Immune checkpoint blockers in solid organ transplant recipients and cancer: the INNOVATED cohort.

BACKGROUND: Patients with solid organ transplant (SOT) and solid tumors are usually excluded from clinical trials testing immune checkpoint blockers (ICB). As transplant rates are increasing, we aimed to evaluate ICB outcomes in this population, with a special focus on lung cancer. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study collecting real data of ICB use in patients with SOT and solid tumors. Clinical data and treatment outcomes were assessed by using retrospective medical chart reviews in every participating center. Study endpoints were: overall response rate (ORR), 6-month progression-free survival (PFS), and grade ≥3 immune-related adverse events. RESULTS: From August 2016 to October 2022, 31 patients with SOT (98% kidney) and solid tumors were identified (36.0% lung cancer, 19.4% melanoma, 13.0% genitourinary cancer, 6.5% gastrointestinal cancer). Programmed death-ligand 1 expression was positive in 29% of tumors. Median age was 61 years, 69% were males, and 71% received ICB as first-line treatment. In the whole cohort the ORR was 45.2%, with a 6-month PFS of 56.8%. In the lung cancer cohort, the ORR was 45.5%, with a 6-month PFS of 32.7%, and median overall survival of 4.6 months. The grade 3 immune-related adverse events rate leading to ICB discontinuation was 12.9%. Allograft rejection rate was 25.8%, and risk of rejection was similar regardless of the type of ICB strategy (monotherapy or combination, 28% versus 33%, P = 1.0) or response to ICB treatment. CONCLUSIONS: ICB could be considered a feasible option for SOT recipients with some advanced solid malignancies and no alternative therapeutic options. Due to the risk of allograft rejection, multidisciplinary teams should be involved before ICB therapy.

SAPPHIRE: phase III study of sitravatinib plus nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy revolutionized treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, most patients progress due to primary or acquired resistance. Sitravatinib is a receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that can shift the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment toward an immunostimulatory state. Combining sitravatinib with nivolumab (sitra + nivo) may potentially overcome initial CPI resistance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the phase III SAPPHIRE study, patients with advanced non-oncogenic driven, nonsquamous NSCLC who initially benefited from (≥4 months on CPI without progression) and subsequently experienced disease progression on or after CPI combined with or following platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1 : 1 to sitra (100 mg once daily administered orally) + nivo (240 mg every 2 weeks or 480 mg every 4 weeks administered intravenously) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks administered intravenously). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of response (DOR; all assessed by blinded independent central review), and safety. RESULTS: A total of 577 patients included randomized: sitra + nivo, n = 284; docetaxel, n = 293 (median follow-up, 17.1 months). Sitra + nivo did not significantly improve OS versus docetaxel [median, 12.2 versus 10.6 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-1.05; P = 0.144]. The median PFS was 4.4 versus 5.4 months, respectively (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.32; P = 0.452). The ORR was 15.6% for sitra + nivo and 17.2% for docetaxel (P = 0.597); CBR was 75.5% and 64.5%, respectively (P = 0.004); median DOR was 7.4 versus 7.1 months, respectively (P = 0.924). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 53.0% versus 66.7% of patients receiving sitra + nivo versus docetaxel, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although median OS was numerically longer with sitra + nivo, the primary endpoint was not met in patients with previously treated advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. The safety profiles demonstrated were consistent with previous reports.

Clinical experience and management of adverse events in patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer receiving alectinib.

Alectinib is a preferred first-line therapy for patients with advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in several national clinical practice guidelines. The randomized, global, phase III ALEX study has demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival for alectinib over crizotinib in treatment-naive ALK-positive NSCLC. It was also the first study to show clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival for a next-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor relative to crizotinib. The J-ALEX and ALESIA phase III studies confirmed the clinical benefit of alectinib relative to crizotinib in the first-line ALK-positive NSCLC treatment setting in Japanese and Asian patients, respectively. Across these pivotal phase III trials, alectinib had a manageable, well-characterized safety profile. Here, we review the safety and tolerability of long-term alectinib treatment in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC and provide guidance for physicians, based on clinical experience, on the management of the most frequently reported adverse events (AEs). Most AEs associated with alectinib can be managed by dose reduction. Some alectinib-related AEs are not yet fully characterized, including myalgia and peripheral oedema and deciphering their underlying mechanism of action could enhance their management. With longer-term follow-up, the safety profile of alectinib continues to remain consistent in the ALEX study, with no new safety signals observed. Safety and tolerability data from the first-line phase III alectinib trials are also consistent with those observed in clinical trials of alectinib in later-line settings. These results add to the weight of evidence recommending alectinib as a preferred therapy for treatment-naive advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

