Dacomitinib in EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer with brain metastasis: a single-arm, phase II study.

INTRODUCTION: Dacomitinib showed superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival compared to gefitinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations in the ARCHER1050 study. However, because that study did not include patients with brain metastases, the efficacy of dacomitinib in patients with brain metastases has not been clarified. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This single-arm phase II study enrolled 30 patients with treatment-naïve advanced NSCLC harboring activating EGFR mutations from January 2021 to June 2021 and started them on dacomitinib (45 mg/day). All patients had non-irradiated brain metastases with a diameter of ≥5 mm. The primary endpoint was confirmed intracranial objective response rate (iORR). RESULTS: Patients had exon 19 deletions (46.7%) and L858R mutations in exon 21 (55.3%). The confirmed iORR was 96.7% (29/30), with an intracranial complete response of 63.3%. Median intracranial PFS (iPFS) was not reached, with 12- and 18-month iPFS rates of 78.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 64.8% to 95.4%] and 70.4% (95% CI 54.9% to 90.1%), respectively. In the competing risk analysis, the 12-month cumulative incidence of intracranial progression was 16.7%. Regarding the overall efficacy for intracranial and extracranial lesions, the overall ORR was 96.7%, and the median PFS was 17.5 months (95% CI 15.2 months-not reached). Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events were reported in 16.7% of patients, and 83.3% required a reduced dacomitinib dose to manage adverse events. However, none permanently discontinued dacomitinib treatment due to treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Dacomitinib has outstanding intracranial efficacy in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC with brain metastases.

Pembrolizumab versus methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-040): Subgroup analysis by pattern of disease recurrence.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-040 study, pembrolizumab prolonged OS versus chemotherapy in previously treated recurrent or metastatic (R/M) HNSCC. We present a post hoc subgroup analysis by disease recurrence pattern: recurrent-only, recurrent and metastatic (recurrent-metastatic), and metastatic-only HNSCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients had HNSCC that progressed during or after platinum-containing treatment for R/M disease or had recurrence or progression within 3-6 months of previous platinum-containing definitive therapy for locally advanced disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W or investigator's choice of standards of care (SOC): methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab. Outcomes included OS, PFS, ORR, and DOR. The data cutoff was May 15, 2017. RESULTS: There were 125 patients (pembrolizumab, 53; SOC, 72) in the recurrent-only subgroup, 204 in the recurrent-metastatic subgroup (pembrolizumab, 108; SOC, 96), and 166 in the metastatic-only subgroup (pembrolizumab, 86; SOC, 80). The hazard ratio (95% CI) for death for pembrolizumab versus SOC was 0.83 (0.55-1.25) in the recurrent-only, 0.78 (0.58-1.06) in the recurrent-metastatic, and 0.74 (0.52-1.05) in the metastatic-only subgroups. PFS was similar between treatment arms in all subgroups. ORR was 22.6% for pembrolizumab versus 16.7% for SOC in the recurrent-only, 10.2% versus 6.3% in the recurrent-metastatic, and 15.1% versus 8.8% in the metastatic-only subgroups. DOR was numerically longer with pembrolizumab in all subgroups. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab provided numerically longer OS and durable responses in all subgroups compared with SOC, suggesting that patients with previously treated R/M HNSCC benefit from pembrolizumab regardless of recurrence pattern.

A phase II open-label trial of avelumab plus axitinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer or treatment-naïve, cisplatin-ineligible urothelial cancer.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that avelumab plus axitinib could improve clinical outcomes in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or urothelial carcinoma (UC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We enrolled previously treated patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC, or untreated, cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced or metastatic UC. Patients received avelumab 800 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) and axitinib 5 mg orally two times daily. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Immunohistochemistry was used to assess programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (SP263 assay) and the presence of CD8+ T cells (clone C8/144B). Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was assessed by whole-exome sequencing. RESULTS: A total of 61 patients were enrolled and treated (NSCLC, n = 41; UC, n = 20); 5 remained on treatment at data cut-off (26 February 2021). The confirmed ORR was 31.7% in the NSCLC cohort and 10.0% in the UC cohort (all partial responses). Antitumor activity was observed irrespective of PD-L1 expression. In exploratory subgroups, ORRs were higher in patients with higher (≥median) CD8+ T cells in the tumor. ORRs were higher in patients with lower TMB (

