Top advances of the year: Perioperative therapy for lung cancer.

Emerging data supporting the rise of perioperative immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as a standard of care in the treatment of early stage, surgically resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) dominated the NSCLC news in 2023. Adjuvant pembrolizumab became the second adjuvant ICI to receive US Food and Drug Administration approval in early 2023 after the 2021 approval of adjuvant atezolizumab and the 2022 approval of neoadjuvant nivolumab with chemotherapy. Subsequently in 2023, multiple phase 3 trials examining perioperative ICIs were positive and demonstrated clinically meaningful outcomes by prolonging event-free survival, improving pathologic complete response rates, and trending toward improved overall survival in most. Perioperative pembrolizumab became the first ICI to attain US Food and Drug Administration approval in this setting through the KEYNOTE-671 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03425643), which also demonstrated a definitive overall survival benefit in the entire study population. However, questions remain regarding patient selection for either approach and how we can optimize biomarkers to determine who needs adjuvant therapy after surgery.

A Phase 1/2 Study to Evaluate the Safety and Activity of Nivolumab in Combination With Vorolanib, a Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor, in Patients With Refractory Thoracic Tumors.

Introduction: Targeting the tumor microenvironment may enhance response to immunotherapy (immune checkpoint inhibitors) and improve outcomes for patients. This study tested the safety and efficacy of vorolanib, a novel tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor, platelet-derived growth factor, and c-KIT, in combination with programmed cell death protein 1 blockade using nivolumab for refractory thoracic malignancies. Methods: This single-arm multicenter study enrolled patients with extensive-stage SCLC, thymic carcinoma, and NSCLC, either naive or had progressed on previous chemotherapy or immune checkpoint inhibitors (either primary or acquired resistance). The primary objective of phase 1 was to determine the maximum tolerated dose, and the primary end point for each dose-expansion cohort was the objective response rate. Results: A total of 88 patients were enrolled in phase 1 (n = 11) and dose expansion (n = 77) cohorts. Transaminitis was dose-limiting and expansion proceeded with oral vorolanib 200 mg daily combined with intravenous nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks. The objective response rate per cohort were as follows: NSCLC naive 33% (five of 15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 13%-60%), NSCLC primary refractory 5.9% (one of 17, 95% CI: 0%-17.6%), NSCLC acquired resistance 11.1% (two of 18, 95% CI: 0%-27.8%); SCLC 0% (zero of 18), and thymic carcinoma 11% (one of nine, 95% CI: 0%-33%). Disease control rate ranged from 11.1% in SCLC (two of 18, 0%-27.8%) to 66.7 % in thymic carcinoma (six of nine, 95% CI: 33.3%-100%). The most common adverse events were fatigue (32%), aspartate transaminase (27%) and alanine transaminase elevation (25%), and diarrhea (19%). Transaminitis was more common in patients with thymic carcinoma than other tumors. Conclusions: Vorolanib plus nivolumab had a manageable safety profile and may have clinical benefits in various thoracic malignancies. The disease control rate in thymic malignancies warrants further assessment.

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.

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.

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.

The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Early Lung Imaging Confederation Open-Source Deep Learning and Quantitative Measurement Initiative.

INTRODUCTION: With global adoption of computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening, there is increasing interest to use artificial intelligence (AI) deep learning methods to improve the clinical management process. To enable AI research using an open-source, cloud-based, globally distributed, screening CT imaging data set and computational environment that are compliant with the most stringent international privacy regulations that also protect the intellectual properties of researchers, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer sponsored development of the Early Lung Imaging Confederation (ELIC) resource in 2018. The objective of this report is to describe the updated capabilities of ELIC and illustrate how this resource can be used for clinically relevant AI research. METHODS: In this second phase of the initiative, metadata and screening CT scans from two time points were collected from 100 screening participants in seven countries. An automated deep learning AI lung segmentation algorithm, automated quantitative emphysema metrics, and a quantitative lung nodule volume measurement algorithm were run on these scans. RESULTS: A total of 1394 CTs were collected from 697 participants. The LAV950 quantitative emphysema metric was found to be potentially useful in distinguishing lung cancer from benign cases using a combined slice thickness more than or equal to 2.5 mm. Lung nodule volume change measurements had better sensitivity and specificity for classifying malignant from benign lung nodules when applied to solid lung nodules from high-quality CT scans. CONCLUSIONS: These initial experiments revealed that ELIC can support deep learning AI and quantitative imaging analyses on diverse and globally distributed cloud-based data sets.

