skipping NSCLC in the VISION study. Design, Setting, and Participants: The VISION phase 2 nonrandomized clinical trial was a multicohort, open-label, multicenter study that enrolled patients with METex14-skipping advanced/metastatic NSCLC (cohorts A and C) from September 2016 to May 2021. Cohort C (>18 months' follow-up) was an independent cohort, designed to confirm findings from cohort A (>35 months' follow-up). Data cutoff was November 20, 2022. Intervention: Patients received tepotinib, 500 mg (450 mg active moiety), once daily. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was objective response by independent review committee (RECIST v1.1). Secondary end points included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: Cohorts A and C included 313 patients (50.8% female, 33.9% Asian; median [range] age, 72 [41-94] years). The objective response rate (ORR) was 51.4% (95% CI, 45.8%-57.1%) with a median (m)DOR of 18.0 (95% CI, 12.4-46.4) months. In cohort C (n = 161), an ORR of 55.9% (95% CI, 47.9%-63.7%) with an mDOR of 20.8 (95% CI, 12.6-not estimable [NE]) months was reported across treatment lines, comparable to cohort A (n = 152). In treatment-naive patients (cohorts A and C; n = 164), ORR was 57.3% (95% CI, 49.4%-65.0%) and mDOR was 46.4 (95% CI, 13.8-NE) months. In previously treated patients (n = 149), ORR was 45.0% (95% CI, 36.8%-53.3%) and mDOR was 12.6 (95% CI, 9.5-18.5) months. Peripheral edema, the most common treatment-related adverse event, occurred in 210 patients (67.1%) (35 [11.2%] experienced grade ≥3 events). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings from cohort C in this nonrandomized clinical trial supported the results from original cohort A. Overall, the long-term outcomes of VISION demonstrated robust and durable clinical activity following treatment with tepotinib, particularly in the treatment-naive setting, in the largest known clinical trial of patients with METex14-skipping NSCLC, supporting the global approvals of tepotinib and enabling clinicians to implement this therapeutic approach for such patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02864992.

Detecting ALK, ROS1, and RET fusions and the METΔex14 splicing variant in liquid biopsies of non-small-cell lung cancer patients using RNA-based techniques.

ALK, ROS1, and RET fusions and MET∆ex14 variant associate with response to targeted therapies in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Technologies for fusion testing in tissue must be adapted to liquid biopsies, which are often the only material available. In this study, circulating-free RNA (cfRNA) and extracellular vesicle RNA (EV-RNA) were purified from liquid biopsies. Fusion and MET∆ex14 transcripts were analyzed by nCounter (Nanostring) and digital PCR (dPCR) using the QuantStudio® System (Applied Biosystems). We found that nCounter detected ALK, ROS1, RET, or MET∆ex14 aberrant transcripts in 28/40 cfRNA samples from positive patients and 0/16 of control individuals (70% sensitivity). Regarding dPCR, aberrant transcripts were detected in the cfRNA of 25/40 positive patients. Concordance between the two techniques was 58%. Inferior results were obtained when analyzing EV-RNA, where nCounter often failed due to a low amount of input RNA. Finally, results of dPCR testing in serial liquid biopsies of five patients correlated with response to targeted therapy. We conclude that nCounter can be used for multiplex detection of fusion and MET∆ex14 transcripts in liquid biopsies, showing a performance comparable with next-generation sequencing platforms. dPCR could be employed for disease follow-up in patients with a known alteration. cfRNA should be preferred over EV-RNA for these analyses.