Durvalumab with or without tremelimumab versus the EXTREME regimen as first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: KESTREL, a randomized, open-label, phase III study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) have a poor prognosis. The phase III KESTREL study evaluated the efficacy of durvalumab [programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody] with or without tremelimumab [cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) antibody], versus the EXTREME regimen in patients with R/M HNSCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with HNSCC who had not received prior systemic treatment for R/M disease were randomized (2 : 1 : 1) to receive durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) plus tremelimumab 75 mg Q4W (up to four doses), durvalumab monotherapy 1500 mg Q4W, or the EXTREME regimen (platinum, 5-fluorouracil, and cetuximab) until disease progression. Durvalumab efficacy, with or without tremelimumab, versus the EXTREME regimen in patients with PD-L1-high tumors and in all randomized patients was assessed. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Durvalumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab were not superior to EXTREME for overall survival (OS) in patients with PD-L1-high expression [median, 10.9 and 11.2 versus 10.9 months, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.32; P = 0.787 and HR = 1.05; 95% CI 0.80-1.39, respectively]. Durvalumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab prolonged duration of response versus EXTREME (49.3% and 48.1% versus 9.8% of patients remaining in response at 12 months), correlating with long-term OS for responding patients; however, median progression-free survival was longer with EXTREME (2.8 and 2.8 versus 5.4 months). Exploratory analyses suggested that subsequent immunotherapy use by 24.3% of patients in the EXTREME regimen arm contributed to the similar OS outcomes between arms. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) for durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and EXTREME were 8.9%, 19.1%, and 53.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PD-L1-high expression, OS was comparable between durvalumab and the EXTREME regimen. Durvalumab alone, and with tremelimumab, demonstrated durable responses and reduced TRAEs versus the EXTREME regimen in R/M HNSCC.

Pembrolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy in platinum-pretreated, recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer (KEYNOTE-122): an open-label, randomized, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab previously demonstrated robust antitumor activity and manageable safety in a phase Ib study of patients with heavily pretreated, programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive, recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). The phase III KEYNOTE-122 study was conducted to further evaluate pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with platinum-pretreated, recurrent and/or metastatic NPC. Final analysis results are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: KEYNOTE-122 was an open-label, randomized study conducted at 29 sites, globally. Participants with platinum-pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic NPC were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to pembrolizumab or chemotherapy with capecitabine, gemcitabine, or docetaxel. Randomization was stratified by liver metastasis (present versus absent). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), analyzed in the intention-to-treat population using the stratified log-rank test (superiority threshold, one-sided P = 0.0187). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population. RESULTS: Between 5 May 2016 and 28 May 2018, 233 participants were randomly assigned to treatment (pembrolizumab, n = 117; chemotherapy, n = 116); Most participants (86.7%) received study treatment in the second-line or later setting. Median time from randomization to data cut-off (30 November 2020) was 45.1 months (interquartile range, 39.0-48.8 months). Median OS was 17.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.7-22.9 months] with pembrolizumab and 15.3 months (95% CI 10.9-18.1 months) with chemotherapy [hazard ratio, 0.90 (95% CI 0.67-1.19; P = 0.2262)]. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 12 of 116 participants (10.3%) with pembrolizumab and 49 of 112 participants (43.8%) with chemotherapy. Three treatment-related deaths occurred: 1 participant (0.9%) with pembrolizumab (pneumonitis) and 2 (1.8%) with chemotherapy (pneumonia, intracranial hemorrhage). CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab did not significantly improve OS compared with chemotherapy in participants with platinum-pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic NPC but did have manageable safety and a lower incidence of treatment-related adverse events.

