Overall survival and central nervous system activity of crizotinib in ROS1-rearranged lung cancer-final results of the EUCROSS trial.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, we reported the first efficacy and safety analysis of EUCROSS, a phase II trial investigating crizotinib in ROS1 fusion-positive lung cancer. At that time, overall survival (OS) was immature and the effect of crizotinib on intracranial disease control remained unclear. Here, we present the final analysis of OS, systemic and intracranial activity, and the impact of co-occurring aberrations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: EUCROSS was a prospective, single-arm, phase II trial. The primary endpoint was best overall response rate (ORR) using RECIST 1.1. Secondary and exploratory endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), OS, and efficacy in pre-defined subgroups. RESULTS: Median OS of the intention-to-treat population (N = 34) was 54.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 20.3 months-not reached (NR); median follow-up 81.4 months] and median all-cause PFS of the response-evaluable population (N = 30) was 19.4 months (95% CI 10.1-32.2 months). Time on treatment was significantly correlated with OS (R = 0.82; P < 0.0001). Patients with co-occurring TP53 aberrations (28%) had a significantly shorter OS [hazard ratio (HR) 11; 95% CI 2.0-56.0; P = 0.006] and all-cause PFS (HR 4.2; 95% CI 1.2-15; P = 0.025). Patients with central nervous system (CNS) involvement at baseline (N = 6; 20%) had a numerically shorter median OS and all-cause PFS. Median intracranial PFS was 32.2 months (95% CI 23.7 months-NR) and the rate of isolated CNS progression was 24%. CONCLUSIONS: Our final analysis proves the efficacy of crizotinib in ROS1-positive lung cancer, but also highlights the devastating impact of TP53 mutations on survival and treatment efficacy. Additionally, our data show that CNS disease control is durable and the risk of CNS progression while on crizotinib treatment is low.

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.

Nivolumab plus chemotherapy in first-line metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: results of the phase III CheckMate 227 Part 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: In CheckMate 227 Part 1, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolonged overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥1% versus chemotherapy. We report results from CheckMate 227 Part 2, which evaluated nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred and fifty-five patients with systemic therapy-naive, stage IV/recurrent NSCLC without EGFR mutations or ALK alterations were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was OS with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. OS in all randomized patients was a hierarchically tested secondary endpoint. RESULTS: At 19.5 months' minimum follow-up, no significant improvement in OS was seen with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC [median OS 18.8 versus 15.6 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95.62% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.08, P = 0.1859]. Descriptive analyses showed OS improvement with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in all randomized patients (median OS 18.3 versus 14.7 months, HR 0.81, 95.62% CI 0.67-0.97) and in an exploratory analysis in squamous NSCLC (median OS 18.3 versus 12.0 months, HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50-0.97). A trend toward improved OS was seen with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy, regardless of the tumor mutation status of STK11 or TP53, regardless of tumor mutational burden, and in patients with intermediate/poor Lung Immune Prognostic Index scores. Safety with nivolumab plus chemotherapy was consistent with previous reports of first-line settings. CONCLUSIONS: CheckMate 227 Part 2 did not meet the primary endpoint of OS with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC. Descriptive analyses showed prolonged OS with nivolumab plus chemotherapy in all-randomized and squamous NSCLC populations, suggesting that this combination may benefit patients with untreated metastatic NSCLC.

