Tertiary lymphoid structure-related immune infiltrates in NSCLC tumor lesions correlate with low tumor-reactivity of TIL products.

Adoptive transfer of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL therapy) has proven highly effective for treating solid cancers, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, not all patients benefit from this therapy for yet unknown reasons. Defining markers that correlate with high tumor-reactivity of the autologous TIL products is thus key for achieving better tailored immunotherapies. We questioned whether the composition of immune cell infiltrates correlated with the tumor-reactivity of expanded TIL products. Unbiased flow cytometry analysis of immune cell infiltrates of 26 early-stage and 20 late-stage NSCLC tumor lesions was used for correlations with the T cell differentiation and activation status, and with the expansion rate and anti-tumor response of generated TIL products. The composition of tumor immune infiltrates was highly variable between patients. Spearman's Rank Correlation revealed that high B cell infiltration negatively correlated with the tumor-reactivity of the patient's expanded TIL products, as defined by cytokine production upon exposure to autologous tumor digest. In-depth analysis revealed that tumor lesions with high B cell infiltrates contained tertiary lymphoid structure (TLS)-related immune infiltrates, including BCL6+ antibody-secreting B cells, IgD+BCL6+ B cells and CXCR5+BLC6+ CD4+ T cells, and higher percentages of naïve CD8+ T cells. In conclusion, the composition of immune cell infiltrates in NSCLC tumors associates with the functionality of the expanded TIL product. Our findings may thus help improve patient selection for TIL therapy.

Osimertinib-induced DNA resistance mutations in cerebrospinal fluid of EGFR mutated NSCLC patients developing leptomeningeal metastases: ORA-LM study.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis and treatment of leptomeningeal metastases (LM) in epidermal growth factor receptor mutation positive (EGFRm+) NSCLC is challenging. We aimed to identify resistance mechanisms (RM) to osimertinib in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma. METHODS: EGFRm+ patients with new or progressive LM during osimertinib were enrolled. NGS Ampliseq was performed on DNA isolated from CSF. Patients were prescribed osimertinib dose escalation (DE, 160mg QD) following lumbar puncture. Clinical and radiological response was evaluated four weeks after osimertinib DE. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were included. The driver mutation was identified in 93% of CSF samples (n=26). Seven (27%) harbored ≥1 RM. Twenty-five patients (89%) were prescribed osimertinib DE. Four weeks afterwards, symptoms improved in five patients, stabilized in nine and worsened in eleven patients. Twenty-one (84%) patients underwent MR imaging. Four showed radiological improvement, fourteen stabilization, and three worsening. CONCLUSIONS: In 27% of patients an RM was found in CSF ctDNA, none of which are targetable at time of writing, and clinical efficacy of osimertinib DE seems limited. There is much to gain in diagnostic as well as therapeutic strategies in EGFRm+ NSCLC LM.