Adjuvant durvalumab for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, phase II study.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy of adjuvant durvalumab after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, phase II study included patients with ESCC who underwent curative surgery after neoadjuvant CCRT. Patients were randomized to receive either durvalumab (20 mg/kg/i.v. every 4 weeks for 12 months) or placebo in a 1:1 ratio and were stratified by age and pathologic tumor stage. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Between March 2016 and June 2018, 86 patients were randomized to the durvalumab (n = 45) or placebo (n = 41) arm. The median follow-up duration was 38.7 months. There was no difference in DFS [hazard ratio (HR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-2.27, P = 0.61] or overall survival (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.52-2.24, P = 0.85) between the two arms. Subgroup analysis was performed for patients for whom the post-CCRT programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression profile could be assessed (n = 54). In the PD-L1-positive group, based on tumor proportion score ≥1%, durvalumab was associated with longer overall survival compared with the placebo (36-month survival rate: 94% versus 64%; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.10-1.76), while in the PD-L1-negative group, it was associated with shorter overall survival (42% versus 55%; HR 1.53, 95% CI 0.48-4.83), showing the tendency of interaction between post-CCRT PD-L1 status and adjuvant durvalumab therapy for overall survival (interaction P = 0.18). CONCLUSIONS: We failed to demonstrate that adjuvant durvalumab improved survival after neoadjuvant CCRT in patients with ESCC. However, post-CCRT PD-L1 expression could predict the survival of patients who receive adjuvant durvalumab after neoadjuvant CCRT, which needs to be validated.

ESMO expert consensus statements on the management of EGFR mutant non-small-cell lung cancer.

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a virtual consensus-building process on epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer in 2021. The consensus included a multidisciplinary panel of 34 leading experts in the management of lung cancer. The aim of the consensus was to develop recommendations on topics that are not covered in detail in the current ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline and where the available evidence is either limited or conflicting. The main topics identified for discussion were: (i) tissue and biomarkers analyses; (ii) early and locally advanced disease; (iii) metastatic disease and (iv) clinical trial design, patient's perspective and miscellaneous. The expert panel was divided into four working groups to address questions relating to one of the four topics outlined above. Relevant scientific literature was reviewed in advance. Recommendations were developed by the working groups and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This manuscript presents the recommendations developed, including findings from the expert panel discussions, consensus recommendations and a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation.

First-in-human phase 1 study of the anti-TIGIT antibody vibostolimab as monotherapy or with pembrolizumab for advanced solid tumors, including non-small-cell lung cancer☆.

BACKGROUND: In this first-in-human phase 1 study (NCT02964013; MK-7684-001), we investigated the safety and efficacy of the anti-TIGIT (T cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain) antibody vibostolimab as monotherapy or in combination with pembrolizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Part A enrolled patients with advanced solid tumors, and part B enrolled patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients received vibostolimab 2.1-700 mg alone or with pembrolizumab 200 mg in part A and vibostolimab 200 mg alone or with pembrolizumab 200 mg in part B. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Part A enrolled 76 patients (monotherapy, 34; combination therapy, 42). No dose-limiting toxicities were reported. Across doses, 56% of patients receiving monotherapy and 62% receiving combination therapy had treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs); grade 3-4 TRAEs occurred in 9% and 17% of patients, respectively. The most common TRAEs were fatigue (15%) and pruritus (15%) with monotherapy and pruritus (17%) and rash (14%) with combination therapy. Confirmed ORR was 0% with monotherapy and 7% with combination therapy. In part B, 39 patients had anti-PD-1 (programmed cell death protein 1)/PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1)-naive NSCLC (all received combination therapy), and 67 had anti-PD-1/PD-L1-refractory NSCLC (monotherapy, 34; combination therapy, 33). In patients with anti-PD-1/PD-L1-naive NSCLC: 85% had TRAEs-the most common were pruritus (38%) and hypoalbuminemia (31%); confirmed ORR was 26%, with responses occurring in both PD-L1-positive and PD-L1-negative tumors. In patients with anti-PD-1/PD-L1-refractory NSCLC: 56% receiving monotherapy and 70% receiving combination therapy had TRAEs-the most common were rash and fatigue (21% each) with monotherapy and pruritus (36%) and fatigue (24%) with combination therapy; confirmed ORR was 3% with monotherapy and 3% with combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Vibostolimab plus pembrolizumab was well tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with advanced solid tumors, including patients with advanced NSCLC.