Circulating L-arginine predicts the survival of cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: The discovery of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has revolutionized the systemic approach to cancer treatment. Most patients receiving ICIs, however, do not derive benefits. Therefore, it is crucial to identify reliable predictive biomarkers of response to ICIs. One important pathway in regulating immune cell reactivity is L-arginine (ARG) metabolism, essential to T-cell activation. We therefore aimed to evaluate the association between baseline plasma ARG levels and the clinical benefit of ICIs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The correlation between ARG levels and clinical ICI activity was assessed by analyzing plasma samples obtained before treatment onset in two independent cohorts of patients with advanced cancer included in two institutional molecular profiling programs (BIP, NCT02534649, n = 77; PREMIS, NCT03984318, n = 296) and from patients in a phase 1 first-in-human study of budigalimab monotherapy (NCT03000257). Additionally, the correlation between ARG levels and ICI efficacy in preclinical settings was evaluated using a syngeneic mouse model of colorectal cancer responsive to ICIs. Using matched peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) plasma samples, we analyzed the correlation between ARG levels and PBMC features through multiplexed flow cytometry analysis. RESULTS: In both discovery and validation cohorts, low ARG levels at baseline (<42 µM) were significantly and independently associated with a worse clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Moreover, at the preclinical level, the tumor rejection rate was significantly higher in mice with high baseline ARG levels than in those with low ARG levels (85.7% versus 23.8%; P = 0.004). Finally, PBMC immunophenotyping showed that low ARG levels were significantly associated with increased programmed death-ligand 1 expression in several immune cell subsets from the myeloid lineage. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that baseline ARG levels predict ICI response. Plasma ARG quantification may therefore represent an attractive biomarker to tailor novel therapeutic regimens targeting the ARG pathway in combination with ICIs.

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.

Single-cell DNA-seq depicts clonal evolution of multiple driver alterations in osimertinib-resistant patients.

BACKGROUND: The development of targeted agents, such as osimertinib for EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), has drastically improved patient outcome, but tumor resistance eventually always occurs. In osimertinib-resistant NSCLC, the emergence of a second molecular driver alteration (such as ALK, RET, FGFR3 fusions or BRAF, KRAS mutations) has been described. Whether those alterations and the activating EGFR mutations occur within a single cancer cell or in distinct cell populations is largely debated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Tumor sequencing was used to identify the acquired resistance mechanisms to osimertinib in the MATCH-R trial (NCT0251782). We implemented single-cell next-generation sequencing to investigate tumor heterogeneity on patient's frozen tissues in which multiple alterations have been identified. Patient-derived models, cell lines, and patient-derived xenografts were exposed to specific inhibitors to investigate combination treatment strategies. RESULTS: Among the 45 patients included in MATCH-R who progressed on osimertinib, 9 developed a second targetable alteration (n = 2 FGFR3-TACC3, n = 1 KIF5B-RET, n = 1 STRN-ALK fusions; n = 2 BRAFV600E, n = 1 KRASG12V, n = 1 KRASG12R, n = 1 KRASG12D mutations). Single-cell analysis revealed that the two driver alterations coexist within one single cancer cell in the four patients whose frozen samples were fully contributive. A high degree of heterogeneity within samples and sequential acquisitions of molecular events were highlighted. A combination treatment concomitantly targeting the two driver alterations was required on the corresponding patient-derived models to restore cell sensitivity, which was consistent with clinical data showing efficacy of brigatinib in the patient with ALK fusion after progression to osimertinib and crizotinib administered sequentially. CONCLUSIONS: Distinct molecular driver alterations at osimertinib resistance coexist with initial EGFR mutations in single cancer cells. The clonal evolution of cancer cell populations emphasized their heterogeneity leading to osimertinib relapse. Combining two targeted treatments is effective to achieve clinical benefit.