Real-World Efficacy and Safety of Amivantamab for EGFR-Mutant NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Amivantamab-vmjw (amivantamab) is a bispecific EGFR/MET antibody approved for patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations, after prior therapy. Nevertheless, the benefits and safety of amivantamab in other EGFR-mutant lung cancer, with or without osimertinib, and with concurrent radiation therapy, are less known. METHODS: We queried the MD Anderson Lung Cancer GEMINI, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, and Stanford Cancer Center's database for patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC treated with amivantamab, not on a clinical trial. The data analyzed included initial response, duration of treatment, and concomitant radiation safety in overall population and prespecified subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 61 patients received amivantamab. Median age was 65 (31-81) years old; 72.1% were female; and 77% were patients with never smoking history. Median number of prior lines of therapies was four. On the basis of tumor's EGFR mutation, 39 patients were in the classical mutation cohort, 15 patients in the exon 20 cohort, and seven patients in the atypical cohort. There were 37 patients (58.7%) who received amivantamab concomitantly with osimertinib and 25 patients (39.1%) who received concomitant radiation. Furthermore, 54 patients were assessable for response in the overall population; 19 patients (45.2%) had clinical response and disease control rate (DCR) was 64.3%. In the classical mutation cohort of the 33 assessable patients, 12 (36.4%) had clinical response and DCR was 48.5%. In the atypical mutation cohort, six of the seven patients (85.7%) had clinical response and DCR was 100%. Of the 13 assessable patients in the exon 20 cohort, five patients (35.7%) had clinical response and DCR was 64.3%. Adverse events reported with amivantamab use were similar as previously described in product labeling. No additional toxicities were noted when amivantamab was given with radiation with or without osimertinib. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world multicenter analysis revealed that amivantamab is a potentially effective treatment option for patients with EGFR mutations outside of exon 20 insertion mutations. The combination of osimertinib with amivantamab is safe and feasible. Radiation therapy also seems safe when administered sequentially or concurrently with amivantamab.

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.

Asian American Women's Experiences of Discrimination and Health Behaviors during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated racism experienced by Asian Americans, especially women and older individuals. Little is known about how discriminatory experiences during the pandemic have influenced health behaviors among Asian Americans. Between 10/2021 and 6/2022, we surveyed 193 Asian American women in the San Francisco area. Participants were asked to report types of discrimination they experienced since March 2020. We explored bivariable associations of discrimination and changes in health behaviors and healthcare utilization. Most women were Chinese American (75%) and over 45-years-old (87%). The top three discriminatory experiences reported were being treated with less respect (60%), being treated unfairly at restaurants/stores (49%), and people acting as if they are better (47%). Chinese American women (vs. non-Chinese Asian American women) reported higher frequencies of being threatened/harassed (40% vs. 22%). Women who reported any discriminatory experience (vs. none) were more likely to report less physical exercise (42.7% vs. 26.3%) and canceling/rescheduling medical appointments (65.0% vs. 45.1%). Our findings begin to elucidate Asian American women's experiences of discrimination since the pandemic and provide evidence of the harmful impacts of anti-Asian racism on health behaviors.

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.

Disparities in outcomes between Black and White patients in North America with thoracic malignancies and COVID-19 infection (TERAVOLT).