Patient-reported outcomes from STARTRK-2: a global phase II basket study of entrectinib for ROS1 fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer and NTRK fusion-positive solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly relevant endpoints in clinical trials, contributing to our understanding of risk-benefit profiles, in addition to efficacy and safety data. We investigated the impact of entrectinib on patient-reported symptoms, functioning, and health-related quality of life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: STARTRK-2 is a phase II basket study in patients with locally advanced/metastatic neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase 1/2/3 (NTRK1/2/3) and ROS proto-oncogene 1 (ROS1) fusion-positive solid tumours. PROs (prespecified secondary endpoint) were evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life questionnaire (QLQ-C30), lung cancer module (QLQ-LC13), and colorectal cancer module (QLQ-CR29), and the EuroQoL 5-Dimension 3-Level instruments, completed before cycle 1 day 1 and each subsequent 4-week cycle of entrectinib dosing, and the end of treatment. Adverse events and treatment-related symptoms were assessed in the safety analysis (SA)-PRO population. Tumour-related symptoms, functioning, and global health status were assessed in the efficacy analysis (EA)-PRO population. Data cut-offs: 31 October 2018 NTRK cohort; 01 May 2019 ROS1 cohort. RESULTS: SA-PRO populations comprised patients with NTRK fusion-positive solid tumours (N = 88) or ROS1 fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (N = 180) who received one or more doses of entrectinib, completed PRO questionnaires on cycle 1 day 1 and answered one or more questions on-study. EA-PRO populations (N = 71) and (N = 145), respectively, comprised SA-PRO patients with measurable baseline disease. Moderate-to-high baseline global health status scores were maintained in EA-PRO populations during treatment. Role and physical functioning scores were moderate-to-high at baseline, with trends towards clinical improvement during treatment. Both cohorts reported low-to-moderate symptom burden at baseline, which was maintained or trended towards clinically meaningful improvement. Symptoms commonly associated with cancer treatment (e.g. nausea, fatigue) remained stable or improved during treatment. All SA-PRO patients experienced one or more adverse events, most frequently constipation or diarrhoea. CONCLUSIONS: PRO findings were consistent with the favourable safety profile of entrectinib, and further reinforce the positive benefit-risk profile of this treatment, indicating minimal overall treatment burden.

Safety and efficacy of quavonlimab, a novel anti-CTLA-4 antibody (MK-1308), in combination with pembrolizumab in first-line advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Quavonlimab (MK-1308), a novel anti-CTLA-4 antibody, in combination with pembrolizumab was investigated in a phase I study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Dose-escalation (DE) phase: patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors received an initial flat dose of quavonlimab as monotherapy [25 mg (cohort 1), 75 mg (cohort 2), or 200 mg (cohort 3)] followed by four treatments of the same quavonlimab dose plus pembrolizumab every 3 weeks (Q3W). Dose-confirmation phase (DC): patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received first-line quavonlimab [25 mg Q3W (arm A), 25 mg Q6W (arm B), 75 mg Q6W (arm C), or 75 mg Q3W (arm E)] plus pembrolizumab. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability and establishment of the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of quavonlimab when used with pembrolizumab. Objective response rate (ORR) was a secondary endpoint. Efficacy based on PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and changes in circulating CD4+/CD8+ cells were exploratory endpoints. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were enrolled in DE [n = 14 (cohort 1); n = 17 (cohort 2); n = 8 (cohort 3)] and 134 in DC [n = 40 (arm A); n = 40 (arm B); n = 40 (arm C); n = 14 (arm E)]. Maximum-tolerated dose was not reached. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events (AEs; graded according to NCI CTCAE v4.03) occurred in 0%, 23.5%, and 75.0% of patients in DE cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively, and 35.0%, 30.0%, 35.0%, and 57.1% of patients in DC arms A, B, C, and E, respectively. Efficacy was observed at all dose levels/schedules in patients with NSCLC. ORRs were 40.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 24.9-56.7; arm A], 37.5% (95% CI, 22.7-54.2; arm B), 27.5% (95% CI, 14.6-43.9; arm C), and 35.7% (95% CI, 12.8-64.9; arm E). PD-L1 expression and total number of circulating CD4+ cells correlated with ORR. CONCLUSIONS: Quavonlimab 25 mg Q6W plus pembrolizumab demonstrated similar efficacy and a better safety profile among all quavonlimab doses/schedules evaluated; this regimen was the chosen RP2D.