Plain language summary of the development of tepotinib: a treatment for a subtype of non-small cell lung cancer called MET exon 14 skipping.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This plain language summary provides an overview of two of the main clinical studies that led to tepotinib's approval, the phase I first-in-human study and the phase II VISION study. WHAT IS TEPOTINIB?: Tepotinib is a targeted anti-cancer treatment taken orally (by mouth). It is available in many countries for people with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), where the tumor contains a genetic mutation (alteration) called 'MET exon 14 skipping'. Tumor cells rely on this mutation to grow and survive, so targeted blocking of the effect of this mutation is an important treatment approach. MET exon 14 skipping occurs in approximately 3-4% of people with NSCLC. These people are usually of older age. This subtype of NSCLC is associated with poor outcomes. Before treatments that specifically target this MET mutation were developed, only general treatments such as chemotherapy were available for this type of cancer. Because chemotherapy attacks all rapidly dividing cells in a person's body and is administered intravenously (through a vein), it can often cause unwanted side effects. Cancer cells grow and divide rapidly because of defects, often involving proteins called 'tyrosine kinases'. Specific tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) were therefore developed to slow or stop cancer growth by targeting these proteins. Tepotinib is a MET TKI. This means that it blocks the activity of the MET pathway that is overactive in MET exon 14 skipping NSCLC. Doing this, may slow down cancer growth. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS FROM THE CLINICAL STUDIES OF TEPOTINIB?: In the studies summarized here, people with MET exon 14 skipping NSCLC who took tepotinib had their tumor growth stopped or their tumor shrunk for a period of time, and they mostly experienced side effects that they could tolerate. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01014936 (tepotinib first-in-human), NCT02864992 (VISION), NCT03940703 (INSIGHT 2) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

An Adjusted Treatment Comparison Comparing Amivantamab Versus Real-World Clinical Practice in Europe and the United States for Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with Activating Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Exon 20 Insertion Mutations.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with advanced, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with Exon 20 insertion mutations (Exon20ins) have poor prognoses, exacerbated by a previous lack of specific treatment guidelines and unmet need for targeted therapies. Amivantamab, an EGFR and MET bispecific antibody, demonstrated efficacy and tolerability in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC with Exon20ins following platinum-based therapy in CHRYSALIS (NCT02609776; Cohort D+). Since CHRYSALIS was single-arm, individual patient data (IPD)-based adjusted analyses versus similar patients in real-world clinical practice (RWCP) were conducted to generate comparative evidence. METHODS: RWCP cohorts were derived from seven European and US real-world sources, comprising patients fulfilling CHRYSALIS Cohort D+ eligibility criteria. Amivantamab was compared with a basket of RWCP treatments. Differences in prognostic characteristics were adjusted for using inverse probability weighting (IPW; average treatment effect among the treated [ATT]). Balance between cohorts was assessed using standardized mean differences (SMDs). Overall response rate (ORR; investigator- [INV] and independent review committee-assessed [IRC]), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS; INV and IRC) and time-to-next treatment (TTNT) were compared. Binary and time-to-event endpoints were analyzed using weighted logistic regression and proportional hazards regression, respectively. RESULTS: Pre-adjustment, baseline characteristics were comparable between cohorts. IPW ATT-adjustment improved comparability, giving closely matched characteristics. ORR (INV) was 36.8% for amivantamab versus 17.0% for the adjusted EU + US cohort (response rate ratio [RR]: 2.16). Median OS, PFS (INV) and TTNT were 22.77 versus 12.52 months (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.47; p < 0.0001), 6.93 versus 4.17 months (HR: 0.55; p < 0.0001) and 12.42 versus 5.36 months (HR: 0.44; p < 0.0001) for amivantamab versus the adjusted EU + US cohort, respectively. Results were consistent versus EU- and US-only cohorts, and when using IRC assessment. CONCLUSION: Adjusted comparisons demonstrated significantly improved outcomes for amivantamab versus RWCP, highlighting the value of amivantamab in addressing unmet need in patients with advanced EGFR Exon20ins NSCLC following platinum-based therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CHRYSALIS: NCT02609776.

Frequency, underdiagnosis, and heterogeneity of epidermal growth factor receptor exon 20 insertion mutations using real-world genomic datasets.

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertion mutations (ex20ins) account for ≤ 12% of all EGFR-mutant nonsmall cell lung cancers. We analysed real-world datasets to determine the frequency of ex20ins variants, and the ability of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and next-generation sequencing (NGS) to identify them. Three real-world United States NGS databases were used: GENIE, FoundationInsights, and GuardantINFORM. Mutation profiles consistent with in-frame EGFR ex20ins were summarized. GENIE, FoundationInsights, and GuardantINFORM datasets identified 180, 627, and 627 patients with EGFR ex20ins respectively. The most frequent insertion region of exon 20 was the near loop (~ 70%), followed by the far loop (~ 30%) and the helical (~ 3-6%) regions. GENIE, FoundationInsights, and GuardantINFORM datasets identified 41, 102, and 96 unique variants respectively. An analysis of variants projected that ~ 50% of EGFR ex20ins identified by NGS would have been missed by PCR-based assays. Given the breadth of EGFR ex20ins identified in the real-world US datasets, the ability of PCR to identify these mutations is limited. NGS platforms are more appropriate to identify patients likely to benefit from EGFR ex20ins-targeted therapies.