BACKGROUND: Patients with thoracic malignancies who develop COVID-19 infection have a higher hospitalization rate compared to the general population and to those with other cancer types, but how this outcome differs by race and ethnicity is relatively understudied. METHODS: The TERAVOLT database is an international, multi-center repository of cross-sectional and longitudinal data studying the impact of COVID-19 on individuals with thoracic malignancies. Patients from North America with thoracic malignancies and confirmed COVID-19 infection were included for this analysis of racial and ethnic disparities. Patients with missing race data or races and ethnicities with fewer than 50 patients were excluded from analysis. Multivariable analyses for endpoints of hospitalization and death were performed on these 471 patients. RESULTS: Of the 471 patients, 73% were White and 27% were Black. The majority (90%) were non-Hispanic ethnicity, 5% were Hispanic, and 4% were missing ethnicity data. Black patients were more likely to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status ≥ 2 (p-value = 0.04). On multivariable analysis, Black patients were more likely than White patients to require hospitalization (Odds Ratio (OR): 1.69, 95% CI: 1.01-2.83, p-value = 0.044). These differences remained across different waves of the pandemic. However, no statistically significant difference in mortality was found between Black and White patients (OR 1.29, 95% CI: 0.69-2.40, p-value = 0.408). CONCLUSIONS: Black patients with thoracic malignancies who acquire COVID-19 infection are at a significantly higher risk of hospitalization compared to White patients, but there is no significant difference in mortality. The underlying drivers of racial disparity among patients with thoracic malignancies and COVID-19 infection require ongoing investigation.

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.

Comparison of SP263 and 22C3 immunohistochemistry PD-L1 assays for clinical efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab in non-small cell lung cancer: results from the randomized phase III IMpower010 trial.

BACKGROUND: Tumor samples from the phase III IMpower010 study were used to compare two programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry assays (VENTANA SP263 and Dako 22C3) for identification of PD-L1 patient subgroups (negative, positive, low, and high expression) and their predictive value for adjuvant atezolizumab compared with best supportive care (BSC) in resectable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: PD-L1 expression was assessed by the SP263 assay, which measured the percentage of tumor cells with any membranous PD-L1 staining, and the 22C3 assay, which scored the percentage of viable tumor cells showing partial or complete membranous PD-L1 staining. RESULTS: When examining the concordance at the PD-L1-positive threshold (SP263: tumor cell (TC)≥1%; 22C3: tumor proportion score (TPS)≥1%), the results were concordant between assays for 83% of the samples. Similarly, at the PD-L1-high cut-off (SP263: TC≥50%; 22C3: TPS≥50%), the results were concordant between assays for 92% of samples. The disease-free survival benefit of atezolizumab over BSC was comparable between assays for PD-L1-positive (TC≥1% by SP263: HR, 0.58 (95% CI: 0.40 to 0.85) vs TPS≥1% by 22C3: HR, 0.65 (95% CI: 0.45 to 0.95)) and PD-L1-high (TC≥50% by SP263: HR, 0.27 (95% CI: 0.14 to 0.53) vs TPS≥50% by 22C3: HR, 0.31 (95% CI: 0.16 to 0.60)) subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The SP263 and 22C3 assays showed high concordance and a comparable clinical predictive value of atezolizumab at validated PD-L1 thresholds, suggesting that both assays can identify patients with early-stage NSCLC most likely to experience benefit from adjuvant atezolizumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02486718.

Risk Model-Based Lung Cancer Screening and Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the US.

Importance: The revised 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines for lung cancer screening have been shown to reduce disparities in screening eligibility and performance between African American and White individuals vs the 2013 guidelines. However, potential disparities across other racial and ethnic groups in the US remain unknown. Risk model-based screening may reduce racial and ethnic disparities and improve screening performance, but neither validation of key risk prediction models nor their screening performance has been examined by race and ethnicity. Objective: To validate and recalibrate the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial 2012 (PLCOm2012) model-a well-established risk prediction model based on a predominantly White population-across races and ethnicities in the US and evaluate racial and ethnic disparities and screening performance through risk-based screening using PLCOm2012 vs the USPSTF 2021 criteria. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a population-based cohort design, the Multiethnic Cohort Study enrolled participants in 1993-1996, followed up through December 31, 2018. Data analysis was conducted from April 1, 2022, to May 19. 2023. A total of 105 261 adults with a smoking history were included. Exposures: The 6-year lung cancer risk was calculated through recalibrated PLCOm2012 (ie, PLCOm2012-Update) and screening eligibility based on a 6-year risk threshold greater than or equal to 1.3%, yielding similar eligibility as the USPSTF 2021 guidelines. Outcomes: Predictive accuracy, screening eligibility-incidence (E-I) ratio (ie, ratio of the number of eligible to incident cases), and screening performance (sensitivity, specificity, and number needed to screen to detect 1 lung cancer). Results: Of 105 261 participants (60 011 [57.0%] men; mean [SD] age, 59.8 [8.7] years), consisting of 19 258 (18.3%) African American, 27 227 (25.9%) Japanese American, 21 383 (20.3%) Latino, 8368 (7.9%) Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, and 29 025 (27.6%) White individuals, 1464 (1.4%) developed lung cancer within 6 years from enrollment. The PLCOm2012-Update showed good predictive accuracy across races and ethnicities (area under the curve, 0.72-0.82). The USPSTF 2021 criteria yielded a large disparity among African American individuals, whose E-I ratio was 53% lower vs White individuals (E-I ratio: 9.5 vs 20.3; P < .001). Under the risk-based screening (PLCOm2012-Update 6-year risk ≥1.3%), the disparity between African American and White individuals was substantially reduced (E-I ratio: 15.9 vs 18.4; P < .001), with minimal disparities observed in persons of other minoritized groups, including Japanese American, Latino, and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander. Risk-based screening yielded superior overall and race and ethnicity-specific performance to the USPSTF 2021 criteria, with higher overall sensitivity (67.2% vs 57.7%) and lower number needed to screen (26 vs 30) at similar specificity (76.6%). Conclusions: The findings of this cohort study suggest that risk-based lung cancer screening can reduce racial and ethnic disparities and improve screening performance across races and ethnicities vs the USPSTF 2021 criteria.