Osimertinib plus platinum-pemetrexed in newly diagnosed epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: safety run-in results from the FLAURA2 study.

BACKGROUND: The phase III FLAURA2 (NCT04035486) study will evaluate efficacy and safety of first-line osimertinib with platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy versus osimertinib monotherapy in epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive (EGFRm) advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The safety run-in, reported here, assessed the safety and tolerability of osimertinib with chemotherapy prior to the randomized phase III evaluation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (≥18 years; Japan: ≥20 years) with EGFRm locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC received oral osimertinib 80 mg once daily (QD), with either intravenous (IV) cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or IV carboplatin target area under the curve 5, plus pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 every 3 weeks (Q3W) for four cycles. Maintenance was osimertinib 80 mg QD with pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 Q3W until progression/discontinuation. The primary objective was to evaluate safety and tolerability of the osimertinib-chemotherapy combination. RESULTS: Thirty patients (15 per group) received treatment [Asian, 73%; female, 63%; median age (range) 61 (45-84) years]. Adverse events (AEs) were reported by 27 patients (90%): osimertinib-carboplatin-pemetrexed, 100%; osimertinib-cisplatin-pemetrexed, 80%. Most common AEs were constipation (60%) with osimertinib-carboplatin-pemetrexed and nausea (60%) with osimertinib-cisplatin-pemetrexed. In both groups, 20% of patients reported serious AEs. No specific pattern of AEs leading to dose modifications/discontinuations was observed; one patient discontinued all study treatments including osimertinib due to pneumonitis (study-specific discontinuation criterion). Hematologic toxicities were as expected and manageable. CONCLUSIONS: Osimertinib-chemotherapy combination had a manageable safety and tolerability profile in EGFRm advanced/metastatic NSCLC, supporting further assessment in the FLAURA2 randomized phase.

Targeting HER2 in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a glimpse of hope? An updated review on therapeutic strategies in NSCLC harbouring HER2 alterations.

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbouring HER2 alterations is now considered a distinct molecular subtype. The activation of HER2 in NSCLC occurs via three mechanisms, i.e. gene mutation (1%-4% of cases), gene amplification (2%-5%) and protein overexpression (2%-30%), with different prognostic and predictive outcomes. So far, non-selective tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have shown a minor benefit in HER2-mutant NSCLC patients with objective response rates (ORRs) ranging from 0% to 19%. Trastuzumab-based chemotherapy was not found to be superior to chemotherapy alone [median progression-free survival (PFS) 6.1 versus 7 months, respectively] and dual HER2 antibody blockade with trastuzumab and pertuzumab had limited efficacy (ORR 13%-21%). In contrast, novel more selective HER2 TKIs such as poziotinib and pyrotinib have shown a promising activity in HER2-mutant pre-treated NSCLC patients, with response rates up to 38% and 44%, respectively. The most encouraging data come from phase II studies that evaluated the antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) ado-trastuzumab-emtansine and trastuzumab-deruxtecan in patients with HER2-mutant NSCLC, with response rates of 50% and 62%, respectively. These agents are bringing hope to the management of HER2-altered NSCLC. Moreover, a paradigm shift from monotherapies towards combinations of agents with distinct mechanisms of action, such as ADCs with irreversible TKIs or immune checkpoint inhibitors, is already taking place and will change the therapeutic landscape of HER2-driven NSCLC. This paper provides a practical, concise and updated review on the therapeutic strategies in NSCLC with HER2 molecular alterations.