Overall survival with adjuvant atezolizumab after chemotherapy in resected stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (IMpower010): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: IMpower010 (NCT02486718) demonstrated significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) with adjuvant atezolizumab versus best supportive care (BSC) following platinum-based chemotherapy in the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive and all stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) populations, at the DFS interim analysis. Results of the first interim analysis of overall survival (OS) are reported here. PATIENT AND METHODS: The design, participants, and primary-endpoint DFS outcomes have been reported for this phase III, open-label, 1 : 1 randomised study of atezolizumab (1200 mg q3w; 16 cycles) versus BSC after adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy (1-4 cycles) in adults with completely resected stage IB (≥4 cm)-IIIA NSCLC (per the Union Internationale Contre le Cancer and American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system, 7th edition). Key secondary endpoints included OS in the stage IB-IIIA intent-to-treat (ITT) population and safety in randomised treated patients. The first pre-specified interim analysis of OS was conducted after 251 deaths in the ITT population. Exploratory analyses included OS by baseline PD-L1 expression level (SP263 assay). RESULTS: At a median of 45.3 months' follow-up on 18 April 2022, 127 of 507 patients (25%) in the atezolizumab arm and 124 of 498 (24.9%) in the BSC arm had died. The median OS in the ITT population was not estimable; the stratified hazard ratio (HR) was 0.995 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.28]. The stratified OS HRs (95% CI) were 0.95 (0.74-1.24) in the stage II-IIIA (n = 882), 0.71 (0.49-1.03) in the stage II-IIIA PD-L1 tumour cell (TC) ≥1% (n = 476), and 0.43 (95% CI 0.24-0.78) in the stage II-IIIA PD-L1 TC ≥50% (n = 229) populations. Atezolizumab-related adverse event incidences remained unchanged since the previous analysis [grade 3/4 in 53 (10.7%) and grade 5 in 4 (0.8%) of 495 patients, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Although OS remains immature for the ITT population, these data indicate a positive trend favouring atezolizumab in PD-L1 subgroup analyses, primarily driven by the PD-L1 TC ≥50% stage II-IIIA subgroup. No new safety signals were observed after 13 months' additional follow-up. Together, these findings support the positive benefit-risk profile of adjuvant atezolizumab in this setting.

Ramucirumab plus erlotinib versus placebo plus erlotinib in previously untreated EGFR-mutated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (RELAY): exploratory analysis of next-generation sequencing results.

BACKGROUND: Ramucirumab plus erlotinib (RAM + ERL) demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) over placebo + ERL (PBO + ERL) in the phase III RELAY study of patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (EGFR+ mNSCLC; NCT02411448). Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was used to identify clinically relevant alterations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and explore their impact on treatment outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with EGFR+ mNSCLC were randomized 1 : 1 to ERL (150 mg/day) plus RAM (10 mg/kg)/PBO every 2 weeks. Liquid biopsies were to be prospectively collected at baseline, cycle 4 (C4), and postdiscontinuation follow-up. EGFR and co-occurring/treatment-emergent (TE) genomic alterations in ctDNA were analyzed using Guardant360 NGS platform. RESULTS: In those with valid baseline samples, detectable activating EGFR alterations in ctDNA (aEGFR+) were associated with shorter PFS [aEGFR+: 12.7 months (n = 255) versus aEGFR-: 22.0 months (n = 131); hazard ratio (HR) = 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42-2.51]. Irrespective of detectable/undetectable baseline aEGFR, RAM + ERL was associated with longer PFS versus PBO + ERL [aEGFR+: median PFS (mPFS) = 15.2 versus 11.1 months, HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.85; aEGFR-: mPFS = 22.1 versus 19.2 months, HR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.49-1.30]. Baseline alterations co-occurring with aEGFR were identified in 69 genes, most commonly TP53 (43%), EGFR (other than aEGFR; 25%), and PIK3CA (10%). PFS was longer in RAM + ERL, irrespective of baseline co-occurring alterations. Clearance of baseline aEGFR by C4 was associated with longer PFS (mPFS = 14.1 versus 7.0 months, HR = 0.481, 95% CI 0.33-0.71). RAM + ERL improved PFS outcomes, irrespective of aEGFR mutation clearance. TE gene alterations were most commonly in EGFR [T790M (29%), other (19%)] and TP53 (16%). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline aEGFR alterations in ctDNA were associated with shorter mPFS. RAM + ERL was associated with improved PFS outcomes, irrespective of detectable/undetectable aEGFR, co-occurring baseline alterations, or aEGFR+ clearance by C4. aEGFR+ clearance by C4 was associated with improved PFS outcomes. Monitoring co-occurring alterations and aEGFR+ clearance may provide insights into mechanisms of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance and the patients who may benefit from intensified treatment schedules.