Comparative Clinical Outcomes Between EGFR Ex20ins and Wildtype NSCLC Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: The activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in NSCLC harboring EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations (ex20ins) has not been closely examined due to the frequent exclusion of patients with EGFR mutations from large immunotherapy-based NSCLC trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A real-world, retrospective study was conducted to compare outcomes of ICI-treated patients with EGFR ex20ins and wildtype NSCLC (wt-NSCLC; defined as EGFR and ALK test negative). Patients with advanced NSCLC from the Flatiron Health database (2015-2020) were included in the analysis. Real-world time to next therapy (rwTTNT) and overall survival (rwOS), stratified by ICI initiation line of therapy, were the prespecified primary and secondary endpoints, respectively. RESULTS: Among 59 patients with EGFR ex20ins NSCLC and 5365 with wt-NSCLC, ICI treatment was received as first-line therapy in 25% and 39%, respectively. Patients with EGFR ex20ins had a 58% increased risk of shorter time to next-line therapy compared with wt-NSCLC (adjusted hazard ratio of 1.58 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.1]; P = .0012). The median rwTTNT for first ICI line was 3.7 months (95% CI, 3.0-4.9) for EGFR ex20ins NSCLC compared with 5.8 months (95% CI, 5.6-6.0) for wt-NSCLC. No meaningful difference in rwOS between the groups was observed. CONCLUSIONS: ICI therapy may be less effective for patients with EGFR ex20ins compared with wt-NSCLC. Consistent with prior data on exon 19 deletion and L858R substitution, tumors harboring ex20ins appear to be less responsive to immune checkpoint inhibition than wt-NSCLC.

Alectinib for the treatment of pretreated RET-rearranged advanced NSCLC: Results of the ETOP ALERT-lung trial.

BACKGROUND: Alectinib, a highly selective next generation ALK-inhibitor, has exhibited potent anti-tumour activity in RET-rearranged NSCLC in the preclinical stage. METHODS: ALERT-lung is a single-arm, phase II trial evaluating the activity of alectinib for the treatment of pretreated RET-rearranged advanced NSCLC. Alectinib was administered orally, 600 mg, twice per day until progression, refusal or unacceptable toxicity (treatment could continue beyond progression, if patient was deriving clinical benefit). Patient recruitment closed prematurely due to discouraging results for alectinib in a phase I/II study in the same indication. RESULTS: All 14 patients who enrolled until the premature accrual closure, received at lease one dose of alectinib. Among them, median age was 61 years, majority (71 %) was female, never smokers, of ECOG PS 1. No objective response (complete or partial response) was recorded. Of the 13 evaluable patients, three (23 %) achieved and maintained disease stabilisation for 24 weeks. Up to 31 March 2021 (median follow-up 15.9 months), 12 PFS-events (92 %) were observed, with median PFS of 3.7 months (95 % C.I.: 1.8 - 7.3 months). Overall, three deaths (23 %) were reported. Seven patients (50 %) experienced grade ≥ 3 adverse events, while three discontinued treatment due to erythema multiforme of grade 3, related to alectinib. No treatment-related serious adverse event was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Accrual into our trial was terminated early in response to other reports of limited activity of alectinib in patients with RET-fusion NSCLC and the emergence of more potent selective RET-inhibitors. Also in our trial, alectinib did not show the expected potential for anti-tumour activity in NSCLC.

Cabozantinib combination therapy for the treatment of solid tumors: a systematic review.