Osimertinib versus platinum-pemetrexed for patients with EGFR T790M advanced NSCLC and progression on a prior EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor: AURA3 overall survival analysis.

BACKGROUND: In AURA3 (NCT02151981), osimertinib, a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), significantly prolonged progression-free survival and improved response in patients with EGFR T790M advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and progression on prior EGFR-TKI treatment. We report the final AURA3 overall survival (OS) analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients were randomized 2 : 1 to osimertinib (80 mg orally, once daily) or pemetrexed plus carboplatin/cisplatin (platinum-pemetrexed) intravenously, every 3 weeks (≤6 cycles). Patients could crossover to osimertinib on progression confirmed by blinded independent central review. OS and safety were secondary end points. RESULTS: A total of 279 patients were randomly assigned to receive osimertinib and 140 to platinum-pemetrexed (136 received treatment). At data cut-off (DCO; 15 March 2019), 188 patients (67%) receiving osimertinib versus 93 (66%) receiving platinum-pemetrexed had died. The hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-1.12; P = 0.277]; the median OS was 26.8 months (95% CI 23.5-31.5) versus 22.5 months (95% CI 20.2-28.8) for osimertinib and platinum-pemetrexed, respectively. The estimated 24- and 36-month survival was 55% versus 43% and 37% versus 30%, respectively. After crossover adjustment, there was an HR of 0.54 (95% CI 0.18-1.6). Time to first subsequent therapy or death showed a clinically meaningful advantage toward osimertinib (HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.16-0.28; P < 0.001). At DCO, 99/136 (73%) patients in the platinum-pemetrexed arm had crossed over to osimertinib, 66/99 (67%) of whom had died. The most common adverse events possibly related to study treatment were diarrhea (32%; grade ≥3, 1%) and rash (grouped term; 32%; grade ≥3, <1%) in the osimertinib arm, versus nausea (47%; grade ≥3, 3%) in the platinum-pemetrexed arm. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T790M advanced NSCLC, no statistically significant benefit in OS was observed for osimertinib versus platinum-pemetrexed, which possibly reflects the high crossover rate of patients from platinum-pemetrexed to osimertinib. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02151981; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02151981.

A phase II, multicenter, two cohort study of 160 mg osimertinib in EGFR T790M-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients with brain metastases or leptomeningeal disease who progressed on prior EGFR TKI therapy.

BACKGROUND: Up to 40% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations treated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) present with disease progression in the central nervous system (CNS), either as brain metastases (BM) or leptomeningeal metastases (LM). Osimertinib (80 mg), a third-generation, irreversible, oral EGFR TKI, has shown efficacy in active CNS metastases. However, efficacy of osimertinib 160 mg in BM or LM is unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, single-arm, two cohort study evaluated the efficacy of osimertinib 160 mg in T790M-positive BM or LM NSCLC patients who progressed on prior EGFR TKI (NCT03257124) treatment. The primary end points were objective response rate (ORR) (H1 = 30%) for the BM cohort and overall survival (OS) (H1 = 5 months) for the LM cohort. RESULTS: The median follow-up duration was 10.1 months and 9.6 months for the BM and LM cohorts, respectively. In the BM cohort, intracranial ORR and disease control rate were 55.0% and 77.5%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.0-16.6]; the median OS was 16.9 months [95% CI 7.9-not reached (NR)]. In the LM cohort, intracranial disease control rate was 92.5% and complete response rate was 12.5%. The median OS was 13.3 months (95% CI 9.1-NR); the median PFS was 8.0 months (95% CI 7.2-NR). Subgroup analyses based on previous exposure to T790M-targeting agents, including osimertinib 80 mg or other third-generation EGFR TKIs, showed no difference in PFS in both the BM (n = 18, P = 0.39) and LM (n = 17, P = 0.85) cohorts. Previous radiotherapy favored PFS in the BM cohort (hazard ratio 0.42, P = 0.04). The most common adverse events were decreased appetite, diarrhea, and skin rash; however, most were grade 1-2. CONCLUSION: Thus, osimertinib 160 mg demonstrated promising ORR and survival benefit with a tolerable safety profile in EGFR T790M-positive NSCLC patients with CNS metastasis who progressed on prior EGFR TKIs.