Long-term survival with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolongs survival versus chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We further characterized clinical benefit with this regimen in a large pooled patient population and assessed the effect of response on survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were pooled from four studies of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced NSCLC (CheckMate 227 Part 1, 817 cohort A, 568 Part 1, and 012). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, duration of response, and safety were assessed. Landmark analyses of OS by response status at 6 months and by tumor burden reduction in responders to nivolumab plus ipilimumab were also assessed. RESULTS: In the pooled population (N = 1332) with a minimum follow-up of 29.1-58.9 months, median OS was 18.6 months, with a 3-year OS rate of 35%; median PFS was 5.4 months (3-year PFS rate, 17%). Objective response rate was 36%; median duration of response was 23.7 months, with 38% of responders having an ongoing response at 3 years. In patients with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) <1%, ≥1%, 1%-49%, or ≥50%, 3-year OS rates were 30%, 38%, 30%, and 48%. Three-year OS rates were 30% and 38% in patients with squamous or non-squamous histology. Efficacy outcomes in patients aged ≥75 years were similar to the overall pooled population (median OS, 20.1 months; 3-year OS rate, 34%). In the pooled population, responders to nivolumab plus ipilimumab at 6 months had longer post-landmark OS than those with stable or progressive disease; 3-year OS rates were 66%, 22%, and 14%, respectively. Greater depth of response was associated with prolonged survival; in patients with tumor burden reduction ≥80%, 50% to <80%, or 30% to <50%, 3-year OS rates were 85%, 72%, and 44%, respectively. No new safety signals were identified in the pooled population. CONCLUSION: Long-term survival benefit and durable response with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in this large patient population further support this first-line treatment option for advanced NSCLC.

Treatment outcome of atypical EGFR mutations in the German National Network Genomic Medicine Lung Cancer (nNGM).

BACKGROUND: Atypical EGFR mutations occur in 10%-30% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with EGFR mutations and their sensitivity to classical epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) is highly heterogeneous. Patients harboring one group of uncommon, recurrent EGFR mutations (G719X, S768I, L861Q) respond to EGFR-TKI. Exon 20 insertions are mostly insensitive to EGFR-TKI but display sensitivity to exon 20 inhibitors. Clinical outcome data of patients with very rare point and compound mutations upon systemic treatments are still sparse to date. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, multicenter study of the national Network Genomic Medicine (nNGM) in Germany, 856 NSCLC cases with atypical EGFR mutations including co-occurring mutations were reported from 12 centers. Clinical follow-up data after treatment with different EGFR-TKIs, chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors were available from 260 patients. Response to treatment was analyzed in three major groups: (i) uncommon mutations (G719X, S7681, L861Q and combinations), (ii) exon 20 insertions and (iii) very rare EGFR mutations (very rare single point mutations, compound mutations, exon 18 deletions, exon 19 insertions). RESULTS: Our study comprises the largest thus far reported real-world cohort of very rare EGFR single point and compound mutations treated with different systemic treatments. We validated higher efficacy of EGFR-TKI in comparison to chemotherapy in group 1 (uncommon), while most exon 20 insertions (group 2) were not EGFR-TKI responsive. In addition, we found TKI sensitivity of very rare point mutations (group 3) and of complex EGFR mutations containing exon 19 deletions or L858R mutations independent of the combination partner. Notably, treatment responses in group 3 (very rare) were highly heterogeneous. Co-occurring TP53 mutations exerted a non-significant trend for a detrimental effect on outcome in EGFR-TKI-treated patients in groups 2 and 3 but not in group 1. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we propose a novel nNGM classification of atypical EGFR mutations.

International Tailored Chemotherapy Adjuvant (ITACA) trial, a phase III multicenter randomized trial comparing adjuvant pharmacogenomic-driven chemotherapy versus standard adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Several strategies have been investigated to improve the 4% survival advantage of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this investigator-initiated study we aimed to evaluate the predictive utility of the messenger RNA (mRNA) expression levels of excision repair cross complementation group 1 (ERCC1) and thymidylate synthase (TS) as assessed in resected tumor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred and seventy-three completely resected stage II-III NSCLC patients were enrolled and randomly assigned in each of the four genomic subgroups to investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy (C, n = 389) or tailored chemotherapy (T, n = 384). All anticancer drugs were administered according to standard doses and schedules. Stratification factors included stage and smoking status. The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Six hundred and ninety patients were included in the primary analysis. At a median follow-up of 45.9 months, 85 (24.6%) and 70 (20.3%) patients died in arms C and T, respectively. Five-year survival for patients in arms C and T was of 65.4% (95% CI (confidence interval): 58.5% to 71.4%) and 72.9% (95% CI: 66.5% to 78.3%), respectively. The estimated hazard ratio (HR) was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.56-1.06, P value: 0.109) for arm T versus arm C. HR for recurrence-free survival was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.69-1.14, P value: 0.341) for arm T versus arm C. Grade 3-5 toxicities were more frequently reported in arm C than in arm T. CONCLUSION: In completely resected stage II-III NSCLC tailoring adjuvant chemotherapy conferred a non-statistically significant trend for OS favoring the T arm. In terms of safety, the T arm was associated with better efficacy/toxicity ratio related to the different therapeutic choices in the experimental arm.