Plasma proteomics identifies leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) as a novel predictive biomarker of immune-checkpoint blockade resistance.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) are now widely used in oncology. Most patients, however, do not derive benefit from these agents. Therefore, there is a crucial need to identify novel and reliable biomarkers of resistance to such treatments in order to prescribe potentially toxic and costly treatments only to patients with expected therapeutic benefits. In the wake of genomics, the study of proteins is now emerging as the new frontier for understanding real-time human biology. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed the proteome of plasma samples, collected before treatment onset, from two independent prospective cohorts of cancer patients treated with ICB (discovery cohort n = 95, validation cohort n = 292). We then investigated the correlation between protein plasma levels, clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival and overall survival by Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: By using an unbiased proteomics approach, we show that, in both discovery and validation cohorts, elevated baseline serum level of leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) is associated with a poor clinical outcome in cancer patients treated with ICB, independently of other prognostic factors. We also demonstrated that the circulating level of LIF is inversely correlated with the presence of tertiary lymphoid structures in the tumor microenvironment. CONCLUSION: This novel clinical dataset brings strong evidence for the role of LIF as a potential suppressor of antitumor immunity and suggests that targeting LIF or its pathway may represent a promising approach to improve efficacy of cancer immunotherapy in combination with ICB.

Small cell lung cancer: a slightly less orphan disease after immunotherapy.

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive malignancy accounting for 15% of all diagnosed cases of lung cancer. After >15 years without any clinically relevant therapeutic advances, extensive-disease SCLC has become the second thoracic malignancy for which immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shifted the treatment paradigm to improve overall survival. Today, atezolizumab or durvalumab in combination with platinum-etoposide chemotherapy is considered the new standard of care in the first-line setting in SCLC. However, the magnitude of benefit with this immune-chemotherapy strategy in SCLC is more modest than that observed in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer patients. The immunosuppressive phenotype of SCLC plays an important role in hampering ICI efficacy and may explain the differences in outcomes between these two types of lung cancer. In this review, we provide a summary of recent therapeutic advances in SCLC in light of ICIs, as well as current challenges of this strategy in patients who are elderly, have poor performance status or brain metastases. We also address future perspectives of immunotherapeutic strategies currently in clinical development for these patients.

Lung carcinoids with high proliferative activity: Further support for the identification of a new tumor category in the classification of lung neuroendocrine neoplasms.

Highly proliferative lung carcinoids (HPLC) have been recently reported but information about this subset remains scarce. OBJECTIVES: Clinical and pathological data of 630 patients with lung carcinoids (LC) referred to Gustave Roussy Institute (GR) and European Institute of Oncology (IEO) were retrospectively reviewed to select HPLC and analyze their frequency, behavior and compare their outcome to conventional LC with Ki-67 ≤ 20 % and mitotic count (MC)≤10/2 mm2. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Selection criteria were: diagnosis of LC confirmed by local pathologist, and available clinical and follow-up data. Patients with Ki-67 > 20 % and/or MC > 10/ 2 mm2 in primary or metastatic specimens were identified as HPLC. RESULTS: 30/514 patients (6%) met the selection criteria of HPLC. Based on primary tumor evaluation, 22/25 (88 %) were classified as atypical carcinoids (AC). Median MC was 4.5/2 mm2 (1-11) 6/2 mm2 (3-15) in primary tumors and metastasis, respectively. Median Ki-67 was respectively 23 % (15-65) and 25 % (8-60). Recurrence rate was 66 % (12/18) in HPLC and 9 % (33/352) in conventional LC. Median RFS was 24 (10-NR) months in HPLC, 288 (141-NR) months in LC with Ki-67 index≤5 % and NR (148-NR) months in LC with Ki-67 6-20% (p < 001). Median OS was 203 (83-NR) months in LC with Ki-67 index≤5%, 101 (79-NR) months in LC with Ki-67 index 6-20 % and 53 (39-NR) months in HPLC (p = 002). Among 20 metastatic patients with HPLC, median PFS under platinum-based chemotherapy, everolimus, alkylating-based chemotherapy, FOLFOX and PRRT was 5.1 (95 % CI 0.7-9.4), 12.1(95 %CI 0.3-24), 6.8 (95 % CI 0-14.9), 10.2 (95 % CI 0.4-19.9) and 14.2 months (95 % CI 0-30) respectively. Best response was stable disease (SD) under platinum-based chemotherapy and partial response (PR) under alkylating-based chemotherapy and FOLFOX. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the existence and rarity of HPLC. Their characteristics and clinical behavior are more similar to LC rather than neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs), suggesting that this entity could be managed accordingly.