Background: Cabozantinib monotherapy is approved for the treatment of several types of solid tumors. Investigation into the use of cabozantinib combined with other therapies is increasing. To understand the evidence in this area, we performed a systematic review of cabozantinib combination therapy for the treatment of solid tumors in adults. Methods: This study was designed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, and the protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020144680). On 9 October 2020, we searched for clinical trials and observational studies of cabozantinib as part of a combination therapy for solid tumors using Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases, and by screening relevant congress abstracts. Eligible studies reported clinical or safety outcomes, or biomarker data. Randomized and observational studies with a sample size of fewer than 25 and studies of cabozantinib monotherapy were excluded. For each study, quality was assessed using National Institute for Health and Care Excellence methodology, and the study characteristics were described qualitatively. This study was funded by Ipsen. Results: Of 2421 citations identified, 32 articles were included (6 with results from randomized studies, 24 with results from non-randomized phase I or II studies, and 2 with results from both). The most commonly studied tumor types were metastatic urothelial carcinoma/genitourinary tumors and castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Findings from randomized studies suggested that cabozantinib combined with other therapies may lead to better progression-free survival than some current standards of care in renal cell carcinoma, CRPC, and non-small-cell lung cancer. The most common adverse events were hypertension, diarrhea, and fatigue. Conclusion: This review demonstrates the promising efficacy outcomes of cabozantinib combined with other therapies, and a safety profile similar to cabozantinib alone. However, the findings are limited by the fact that most of the identified studies were reported as congress abstracts only. More evidence from randomized trials is needed to explore cabozantinib as a combination therapy further.

Cabozantinib for the treatment of solid tumors: a systematic review.

Background: Cabozantinib is approved, in various settings, for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma, medullary thyroid cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma, and it has been investigated for the treatment of other cancers. With the available evidence and the real-world performance of cabozantinib compared with clinical trial data, we performed a systematic review of cabozantinib monotherapy as treatment for solid tumors in adults. Methods: This study was designed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020144680). We searched for clinical and observational studies of cabozantinib monotherapy for solid tumors using Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases (October 2020), and screened relevant congress abstracts. Eligible studies reported clinical or safety outcomes, or biomarker data. Small studies (n < 25) and studies of cabozantinib combination therapies were excluded. Quality was assessed using National Institute for Health and Care Excellence methodology, and study characteristics were described qualitatively. Results: Of 2888 citations, 114 were included (52 randomized studies, 29 observational studies, 32 nonrandomized phase I or II studies or pilot trials, and 1 analysis of data from a randomized study and a nonrandomized study). Beyond approved indications, other tumors studied were castration-resistant prostate cancer, urothelial carcinoma, Ewing sarcoma, osteosarcoma, uveal melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer, Merkel cell carcinoma, glioblastoma, pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas, cholangiocarcinoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, colorectal cancer, salivary gland cancer, carcinoid and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, and breast, endometrial and ovarian cancers. The most common adverse events were hypertension, diarrhea, and fatigue. Conclusion: The identified evidence demonstrates the positive efficacy/effectiveness of cabozantinib monotherapy in various solid tumor types, with safety findings being consistent with those observed with other VEGFR-targeting tyrosine kinase inhibitors. When available, real-world findings were consistent with the data reported from clinical trials. A limitation of this review is the high proportion of abstracts; however, this allowed us to capture the most up-to-date findings.

Overall Survival and Biomarker Analysis of Neoadjuvant Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy in Operable Stage IIIA Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NADIM phase II trial).

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus nivolumab has been shown to be effective in resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the NADIM trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03081689). The 3-year overall survival (OS) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis have not been reported. METHODS: This was an open-label, multicenter, single-arm, phase II trial in which patients with stage IIIA NSCLC, who were deemed to be surgically resectable, were treated with neoadjuvant paclitaxel (200 mg/m2 once a day) and carboplatin (area under curve 6) plus nivolumab (360 mg) once on day 1 of each 21-day cycle, for three cycles, followed by adjuvant nivolumab monotherapy for 1 year (240 mg once every 2 weeks for 4 months, followed by 480 mg once every 4 weeks for 8 months). The 3-year OS and ctDNA analysis were secondary objectives of the trial. RESULTS: OS at 36 months was 81.9% (95% CI, 66.8 to 90.6) in the intention-to-treat population, rising to 91.0% (95% CI, 74.2 to 97.0) in the per-protocol population. Neither tumor mutation burden nor programmed cell death ligand-1 staining was predictive of survival. Conversely, low pretreatment levels of ctDNA were significantly associated with improved progression-free survival and OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.20; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.63, and HR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.39, respectively). Clinical responses according to RECIST v1.1 criteria did not predict survival outcomes. However, undetectable ctDNA levels after neoadjuvant treatment were significantly associated with progression-free survival and OS (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.93, and HR, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.55, respectively). The C-index to predict OS for ctDNA levels after neoadjuvant treatment (0.82) was superior to that of RECIST criteria (0.72). CONCLUSION: The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus nivolumab in resectable NSCLC is supported by 3-year OS. ctDNA levels were significantly associated with OS and outperformed radiologic assessments in the prediction of survival.