Consolidation nivolumab and ipilimumab versus observation in limited-disease small-cell lung cancer after chemo-radiotherapy - results from the randomised phase II ETOP/IFCT 4-12 STIMULI trial.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) is the standard treatment in limited-disease small-cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC), with 5-year overall survival (OS) of only 25% to 33%. PATIENTS AND METHODS: STIMULI is a 1:1 randomised phase II trial aiming to demonstrate superiority of consolidation combination immunotherapy versus observation after chemo-radiotherapy plus PCI (protocol amendment-1). Consolidation immunotherapy consisted of four cycles of nivolumab [1 mg/kg, every three weeks (Q3W)] plus ipilimumab (3 mg/kg, Q3W), followed by nivolumab monotherapy (240 mg, Q2W) for up to 12 months. Patient recruitment closed prematurely due to slow accrual and the statistical analyses plan was updated to address progression-free survival (PFS) as the only primary endpoint. RESULTS: Of the 222 patients enrolled, 153 were randomised (78: experimental; 75: observation). Among the randomised patients, median age was 62 years, 60% males, 34%/65% current/former smokers, 31%/66% performance status (PS) 0/1. Up to 25 May 2020 (median follow-up 22.4 months), 40 PFS events were observed in the experimental arm, with median PFS 10.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.0-not estimable (NE)] versus 42 events and median 14.5 months (8.2-NE) in the observation, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02 (0.66-1.58), two-sided P = 0.93. With updated follow-up (03 June 2021; median: 35 months), median OS was not reached in the experimental arm, while it was 32.1 months (26.1-NE) in observation, with HR = 0.95 (0.59-1.52), P = 0.82. In the experimental arm, median time-to-treatment-discontinuation was only 1.7 months. CTCAE v4 grade ≥3 adverse events were experienced by 62% of patients in the experimental and 25% in the observation arm, with 4 and 1 fatal, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The STIMULI trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improving PFS with nivolumab-ipilimumab consolidation after chemo-radiotherapy in LD-SCLC. A short period on active treatment related to toxicity and treatment discontinuation likely affected the efficacy results.

First-line immunotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients with ECOG performance status 2: results of an International Expert Panel Meeting by the Italian Association of Thoracic Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy represents the standard of care in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), either as monotherapy in high programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive tumors (≥50%) or in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy regardless of PD-L1 status. However, most pivotal clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) did not include patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 2. Hence, a consensus is lacking on the safety and efficacy of ICIs in this specific subgroup of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A virtual International Expert Panel took place in July 2021 with the aim of reviewing the available evidence on the use of ICIs in NSCLC patients with ECOG PS 2, both in clinical practice and in a research setting. RESULTS: All panelists expressed concern about the applicability of currently available PS scales to evaluate patients for ICI treatment. The panelists agreed that, though limited, the available data support the safety of single-agent immunotherapy in PS 2 NSCLC patients, whereas concern was raised on the safety of ICI combinations, mainly related to chemotherapy and/or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 toxicity. On the basis of reviewed data, ICI efficacy may be speculated in PS 2 NSCLC patients; however, PS 2 remains a negative prognostic category as compared to PS 0-1 in patients treated with ICI, as it is for chemotherapy. The panelists defined high, medium and low priorities in clinical research. High priority was attributed to the inclusion of PS 2 patients in prospective clinical trials and the specific evaluation of combined ICI treatments with attenuated chemotherapy doses. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current evidence, the panelists outlined the major limitations affecting PS 2 patients with NSCLC and reached common considerations on the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of ICI monotherapy and ICI combinations in the first-line setting.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone (four cycles) in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: CheckMate 9LA 2-year update.