Tepotinib plus osimertinib in patients with EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer with MET amplification following progression on first-line osimertinib (INSIGHT 2): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and MET amplification as a mechanism of resistance to first-line osimertinib have few treatment options. Here, we report the primary analysis of the phase 2 INSIGHT 2 study evaluating tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, combined with osimertinib in this population. METHODS: This open-label, phase 2 study was conducted at 179 academic centres and community clinics in 17 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 and advanced or metastatic EGFR-mutated NSCLC of any histology, with MET amplification by tissue biopsy fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH; MET gene copy number of ≥5 or MET-to-CEP7 ratio of ≥2) or liquid biopsy next-generation sequencing (MET plasma gene copy number of ≥2·3), following progression on first-line osimertinib. Patients received oral tepotinib 500 mg plus oral osimertinib 80 mg once daily. The primary endpoint was independently assessed objective response in patients with MET amplification by central FISH treated with tepotinib plus osimertinib with at least 9 months of follow-up. Safety was analysed in patients who received at least one study drug dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03940703 (enrolment complete). FINDINGS: Between Feb 13, 2020, and Nov 4, 2022, 128 patients (74 [58%] female, 54 [42%] male) were enrolled and initiated tepotinib plus osimertinib. The primary activity analysis population included 98 patients with MET amplification confirmed by central FISH, previous first-line osimertinib and at least 9 months of follow-up (median 12·7 months [IQR 9·9-20·3]). The confirmed objective response rate was 50·0% (95% CI 39·7-60·3; 49 of 98 patients). The most common treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse events were peripheral oedema (six [5%] of 128 patients), decreased appetite (five [4%]), prolonged electrocardiogram QT interval (five [4%]), and pneumonitis (four [3%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 16 (13%) patients. Deaths of four (3%) patients were assessed as potentially related to either trial drug by the investigator due to pneumonitis (two [2%] patients), decreased platelet count (one [1%]), respiratory failure (one [1%]), and dyspnoea (one [1%]); one death was attributed to both pneumonitis and dyspnoea. INTERPRETATION: Tepotinib plus osimertinib showed promising activity and acceptable safety in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC and MET amplification as a mechanism of resistance to first-line osimertinib, suggesting a potential chemotherapy-sparing oral targeted therapy option that should be further investigated. FUNDING: Merck (CrossRef Funder ID: 10.13039/100009945).

Trastuzumab deruxtecan in HER2-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer: a plain language summary of the DESTINY-Lung01 study.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of the publication about the DESTINY-Lung01 study, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in September 2021. The DESTINY-Lung01 study includes 181 adults with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that could not be treated with surgery and who have had previous standard anticancer treatment. The publication includes information and results about 91 of the 181 study participants. These 91 participants had HER2-mutant NSCLC. Researchers wanted to learn if the drug trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) could help treat participants with HER2-mutant NSCLC. At the time of this publication, this study is ongoing. WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS?: Results from the study showed that 55% of participants responded to treatment with T-DXd. The median length of time participants continued to respond to T-DXd was 9.3 months.After receiving T-DXd, 92% of participants had disease control. After receiving T-DXd, half of the participants lived for at least 17.8 months. After receiving T-DXd, half of the participants lived for 8.2 months before their cancer got worse.During the study, 97% of participants had drug-related adverse events, with nausea being the most common. There were 20% of participants with serious drug-related adverse events. WHAT WERE THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS REPORTED BY THE RESEARCHERS?: Based on these results, T-DXd could be a treatment option for people with HER2-mutant NSCLC that has been previously treated.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03505710 (DESTINY-Lung01) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Head-to-head comparison of composite and individual biomarkers to predict clinical benefit to PD-1 blockade in non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of PD-1 blocking agents in advanced NSCLC has shown prolonged effectiveness, but only in a minority of patients. Multiple biomarkers have been explored to predict treatment benefit, yet their combined performance remains inadequately examined. In this study, we assessed the combined predictive performance of multiple biomarkers in NSCLC patients treated with nivolumab. METHODS: Pretreatment samples from 135 patients receiving nivolumab were used to evaluate the predictive performance of CD8 tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), intratumoral (IT) localization of CD8 TILs, PD-1 high expressing TILs (PD1T TILs), CD3 TILs, CD20 B-cells, tertiary lymphoid structures (TLS), PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) and the Tumor Inflammation score (TIS). Patients were randomly assigned to a training (n = 55) and validation cohort (n = 80). The primary outcome measure was Disease Control at 6 months (DC 6m) and the secondary outcome measure was DC at 12 months (DC 12m). RESULTS: In the validation cohort, the two best performing composite biomarkers (i.e. CD8+IT-CD8 and CD3+IT-CD8) demonstrated similar or lower sensitivity (64% and 83%) and NPV (76% and 85%) compared to individual biomarkers PD-1T TILs and TIS (sensitivity: 72% and 83%, NPV: 86% and 84%) for DC 6m, respectively. Additionally, at 12 months, both selected composite biomarkers (CD8+IT-CD8 and CD8+TIS) demonstrated inferior predictive performance compared to PD-1T TILs and TIS alone. PD-1T TILs and TIS showed high sensitivity (86% and 100%) and NPV (95% and 100%) for DC 12m. PD-1T TILs could more accurately discriminate patients with no long-term benefit, as specificity was substantially higher compared to TIS (74% versus 39%). CONCLUSION: Composite biomarkers did not show improved predictive performance compared to PD-1T TILs and TIS alone for both the 6- and 12-month endpoints. PD-1T TILs and TIS identified patients with DC 12m with high sensitivity. Patients with no long-term benefit to PD-1 blockade were most accurately identified by PD-1T TILs.