HLA-corrected tumor mutation burden and homologous recombination deficiency for the prediction of response to PD-(L)1 blockade in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been shown to be beneficial for some patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the underlying mechanisms mediating the limited response to ICIs remain unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out whole-exome sequencing on 198 advanced NSCLC tumors that had been sampled before anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapy. Detailed clinical characteristics were collected on these patients. We designed a new method to estimate human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-corrected tumor mutation burden (TMB), a modification which considers the loss of heterozygosity of HLA from conventional TMB. We carried out external validation of our findings utilizing 89 NSCLC samples and 110 melanoma samples from two independent cohorts of immunotherapy-treated patients. RESULTS: Homology-dependent recombination deficiency was identified in 37 patients (18.7%) and was associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS; P = 0.049). Using the HLA-corrected TMB, non-responders to ICIs were identified, despite having a high TMB (top 25%). Ten patients (21.3% of the high TMB group) were reclassified from the high TMB group into the low TMB group. The objective response rate (ORR), PFS, and overall survival (OS) were all lower in these patients compared with those of the high TMB group (ORR: 20% versus 59%, P = 0.0363; PFS: hazard ratio = 2.91, P = 0.007; OS: hazard ratio = 3.43, P = 0.004). Multivariate analyses showed that high HLA-corrected TMB was associated with a significant survival advantage (hazard ratio = 0.44, P = 0.015), whereas high conventional TMB was not associated with a survival advantage (hazard ratio = 0.63, P = 0.118). Applying this approach to the independent cohorts of 89 NSCLC patients and 110 melanoma patients, TMB-based survival prediction was significantly improved. CONCLUSION: HLA-corrected TMB can reconcile the observed disparity in relationships between TMB and ICI responses, and is of predictive and prognostic value for ICI therapies.

TATTON: a multi-arm, phase Ib trial of osimertinib combined with selumetinib, savolitinib, or durvalumab in EGFR-mutant lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib is a potent, third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). The multi-arm phase Ib TATTON study (NCT02143466) was designed to assess the safety and tolerability of osimertinib in combination with other targeted therapies: selumetinib (MEK1/2 inhibitor), savolitinib (MET-TKI), or durvalumab [anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) monoclonal antibody]. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer and disease progression on a prior EGFR-TKI were enrolled and allocated to dose-escalating cohorts combining osimertinib 80 mg orally (p.o.) once a day with selumetinib (25-75 mg p.o. twice a day; continuous or intermittent), savolitinib (600-800 mg p.o. once a day), or durvalumab (3-10 mg/kg intravenous every 2 weeks). RESULTS: At data cut-off (28 February 2018), 77 patients were enrolled and received osimertinib plus selumetinib (n = 36), savolitinib (n = 18), or durvalumab (n = 23). Most common adverse events (any grade), occurring in ≥20% of patients across dose groups, were: selumetinib arm-diarrhea (75%), rash (58%), nausea (47%); savolitinib arm-nausea (67%), rash (56%), vomiting (50%); durvalumab arm-rash (48%), vomiting (43%), diarrhea (39%). Dose-limiting toxicities were reported in the selumetinib 25 mg (n = 1), 50 mg (n = 1), and 75 mg (n = 4) continuous-dose groups, savolitinib 600 mg (n = 1) and 800 mg dose groups (n = 2), and durvalumab 10 mg/kg (n = 1) dose group. The objective response rate was 42% (95% confidence interval 26% to 59%), 44% (22% to 69%), and 43% (23% to 66%) in the selumetinib, savolitinib, and durvalumab arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate the feasibility of combining osimertinib 80 mg with selumetinib or savolitinib at identified tolerable, active doses. A combination of osimertinib with durvalumab was not feasible due to increased reporting of interstitial lung disease. Osimertinib-based combination therapies represent a compelling approach now being further investigated. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: NCT02143466.

