Immune-Related Adverse Events and Survival Among Patients With Metastatic NSCLC Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Importance: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) secondary to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy reportedly improve overall survival (OS) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, studies have been small and the association between irAE severity and OS remains poorly defined. Objective: To examine the association between irAEs and their severity with OS in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC receiving ICIs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective observational cohort study included patients with NSCLC receiving ICIs between March 1, 2014, and November 30, 2021, with follow-up until March 31, 2023. Data analysis was completed April 26, 2023. The Alberta Immunotherapy Database, a provincial, multicenter cohort, was used to capture data from patients receiving ICIs in Alberta, Canada. Participants included 803 patients 18 years or older who received at least 1 cycle of ICI (alone or with chemotherapy), agnostic to treatment line. Exposure: Developing an irAE mandating delay or discontinuation of ICI therapy and/or systematic corticosteroids for management of toxic effects (hereinafter referred to as clinically meaningful irAEs). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was association between irAEs and OS according to Kaplan-Meier analysis. Clinically meaningful irAEs were identified. Patients with poor prognosis (survival <3 months) who may have died prior to irAE development were excluded from OS analysis, mitigating immortal time bias. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression analyses ascertained variables associated with OS. Results: Among the 803 patients included in the analysis, the median age of patients with irAEs was 69.7 (IQR, 63.1-75.2) years and the median age of those without irAEs was 67.5 (IQR, 60.4-73.3) years, with comparable sex distribution (139 of 295 men [47.1%] and 156 of 295 women [52.9%] with irAEs vs 254 of 505 men [50.3%] and 251 of 505 women [49.7%] without irAEs). Mitigating immortal time bias (n = 611), irAEs were associated with OS (median OS with irAEs, 23.7 [95% CI, 19.3-29.1] months; median OS without irAEs, 9.8 [95% CI, 8.7-11.4] months; P < .001). No OS difference was associated with treatment in hospital vs as outpatients for an irAE (median OS, 20.8 [95% CI, 11.7-30.6] vs 25.6 [95% CI, 20.1-29.8] months; P = .33). Developing irAEs remained associated with OS in the total cohort after Cox proportional hazards regression with known prognostic characteristics (hazard ratio, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.40-0.70]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 803 patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC receiving ICIs, developing a clinically meaningful irAE was associated with improved OS. This association was not compromised by hospitalization for severe toxic effects. Whether and how ICI therapy resumption after an irAE is associated with OS warrants further study.

Lung Immune Therapy Evaluation (LITE) Risk, a Novel Prognostic Model for Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Immune Checkpoint Blockade.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to identify baseline characteristics, that are prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in patients with NSCLC treated with ICI monotherapy, in order to derive the Lung Immune Therapy Evaluation (LITE) risk, a prognostic model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multi-center observational cohort study of patients with advanced NSCLC that received ≥1 dose of ICI monotherapy. The training set (n=342) consisted of patients with NSCLC who received first line ICI. The test set (n=153) used for external validation was a discrete cohort of patients who received second line ICI. 20 candidate prognostic factors were examined. Penalized Cox regression was used for variable selection. Multiple imputation was used to address missingness. RESULTS: Three baseline characteristics populated the final model: ECOG (0, 1 or ≥2), lactate dehydrogenase>upper limit of normal, and derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio ≥3. Patients were parsed into 3 risk groups; favorable (n=146, risk score 0-1), intermediate (n=101, risk score 2) and poor (n=95, risk score ≥3). The c-statistic of the training cohort was 0.702 and 0.694 after bootstrapping. The test cohort c-statistic was 0.664. The median OS for favorable, intermediate and poor LITE risk were; 28.3 months, 9.1 months and 2.1 months respectively. Improving LITE risk group was associated with improved OS, intermediate vs favorable HR 2.08 (95%CI 1.46-2.97, P < .001); poor vs favorable HR 5.21 (95%CI 3.69-7.34, P < .001). CONCLUSION: A simple prognostic model, utilizing accessible clinical data, can discriminate survival outcomes in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Five-Year Survival Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Versus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in CheckMate 227.

PURPOSE: We present 5-year results from CheckMate 227 Part 1, in which nivolumab plus ipilimumab improved overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status. METHODS: Adults with stage IV/recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR mutations or ALK alterations and with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% or < 1% (n = 1739) were randomly assigned. Patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% were randomly assigned to first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab alone, or chemotherapy. Patients with tumor PD-L1 < 1% were randomly assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy. End points included exploratory 5-year results for efficacy, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 61.3 months, 5-year OS rates were 24% versus 14% for nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 19% versus 7% (PD-L1 < 1%). The median duration of response was 24.5 versus 6.7 months (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 19.4 versus 4.8 months (PD-L1 < 1%). Among patients surviving 5 years, 66% (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 64% (PD-L1 < 1%) were off nivolumab plus ipilimumab without initiating subsequent systemic anticancer treatment by the 5-year time point. Survival benefit continued after nivolumab plus ipilimumab discontinuation because of treatment-related adverse events, with a 5-year OS rate of 39% (combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% populations). Quality of life in 5-year survivors treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab was similar to that in the general US population through the 5-year follow-up. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: With all patients off immunotherapy treatment for ≥ 3 years, nivolumab plus ipilimumab increased 5-year survivorship versus chemotherapy, including long-term, durable clinical benefit regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. These data support nivolumab plus ipilimumab as an effective first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

Phase Ib study of avadomide (CC-122) in combination with rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma.

The multicenter, phase Ib CC-122-DLBCL-001 dose-expansion study (NCT02031419) explored the cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD) agent avadomide (CC-122) plus rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or follicular lymphoma (FL). Patients received avadomide 3 mg/day 5 days on/2 days off plus rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 8 of cycle 1, day 1 of cycles 2 through 6, and day 1 of every third subsequent cycle for 2 years. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability; preliminary efficacy was a secondary endpoint. A total of 68 patients were enrolled (DLBCL [n = 27], FL [n = 41; 31 lenalidomide-naïve, 10 lenalidomide-treated]). Median age was 62 years (range, 33-84 years), and patients had received a median of 3 (range, 1-8) prior regimens. Among patients with DLBCL, 66.7% had primary refractory disease (partial response or less to initial therapy). Among patients with FL, 65.9% were rituximab-refractory at study entry and 10.0% were lenalidomide-refractory. The most common any-grade avadomide-related adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (63.2%), infections/infestations (23.5%), fatigue (22.1%), and diarrhea (19.1%). The most common grade 3/4 avadomide-related AEs were neutropenia (55.9%) infections/infestations (8.8%), and febrile neutropenia (7.4%). In patients with DLBCL, overall response rate (ORR) was 40.7% and median duration of response (mDOR) was 8.0 months. In patients with FL, ORR was 80.5% and mDOR was 27.6 months; response rates were similar in lenalidomide-naïve and -treated patients. Avadomide plus rituximab was well tolerated, and preliminary antitumor activity was observed in patients with R/R DLBCL and FL, including subgroups with typically poor outcomes. These results support further investigation of novel CELMoD agents in combination with rituximab in R/R DLBCL and FL.

Phase Ib study of combinations of avadomide (CC-122), CC-223, CC-292, and rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

There is a need for additional treatment options for patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who do not benefit from available therapies. We examined combinations of the cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD) agent avadomide (CC-122), the selective, ATP-competitive mammalian target of rapamycin kinase inhibitor CC-223, and the potent, selective, covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor CC-292 in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL. In the multicenter, phase Ib CC-122-DLBCL-001 study (NCT02031419), the dose-escalation portion explored combinations of CC-122, CC-223, and CC-292 administered as doublets or triplets with rituximab in patients with chemorefractory DLBCL. Primary endpoints were safety, tolerability, and dose-limiting toxicities; additional endpoints included pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, biomarkers, and preliminary efficacy. As of December 1, 2017, 106 patients were enrolled across four cohorts. The median age was 65 years (range 24-84 years), and patients had a median of 3 (range 1-10) prior to regimens. A total of 101 patients (95.3%) discontinued, most commonly due to disease progression (49.1%). The most common any-grade adverse events (AEs) across treatment arms were gastrointestinal and hematologic; the most common grade 3/4 AEs were hematologic. CC-122 was well tolerated, with no unexpected safety concerns. Preliminary efficacy was observed in three of four treatment arms. CC-122 plus rituximab was considered suitable for dose expansion, whereas CC-223 and CC-292 combinations were associated with enhanced toxicity and/or insufficient improvement in responses. CC-122 plus rituximab was well tolerated, with preliminary antitumor activity in patients with R/R DLBCL. This innovative study demonstrates the feasibility of assessing the tolerability and preliminary efficacy of novel combinations utilizing a multi-arm dose-finding design.

Expected Cost Savings From Low-Dose Computed Tomography Scan Screening for Lung Cancer in Alberta, Canada.

Introduction: The expensive modern therapeutic regimens for advanced lung cancer (LC) stages have been recently approved. We evaluated whether low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) LC screening of high-risk Albertans is cost saving. Methods: We used a decision analytical modeling technique with a health system perspective and a time horizon of 3 years to compare benefits associated with reduced health service utilization (HSU) from earlier diagnosis to the costs of screening. Using patient-level data, HSU costs by stage of disease were estimated for patients with LC, including inpatient, outpatient, and physician services, and costs for prescription drugs and cancer treatments. Results: Of 101,000 people aged 55 to 74 years eligible for screening, an estimated 88,476 scans would be performed in Alberta in 3 years. Given LDCT sensitivity and specificity of 90.5% and 93.1%, respectively, we estimated that a stage shift toward earlier diagnosis would be expected whereby 43% more patients would be identified at stage 1 or 2 as compared with without screening. The estimated cost of screening is $35.6 million (M), whereas the stage shift associated with screening would avoid $42M in HSU costs. The net cost avoidance associated with screening is therefore $6.65M. The probability for the screening to be cost saving is estimated at 72%. Conclusions: This study has revealed that LDCT LC screening is likely to be cost saving in Alberta. Adoption of this program into the provincial health care system is worth considering provided constraints in the system related to surgical capacity and CT wait times could be addressed.

Novel, First-in-Human, Oral PCLX-001 Treatment in a Patient with Relapsed Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

Patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have limited treatment options, particularly if they are transplantation or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell ineligible, and novel therapeutics are needed. An 86-year-old woman with relapsed DLBCL received a novel, first-in-class small molecule inhibitor of N-myristoyltransferase (NMT) as the initial patient on a phase I dose escalation trial. Daily oral administration of 20 mg PCLX-001 tablets produced a pharmacokinetic profile suitable for single daily dosing: rapid oral absorption, followed by an apparent elimination half-life of 16 h, without systemic accumulation of drug by day 15. Pharmacodynamic tests showed no clear change in NMT1 and NMT2 levels or selected NMT substrate Lyn and HGAL protein levels in normal circulating blood mononuclear cells, suggesting a higher dose will be required for normal tissue toxicity. The patient did not experience any dose-limiting toxicities but had disease progression after 28 days of study therapy. Dose escalation continues in other patients in this first-in-human study of a new class of anticancer drug. We conclude that PCLX-001 oral monotherapy has suitable pharmacokinetic parameters for dose escalation, and that higher doses are required to achieve pharmacodynamic evidence of on-target activity in normal tissues. The current protocol is appropriately designed to achieve these ends, and the study proceeds without modification.

Real-World Management and Outcomes of Crizotinib-Treated ROS1-Rearranged NSCLC: A Retrospective Canadian Cohort.

The use, safety and effectiveness of crizotinib as part of the management of ROS1-rearranged NSCLC patients in a real-world Canadian clinical cohort was the focus of this retrospective review. Twenty-one ROS1-rearranged patients with advanced/metastatic disease receiving crizotinib between 2014-2020 were identified; crizotinib demonstrated tolerability and effectiveness in this population where outcomes were similar to those described in other crizotinib-treated real-world cohorts, but lower than those of the PROFILE 1001 clinical trial population. Systemic anti-cancer therapy prior to crizotinib initiation occurred in half of the study cohort, with platin-pemetrexed and immune checkpoint inhibitors being most common. Platin-pemetrexed showed good effectiveness in this cohort, but despite high prevalence of upregulated PD-L1 expression, immune checkpoint inhibitors showed poor effectiveness in his cohort. Among all systemic therapies received, crizotinib showed the most effective disease control, although longer intervals between diagnosis and crizotinib initiation were more common among those showing a lack of clinical response to crizotinib, and patients with brain metastases at the time of crizotinib initiation also showed increased diagnosis to crizotinib initiation intervals and decreased clinical response to crizotinib. This study reveals crizotinib has clinical benefit, but timely identification of ROS1-rearrangements and initiation targeted therapies appears important to maximize outcome in this population.

First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced NSCLC: 4-Year Outcomes From the Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 CheckMate 227 Part 1 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In CheckMate 227, nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in patients with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) greater than or equal to 1% (primary end point) or less than 1% (prespecified descriptive analysis). We report results with minimum 4 years' follow-up. METHODS: Adults with previously untreated stage IV or recurrent NSCLC were randomized (1:1:1) to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, or chemotherapy (PD-L1 ≥1%); or to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy (PD-L1 <1%). Efficacy included OS and other measures. Safety included timing and management of immune-mediated adverse events (AEs). A post hoc analysis evaluated efficacy in patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to treatment-related AEs (TRAEs). RESULTS: After 54.8 months' median follow-up, OS remained longer with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with PD-L1 greater than or equal to 1% (hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.90) and PD-L1 less than 1% (0.64; 0.51-0.81); 4-year OS rate with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy was 29% versus 18% (PD-L1 ≥1%); and 24% versus 10% (PD-L1 <1%). Benefits were observed in both squamous and nonsquamous histologies. In a descriptive analysis, efficacy was improved with nivolumab plus ipilimumab relative to nivolumab (PD-L1 ≥1%) and nivolumab plus chemotherapy (PD-L1 <1%). Safety was consistent with previous reports. The most common immune-mediated AE with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, and nivolumab plus chemotherapy was rash; most immune-mediated AEs (except endocrine events) occurred within 6 months from start of treatment and resolved within 3 months after, mainly with systemic corticosteroids. Patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to TRAEs had long-term OS benefits, as seen in the all randomized population. CONCLUSIONS: At more than 4 years' minimum follow-up, with all patients off immunotherapy treatment for at least 2 years, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate durable long-term efficacy in patients with advanced NSCLC. No new safety signals were identified. Immune-mediated AEs occurred early and resolved quickly with guideline-based management. Discontinuation of nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to TRAEs did not have a negative impact on the long-term benefits seen in all randomized patients.

Retrospective Real-World Outcomes for Patients With ALK-Rearranged Lung Cancer Receiving ALK Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: This study explored the use, safety, and efficacy of initial use of an ALK-inhibiting targeted therapy (ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI]) in patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC in a population-based, real-world clinical population within the province of Alberta, Canada. METHODS: Demographic, clinical, treatment, and outcome data of the patients with advanced or metastatic ALK-rearranged NSCLC receiving their first ALK TKI between 2014 and 2019 were included in the analysis. RESULTS: A total of 92 patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC treated with ALK TKI (78% crizotinib, 22% alectinib) were identified. In the ALK-rearranged cohort, 1-year survival rate was 73% and median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 48.5 months and 17.0 months, respectively. An objective response rate of 49% was observed, and adverse events were reported in 70% of the patients, primarily of low grade (84%). Case-matched comparison to patients with ALK-wildtype disease treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy revealed the benefit of ALK TKI in the context of an ALK rearrangement (ALK-rearranged versus ALK-wildtype) (median post-treatment initiation OS: 46.8 versus 14.2 mo, p < 0.001). Outcomes, measured from the time of ALK TKI initiation, differed by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) (ECOG < 2 versus ECOG ≥ 2) (median OS: not reached versus 6.8 mo, p < 0.001; median PFS 17.6 versus 7.4 mo, p = 0.02), disease presentation (relapsed versus de novo) (median PFS: 30.8 versus 15.0 mo, p = 0.04), and brain metastasis onset (brain metastases development during ALK TKI versus baseline brain metastases) (not reached versus 12.8 mo, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trials have firmly established that ALK TKIs are safe, well tolerated, and effective; these findings reveal that their impact in a real-world setting is just as profound. The availability and use of ALK TKI therapies contribute to the impressive gains in survival experienced by contemporary patients with ALK-rearranged disease, rendering patients with this oncodriven form of NSCLC among the longest surviving patients with lung cancer.

Pharmacological and clinical properties of lorlatinib in the treatment of ALK-rearranged advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 3-7% of advanced non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are driven by an anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement. Crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib, and brigatinib are active ALK inhibitors (ALKi) used to treat this oncogene-driven subset of NSCLC. Resistance occurs with time to ALKi and new therapeutics are being developed. Lorlatinib is an efficacious third-generation ALKi with an ability to overcome resistance mutations that develop with first- or second-generation ALKi. AREAS COVERED: Herein, the authors review the mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy, and safety of lorlatinib and provide their future perspectives on this drug. EXPERT COMMENTARY: Lorlatinib is a potent ALK and ROS-1 inhibitor that also has activity against many acquired ALK resistance mutations. Clinical trials show the robust systemic and intracranial anti-tumor activity of lorlatinib in ALK rearranged advanced NSCLC. Adverse events of lorlatinib are unique and manageable. These include hypocholesteremia, hypertriglyceridemia, edema, cognitive effects, weight gain, and diarrhea. Loratinib will play an increasing role in the management of ALK-rearranged NSCLC with the optimal sequencing of ALKi undergoing further research.

EV-101: A Phase I Study of Single-Agent Enfortumab Vedotin in Patients With Nectin-4-Positive Solid Tumors, Including Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To assess the safety/tolerability and antitumor activity of enfortumab vedotin (EV), a novel investigational antibody-drug conjugate that delivers the microtubule-disrupting agent, monomethyl auristatin E, to cells that express Nectin-4. METHODS: EV-101 is a phase I dose escalation/expansion study that enrolled patients with Nectin-4-expressing solid tumors (eg, metastatic urothelial carcinoma [mUC]) who progressed on ≥ 1 prior chemotherapy regimen and/or programmed death-1 receptor/programmed death ligand-1 [PD-(L)1] inhibitor, including a cohort of patients with mUC who received prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. Patients received escalating doses of EV up to 1.25 mg/kg on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 28-day cycle. Primary objectives were evaluation of safety/tolerability and pharmacokinetics; antitumor activity was a secondary objective. RESULTS: Enrolled patients with mUC (n = 155) were heavily pretreated, with 96% having prior platinum-based chemotherapy and 29% receiving ≥ 3 lines of prior treatment. Maximum tolerated dose of EV was not established; however, the recommended phase II dose was identified as 1.25 mg/kg. Rash, peripheral neuropathy, fatigue, alopecia, and nausea were the most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs); the most common TRAEs were grade 1-2 in severity. Among the 112 patients with mUC treated with single-agent EV 1.25 mg/kg, the investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 43%, and duration of response was 7.4 months. Median overall survival (OS) was 12.3 months, and the OS rate at 1 year was 51.8%. Similar ORR and estimated median OS were observed in patients ≥ 75 years of age with and without prior anti-PD-(L)1 treatment, liver metastases, or upper-tract disease. CONCLUSION: Single-agent EV was generally well tolerated and provided clinically meaningful and durable responses in patients with mUC; survival data are encouraging. A pivotal phase II and a confirmatory phase III study are ongoing.

Development, validation and results from the impact of treatment evolution in non-small cell lung cancer (iTEN) model.

OBJECTIVES: Treatment of advanced NSCLC (aNSCLC) is rapidly evolving, as new targeted and immuno-oncology (I-O) treatments become available. The iTEN model was developed to predict the cost and survival benefits of changing aNSCLC treatment patterns from a Canadian healthcare system perspective. This report describes iTEN model development and validation. MATERIALS & METHODS: A discrete event patient simulation of aNSCLC was developed. A modified Delphi process using Canadian clinical experts informed the development of treatment sequences that included commonly used, Health Canada approved treatments of aNSCLC. Treatment efficacy and the timing of progression and death were estimated from published Kaplan-Meier progression free and overall survival data. Costs (2018 CDN$) included were: drug acquisition and administration, imaging, monitoring, adverse events, physician visits, best supportive care, and end-of-life. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Clinical validity of the iTEN model was assessed by comparing model survival predictions to published real-world evidence (RWE). Four RWE studies that reported the overall survival of patients treated with a broad sampling of common aNSCLC treatment patterns were used for validation. The validation coefficient of determination was R2 = 0.95, with the model generally producing estimates that were neither optimistic nor conservative. The model estimated that current Canadian practice patterns yield a median survival of almost 13 months, a five-year survival rate of 3% and a life-time per-treated-patient cost of $110,806. Cost and survival estimates are presented and were found to vary by aNSCLC subtype. In conclusion, the iTEN model is a reliable tool for forecasting the impact on cost and survival of new treatments for aNSCLC.

Prolonged Response to Regorafenib in a Patient with Iodine Refractory Thyroid Cancer.

Thyroid cancer is the most common type of endocrine malignancy. Cornerstones of thyroid cancer treatment include surgery, radioactive iodine ablation, and thyroid stimulating hormone suppression. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend two tyrosine kinase inhibitors for thyroid cancer patients who are non-responsive to iodine: sorafenib and lenvatinib. Another oral kinase inhibitor, regorafenib, is not considered standard of care treatment for differentiated thyroid cancer. The chemical structures of regorafenib and sorafenib differ by a single fluorine atom. Given the significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) of sorafenib compared to placebo demonstrated in the phase 3 DECISION trial, we report on a patient with iodine-refractory follicular thyroid cancer treated with regorafenib as part of a phase 1 clinical trial. A 75 year old woman was diagnosed with follicular thyroid carcinoma in 2006 and initiated on treatment with regorafenib in 2011. She has completed 76 cycles with stable disease and pulmonary metastases 34% smaller than baseline.