Model-Informed Development of a Cost-Saving Dosing Regimen for Sacituzumab Govitecan.

BACKGROUND: The antibody-drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan is approved for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer and has shown promising results in various other types of cancer. Its costs may limit patient access to this novel effective treatment modality. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop an evidence-based rational dosing regimen that results in targeted drug exposure within the therapeutic range while minimizing financial toxicity, to improve treatment access. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Exposure equivalent dosing strategies were developed based on pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation by using the published pharmacokinetic model developed by the license holder. The alternative dose was based on the principle of using complete vials to prevent spillage and on the established non-linear relationship between body weight and systemic exposure. Equivalent exposure compared to the approved dosing regimen of 10 mg/kg was aimed for. Equivalent exposure was conservatively defined as calculated geometric mean ratios within the 0.9-1.11 boundaries for area under the concentration-time curve (AUC), trough concentration (Ctrough) and maximum concentration (Cmax) of the alternative dosing regimen compared to the approved dosing regimen. Since different vial sizes are available for the European Union (EU) and United States (US) market, because body weight distributions differ between these populations, we performed our analysis for both scenarios. RESULTS: Dosing regimens of sacituzumab govitecan for the EU (< 50 kg: 400 mg, 50-80 kg: 600 mg, and > 80 kg: 800 mg) and US population (< 40 kg: 360 mg, 40-65 kg: 540 mg, 65-90 kg: 720 mg, and > 90 kg: 900 mg) were developed, based on weight bands. The geometric mean ratios for all pharmacokinetic outcomes were within the predefined equivalence boundaries, while the quantity of drug used was 21.5% and 19.0% lower for the EU and US scenarios, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With the alternative dosing proposal, an approximately 20% reduction in drug expenses for sacituzumab govitecan can be realized while maintaining an equivalent and more evenly distributed exposure throughout the body weight range, without notable increases in pharmacokinetic variability.

Can blood-based markers predict RECIST progression in non-small cell lung cancer treated with immunotherapy?

PURPOSE: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the potential of routine blood markers, serum tumour markers and their combination in predicting RECIST-defined progression in patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. METHODS: We employed time-varying statistical models and machine learning classifiers in a Monte Carlo cross-validation approach to investigate the association between RECIST-defined progression and blood markers, serum tumour markers and their combination, in a retrospective cohort of 164 patients with NSCLC. RESULTS: The performance of the routine blood markers in the prediction of progression free survival was moderate. Serum tumour markers and their combination with routine blood markers generally improved performance compared to routine blood markers alone. Elevated levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) ranked as the top predictive routine blood markers, and CYFRA 21.1 was consistently among the most predictive serum tumour markers. Using these classifiers to predict overall survival yielded moderate to high performance, even when cases of death-defined progression were excluded. Performance varied across the treatment journey. CONCLUSION: Routine blood tests, especially when combined with serum tumour markers, show moderate predictive value  of RECIST-defined progression in NSCLC patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. The relationship between overall survival and RECIST-defined progression may be influenced by confounding factors.

Recommendations for reporting tissue and circulating tumour (ct)DNA next-generation sequencing results in non-small cell lung cancer.