Afatinib versus methotrexate as second-line treatment in Asian patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck progressing on or after platinum-based therapy (LUX-Head & Neck 3): an open-label, randomised phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options are limited for patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) following progression after first-line platinum-based therapy, particularly in Asian countries. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase III trial, we enrolled Asian patients aged ≥18 years, with histologically or cytologically confirmed recurrent/metastatic HNSCC following first-line platinum-based therapy who were not amenable for salvage surgery or radiotherapy, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0/1. Patients were randomised (2 : 1) to receive oral afatinib (40 mg/day) or intravenous methotrexate (40 mg/m2/week), stratified by ECOG performance status and prior EGFR-targeted antibody therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent central review committee blinded to treatment allocation. RESULTS: A total of 340 patients were randomised (228 afatinib; 112 methotrexate). After a median follow-up of 6.4 months, afatinib significantly decreased the risk of progression/death by 37% versus methotrexate (hazard ratio 0.63; 95% confidence interval 0.48-0.82; P = 0.0005; median 2.9 versus 2.6 months; landmark analysis at 12 and 24 weeks, 58% versus 41%, 21% versus 9%). Improved PFS was complemented by quality of life benefits. Objective response rate was 28% with afatinib and 13% with methotrexate. There was no significant difference in overall survival. The most common grade ≥3 drug-related adverse events were rash/acne (4% with afatinib versus 0% with methotrexate), diarrhoea (4% versus 0%), fatigue (1% versus 5%), anaemia (<1% versus 5%) and leukopenia (0% versus 5%). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the phase III LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial, afatinib significantly improved PFS versus methotrexate, with a manageable safety profile. These results demonstrate the efficacy and feasibility of afatinib as a second-line treatment option for certain patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01856478.

Use of archival versus newly collected tumor samples for assessing PD-L1 expression and overall survival: an updated analysis of KEYNOTE-010 trial.

BACKGROUND: In KEYNOTE-010, pembrolizumab versus docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) in patients with programmed death-1 protein (PD)-L1-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A prespecified exploratory analysis compared outcomes in patients based on PD-L1 expression in archival versus newly collected tumor samples using recently updated survival data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PD-L1 was assessed centrally by immunohistochemistry (22C3 antibody) in archival or newly collected tumor samples. Patients received pembrolizumab 2 or 10 mg/kg Q3W or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 Q3W for 24 months or until progression/intolerable toxicity/other reason. Response was assessed by RECIST v1.1 every 9 weeks, survival every 2 months. Primary end points were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and ≥1%; pembrolizumab doses were pooled in this analysis. RESULTS: At date cut-off of 24 March 2017, median follow-up was 31 months (range 23-41) representing 18 additional months of follow-up from the primary analysis. Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel continued to improve OS in patients with previously treated, PD-L1-expressing advanced NSCLC; hazard ratio (HR) was 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57, 0.77]. Of 1033 patients analyzed, 455(44%) were enrolled based on archival samples and 578 (56%) on newly collected tumor samples. Approximately 40% of archival samples and 45% of newly collected tumor samples were PD-L1 TPS ≥50%. For TPS ≥50%, the OS HRs were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.91) and 0.40 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.56) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In patients with TPS ≥1%, OS HRs were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.93) and 0.59 (95% CI: 0.48, 0.73) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In TPS ≥50%, PFS HRs were similar across archival [0.63 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.89)] and newly collected samples [0.53 (95% CI: 0.38, 0.72)]. In patients with TPS ≥1%, PFS HRs were similar across archival [0.82 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.02)] and newly collected samples [0.83 (95% CI: 0.68, 1.02)]. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab continued to improve OS over docetaxel in intention to treat population and in subsets of patients with newly collected and archival samples. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01905657.

Detection of bovine coronavirus in nasal swab of non-captive wild water deer, Korea.

Bovine coronavirus (BCoV) is a causative agent of respiratory and enteric diseases in cattle and calves. BCoV infection was also evident in captive wild ruminants. Recently, water deer are recognized as the most common wildlife to approach farmhouses and livestock barns in Korea. Therefore, we investigated 77 nasal swab samples from non-captive wild water deer (Hydropotes inermis) between November 2016 and September 2017 and identified three samples positive for coronavirus, indicating potential for respiratory shedding. The full genomic sequences of the water deer coronavirus were closely related to BCoV (>98%). Therefore, effective biosecurity system in bovine farms would be necessary to prevent contact between farm ruminants and free-ranging wild water deer.

CNS response to osimertinib in patients with T790M-positive advanced NSCLC: pooled data from two phase II trials.

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) metastases are common in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Osimertinib has shown systemic efficacy in patients with CNS metastases, and early clinical evidence shows efficacy in the CNS. To evaluate osimertinib activity further, we present a pre-specified subgroup analysis of CNS response using pooled data from two phase II studies: AURA extension (NCT01802632) and AURA2 (NCT02094261). Patients and methods: Patients with T790M-positive advanced NSCLC, who had progressed following prior epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment, received osimertinib 80 mg od (n = 411). Patients with stable, asymptomatic CNS metastases were eligible for enrolment; prior CNS treatment was allowed. Patients with ≥1 measurable CNS lesion (per RECIST 1.1) on baseline brain scan by blinded independent central neuroradiology review (BICR) were included in the evaluable for CNS response set (cEFR). The primary outcome for this CNS analysis was CNS objective response rate (ORR) by BICR; secondary outcomes included CNS duration of response, disease control rate (DCR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Of 128 patients with CNS metastases on baseline brain scans, 50 were included in the cEFR. Confirmed CNS ORR and DCR were 54% [27/50; 95% confidence interval (CI) 39-68] and 92% (46/50; 95% CI 81-98), respectively. CNS response was observed regardless of prior radiotherapy to the brain. Median CNS duration of response (22% maturity) was not reached (range, 1-15 months); at 9 months, 75% (95% CI 53-88) of patients were estimated to remain in response. Median follow-up for CNS PFS was 11 months; median CNS PFS was not reached (95% CI, 7, not calculable). The safety profile observed in the cEFR was consistent with the overall patient population. Conclusions: Osimertinib demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy against CNS metastases, with a high DCR, encouraging ORR, and safety profile consistent with that reported previously. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01802632; NCT02094261.

Co-clinical trials demonstrate predictive biomarkers for dovitinib, an FGFR inhibitor, in lung squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We conducted co-clinical trials in patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models to identify predictive biomarkers for the multikinase inhibitor dovitinib in lung squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC). METHODS: The PDX01-02 were established from LSCC patients enrolled in the phase II trial of dovitinib (NCT01861197) and PDX03-05 were established from LSCC patients receiving surgery. These five PDX tumors were subjected to in vivo test of dovitinib efficacy, whole exome sequencing and gene expression profiling. RESULTS: The PDX tumors recapitulate histopathological properties and maintain genomic characteristics of originating tumors. Concordant with clinical outcomes of the trial enrolled-LSCC patients, dovitinib produced substantial tumor regression in PDX-01 and PDX-05, whereas it resulted in tumor progression in PDX-02. PDX-03 and -04 also displayed poor antitumor efficacy to dovitinib. Mutational and genome-wide copy number profiles revealed no correlation between genomic alterations of FGFR1-3 and sensitivity to dovitinib. Of note, gene expression profiles revealed differentially expressed genes including FGF3 and FGF19 between PDX-01 and 05 and PDX-02-04. Pathway analysis identified two FGFR signaling-related gene sets, FGFR ligand binding/activation and SHC-mediated cascade pathway were substantially up-regulated in PDX-01 and 05, compared with PDX-02-04. The comparison of gene expression profiles between dovitinib-sensitive versus -resistant lung cancer cell lines in the Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia database also found that transcriptional activation of 18 key signaling components in FGFR pathways can predict the sensitivity to dovitinib both in cell lines and PDX tumors. These results highlight FGFR pathway activation as a key molecular determinant for sensitivity to dovitinib. CONCLUSIONS: FGFR gene expression signatures are predictors for the response to dovitinib in LSCC.