BACKGROUND: To further characterize survival benefit with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, we report updated data from the phase III CheckMate 9LA trial with a 2-year minimum follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients were treatment naïve, with stage IV/recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer, no known sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1. Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks with two cycles of chemotherapy, or four cycles of chemotherapy. Updated efficacy and safety outcomes are reported, along with progression-free survival (PFS) after next line of treatment (PFS2), treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) by treatment cycle, and efficacy outcomes in patients who discontinued all treatment components in the experimental arm due to TRAEs. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 30.7 months, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy continued to prolong overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy. Median OS was 15.8 versus 11.0 months [hazard ratio 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.61-0.86)]; 2-year OS rate was 38% versus 26%. Two-year PFS rate was 20% versus 8%. ORR was 38% versus 25%, respectively; 34% versus 12% of all responses were ongoing at 2 years. Median PFS2 was 13.9 versus 8.7 months. Improved efficacy outcomes in the experimental versus control arm were observed across most subgroups, including by programmed death-ligand 1 and histology. No new safety signals were observed; onset of grade 3/4 TRAEs was mostly observed during the first two treatment cycles in the experimental arm. In patients who discontinued all components of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy treatment due to TRAEs (n = 61) median OS was 27.5 months; 56% of responders had an ongoing response ≥1 year after discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: With a 2-year minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy provided durable efficacy benefits over chemotherapy with a manageable safety profile and remains an efficacious first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Clinical definition of acquired resistance to immunotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

Acquired resistance (AR) to programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-(L)1] blockade is frequent in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), occurring in a majority of initial responders. Patients with AR may have unique properties of persistent antitumor immunity that could be re-harnessed by investigational immunotherapies. The absence of a consistent clinical definition of AR to PD-(L)1 blockade and lack of uniform criteria for ensuing enrollment in clinical trials remains a major barrier to progress; such clinical definitions have advanced biologic and therapeutic discovery. We examine the considerations and potential controversies in developing a patient-level definition of AR in NSCLC treated with PD-(L)1 blockade. Taking into account the specifics of NSCLC biology and corresponding treatment strategies, we propose a practical, clinical definition of AR to PD-(L)1 blockade for use in clinical reports and prospective clinical trials. Patients should meet the following criteria: received treatment that includes PD-(L)1 blockade; experienced objective response on PD-(L)1 blockade (inclusion of a subset of stable disease will require future investigation); have progressive disease occurring within 6 months of last anti-PD-(L)1 antibody treatment or rechallenge with anti-PD-(L)1 antibody in patients not exposed to anti-PD-(L)1 in 6 months.

The immune microenvironment in EGFR- and ERBB2-mutated lung adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Targeted therapies have improved survival and quality of life for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with actionable driver mutations. However, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 gene (HER2, also known as ERBB2) exon 20 insertions (Ex20mut) are characterized by a poor response to currently approved tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immunotherapies. The underlying immune biology is not well understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We carried out messenger RNA expression profiling of lung adenocarcinomas (ADCs) with ERBB2 (n = 19) and EGFR exon 20-insertion mutations (n = 13) and compared these to tumors with classical EGFR mutations (n = 40, affecting EGFR exons 18, 19 or 21) and EGFR/ERBB2 mutation-negative lung ADC (EGFR/ERBB2wt, n = 26) focusing on immunologically relevant transcripts. Tumor-infiltrating immune cells were estimated from gene expression profiles. RESULTS: Cytotoxic cells were significantly lower in EGFR-mutated tumors regardless of the affected exon, while Th1 cells were significantly lower in EGFR-Ex20mut compared to EGFR/ERBB2wt tumors. We assessed the differentially expressed genes of ERBB2-Ex20mut and EGFR-Ex20mut tumors compared to EGFR-Ex18/19/21mut and EGFR/ERBB2wt tumors. Of these, the genes GUSB, HDAC11, IFNGR2, PUM1, RASGRF1 and RBL2 were up-regulated, while a lower expression of CBLC, GBP1, GBP2, GBP4 and MYC was observed in all three comparison groups. The omnibus test revealed 185 significantly (FDR = 5%) differentially expressed genes and we found these four most significant gene expression changes in the study cohort: VHL and JAK1 were overexpressed in ERBB2-Ex20mut and EGFR-Ex20mut tumors compared to both EGFR-Ex18/19/21mut and EGFR/ERBB2wt tumors. RIPK1 and STK11IP showed the highest expression in ERBB2-Ex20mut tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted gene expression profiling is a promising tool to read out the characteristics of the tumor microenvironment from routine diagnostic lung cancer biopsies. Significant immune reactivity and specific immunosuppressive characteristics in ERBB2-Ex20mut and EGFR-Ex20mut lung ADC with at least some degree of immune infiltration support further clinical evaluation of immune-modulators as partners of immune checkpoint inhibitors in such tumors.