Amivantamab compared with real-world therapies in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer harboring EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations who progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In the single-arm CHRYSALIS study, amivantamab showed durable responses and manageable safety in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertion mutations (ex20ins) who progressed on prior platinum-based chemotherapy. External controls can provide context for interpreting amivantamab efficacy. METHODS: External controls were selected from three US-based databases (ConcertAI, COTA, and Flatiron). Key inclusion criteria were diagnosis of EGFR ex20ins advanced NSCLC, prior platinum-based chemotherapy, and performance status score ≤ 1. Duplicate external controls were identified using a tokenization procedure and removed, and adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics between amivantamab-treated and external control cohorts was achieved using propensity score weighting. RESULTS: Amivantamab-treated and pooled external control cohorts included 81 and 125 patients, respectively. Baseline characteristics were generally similar across cohorts, except more amivantamab-treated patients were Asian (56% vs 13%). Most common therapies received by external controls were non-platinum-based chemotherapy (25.1%), immuno-oncology therapies (24.2%), EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (16.3%), and platinum-based chemotherapy (16.3%). Overall response rate was 40% among amivantamab-treated patients and 16% among external controls. Amivantamab-treated patients had longer progression-free survival (median 8.3 vs 2.9 months; hazard ratio [HR; 95% CI]: 0.47 [0.34-0.65]), time to next therapy (median 14.8 vs 4.8 months; HR [95% CI]: 0.40 [0.28-0.57]), and overall survival (median 22.8 vs 12.8 months; HR [95% CI]: 0.49 [0.31-0.77]) than external controls. Results were consistent in sensitivity analyses comparing each external control dataset against the amivantamab-treated group separately. CONCLUSION: Among post-platinum patients with EGFR ex20ins advanced NSCLC, those treated with amivantamab had improved outcomes, including 10-month longer overall survival, versus external controls.

Safety of MET Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Patients With MET Exon 14 Skipping Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Clinical Review.

MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping mutations occur in 3% to 4% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases. Currently, four oral MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are in use for the treatment of patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC (tepotinib, capmatinib, savolitinib, and crizotinib). To support optimal management of METex14 skipping NSCLC in this typically older patient population, the safety profiles of these treatment options are reviewed here. Published safety data from prospective clinical trials with MET TKIs in patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC were reviewed. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurring in ≥ 10% of patients were reported where feasible. Guidance on clinical monitoring and management of key MET TKI TRAEs and drug-drug interactions is provided. Across the clinical trials, safety data for MET TKIs were reported for 442 patients with METex14 skipping. Peripheral edema was the most reported TRAE (50%-63% of patients; grade ≥ 3: 1%-11%), followed by nausea (26%-46% of patients; grade ≥ 3: 0%-1%). TRAEs led to dose reductions in 33% to 38% of patients and to discontinuation in 7% to 14% of patients, across the MET TKIs. Considerations on interpreting available safety data are provided, along with insights into monitoring and managing specific MET TKI TRAEs of interest and drug-drug interactions. Overall, MET TKIs are tolerable treatment options for patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC, an older population for whom chemo- or immuno-therapy may not be an effective nor tolerable option. More data regarding the effectiveness of safety interventions and management strategies are needed.