Outcomes with durvalumab by tumour PD-L1 expression in unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer in the PACIFIC trial.

BACKGROUND: In the PACIFIC trial, durvalumab significantly improved progression-free and overall survival (PFS/OS) versus placebo, with manageable safety, in unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients without progression after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). We report exploratory analyses of outcomes by tumour cell (TC) programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to intravenous durvalumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or placebo ≤12 months, stratified by age, sex, and smoking history, but not PD-L1 status. Where available, pre-CRT samples were tested for PD-L1 expression (immunohistochemistry) and scored at pre-specified (25%) and post hoc (1%) TC cut-offs. Treatment-effect hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated from unstratified Cox proportional hazards models (Kaplan-Meier-estimated medians). RESULTS: In total, 713 patients were randomly assigned, 709 of whom received at least 1 dose of study treatment durvalumab (n = 473) or placebo (n = 236). Some 451 (63%) were PD-L1-assessable: 35%, 65%, 67%, 33%, and 32% had TC ≥25%, <25%, ≥1%, <1%, and 1%-24%, respectively. As of 31 January 2019, median follow-up was 33.3 months. Durvalumab improved PFS versus placebo (primary-analysis data cut-off, 13 February 2017) across all subgroups [HR, 95% confidence interval (CI); medians]: TC ≥25% (0.41, 0.26-0.65; 17.8 versus 3.7 months), <25% (0.59, 0.43-0.82; 16.9 versus 6.9 months), ≥1% (0.46, 0.33-0.64; 17.8 versus 5.6 months), <1% (0.73, 0.48-1.11; 10.7 versus 5.6 months), 1%-24% [0.49, 0.30-0.80; not reached (NR) versus 9.0 months], and unknown (0.59, 0.42-0.83; 14.0 versus 6.4 months). Durvalumab improved OS across most subgroups (31 January 2019 data cut-off; HR, 95% CI; medians): TC ≥ 25% (0.50, 0.30-0.83; NR versus 21.1 months), <25% (0.89, 0.63-1.25; 39.7 versus 37.4 months), ≥1% (0.59, 0.41-0.83; NR versus 29.6 months), 1%-24% (0.67, 0.41-1.10; 43.3 versus 30.5 months), and unknown (0.60, 0.43-0.84; 44.2 versus 23.5 months), but not <1% (1.14, 0.71-1.84; 33.1 versus 45.6 months). Safety was similar across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: PFS benefit with durvalumab was observed across all subgroups, and OS benefit across all but TC <1%, for which limitations and wide HR CI preclude robust conclusions.

ARCTIC: durvalumab with or without tremelimumab as third-line or later treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) experience disease progression after first- and second-line treatment; more treatment options are required for these patients. ARCTIC, a phase III, randomized, open-label study, assessed durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus standard of care (SoC) as ≥ third-line treatment of mNSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ARCTIC comprised two independent sub-studies. Study A: 126 patients with ≥25% of tumor cells (TCs) expressing programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) were randomized (1 : 1) to durvalumab [up to 12 months 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (q2w)] or SoC. Study B: 469 patients with PD-L1 TC <25% were randomized (3 : 2 : 2 : 1) to durvalumab + tremelimumab (12 weeks durvalumab 20 mg/kg + tremelimumab 1 mg/kg q4w then 34 weeks durvalumab 10 mg/kg q2w), SoC, durvalumab (up to 12 months 10 mg/kg q2w), or tremelimumab (24 weeks 10 mg/kg q4w then 24 weeks q12w). Primary end points: overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for durvalumab versus SoC (study A; descriptive only) and durvalumab + tremelimumab versus SoC (study B). RESULTS: Study A: median OS 11.7 (durvalumab) versus 6.8 (SoC) months {hazard ratio (HR) 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.42-0.93]}; median PFS 3.8 (durvalumab) versus 2.2 (SoC) months [HR 0.71 (95% CI, 0.49-1.04)]. Study B: median OS 11.5 (durvalumab + tremelimumab) versus 8.7 (SoC) months [HR 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61-1.05); P = 0.109]. Median PFS of 3.5 months for both groups [HR 0.77 (95% CI, 0.59-1.01); P = 0.056]. Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events: 9.7% (durvalumab) and 44.4% (SoC; study A) and 22.0% (durvalumab + tremelimumab) and 36.4% (SoC; study B). CONCLUSIONS: In heavily pretreated patients with mNSCLC, durvalumab demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in OS and PFS versus SoC (patients with PD-L1 TC ≥25%); numerical improvements in OS and PFS for durvalumab + tremelimumab versus SoC were observed (patients with PD-L1 TC <25%). Safety profiles were consistent with previous studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02352948.

[Role of immunotherapy in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer]. / Place de l'immunothérapie dans le cancer bronchique non à petites cellules localement avancé.

Concomitant radiochemotherapy has been the standard of care for unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), irrespective of histological sub-type or molecular characteristics. Currently, only 15-30 % of patients are alive five years after radiochemotherapy, and this figure remains largely unchanged despite multiple phase III randomised trials. In recent years, immune-checkpoint blockades with anti-PD-(L)1 have revolutionised the care of metastatic NSCLC, becoming the standard front- and second-line strategy. Several preclinical studies reported an increased tumour antigen release, improved antigen presentation, and T-cell infiltration in irradiated tumours. Immunotherapy has therefore recently been evaluated for patients with locally advanced stage III NSCLC. Following the PACIFIC trial, the anti-PD-L1 durvalumab antibody has emerged as a new standard consolidative treatment for patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC whose disease has not progressed following concomitant platinum-based chemoradiotherapy. Immunoradiotherapy therefore appears to be a promising association in patients with localised NSCLC. Many trials are currently evaluating the value of concomitant immunotherapy and chemoradiotherapy and/or consolidative chemotherapy with immunotherapy in patients with locally advanced unresectable NSCLC.

Pan-Asian adapted Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a CSCO-ESMO initiative endorsed by JSMO, KSMO, MOS, SSO and TOS.

The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was published in 2016. At the ESMO Asia Meeting in November 2017 it was decided by both ESMO and the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) to convene a special guidelines meeting immediately after the Chinese Thoracic Oncology Group Annual Meeting 2018, in Guangzhou, China. The aim was to adapt the ESMO 2016 guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences associated with the treatment of metastatic NSCLC cancer in Asian patients. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC representing the oncological societies of China (CSCO), Japan (JSMO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), Singapore (SSO) and Taiwan (TOS). The voting was based on scientific evidence, and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the six participating Asian countries. During the review process, the updated ESMO 2018 Clinical Practice Guidelines for metastatic NSCLC were released and were also considered, during the final stages of the development of the Pan-Asian adapted Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Circulating innate immune markers and outcomes in treatment-naïve advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Innate immunity represents the first step of activation of the immune system and dictates the quality of adaptive immune responses. Studies have reported links between systemic inflammatory or innate immune markers and prognosis in patients with lung cancer. To our knowledge, the prospective and concomitant study of these systemic markers has never been performed. METHODS: Advanced treatment-naive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients eligible for first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were prospectively included from December 2012 to July 2015 (N = 148). Blood samples of patients were collected before the first cycle for fresh NK cell phenotyping. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were cryopreserved for natural cytotoxicity receptor (NCR) genotyping as well as sera for NCR's ligand quantification. Data on leukocytes, neutrophils and monocyte counts and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels were extracted from electronic medical records. RESULTS: Among all studied markers, monocytosis, neutrophilia, leucocytosis, high LDH and sBAG6 levels and reduced levels of NCR3 transcripts were associated with poor overall survival (OS) in univariate analysis. The levels of NCR3 transcripts was linked to age, number of metastatic sites, monocyte counts, LDH and sBAG6 levels. Neutrophilia was associated to high sBAG6 levels. NCR3 was the unique innate immune parameter that remained as an independent factor associated with both OS (P = 0.003) and progression-free survival (P = 0.009) in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: This study brought evidence that these biomarkers are entangled; parameters associated with an inflammatory process were related to reduced levels of NCR3 transcripts. Finally, the level of NCR3 transcripts was independently associated with outcomes in treatment-naive patients with advanced NSCLC.