Association of the advanced lung cancer inflammation index (ALI) with immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The advanced lung cancer inflammation index [ALI: body mass index × serum albumin/neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)] reflects systemic host inflammation, and is easily reproducible. We hypothesized that ALI could assist guidance of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 672 stage IV NSCLC patients treated with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors alone or in combination with chemotherapy in 25 centers in Greece and Germany, and a control cohort of 444 stage IV NSCLC patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy without subsequent targeted or immunotherapy drugs. The association of clinical outcomes with biomarkers was analyzed with Cox regression models, including cross-validation by calculation of the Harrell's C-index. RESULTS: High ALI values (>18) were significantly associated with longer overall survival (OS) for patients receiving ICI monotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.402, P < 0.0001, n = 460], but not chemo-immunotherapy (HR = 0.624, P = 0.111, n = 212). Similar positive correlations for ALI were observed for objective response rate (36% versus 24%, P = 0.008) and time-on-treatment (HR = 0.52, P < 0.001), in case of ICI monotherapy only. In the control cohort of chemotherapy, the association between ALI and OS was weaker (HR = 0.694, P = 0.0002), and showed a significant interaction with the type of treatment (ICI monotherapy versus chemotherapy, P < 0.0001) upon combined analysis of the two cohorts. In multivariate analysis, ALI had a stronger predictive effect than NLR, PD-L1 tumor proportion score, lung immune prognostic index, and EPSILoN scores. Among patients with PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥50% receiving first-line ICI monotherapy, a high ALI score >18 identified a subset with longer OS and time-on-treatment (median 35 and 16 months, respectively), similar to these under chemo-immunotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The ALI score is a powerful prognostic and predictive biomarker for patients with advanced NSCLC treated with PD-L1 inhibitors alone, but not in combination with chemotherapy. Its association with outcomes appears to be stronger than that of other widely used parameters. For PD-L1-high patients, an ALI score >18 could assist the selection of cases that do not need addition of chemotherapy.

Targeting KRAS in non-small-cell lung cancer: recent progress and new approaches.

Rat sarcoma (RAS) is the most frequently mutated oncogene in human cancer, with Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) being the most commonly mutated RAS isoform. Overall, KRAS accounts for 85% of RAS mutations observed in human cancers and is present in 35% of lung adenocarcinomas (LUADs). While the use of targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) has drastically changed the treatment landscape of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in recent years, historic attempts to target KRAS (both direct and indirect approaches) have had little success, and no KRAS-specific targeted therapies have been approved to date for patients in this molecular subset of NSCLC. With the discovery by Ostrem, Shokat, and colleagues of the switch II pocket on the surface of the active and inactive forms of KRAS, we now have an improved understanding of the complex interactions involved in the RAS family of signaling proteins which has led to the development of a number of promising direct KRASG12C inhibitors, such as sotorasib and adagrasib. In previously treated patients with KRASG12C-mutant NSCLC, clinical activity has been shown for both sotorasib and adagrasib monotherapy; these data suggest promising new treatment options are on the horizon. With the stage now set for a new era in the treatment of KRASG12C-mutated NSCLC, many questions remain to be answered in order to further elucidate the mechanisms of resistance, how best to use combination strategies, and if KRASG12C inhibitors will have suitable activity in earlier lines of therapy for patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC.