A phase 2 single-arm trial of high-dose precision targeted radiotherapy added to immunotherapy for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

HYPOTHESIS: For metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the addition of radiotherapy (RT) to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy could have synergistic anti-cancer effects and address the most threatening tumors. We posited that the addition of high-dose RT to ICI could prolong progression-free survival (PFS). METHODS: In this single arm phase 2 trial, 45 patients with metastatic NSCLC who had received an anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L-1 ICI for 4+ weeks were enrolled from July 2017-May 2021. Patients received high-dose RT to 1-4 extracranial tumors and continued ICI until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was PFS at 24 weeks, comparing to a historical control rate of 35%. RESULTS: Of 44 evaluable patients, median age was 71, 75% had adenocarcinoma, 64% had polymetastatic disease, and 85% of cancers with known PD-L1 percentage were PD-L1 positive. Median number of treated tumors was two and most common dose was 40 Gy in 10 fractions (41/81 tumors). Median follow-up was 23.3 months. The trial met the primary outcome: 24-week PFS was 60% (95% CI 44-75%), higher than the historical control rate (p<0.001). Median PFS was 6.9 months (95% CI 4.0-13.5 mo) and median OS was 27.4 months (95% CI 20.4-not reached). Several patients with pre-study disease progression on ICI treatment achieved durable responses to study treatment, up to 53 months. Local recurrence rate was low: cumulative incidence of 5% at one, two, and three years. Two dose-limiting toxicities were observed (5%), including one grade 5 pneumonitis. CONCLUSIONS: The strategy improved 24-week PFS compared to historical controls receiving ICI alone. The excellent local control supports the efficacy of high-dose RT in addressing macroscopic disease.

Cabozantinib Plus Atezolizumab or Cabozantinib Alone in Patients With Advanced NSCLC Previously Treated With an Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor: Results From the Phase 1b COSMIC-021 Study.

Introduction: We evaluated efficacy and safety of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab or cabozantinib alone in advanced NSCLC previously treated with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). Methods: COSMIC-021 (NCT03170960) is a phase 1b, multicenter study in advanced solid tumors. This analysis included patients with stage IV non-squamous NSCLC without actionable genomic aberrations in EGFR, ALK, ROS1, or BRAF-V600E who progressed on one prior ICI and less than or equal to two prior lines of systemic anticancer therapy. Patients received cabozantinib 40 mg orally/day plus atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenously every three weeks (combination cohort) or cabozantinib 60 mg orally/day (single-agent cabozantinib cohort). Primary end point of the combination cohort was objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 by investigator. Outcomes in the single-agent cabozantinib cohort were exploratory. Results: Eighty-one patients assigned to combination therapy and 31 assigned to single-agent cabozantinib received greater than or equal to one dose of study treatment. Median (range) follow-up was 26.1 months (12.1-44.2) and 22.4 months (1.5-29.0), respectively. Objective response rate was 20% (95% confidence interval: 11.7%-30.1%) in combination cohort and 6% (95% confidence interval: 0.8%-21.4%) in single-agent cabozantinib cohort. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 86% of patients in the combination cohort and 90% in the single-agent cabozantinib cohort; grade 3/4 TRAEs were 44% and 48%, respectively. There were two grade 5 TRAEs: pneumonitis (n = 1, combination) and gastric ulcer hemorrhage (n = 1, single-agent). Neither PD-L1 expression in tumor cells nor tumor mutation burden correlated with outcomes. Conclusions: Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab demonstrated modest clinical activity and manageable toxicity in advanced NSCLC after progression on prior ICI.

Smoking and the Risk of Second Primary Lung Cancer Among Breast Cancer Survivors from the Population-Based UK Biobank Study.