Tepotinib Efficacy and Safety in Patients with MET Exon 14 Skipping NSCLC: Outcomes in Patient Subgroups from the VISION Study with Relevance for Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE: Primary analysis of VISION showed tepotinib had durable clinical activity in patients with MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We present updated outcomes for clinically relevant subgroups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II, open-label, multi-cohort study of 500 mg (450 mg active moiety) tepotinib in patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC assessed efficacy and safety in predefined subgroups according to age, prior therapies (chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors), and brain metastases. An ad hoc retrospective analysis using Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Brain Metastases (RANO-BM) criteria assessed intracranial activity. RESULTS: 152 patients were evaluable for efficacy (median age: 73.1). Overall, objective response rate (ORR) was 44.7% [95% confidence interval (CI): 36.7-53.0]. Patients aged <75 (n = 84) and ≥75 (n = 68) had ORRs of 48.8% (95% CI: 37.7-60.0) and 39.7% (95% CI: 28.0-52.3), respectively. Treatment-naïve (n = 69) versus previously treated (n = 83) patients showed consistent efficacy [ORR (95% CI): 44.9% (32.9-57.4) vs. 44.6% (33.7-55.9); median duration of response (95% CI): 10.8 (6.9-not estimable) vs. 11.1 (9.5-18.5) months]. Of 15 patients analyzed by RANO-BM (12 received prior radiotherapy), 13 achieved intracranial disease control; 5 of 7 patients with measurable brain metastases had partial intracranial responses. Of 255 patients evaluable for safety, 64 (25.1%) experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAE), leading to discontinuation in 27 patients (10.6%). Rates of adverse events (AE) were broadly consistent irrespective of prior therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Tepotinib showed meaningful activity across subgroups by age, prior therapies, and brain metastases, with a manageable safety profile and few treatment discontinuations. See related commentary by Rosner and Spira, p. 1055.

Comparative clinical outcomes for patients with advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations and common EGFR mutations.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world clinical outcomes in patients with advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR exon 20 insertion (exon20ins) mutations have not been extensively studied. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to assess the clinical outcomes of EGFR exon20ins compared with common EGFR (cEGFR) mutations. METHODS: Adults with advanced NSCLC harboring any EGFR mutations in the NSCLC Flatiron registry (2011 through May 2020) were included. To compare the relative prognosis (prognostic value) of exon20ins vs cEGFR, real-world overall survival (rwOS) was the primary endpoint. Separately, to compare the relative response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment (predictive value), real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: For the prognostic value analysis, 3014 patients with EGFR mutant NSCLC (cEGFR, n = 2833; EGFR exon20ins, n = 181) were eligible. The median (95% CI) rwOS was 16.2 (11.04-19.38) months in the EGFR exon20ins cohort vs 25.5 (24.48-27.04) months in the cEGFR cohort (adjusted HR, 1.75 [1.45-2.13]; p < 0.0001); 5-year rwOS was 8% and 19%, respectively. For the predictive value analysis, 2825 patients received TKI treatment and were eligible (cEGFR, n = 2749; EGFR exon20ins, n = 76). The median (95% CI) rwPFS from start of the first TKI was 2.9 (2.14-3.91) months in the EGFR exon20ins cohort vs 10.5 (10.05-10.94) months in the cEGFR cohort (adjusted HR, 2.69 [2.05-3.54]; p < 0001). Among patients with EGFR exon20ins, the most common prescribed first-line therapy was platinum-based chemotherapy (61.3%) followed by EGFR TKIs (21.5%); second-line treatments were varied, with no clear standard of care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with EGFR exon20ins have poor prognosis and receive little benefit from EGFR TKI treatment. More effective therapies are needed in this difficult-to-treat population.

First-line osimertinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer and with a coexisting low allelic fraction of Thr790Met.

AIM OF THE STUDY: The AZENT (NCT02841579) study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of first-line osimertinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor(EGFR)mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with a coexisting low allelic fraction of Thr790Met. METHODS: In this multicentre, single-arm, open-label, phase IIa study, patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC harbouring centrally confirmedEGFR Thr790Met mutation received 80 mg osimertinib daily. The primary end-point was objective response rate (ORR). The secondary end-points included disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Efficacy was assessed as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, version 1.1. Blood samples collected at baseline, end of week 2 and disease progression were analysed using next-generation sequencing. As osimertinib was approved as a first-line therapy during the trial, this led to early termination of phase II; thus, analysis is considered exploratory. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled and received osimertinib. All 22 patients were included in the efficacy and safety analysis. At the data cutoff, 10 (50%) patients remained on treatment. The median duration of follow-up was 24.4 months (interquartile range 12.9 to 26.0). The ORR was 77.3% (17/22 [95% confidence interval {CI} 54.6 to 89.3]). The DCR was 86.4% (19/22, [95% CI 65.1 to 97.1]). The median PFS was 23.1 months (95% CI 14.1 to NE). The median OS was 28·4 months (95% CI 25.6 to NE). CONCLUSION: Despite early study termination, osimertinib first-line therapy yields an overall PFS of 23.1 months in EGFR-mutant patients harbouring a coexisting low allelic fraction of EGFR Thr790Met mutation.