Rapid atrophy of cardiac left ventricular mass in patients with non-small cell carcinoma of the lung.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a systemic catabolic condition affecting skeletal muscle and fat. We aimed to determine whether cardiac atrophy occurs in this condition and assess its association with cardiac function, symptoms, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Treatment naïve metastatic non-small cell lung cancer patients (n = 50) were assessed prior to and 4 months after commencement of carboplatin-based palliative chemotherapy. Methods included echocardiography for left ventricular mass (LVM) and LV function [LV ejection fraction, global longitudinal strain (GLS), diastolic function], computed tomography to quantify skeletal muscle and total adipose tissue, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS), validated questionnaires for dyspnoea and fatigue, plasma biomarkers, tumour response to therapy, and overall survival. RESULTS: During 112 ± 6 days, the median change in LVM was -8.9% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) -10.8 to -4.8, P < 0.001]. Quartiles of LVM loss were -20.1%, -12.9%, -4.8%, and +5.5%. Losses of muscle, adipose tissue, and LVM were frequently concurrent; LVM loss > median value was associated with loss of skeletal muscle [odds ratio (OR) = 4.5, 95% CI: 1.4-14.8, P=0.01] and loss of total adipose tissue (OR = 10.0, 95% CI: 2.7-36.7, P < 0.001). LVM loss was associated with decreased GLS (OR = 6.6, 95% CI: 1.9-22.7, P=0.003) but not with LV ejection fraction or diastolic function. In the population overall, plasma levels of C-reactive protein (P=0.008), high sensitivity troponin T (hs-TnT) (P=0.03), and galectin-3 (P=0.02) increased over time, while N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide and hs-cTnI did not change over time. C-reactive protein was the only biomarker associated with LVM loss but at the univariate level only. Independent predictors of LVM loss were prior weight loss (adjusted OR = 10.2, 95% CI: 2.2-46.9, P=0.003) and tumour progression (adjusted OR = 14.6, 95% CI: 1.4-153.9, P=0.02). LVM loss was associated with exacerbations of fatigue (OR = 6.6, 95% CI: 1.9-22.7, P=0.003), dyspnoea (OR = 9.3, 95% CI: 2.4-35.8, P<0.001), and deterioration of performance status (OR = 4.8, 95% CI: 1.3-18.3,P=0.02). Patients with concurrent loss of LVM, skeletal muscle, and fat were more likely to deteriorate in all three symptom domains and to have reduced survival (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Intense LVM atrophy is associated with non-small cell lung cancer-induced cachexia. Loss of LVM was associated with emerging alterations of GLS, indicating subtle changes in left ventricular function. Longer term studies are needed to assess the full scope of cardiac atrophy and its impact. LVM atrophy arises in conjunction with losses of fat and skeletal muscle and is temporally associated with meaningful declines in performance status, worsening of fatigue, and dyspnoea, as well as poorer tumour response and decreased survival. The specific contribution of LVM atrophy to these outcomes requires further study.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with high tumour mutational burden: patient-reported outcomes results from the randomised, open-label, phase III CheckMate 227 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III CheckMate 227 study, first-line nivolumab + ipilimumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival (co-primary end-point) versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and high tumour mutational burden (TMB; ≥10 mutations/megabase). AIM: To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in this population. METHODS: Disease-related symptoms and general health status were assessed using the validated PRO questionnaires Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) and EQ-5D, respectively. LCSS average symptom burden index (ASBI) and three-item global index (3-IGI) and EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS) and utility index (UI) scores and changes from baseline were analysed descriptively. Longitudinal changes were assessed by mixed-effect model repeated measures (MMRMs) and time to first deterioration/improvement analyses. RESULTS: In the high TMB population, PRO questionnaire completion rates were ∼90% at baseline and >80% for most on-treatment assessments. During treatment, mean changes from baseline with nivolumab + ipilimumab showed early, clinically meaningful improvements in LCSS ASBI/3-IGI and EQ-5D VAS/UI; with chemotherapy, symptoms and health-related quality of life remained stable (LCSS ASBI/3-IGI, EQ-5D UI) or improved following induction (EQ-5D VAS). MMRM-assessed changes in symptom burden were improved with nivolumab + ipilimumab versus chemotherapy. Symptom deterioration by week 12 was lower with nivolumab + ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (22.3% versus 35.0%; absolute risk reduction: 12.7% [95% confidence interval 2.4-22.5]), irrespective of discontinuation. Time to first deterioration was delayed with nivolumab + ipilimumab versus chemotherapy across LCSS and EQ-5D summary measures. CONCLUSION: First-line nivolumab + ipilimumab demonstrated early, sustained improvements in PROs versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC and high TMB. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02477826.

Cost-effectiveness of second-line atezolizumab in Canada for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness in Canada of atezolizumab compared with docetaxel or nivolumab for the treatment of advanced NSCLC after first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Materials and methods: A three-state partitioned-survival model was developed. Clinical inputs were obtained from the phase III OAK trial comparing atezolizumab with docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC who progressed after first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were extrapolated beyond the trial period using parametric models. A cure model assuming a 1% cure fraction was fitted to the OS data for atezolizumab. Outcomes for nivolumab were informed by a network meta-analysis (NMA) vs atezolizumab. Resource use and costs were informed by clinical expert opinion and published Canadian sources. Utility values were obtained from the OAK trial. The perspective of the analysis was that of the Canadian publicly-funded healthcare system. The base case time horizon was 10 years, and the discount rate was 1.5% annually for both costs and effects. Scenario analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results and all analyses were performed probabilistically. Results: Atezolizumab demonstrated a quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain of 0.60 compared with docetaxel at an incremental cost of $85,073, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $142,074/QALY. Atezolizumab dominated nivolumab (regardless of dosing regimen), based on modest differences in both QALYs and costs. Docetaxel was most likely to be cost effective at willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds below $125,000/QALY gained, while atezolizumab was most likely to be cost effective beyond this WTP threshold. In most scenario analyses, the results remained robust to changes in parameters. A reduced time horizon and alternative approaches to the NMA had the greatest impact on cost-effectiveness results. Conclusion: Atezolizumab represents a cost-effective therapeutic option in Canada for the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC who progress after first-line platinum doublet chemotherapy.

A Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of Veliparib Combined with Carboplatin and Etoposide in Patients with Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer and Other Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: This study examined safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of veliparib, a PARP inhibitor, combined with carboplatin and etoposide in patients with extensive-stage (ED) small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and other solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The 3 + 3 design was used for dose escalation of oral veliparib in combination with carboplatin (AUC 5 on day 1) and etoposide (100 mg/m2 on days 1-3) in 21-day cycles. Veliparib dose was explored from 80 to 240 mg b.i.d. on 7-day, 14-day, or continuous schedules. Patients without disease progression continued on maintenance monotherapy (veliparib 400 mg b.i.d.) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were enrolled to determine the recommended phase II dose of 240 mg veliparib for 14 days combined with carboplatin and etoposide based on long-term tolerability. Dose-limiting toxicity occurred in 1 patient (grade 2 toxic motor polyneuropathy) at veliparib 240 mg b.i.d. for 7 days. Most common adverse events related to veliparib were nausea (39%), fatigue (39%), and hematologic toxicities. Continuous dosing of veliparib 240 mg b.i.d. with carboplatin and etoposide resulted in excessive chemotherapy dose delays due to hematologic toxicity (grade 3/4 neutropenia/thrombocytopenia). Etoposide pharmacokinetics was not affected by veliparib. Confirmed responses occurred in 17 of 39 (44%) and 16 of 25 (64%) of all enrolled and ED SCLC patients, respectively. At the RP2D, confirmed responses occurred in 6 of 13 (46%) and 5 of 6 (83%) of all enrolled and ED SCLC patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Veliparib (240 mg b.i.d. 14 days) plus carboplatin/etoposide can be safely combined. Phase II of this study is ongoing in first-line patients with ED SCLC.

Undiagnosed cardiac deficits in non-small cell carcinoma patients in the candidate population for anti-cachexia clinical trials.

PURPOSE: Currently, there is no approved therapy for cancer cachexia. According to European and American regulatory agencies, physical function improvements would be approvable co-primary endpoints of new anti-cachexia medications. As physical functioning is in part dependent on cardiac functioning, we aimed to explore the cardiac status of a group of patients meeting current criteria for inclusion in cachexia clinical trials. METHODS: Seventy treatment-naive patients with metastatic NSCLC [36 (51.4%) male; 96% ECOG 0-1; eligible for carboplatin-based therapy and meeting eligibility criteria for cachexia clinical trials] were recruited before the start of first-line carboplatin-based chemotherapy. Patients were evaluated by echocardiography, electrocardiography, and scales for fatigue and dyspnea. Computed tomography cross-sectional images were utilized for body composition analysis. RESULTS: In 9/70 patients (12.8%), echocardiography allowed discovery of clinically relevant cardiac disorders [seven patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 32%-47%; one patient with severe right ventricular dilation and severe pulmonary hypertension and one patient with severe pericardial effusion warranted hospitalization and drainage]. Another 10/70 (14.3%) patients had diastolic dysfunction with preserved LVEF. The cardiac conditions were associated with aggravated fatigue (p < 0.05), dyspnea (p < 0.05), and anemia (p = 0.06). Five out of seven patients with LVEF < 50% were sarcopenic and one was borderline sarcopenic. CONCLUSION: Baseline cardiac status of the metastatic NSCLC patients adds potential heterogeneity for anti-cachexia clinical trials. Detailed cardiac screening data might be useful for inclusion/exclusion criteria, randomization, and post hoc analysis.