OBJECTIVE: Long-term breast cancer (BC) survivors are known to develop second malignancies, with second primary lung cancer (SPLC) one common type. Smoking was identified as a main risk factor for SPLC among BC survivors. These findings were limited to the U.S. and focused on smoking status, not incorporating cumulative smoking exposures (eg, pack-years). We examine SPLC incidence and evaluate the associations between SPLC risk and cumulative cigarette smoking exposures and other potential factors among BC survivors in a prospective European cohort. METHODS: Of 502,505 participants enrolled in the UK Biobank in 2006 to 2010, we identified 8429 patients diagnosed with BC between 2006 and 2016 and followed for second malignancies through 2016. Smoking information was collected at enrollment, and treatment data were collected using electronic health records. Multivariable cause-specific Cox regression (CSC) evaluated the association between each factor and SPLC risk. RESULTS: Of 8429 BC patients, 40 (0.47%) developed SPLC over 45,376 person-years. The 10-year cumulative SPLC incidence was 0.48% (95% CI = 0.33%-0.62%). The CSC analysis confirmed the association between SPLC and ever-smoking status (adjusted hazard-ratio (aHR) = 3.46 (P < .001). The analysis showed a 24% increment in SPLC risk per 10 smoking pack-years among BC survivors (aHR = 1.24 per-10 pack-years, P = .01). The associations between SPLC and other variables remained statistically insignificant. We applied the USPSTF lung cancer screening eligibility criteria and found that 80% of the 40 BC survivors who developed SPLC would have been ineligible for lung cancer screening. CONCLUSION: In a large, European cohort, cumulative smoking exposure is significantly associated with SPLC risk among BC survivors.

Consolidation ALK Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors Versus Durvalumab or Observation After Chemoradiation in Unresectable Stage III ALK-Positive NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC typically have poor response to immunotherapy; the benefit of consolidation durvalumab in patients with unresectable stage III ALK-positive NSCLC remains unclear. Herein, we compare the efficacy and safety of consolidation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) versus durvalumab or observation after concurrent chemoradiation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using a multicenter study of 17 institutions globally. Patients with unresectable stage III ALK-positive NSCLC treated between 2015 and 2022 were included. Patients received ALK TKI, durvalumab, or observation after concurrent chemoradiation. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were classified by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Outcomes were assessed by multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 67 patients were included, of whom 39 (58%) were female. Median age was 57 (interquartile range: 49-67) years. Furthermore, 15 received consolidation ALK TKI, 30 received durvalumab, and 22 underwent observation. Baseline characteristics were similar across the three groups other than differences in race. After adjusting for stage, age, and nodal status, median rwPFS was significantly longer for ALK TKI (rwPFS not reached, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 22.7- not reached) versus durvalumab (11.3 mo, 95% CI: 8.9-18.5, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.026-0.5, p-adjusted [p-adj] = 0.006) or observation (7.2 mo, 95% CI: 3.4-10.6, HR = 0.04, 95% CI: 0.009-0.2, p-adj < 0.0001). Durvalumab significantly improved median rwPFS compared with observation (HR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.19-0.71, p-adj = 0.002). Median OS in the ALK TKI and durvalumab cohorts was significantly improved compared with patients on observation (ALK TKI-observation: p = 0.04; durvalumab-observation: p = 0.03). TrAE of any grade occurred in eight (53%) and 11 (37%) patients treated with ALK TKI and durvalumab, respectively. Grade greater than or equal to three trAEs occurred in 27% (n = 4) of patients treated with ALK TKI and 6.7% of patients treated with durvalumab. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ALK-positive NSCLC experience significantly improved rwPFS when treated with consolidation ALK TKI therapy, surpassing outcomes found with either durvalumab or observation. Although both ALK TKI therapy and durvalumab offer an extension in OS compared with observation alone, it seems that ALK TKI therapy is the superior choice, underscoring its pivotal role in enhancing patient survival.

Racial and ethnic differences in second primary lung cancer risk among lung cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Recent therapeutic advances have improved survival among lung cancer (LC) patients, who are now at high risk of second primary lung cancer (SPLC). Hispanics comprise the largest minority in the United States, who have shown a lower LC incidence and mortality than other races, and yet their SPLC risk is poorly understood. We quantified the SPLC incidence patterns among Hispanics vs other races. METHODS: We used data from the Multiethnic Cohort, a population-based cohort of 5 races (African American, Japanese American, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian, and White), recruited between 1993 and 1996 and followed through 2017. We identified patients diagnosed with initial primary lung cancer (IPLC) and SPLC via linkage to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. We estimated the 10-year cumulative incidence of IPLC (in the entire cohort) and SPLC (among IPLC patients). A standardized incidence ratio (SIR) was calculated as the ratio of SPLC-to-IPLC incidence by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: Among 202 692 participants, 6788 (3.3%) developed IPLC over 3 871  417 person-years. The 10-year cumulative IPLC incidence was lower among Hispanics (0.80%, 0.72 to 0.88) vs Whites (1.67%, 1.56 to 1.78) or Blacks (2.44%, 2.28 to 2.60). However, the 10-year SPLC incidence following IPLC was higher among Hispanics (3.11%, 1.62 to 4.61) vs Whites (2.80%, 1.94 to 3.66) or Blacks (2.29%, 1.48 to 3.10), resulting in a significantly higher SIR for Hispanics (SIR = 8.27, 5.05 to 12.78) vs Whites (SIR = 5.60, 4.11 to 7.45) or Blacks (SIR = 3.48, 2.42 to 4.84; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Hispanics have a higher SPLC incidence following IPLC than other races, which may be potentially due to better survival after IPLC and extended duration for SPLC development. Continuing surveillance is warranted to reduce racial disparities among LC survivors.

Molecular Characteristics and Pretreatment Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as Predictors of Durable Clinical Benefit from Immune Checkpoint Inhibition in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prior research in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has shown that tumors with specific driver mutations may be less likely to respond to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). In this analysis, we evaluated the characteristics of patients with durable clinical benefit (DCB) to ICI compared to those with no durable clinical benefit (NDB), with emphasis on the role of molecular alterations in EGFR, ALK, and ROS1 and pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR). METHODS: We retrospectively collected clinical characteristics and outcomes for patients who initiated ICI monotherapy for advanced NSCLC at Stanford University between April 2015 and May 2018. Patients were classified as having DCB if time on ICI therapy was greater than or equal to 180 days, or NDB if less than 180 days. Outcomes included best radiographic benefit while on ICI and survival from time of ICI initiation. RESULTS: Of 123 patients treated with ICI for NSCLC, 28 patients had DCB (23%), while 95 had NDB (77%). Median overall survival from initiation of ICI in the 33 patients with molecular alterations in EGFR (n = 31), ALK, or ROS1 and NLR of 5.9 or higher was 2.0 months, compared to 8.1 months in patients with these genomic alterations and NLR less than 5.9. Median overall survival in patients without alterations in EGFR, ALK, or ROS1 and NLR of 5.9 or higher was 4.3 months, compared to 12.1 months in patients with NLR less than 5.9 (P = .023). CONCLUSIONS: Elevation in pretreatment NLR was associated with significantly lower overall median survival from initiation of ICI, particularly when in combination with NSCLC with alterations in EGFR, ALK, or ROS1. This finding could influence clinical practice as NLR is readily available through routine blood testing.

Efficacy and safety of sintilimab in combination with chemotherapy for recurrent extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a real-world retrospective study.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) no longer are approved for second-line or later treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC), and have not been studied in combination with chemotherapy. Exploring the efficacy and safety of second-line or later immunotherapy for ES-SCLC is an urgent clinical question that needs to be addressed, and combination therapies are an important research direction. This study intended to investigate the efficacy and safety of the sintilimab in combination with chemotherapy as a second-line and beyond treatment option for ES-SCLC. Methods: Medical records of patients who received treatment with sintilimab in combination with chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone as a second-line or beyond therapy were retrospectively analyzed. The study evaluated efficacy and safety. Indicators of efficacy included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Safety indicators included adverse events (AEs). Results: This cohort comprised of 46 patients: 24 in the sintilimab combination chemotherapy group and 22 in the chemotherapy group. Chemotherapy received by both groups was either albumin-bound paclitaxel or irinotecan. Compared with the chemotherapy group, the sintilimab combination chemotherapy group had higher ORR and DCR (ORR: 37.5% vs. 9.1%, P=0.04; DCR: 75.0% vs. 40.9%, P=0.04), and significantly prolonged PFS and OS [median PFS (mPFS): 5.07 vs. 2.45 months, P=0.006; median OS (mOS): 14.43 vs. 10.34 months, P=0.009]. Also, there was no significant increase in the incidence of AEs in the sintilimab combination chemotherapy group, which was well tolerated by patients. Conclusions: Sintilimab in combination with chemotherapy is superior to single-agent chemotherapeutic treatment as second-line or later therapy in ES-SCLC patients who have not received prior immunotherapy. These results need to be confirmed in future clinical trials.

A process to reanalyze clinical DNA sequencing data for biomarker matching in the Lung-MAP Master Protocol.

For cancer clinical trials that require central confirmation of tumor genomic profiling, exhaustion of tissue from standard-of-care testing may prevent enrollment. For Lung-MAP, a master protocol that requires results from a defined centralized clinical trial assay to assign patients to a therapeutic substudy, we developed a process to repurpose existing commercial vendor raw genomic data for eligibility: genomic data reanalysis (GDR). Molecular results for substudy assignment were successfully generated for 369 of the first 374 patients (98.7%) using GDR for Lung-MAP, with a median time from request to result of 9 days. During the same period, 691 of 791 (87.4%) tissue samples received successfully yielded results, in a median of 14 days beyond sample acquisition. GDR is a scalable bioinformatic pipeline that expedites reanalysis of existing data for clinical trials in which validated integral biomarker testing is required for participation.

CONTACT-01: A Randomized Phase III Trial of Atezolizumab + Cabozantinib Versus Docetaxel for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After a Checkpoint Inhibitor and Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Although checkpoint inhibitors have improved first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a therapeutic need remains for patients whose disease does not respond or who experience disease progression after anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy. CONTACT-01 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04471428) evaluated atezolizumab plus cabozantinib versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic NSCLC who developed disease progression after concurrent or sequential treatment with anti-PD-L1/PD-1 and platinum-containing chemotherapy. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, phase III trial randomly assigned patients 1:1 to atezolizumab 1,200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks (q3w) plus cabozantinib 40 mg orally once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One hundred eighty-six patients were assigned atezolizumab plus cabozantinib, and 180 docetaxel. Minimum OS follow-up was 10.9 months. Median OS was 10.7 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 12.3) with atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 10.5 months (95% CI, 8.6 to 13.0) with docetaxel (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.16]; P = .3668). Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 5.6) and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.1 to 4.4), respectively (stratified HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92]). Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71 (38.4%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 73 (39.5%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 5 AEs occurred in 14 (7.6%) and 10 (6.0%) patients in the atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and docetaxel arms, respectively (treatment-related in four [2.2%] and one [0.6%], respectively). CONCLUSION: Atezolizumab plus cabozantinib after disease progression following anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy and platinum-containing chemotherapy for metastatic NSCLC did not improve OS compared with docetaxel. Safety was consistent with known profiles of these agents.

Systematic analysis of off-label and off-guideline cancer therapy usage in a real-world cohort of 165,912 US patients.

Patients with cancer may be given treatments that are not officially approved (off-label) or recommended by guidelines (off-guideline). Here we present a data science framework to systematically characterize off-label and off-guideline usages using real-world data from de-identified electronic health records (EHR). We analyze treatment patterns in 165,912 US patients with 14 common cancer types. We find that 18.6% and 4.4% of patients have received at least one line of off-label and off-guideline cancer drugs, respectively. Patients with worse performance status, in later lines, or treated at academic hospitals are significantly more likely to receive off-label and off-guideline drugs. To quantify how predictable off-guideline usage is, we developed machine learning models to predict which drug a patient is likely to receive based on their clinical characteristics and previous treatments. Finally, we demonstrate that our systematic analyses generate hypotheses about patients' response to treatments.

HER2-Mutant Advanced and/or Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A US Electronic Health Records Database Analysis of Clinical Characteristics, Treatment Practice Patterns, and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Real-world data for advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with mutations in human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) are scarce. We aimed to assess treatment patterns and outcomes among patients with HER2-mutant advanced/metastatic NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective nationwide electronic health record study evaluated patient characteristics, treatment patterns, treatment duration, and overall survival for adults with HER2-mutant advanced/metastatic NSCLC without epidermal growth factor receptor mutation. RESULTS: Of 55 included patients, median (quartile 1 [Q1]-quartile 3 [Q3]) age was 63.0 (58.0-72.0) years, 42 (76%) were women, and 39 (71%) were current/former smokers. In first-line therapy, 14 regimens were used for median (Q1-Q3) duration of 3.1 (2.4-6.2) months, with most patients (n = 39, 71%) receiving platinum-based chemotherapy alone or in combination with other agents. Median (95% CI) overall survival from first-line treatment initiation was 19.0 (12.2-not estimable) months, with no significant association with age, sex, or smoking status. Thirty-five (64%) patients received second-line therapy for median (Q1-Q3) duration of 3.3 (2.0-5.2) months. Fourteen second-line regimens were used; most commonly immunotherapy alone or in combination with other agents (n = 16, 46%). Sixteen (46%) patients received third-line therapy for median (Q1-Q3) duration of 1.9 (1.3-2.7) months. Nine third-line regimens were used, with 7 (44%) patients receiving HER2-directed agents. CONCLUSION: First- and second-line treatments for HER2-mutant NSCLC varied widely and treatment duration was short. The approval of trastuzumab deruxtecan for NSCLC supports wider HER2 testing to identify eligible patients for HER2-directed therapy.

THE IMPACT OF ROUTINE CARDIAC TROPONIN I-BASED CARDIOTOXICITY SCREENING ON CLINICAL OUTCOMES IN PATIENTS ON CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY.

Purpose: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) used as cancer therapy have been associated with a range of cardiac immune-related adverse events (irAEs), including fulminant myocarditis with a high case fatality rate. Early detection through cardiotoxicity screening by biomarker monitoring can lead to prompt intervention and improved patient outcomes. In this study, we investigate the association between cardiotoxicity screening with routine serial troponin I monitoring in asymptomatic patients receiving ICI, cardiovascular adverse event (CV AE) detection, and overall survival (OS). Methods: We instituted a standardized troponin I screening protocol at baseline and with each ICI dose (every 2-4 weeks) in all patients receiving ICI at our center starting Jan 2019. We subsequently collected data in 825 patients receiving ICI at our institution from January 2018 to October 2021. Of these patients, 428 underwent cardiotoxicity screening with serial troponin I monitoring during ICI administration (Jan 2019-Oct 2021) and 397 patients were unmonitored (Jan 2018-Dec 2018). We followed patients for nine months following their first dose of ICI and compared outcomes of CV AEs and OS between monitored and unmonitored patients. Additionally, we investigated rates of CV AEs, all-cause mortality, and oncologic time-to-treatment failure (TTF) between patients with an elevated troponin I value during the monitoring period versus patients without elevated troponin I. Results: We found a lower rate of severe (grades 4-5) CV AEs, resulting in critical illness or death, in patients who underwent troponin monitoring (0.5%) compared to patients who did not undergo monitoring (1.8%), (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02-0.79, p = 0.04). There was no difference in overall CV AEs (grades 3-5) or OS between monitored and unmonitored patients. In the entire cohort, patients with at least one elevated troponin I during the follow up period, during routine monitoring or unmonitored, had a higher risk of overall CV AEs (HR 10.96, 95% CI 4.65-25.85, p<0.001) as well as overall mortality (HR 2.67, 95% CI 1.69 - 4.10, p<0.001) compared to those without elevated troponin. Oncologic time-to-treatment failure (TTF) was not significantly different in a sub-cohort of monitored vs. unmonitored patients. Conclusions: Patients undergoing cardiotoxicity screening with troponin I monitoring during ICI therapy had a lower rate of severe (grade 4-5) CV AEs compared patients who were not screened. Troponin I elevation in screened and unscreened patients was significantly associated with increased CV AEs as well as increased mortality. Troponin I monitoring did not impact oncologic time-to-treatment-failure in a sub-cohort analysis of patients treated with ICI. These results provide preliminary evidence for clinical utility of cardiotoxicity screening with troponin I monitoring in patients receiving ICI therapy.

Consolidation Osimertinib Versus Durvalumab Versus Observation After Concurrent Chemoradiation in Unresectable EGFR-Mutant NSCLC: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Durvalumab improves survival when used as consolidation therapy after chemoradiation (CRT) in patients with stage III NSCLC. The optimal consolidation therapy for patients with EGFR-mutant (EGFRmut) stage III NSCLC remains unknown. METHODS: In this multi-institutional, international retrospective analysis across 24 institutions, we evaluated outcomes in patients with stage III EGFRmut NSCLC treated with concurrent CRT followed by consolidation therapy with osimertinib, durvalumab, or observation between 2015 and 2022. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS, primary end point) and overall survival (secondary end point). Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) during consolidation treatment were defined using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used. RESULTS: Of 136 patients with stage III EGFRmut NSCLC treated with definitive concurrent CRT, 56 received consolidation durvalumab, 33 received consolidation osimertinib, and 47 was on observation alone. Baseline characteristics were similar across the three cohorts. With a median follow-up of 46 months for the entire cohort, the median duration of treatment was not reached (NR) for osimertinib (interquartile range: NR-NR) and was 5.5 (interquartile range: 2.4-10.8) months with durvalumab. After adjusting for nodal status, stage III A/B/C, and age, patients treated with consolidation osimertinib had significantly longer 24-month rwPFS compared to those treated with durvalumab or in the observation cohorts (osimertinib: 86%, durvalumab: 30%, observation: 27%, p < 0.001 for both comparisons). There was no difference in rwPFS between the durvalumab and the observation cohorts. No significant difference in overall survival across the three cohorts was detected, likely due to the limited follow-up. Any-grade trAE occurred in 52% (2 [6.1%] grade ≥3) and 48% (10 [18%] grade ≥3) of patients treated with osimertinib and durvalumab, respectively. Of 45 patients who progressed on consolidation durvalumab, 37 (82%) subsequently received EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Of these, 14 (38%) patients developed trAEs including five patients with pneumonitis (14%; 2 [5.4%] grade ≥3) and five patients with diarrhea (14%; 1 [2.7%] grade ≥3). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that among patients with stage III unresectable NSCLC with a sensitizing EGFR mutation, consolidation osimertinib was associated with a significantly longer rwPFS compared to durvalumab or observation. No unanticipated safety signals were observed with consolidation osimertinib.

The effect of neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage on smoking status, quit attempts, and receipt of cessation support among adults with cancer: Results from nine ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group trials.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is associated with adverse outcomes among patients diagnosed with cancer. Socioeconomic determinants influence access and utilization of tobacco treatment; little is known about the relationship between neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage (NSD) and tobacco assessment, assistance, and cessation among patients diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: A modified Cancer Patient Tobacco Use Questionnaire (C-TUQ) was administered to patients enrolled in nine ECOG-ACRIN clinical trials. We examined associations of NSD with (1) smoking status, (2) receiving tobacco cessation assessment and support, and (3) cessation behaviors. NSD was classified by tertiles of the Area Deprivation Index. Associations between NSD and tobacco variables were evaluated using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 740 patients completing the C-TUQ were 70% male, 94% White, 3% Hispanic, mean age 58.8 years. Cancer diagnoses included leukemia 263 (36%), lymphoma 141 (19%), prostate 131 (18%), breast 79 (11%), melanoma 69 (9%), myeloma 53 (7%), and head and neck 4 (0.5%). A total of 402 (54%) never smoked, 257 (35%) had formerly smoked, and 81 (11%) were currently smoking. Patients in high disadvantaged neighborhoods were approximately four times more likely to report current smoking (odds ratio [OR], 3.57; 95% CI, 1.69-7.54; p = .0009), and more likely to report being asked about smoking (OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 1.64-10.98; p = .0029), but less likely to report receiving counseling (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.58; p = .0086) versus those in the least disadvantaged neighborhoods. CONCLUSIONS: Greater neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with smoking but less cessation support. Increased cessation support in cancer care is needed, particularly for patients from disadvantaged neighborhoods.

Patient Selection and Outcomes for Hypofractionated Accelerated Radiation and Concurrent Chemotherapy for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: Adoption of hypofractionated accelerated radiation therapy (HART) with concurrent chemotherapy has been limited by toxicity concerns. We aimed to describe outcomes of patients treated with HART and concurrent chemotherapy and to evaluate dosimetry to organs at risk to guide patient selection. MATERIALS/METHODS: We evaluated a retrospective cohort of NSCLC patients treated with concurrent chemotherapy with HART (>2.2 Gy per fraction) or standard fractionated radiation therapy (SFRT; 2-2.2 Gy fractions). Dosimetric parameters to key organs at risk were compared, and toxicity, patterns of recurrence and survival were calculated for the cohorts. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients treated with HART were compared with 100 patients treated with SFRT. Median dose per fraction for the HART cohort was 2.75 Gy (range 2.4-3 Gy). HART patients had significantly lower doses to the lung, heart, and esophagus due to patient selection. The HART group and had rates of grade 2+ pneumonitis (9.4 vs. 19%, P = .16) and grade 2+ esophagitis (20.8 vs. 45%, P < .01) that compared favorably to SFRT. Cumulative incidence of in-field recurrence trended lower in the HART cohort (7.6% vs. 23.1%, P = .058). Among the HART group, 88.7% (47/53) met the newly proposed lung constraints based on the degree of hypofractionation CONCLUSION: In select patients with favorable dosimetry to organs at risk, definitive HART with concurrent chemotherapy achieved excellent local control with low toxicity. These results are being used to inform a prospective study on the safety and efficacy of HART with concurrent chemotherapy for select NSCLC patients.

Risk model-based management for second primary lung cancer among lung cancer survivors through a validated risk prediction model.

BACKGROUND: Recent therapeutic advances and screening technologies have improved survival among patients with lung cancer, who are now at high risk of developing second primary lung cancer (SPLC). Recently, an SPLC risk-prediction model (called SPLC-RAT) was developed and validated using data from population-based epidemiological cohorts and clinical trials, but real-world validation has been lacking. The predictive performance of SPLC-RAT was evaluated in a hospital-based cohort of lung cancer survivors. METHODS: The authors analyzed data from 8448 ever-smoking patients diagnosed with initial primary lung cancer (IPLC) in 1997-2006 at Mayo Clinic, with each patient followed for SPLC through 2018. The predictive performance of SPLC-RAT and further explored the potential of improving SPLC detection through risk model-based surveillance using SPLC-RAT versus existing clinical surveillance guidelines. RESULTS: Of 8448 IPLC patients, 483 (5.7%) developed SPLC over 26,470 person-years. The application of SPLC-RAT showed high discrimination area under the receiver operating characteristics curve: 0.81). When the cohort was stratified by a 10-year risk threshold of ≥5.6% (i.e., 80th percentile from the SPLC-RAT development cohort), the observed SPLC incidence was significantly elevated in the high-risk versus low-risk subgroup (13.1% vs. 1.1%, p < 1 × 10-6 ). The risk-based surveillance through SPLC-RAT (≥5.6% threshold) outperformed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines with higher sensitivity (86.4% vs. 79.4%) and specificity (38.9% vs. 30.4%) and required 20% fewer computed tomography follow-ups needed to detect one SPLC (162 vs. 202). CONCLUSION: In a large, hospital-based cohort, the authors validated the predictive performance of SPLC-RAT in identifying high-risk survivors of SPLC and showed its potential to improve SPLC detection through risk-based surveillance. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Lung cancer survivors have a high risk of developing second primary lung cancer (SPLC). However, no evidence-based guidelines for SPLC surveillance are available for lung cancer survivors. Recently, an SPLC risk-prediction model was developed and validated using data from population-based epidemiological cohorts and clinical trials, but real-world validation has been lacking. Using a large, real-world cohort of lung cancer survivors, we showed the high predictive accuracy and risk-stratification ability of the SPLC risk-prediction model. Furthermore, we demonstrated the potential to enhance efficiency in detecting SPLC using risk model-based surveillance strategies compared to the existing consensus-based clinical guidelines, including the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

Personalized Accelerated ChEmoRadiation (PACER) for Lung Cancer: Protocol for a Bayesian Optimal Phase I/II Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Prior attempts to escalate radiation dose for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have not improved survival. Given the high risk for cardiopulmonary toxicity with treatment and heterogenous presentation of locally advanced NSCLC, it is unlikely that a single dose regimen is optimal for all patients. This phase I/II trial aims to evaluate a novel treatment approach where the level of accelerated hypofractionation is determined by the predicted toxicity from dose to organs at risk (OARs). METHODS: Patients ≥ 18 years old with lung cancer planned for fractionated radiotherapy to the lung with concurrent chemotherapy will be eligible. Radiation therapy (RT) will be delivered to a total dose of 60 to 66 Gy in 30, 25, or 20 fractions depending on the ability to meet constraints to key organs at risk including the lungs, heart, and esophagus. The primary endpoint is high grade pulmonary, esophageal, or cardiac toxicity. A Bayesian optimized design is used to determine stopping boundaries and evaluate the primary endpoint. CONCLUSION: PACER will evaluate the safety and feasibility of personalized accelerated chemoradiotherapy for lung cancer.

Efficacy of Mobocertinib and Amivantamab in Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With EGFR Exon 20 Insertions Previously Treated With Platinum-Based Chemotherapy: An Indirect Treatment Comparison.

INTRODUCTION: Exon 20 insertions (ex20ins) mutations of the EGFR gene account for 1% to 2% of all non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). Targeted therapies have been developed to treat this cancer type but have not been studied in head-to-head trials. Our objective was to use a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) to assess the efficacy of mobocertinib and amivantamab in patients with NSCLC EGFR ex20ins mutations who were previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An unanchored MAIC was conducted to estimate the treatment effects of mobocertinib and amivantamab using individual-level data from the mobocertinib phase I/II single-arm trial (NCT02716116) and published data from the amivantamab single-arm CHRYSALIS trial (NCT02609776). Confirmed overall response rate (cORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and duration of response (DoR) were assessed. RESULTS: Both trials were comparable in terms of study population, study design, and outcome definitions and included 114 patients who received mobocertinib and 114 patients who received amivantamab. After MAIC weighting, all reported baseline characteristics were balanced between mobocertinib and amivantamab. The weighted odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] comparing mobocertinib to amivantamab was 0.56 (0.30-1.04) for independent review committee (IRC)-assessed cORR and 0.98 (0.53-1.82) for investigator (INV)-assessed cORR. The weighted hazard ratio (HR) comparing mobocertinib to amivantamab was 0.74 (0.51-1.07) for IRC-assessed PFS, 0.92 (0.57-1.48) for OS, and 0.59 (0.30-1.18) for INV-assessed DoR. CONCLUSION: MAIC analysis showed that mobocertinib and amivantamab had similar efficacy in patients with NSCLC harboring EGFR ex20ins mutations whose disease progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. These findings may benefit patients by supporting future treatment options.

Phenotyping EMT and MET cellular states in lung cancer patient liquid biopsies at a personalized level using mass cytometry.

Malignant pleural effusions (MPEs) can be utilized as liquid biopsy for phenotyping malignant cells and for precision immunotherapy, yet MPEs are inadequately studied at the single-cell proteomic level. Here we leverage mass cytometry to interrogate immune and epithelial cellular profiles of primary tumors and pleural effusions (PEs) from early and late-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, with the goal of assessing epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) states in patient specimens. By using the EMT-MET reference map PHENOSTAMP, we observe a variety of EMT states in cytokeratin positive (CK+) cells, and report for the first time MET-enriched CK+ cells in MPEs. We show that these states may be relevant to disease stage and therapy response. Furthermore, we found that the fraction of CD33+ myeloid cells in PEs was positively correlated to the fraction of CK+ cells. Longitudinal analysis of MPEs drawn 2 months apart from a patient undergoing therapy, revealed that CK+ cells acquired heterogeneous EMT features during treatment. We present this work as a feasibility study that justifies deeper characterization of EMT and MET states in malignant cells found in PEs as a promising clinical platform to better evaluate disease progression and treatment response at a personalized level.

Second Primary Lung Cancer Among Lung Cancer Survivors Who Never Smoked.

Importance: Lung cancer among never-smokers accounts for 25% of all lung cancers in the US; recent therapeutic advances have improved survival among patients with initial primary lung cancer (IPLC), who are now at high risk of developing second primary lung cancer (SPLC). As smoking rates continue to decline in the US, it is critical to examine more closely the epidemiology of lung cancer among patients who never smoked, including their risk for SPLC. Objective: To estimate and compare the cumulative SPLC incidence among lung cancer survivors who have never smoked vs those who have ever smoked. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based prospective cohort study used data from the Multiethnic Cohort Study (MEC), which enrolled participants between April 18, 1993, and December 31, 1996, with follow-up through July 1, 2017. Eligible individuals for this study were aged 45 to 75 years and had complete smoking data at baseline. These participants were followed up for IPLC and further SPLC development through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry. The data were analyzed from July 1, 2022, to January 31, 2023. Exposures: Never-smoking vs ever-smoking exposure at MEC enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: The study had 2 primary outcomes: (1) 10-year cumulative incidence of IPLC in the entire study cohort and 10-year cumulative incidence of SPLC among patients with IPLC and (2) standardized incidence ratio (SIR) (calculated as the SPLC incidence divided by the IPLC incidence) by smoking history. Results: Among 211 414 MEC participants, 7161 (3.96%) developed IPLC over 4 038 007 person-years, and 163 (2.28%) developed SPLC over 16 470 person-years. Of the participants with IPLC, the mean (SD) age at cohort enrollment was 63.6 (7.7) years, 4031 (56.3%) were male, and 3131 (43.7%) were female. The 10-year cumulative IPLC incidence was 2.40% (95% CI, 2.31%-2.49%) among ever-smokers, which was 7 times higher than never-smokers (0.34%; 95% CI, 0.30%-0.37%). However, the 10-year cumulative SPLC incidence following IPLC was as high among never-smokers (2.84%; 95% CI, 1.50%-4.18%) as ever-smokers (2.72%; 95% CI, 2.24%-3.20%), which led to a substantially higher SIR for never-smokers (14.50; 95% CI, 8.73-22.65) vs ever-smokers (3.50; 95% CI, 2.95-4.12). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings indicate that SPLC risk among lung cancer survivors who never smoked is as high as among those with IPLC who ever-smoked, highlighting the need to identify risk factors for SPLC among patients who never smoked and to develop a targeted surveillance strategy.