Overall Survival Among Patients With De Novo Stage IV Metastatic and Distant Metastatic Recurrent Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Importance: Despite recent breakthroughs in therapy, advanced lung cancer still poses a therapeutic challenge. The survival profile of patients with metastatic lung cancer remains poorly understood by metastatic disease type (ie, de novo stage IV vs distant recurrence). Objective: To evaluate the association of metastatic disease type on overall survival (OS) among patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to identify potential mechanisms underlying any survival difference. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cohort study of a national US population based at a tertiary referral center in the San Francisco Bay Area using participant data from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) who were enrolled between 2002 and 2004 and followed up for up to 7 years as the primary cohort and patient data from Stanford Healthcare (SHC) for diagnoses between 2009 and 2019 and followed up for up to 13 years as the validation cohort. Participants from NLST with de novo metastatic or distant recurrent NSCLC diagnoses were included. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to March 2023. Exposures: De novo stage IV vs distant recurrent metastatic disease. Main Outcomes and Measures: OS after diagnosis of metastatic disease. Results: The NLST and SHC cohort consisted of 660 and 180 participants, respectively (411 men [62.3%] vs 109 men [60.6%], 602 White participants [91.2%] vs 111 White participants [61.7%], and mean [SD] age of 66.8 [5.5] vs 71.4 [7.9] years at metastasis, respectively). Patients with distant recurrence showed significantly better OS than patients with de novo metastasis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.87; P < .001) in NLST, which was replicated in SHC (aHR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.43-0.96; P = .03). In SHC, patients with de novo metastasis more frequently progressed to the bone (63 patients with de novo metastasis [52.5%] vs 19 patients with distant recurrence [31.7%]) or pleura (40 patients with de novo metastasis [33.3%] vs 8 patients with distant recurrence [13.3%]) than patients with distant recurrence and were primarily detected through symptoms (102 patients [85.0%]) as compared with posttreatment surveillance (47 patients [78.3%]) in the latter. The main finding remained consistent after further adjusting for metastasis sites and detection methods. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, patients with distant recurrent NSCLC had significantly better OS than those with de novo disease, and the latter group was associated with characteristics that may affect overall survival. This finding can help inform future clinical trial designs to ensure a balance for baseline patient characteristics.

Software Application Profile: dynamicLM-a tool for performing dynamic risk prediction using a landmark supermodel for survival data under competing risks.

MOTIVATION: Providing a dynamic assessment of prognosis is essential for improved personalized medicine. The landmark model for survival data provides a potentially powerful solution to the dynamic prediction of disease progression. However, a general framework and a flexible implementation of the model that incorporates various outcomes, such as competing events, have been lacking. We present an R package, dynamicLM, a user-friendly tool for the landmark model for the dynamic prediction of survival data under competing risks, which includes various functions for data preparation, model development, prediction and evaluation of predictive performance. IMPLEMENTATION: dynamicLM as an R package. GENERAL FEATURES: The package includes options for incorporating time-varying covariates, capturing time-dependent effects of predictors and fitting a cause-specific landmark model for time-to-event data with or without competing risks. Tools for evaluating the prediction performance include time-dependent area under the ROC curve, Brier Score and calibration. AVAILABILITY: Available on GitHub [https://github.com/thehanlab/dynamicLM].

Individualized Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for Lung Tumors: The iSABR Phase 2 Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

Importance: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is used for treating lung tumors but can cause toxic effects, including life-threatening damage to central structures. Retrospective data suggested that small tumors up to 10 cm3 in volume can be well controlled with a biologically effective dose less than 100 Gy. Objective: To assess whether individualizing lung SABR dose and fractionation by tumor size, location, and histological characteristics may be associated with local tumor control. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nonrandomized controlled trial (the iSABR trial, so named for individualized SABR) was a phase 2 multicenter trial enrolling participants from November 15, 2011, to December 5, 2018, at academic medical centers in the US and Japan. Data were analyzed from December 9, 2020, to May 10, 2023. Patients were enrolled in 3 groups according to cancer type: initial diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition T1-3N0M0 tumor (group 1), a T1-3N0M0 new primary NSCLC with a history of prior NSCLC or multiple NSCLCs (group 2), or lung metastases from NSCLC or another solid tumor (group 3). Intervention: Up to 4 tumors were treated with once-daily SABR. The dose ranged from 25 Gy in 1 fraction for peripheral tumors with a volume of 0 to 10 cm3 to 60 Gy in 8 fractions for central tumors with a volume greater than 30 cm3. Main outcome: Per-group freedom from local recurrence (same-lobe recurrence) at 1 year, with censoring at time of distant recurrence, death, or loss to follow-up. Results: In total, 217 unique patients (median [IQR] age, 72 [64-80] years; 129 [59%] male; 150 [69%] current or former smokers) were enrolled (some multiple times). There were 240 treatment courses: 79 in group 1, 82 in group 2, and 79 in group 3. A total of 285 tumors (211 [74%] peripheral and 74 [26%] central) were treated. The most common dose was 25 Gy in 1 fraction (158 tumors). The median (range) follow-up period was 33 (2-109) months, and the median overall survival was 59 (95% CI, 49-82) months. Freedom from local recurrence at 1 year was 97% (90% CI, 91%-99%) for group 1, 94% (90% CI, 87%-97%) for group 2, and 96% (90% CI, 89%-98%) for group 3. Freedom from local recurrence at 5 years ranged from 83% to 93% in the 3 groups. The proportion of patients with grade 3 to 5 toxic effects was low, at 5% (including a single patient [1%] with grade 5 toxic effects). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this nonrandomized controlled trial suggest that individualized SABR (iSABR) used to treat lung tumors may allow minimization of treatment dose and is associated with excellent local control. Individualized dosing should be considered for use in future trials. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01463423.

Optimizing Lung Cancer Screening With Risk Prediction: Current Challenges and the Emerging Role of Biomarkers.

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.Lung cancer screening has been demonstrated to reduce lung cancer mortality, but its benefits must be weighed against the potential harms of unnecessary procedures, false-positive radiological findings, and overdiagnosis. Individuals at highest risk of lung cancer are more likely to maximize benefits while minimizing harm from screening. Although current lung cancer screening guidelines recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) only consider age and smoking history for screening eligibility, National Comprehensive Cancer Network and other society guidelines recommend screening on the basis of individualized risk assessment including family history, environmental exposures, and presence of chronic lung disease. Risk prediction models have been developed to integrate various risk factors into an individualized risk prediction score. Previous evidence showed that risk prediction model-based screening eligibility could improve sensitivity for detecting lung cancer cases without reducing specificity. Furthermore, recent advances in lung cancer biomarkers have enhanced the performance of risk prediction in identifying lung cancer cases relative to the USPSTF criteria. These risk prediction models can be used to guide shared decision-making discussions before proceeding with lung cancer screening. This study aims to provide a concise overview of these prediction models and the emerging role of biomarker testing in risk prediction to facilitate conversations with patients. The goal was to assist clinicians in assessing individual patient risk, leading to more informed decision making.