Non-small cell lung cancer is a heterogeneous disease and molecular characterisation plays an important role in its clinical management. Next-generation sequencing-based panel testing enables many molecular alterations to be interrogated simultaneously, allowing for comprehensive identification of actionable oncogenic drivers (and co-mutations) and appropriate matching of patients with targeted therapies. Despite consensus in international guidelines on the importance of broad molecular profiling, adoption of next-generation sequencing varies globally. One of the barriers to its successful implementation is a lack of accepted standards and guidelines specifically for the reporting and clinical annotation of next-generation sequencing results. Based on roundtable discussions between pathologists and oncologists, we provide best practice recommendations for the reporting of next-generation sequencing results in non-small cell lung cancer to facilitate its use and enable easy interpretation for physicians. These are intended to complement existing guidelines related to the use of next-generation sequencing (solid and liquid). Here, we discuss next-generation sequencing workflows, the structure of next-generation sequencing reports, and our recommendations for best practice thereof. The aim of these recommendations and considerations is ultimately to ensure that reports are fully interpretable, and that the most appropriate treatment options are selected based on robust molecular profiles in well-defined reports.

The optimal treatment for patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer: minimally invasive lobectomy versus stereotactic ablative radiotherapy - a nationwide cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the Early-Stage LUNG cancer (ESLUNG) study was to compare outcomes after minimally invasive lobectomy (MIL) and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) in patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients with clinical stage I NSCLC (according to TNM7), treated in 2014-2016 with MIL or SABR, were included. 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were calculated and compared between patients treated with MIL and a propensity score (PS)-weighted SABR population with characteristics comparable to those of the MIL group. RESULTS: 1211 MIL and 972 SABR patients were included. Nodal upstaging occurred in 13.0 % of operated patients. 30-day mortality was 1.0 % after MIL and 0.2 % after SABR. After SABR, the 5-year regional recurrence rate (18.1 versus 14.2 %; HR 0.74, 95 % CI 0.58-0.94) and distant metastasis rate (26.2 versus 20.2 %; HR 0.72, 95 % CI 0.59-0.88) were significantly higher than after MIL, with similar local recurrence rate (13.1 versus 12.1 %; HR 0.90, 95 % CI 0.68-1.19). Unadjusted 5-year OS and RFS were 70.2 versus 40.3 % and 58.0 versus 25.1 % after MIL and SABR, respectively. PS-weighted, multivariable analyses showed no significant difference in OS (HR 0.89, 95 % CI 0.65-1.20) and better RFS after MIL (HR 0.70, 95 % CI 0.49-0.99). CONCLUSION: OS was not significantly different between stage I NSCLC patients treated with MIL and the PS-weighted population of patients treated with SABR. For operable patients with stage I NSCLC, SABR could therefore be an alternative treatment option with comparable OS outcome. However, RFS was better after MIL due to fewer regional recurrences and distant metastases. Future studies should focus on optimization of patient selection for MIL or SABR to further reduce postoperative mortality and morbidity after MIL and nodal failures after SABR.

BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC: disease overview and treatment landscape.

In this review, we cover the current understanding of BRAF mutations and associated clinical characteristics in patients with metastatic NSCLC, approved and emerging treatment options, BRAF sequencing approaches, and unmet needs. The BRAFV600E mutation confers constitutive activity of the MAPK pathway, leading to enhanced growth, proliferation, and survival of tumor cells. Testing for BRAF mutations enables patients to be treated with therapies that directly target BRAFV600E and the MAPK pathway, but BRAF testing lags behind other oncogene testing in metastatic NSCLC. Additional therapies targeting BRAFV600E mutations provide options for patients with metastatic NSCLC. Emerging therapies and combinations under investigation could potentially overcome issues of resistance and target non-V600E mutations. Therefore, because targeted therapies with enhanced efficacy are on the horizon, being able to identify BRAF mutations in metastatic NSCLC may become even more important.

Trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (DESTINY-Lung01): primary results of the HER2-overexpressing cohorts from a single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: DESTINY-Lung01 is a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study evaluating the antitumour activity and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan, a HER2-directed antibody-drug conjugate, in patients with HER2-overexpressing or HER2 (ERBB2)-mutant unresectable or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The results of the HER2-mutant cohort (cohort 2) have been reported elsewhere. Herein, we report the primary analysis of cohorts 1 and 1A, which aimed to evaluate the activity and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan 5·4 mg/kg and 6·4 mg/kg in patients with HER2-overexpressing NSCLC. METHODS: Patients aged 18 years or older with unresectable or metastatic (or both unresectable and metastatic) non-squamous NSCLC who had relapsed following or were refractory to standard treatment or for whom no standard treatment was available, with an HER2 immunohistochemistry score of 3+ or 2+ (without known HER2 mutations) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, were enrolled at 20 specialist hospitals in France, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, and the USA. Patients were assigned to cohorts sequentially, first to cohort 1, to receive trastuzumab deruxtecan 6·4 mg/kg (cohort 1), then to cohort 1A, to receive trastuzumab deruxtecan 5·4 mg/kg, both administered intravenously once every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate by independent central review and was assessed in the full analysis set, which included all patients who signed an informed consent form and were enrolled in the study. Safety was assessed in all enrolled patients who received at least one dose of trastuzumab deruxtecan. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03505710, and is ongoing (closed to recruitment). FINDINGS: Between Aug 27, 2018, and Jan 28, 2020, 49 patients were enrolled in cohort 1 (median age 63·0 years [IQR 58·0-68·0], 30 [61%] male, 19 [39%] female, and 31 [63%] White), and from June 16 to Dec 9, 2020, 41 patients were enrolled in cohort 1A (median age 62·0 years [IQR 56·0-66·0], 22 [54%] male, 19 [46%] female, and 31 [76%] White). As of data cutoff (Dec 3, 2021), the median treatment duration was 4·1 months (IQR 1·4-7·1) in cohort 1 and 5·5 months (1·4-8·7) in cohort 1A, and median follow-up was 12·0 months (5·4-22·4) in cohort 1 and 10·6 months (4·5-13·5) in cohort 1A. Confirmed objective response rate by independent central review was 26·5% (95% CI 15·0-41·1; 13 of 49, all partial responses) in cohort 1 and 34·1% (20·1-50·6; 14 of 41; two complete responses and 12 partial responses) in cohort 1A. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or worse were neutropenia (12 [24%] of 49 in cohort 1, none in cohort 1A), pneumonia (six [12%] and two [5%], respectively), fatigue (six [12%] and three [7%], respectively), and disease progression (six [12%] and four [10%], respectively). Drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurred in 26 (53%) of 41 patients in cohort 1 and nine (22%) of 49 patients in cohort 1A. Drug-related serious adverse events were reported in ten (20%) patients and three (7%) patients, respectively. Deaths due to treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in ten (20%) patients in cohort 1 (disease progression in six (12%) patients and bronchospasm, hydrocephalus, respiratory failure, and pneumonitis in one [2%] patient each), and in seven (17%) patients in cohort 1A (due to disease progression in four (10%) patients and dyspnoea, malignant neoplasm, and sepsis in one (2%) patient each). One death due to a treatment-emergent adverse event was determined to be due to study treatment by the investigator, which was in cohort 1 (pneumonitis). Independent adjudication of interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis found that drug-related interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis occurred in ten (20%) patients in cohort 1 (two [4%] grade 1, five [10%] grade 2, and three [6%] grade 5) and two (5%) patients in cohort 1A (one [2%] grade 2 and one [2%] grade 5). An additional patient in cohort 1A had grade 4 pneumonitis after the data cutoff, which was subsequently adjudicated as drug-related grade 5 interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis. INTERPRETATION: Given the low antitumour activity of existing treatment options in this patient population, trastuzumab deruxtecan might have the potential to fill a large unmet need in HER2-overexpressing NSCLC. Our findings support further investigation of trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with HER2-overexpressing NSCLC. FUNDING: Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca.

Cemiplimab in locally advanced or metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: prospective real-world data from the DRUG Access Protocol.

Background: The DRUG Access Protocol provides patients with cancer access to registered anti-cancer drugs that are awaiting reimbursement in the Netherlands and simultaneously collects prospective real-world data (RWD). Here, we present RWD from PD-1 blocker cemiplimab in patients with locally advanced or metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (laCSCC; mCSCC). Methods: Patients with laCSCC or mCSCC received cemiplimab 350 mg fixed dose every three weeks. Primary endpoints were objective clinical benefit rate (CBR), defined as objective response (OR) or stable disease (SD) at 16 weeks, physician-assessed CBR, defined as clinician's documentation of improved disease or SD based on evaluation of all available clinical parameters at 16 weeks, objective response rate (ORR), and safety, defined as grade ≥ 3 treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) occurring up to 30 days after last drug administration. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Findings: Between February 2021 and December 2022, 151 patients started treatment. Objective and physician-assessed CBR were 54.3% (95% CI, 46.0-62.4) and 59.6% (95% CI, 51.3-67.5), respectively. ORR was 35.1% (95% CI, 27.5-43.3). After a median follow-up of 15.2 months, median DoR was not reached. Median PFS and OS were 12.2 (95% CI, 7.0-not reached) and 24.2 months (95% CI, 18.8-not reached), respectively. Sixty-eight TRAEs occurred in 29.8% of patients. Most commonly reported TRAE was a kidney transplant rejection (9.5%). Interpretation: Cemiplimab proved highly effective and safe in this real-world cohort of patients with laCSCC or mCSCC, confirming its therapeutic value in the treatment of advanced CSCC in daily clinical practice. Funding: The DRUG Access Protocol is supported by all participating pharmaceutical companies: Bayer, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi.

Osimertinib Plasma Trough Concentration in Relation to Brain Metastases Development in Patients With Advanced EGFR-Mutated NSCLC.

Introduction: Brain metastases (BM) are common in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated (EGFRm+) NSCLC. Despite good BM-related outcomes of osimertinib, several patients still experience intracranial progression. A possible explanation is pharmacologic failure due to low plasma trough levels (Cmin,SS) and consequently limited intracranial osimertinib exposure. We investigated the relation between osimertinib Cmin,SS and BM development or progression. Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study, including patients receiving osimertinib for advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC. At osimertinib start, patients were allocated to the BM or no or unknown BM cohort and were further divided into subgroups based on osimertinib Cmin,SS (low, middle, and high exposure). Cumulative incidence of BM progression or development and overall survival were determined for each group. Results: A total of 173 patients were included, with 49 (28.3%) had baseline BM. Of these patients, 36.7% experienced BM progression, of which 16.7% in the low (<159.3 ng/mL), 40.0% in the middle, and 47.1% in the high (>270.7 ng/mL) Cmin,SS subgroups. After 12 months, the cumulative incidence of BM progression for the BM cohort was 20% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6-49.0), 31% (95% CI:10.6-53.9), and 31% (95% CI:10.8-54.5) per Cmin,SS subgroup, respectively. After 20 months, this was 20% (95% CI:2.6-49.0), 52% (95% CI:23.8-74.2), and 57% (95% CI:24.9-79.7), respectively. For the no or unknown BM cohort, 4.0% developed BM without differences within Cmin,SS subgroups. Conclusions: No relation was found between osimertinib Cmin,SS and BM development or progression in patients with advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC. This suggests that systemic osimertinib exposure is not a surrogate marker for BM development or progression.

Survival difference between patients with single versus multiple metastatic lymph nodes and the role of histology in pathological stage II-N1 non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies investigating whether metastatic lymph node count is a relevant prognostic factor in pathological N1 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), showed conflicting results. Hypothesizing that outcome may also be related to histological features, we determined the prognostic impact of single versus multiple metastatic lymph nodes in different histological subtypes for patients with stage II-N1 NSCLC. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, including patients treated with a surgical resection for stage II-N1 NSCLC (TNM 7th edition) in 2010-2016. Overall survival (OS) was assessed for patients with single (pN1a) and multiple (pN1b) metastatic nodes. Using multivariable analysis, we compared OS between pN1a and pN1b in different histological subtypes. RESULTS: After complete resection of histologically proven stage II-N1 NSCLC, 1309 patients were analyzed, comprising 871 patients with pN1a and 438 with pN1b. The median number of pathologically examined nodes (N1 + N2) was 9 (interquartile range 6-13). Five-year OS was 53% for pN1a versus 51% for pN1b. In multivariable analysis, OS was significantly different between pN1a and pN1b (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01-1.40). When stratifying for histology, the prognostic impact of pN1a/b was only observed in adenocarcinoma patients (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.15-1.81). CONCLUSION: Among patients with stage II-N1 adenocarcinoma, the presence of multiple metastatic nodes had a significant impact on survival, which was not observed for other histological subtypes. If further refinement as to lymph node count will be considered for incorporation into a new staging system, evaluation of the role of histology is recommended.

A plain language summary of the PHAROS study: the combination of encorafenib and binimetinib for people with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of the results of a study called PHAROS. This study looked at combination treatment with encorafenib (BRAFTOVI®) and binimetinib (MEKTOVI®). This combination of medicines was studied in people with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). NSCLC is the most common type of lung cancer. Metastatic means that the cancer has spread to other parts of the body. All people in this study had a type of NSCLC that has a change in a gene called BRAF termed a BRAF V600E mutation. A gene is a part of the DNA that has instructions for making things that your body needs to work, and the BRAF V600E mutation contributes to the growth of the lung cancer. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: In this study, 98 people with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC were treated with the combination of encorafenib and binimetinib (called encorafenib plus binimetinib in this summary). Before starting the study, 59 people had not received any treatment for their metastatic NSCLC, and 39 people had received previous anticancer treatment. At the time of this analysis, 44 (75%) out of 59 people who did not receive any treatment before taking encorafenib plus binimetinib had their tumors shrink or disappear. Eighteen (46%) out of 39 people who had received treatment before starting encorafenib plus binimetinib also had their tumors shrink or disappear. The most common side effects of encorafenib plus binimetinib were nausea, diarrhea, fatigue, and vomiting. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: These results support the use of encorafenib plus binimetinib combination treatment as a new treatment option in people with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC. The side effects of encorafenib plus binimetinib in this study were similar to the side effects seen with encorafenib plus binimetinib in people with a type of skin cancer called metastatic melanoma.

Combining Genomic Biomarkers to Guide Immunotherapy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: The clinical value of STK11, KEAP1, and EGFR alterations for guiding immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial, as some patients with these proposed resistance biomarkers show durable ICB responses. More specific combinatorial biomarker approaches are urgently needed for this disease. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: To develop a combinatorial biomarker strategy with increased specificity for ICB unresponsiveness in NSCLC, we performed a comprehensive analysis of 254 patients with NSCLC treated with ligand programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) blockade monotherapy, including a discovery cohort of 75 patients subjected to whole-genome sequencing (WGS), and an independent validation cohort of 169 patients subjected to tumor-normal large panel sequencing. The specificity of STK11/KEAP1/EGFR alterations for ICB unresponsiveness was assessed in the contexts of a low (<10 muts/Mb) or high (≥10 muts/Mb) tumor mutational burden (TMB). RESULTS: In low TMB cases, STK11/KEAP1/EGFR alterations were highly specific biomarkers for ICB resistance, with 0/15 (0.0%) and 1/34 (2.9%) biomarker-positive patients showing treatment benefit in the discovery and validation cohorts, respectively. This contrasted with high TMB cases, where 11/13 (85%) and 15/34 (44%) patients with at least one STK11/KEAP1/EGFR alteration showed durable treatment benefit in the discovery and validation cohorts, respectively. These findings were supported by analyses of progression-free survival and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: The unexpected ICB responses in patients carrying resistance biomarkers in STK11, KEAP1, and EGFR were almost exclusively observed in patients with a high TMB. Considering these alterations in context, the TMB offered a highly specific combinatorial biomarker strategy for limiting overtreatment in NSCLC.

Blood platelet RNA profiles do not enable for nivolumab response prediction at baseline in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Anti-PD-(L)1 immunotherapy has emerged as a promising treatment approach for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), though the response rates remain low. Pre-treatment response prediction may improve patient allocation for immunotherapy. Blood platelets act as active immune-like cells, thereby constraining T-cell activity, propagating cancer metastasis, and adjusting their spliced mRNA content. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether platelet RNA profiles before start of nivolumab anti-PD1 immunotherapy may predict treatment responses. METHODS: We performed RNA-sequencing of platelet RNA samples isolated from stage III-IV NSCLC patients before treatment with nivolumab. Treatment response was scored by the RECIST-criteria. Data were analyzed using a predefined thromboSeq analysis including a particle-swarm-enhanced support vector machine (PSO/SVM) classification algorithm. RESULTS: We collected and processed a 286-samples cohort, separated into a training/evaluation and validation series and subjected those to training of the PSO/SVM-classification algorithm. We observed only low classification accuracy in the 107-samples validation series (area under the curve (AUC) training series: 0.73 (95% -CI: 0.63-0.84, n = 88 samples), AUC evaluation series: 0.64 (95% -CI: 0.51-0.76, n = 91 samples), AUC validation series: 0.58 (95% -CI: 0.45-0.70, n = 107 samples)), employing a five-RNAs biomarker panel. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that platelet RNA may have minimally discriminative capacity for anti-PD1 nivolumab response prediction, with which the current methodology is insufficient for diagnostic application.

Clinical Relevance of High Plasma Trough Levels of the Kinase Inhibitors Crizotinib, Alectinib, Osimertinib, Dabrafenib, and Trametinib in NSCLC Patients.

BACKGROUND: the study aims to evaluate whether high plasma trough levels of the kinase inhibitors (K.I.s) crizotinib, alectinib, osimertinib, dabrafenib, and trametinib were associated with a higher risk of toxicity in non-small-cell lung cancer patients. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with the selected K.I.s were included if at least one plasma trough level at steady state (C min,ss ) was available. Data were extracted from electronic medical records and laboratory databases. The high group for each K.I. was defined as 10% of patients with the highest first C min,ss . The remaining patients were placed in the non-high group. The frequency of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), defined as adverse events leading to dose reduction, dose interruption, or permanent discontinuation, was compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 542 patients were included in the different K.I. groups. A high C min,ss of crizotinib (n = 96), alectinib (n = 105), osimertinib (n = 227), dabrafenib (n = 52), and trametinib (n = 62) correlated with a C min,ss ≥490, ≥870, ≥405, ≥150, and ≥25 ng/mL, respectively. DLTs were more common in the alectinib high group than in the alectinib non-high group (64% vs. 29%, P = 0.036). Liver toxicity was observed in 4 (36%) patients in the high group and 5 (5%) patients in the non-high group ( P = 0.007). For other K.I.s, no significant differences were observed in the frequency of DLTs between the high and non-high groups. CONCLUSIONS: For alectinib, high C min,ss was correlated with a higher risk of DLT. No differences in the frequency of DLTs were observed between the high and non-high groups for crizotinib, osimertinib, dabrafenib, and trametinib.