Radiographic response to neoadjuvant therapy in pleural mesothelioma should serve as a guide for patient selection for cytoreductive operations.

Background: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is associated with poor prognosis despite advances in multimodal therapeutic strategies. While patients with resectable disease may benefit from added survival with oncologic resection, patient selection for mesothelioma operations often relies on both objective and subjective evaluation metrics. We sought to evaluate factors associated with improved overall survival (OS) in patients with mesothelioma who underwent macroscopic complete resection (MCR). Methods: Patients with MPM who received neoadjuvant therapy and underwent MCR were identified in a prospectively maintained departmental database. Clinicopathologic, blood-based, and radiographic variables were collected and included in a Cox regression analysis (CRA). Response to neoadjuvant therapy was characterized by a change in tumor thickness from pretherapy to preoperative scans using the modified RECIST criteria. Results: In this study, 99 patients met the inclusion criteria. The median age of the included patients was 64.7 years, who were predominantly men, had smoking and asbestos exposure, and who received neoadjuvant therapy. The median change in tumor thickness following neoadjuvant therapy was -16.5% (interquartile range of -49.7% to +14.2%). CRA demonstrated reduced OS associated with non-epithelioid histology [hazard ratio (HR): 3.06, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.62-5.78, p < 0.001] and a response to neoadjuvant therapy inferior to the median (HR: 2.70, CI: 1.55-4.72, p < 0.001). Patients who responded poorly (below median) to neoadjuvant therapy had lower median survival (15.8 months compared to 38.2 months, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Poor response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with MPM is associated with poor outcomes even following maximum surgical cytoreduction and should warrant a patient-centered discussion regarding goals of care and may therefore help guide further therapeutic decisions.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in operable non-small cell lung cancer: the phase 2 platform NEOSTAR trial.

Neoadjuvant ipilimumab + nivolumab (Ipi+Nivo) and nivolumab + chemotherapy (Nivo+CT) induce greater pathologic response rates than CT alone in patients with operable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The impact of adding ipilimumab to neoadjuvant Nivo+CT is unknown. Here we report the results and correlates of two arms of the phase 2 platform NEOSTAR trial testing neoadjuvant Nivo+CT and Ipi+Nivo+CT with major pathologic response (MPR) as the primary endpoint. MPR rates were 32.1% (7/22, 80% confidence interval (CI) 18.7-43.1%) in the Nivo+CT arm and 50% (11/22, 80% CI 34.6-61.1%) in the Ipi+Nivo+CT arm; the primary endpoint was met in both arms. In patients without known tumor EGFR/ALK alterations, MPR rates were 41.2% (7/17) and 62.5% (10/16) in the Nivo+CT and Ipi+Nivo+CT groups, respectively. No new safety signals were observed in either arm. Single-cell sequencing and multi-platform immune profiling (exploratory endpoints) underscored immune cell populations and phenotypes, including effector memory CD8+ T, B and myeloid cells and markers of tertiary lymphoid structures, that were preferentially increased in the Ipi+Nivo+CT cohort. Baseline fecal microbiota in patients with MPR were enriched with beneficial taxa, such as Akkermansia, and displayed reduced abundance of pro-inflammatory and pathogenic microbes. Neoadjuvant Ipi+Nivo+CT enhances pathologic responses and warrants further study in operable NSCLC. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03158129 .).

Vidutolimod in Combination With Atezolizumab With and Without Radiation Therapy in Patients With Programmed Cell Death Protein 1 or Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Blockade-Resistant Advanced NSCLC.

Introduction: Vidutolimod, a CpG-A TLR9 agonist, was investigated in a phase 1b study (CMP-001-003; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03438318) in combination with atezolizumab with and without radiation therapy (RT) in patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods: Patients with progressive disease after anti-programmed cell death protein 1 or programmed death-ligand 1 therapy received either vidutolimod and atezolizumab (part A) or vidutolimod, atezolizumab, and RT (part B). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety of vidutolimod and atezolizumab with and without RT. Key secondary end point was best objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Results: Between March 28, 2018, and July 25, 2019, a total of 29 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of vidutolimod (part A, n = 13; part B, n = 16). Intratumoral injections of vidutolimod were administered successfully, including injection of visceral lesions. The most common treatment-related adverse events (≥30%) were flu-like symptoms and hypotension. No objective responses were observed; 23.1% and 50.0% of the patients in parts A and B, respectively, had stable disease as best response. In parts A and B, 15.4% and 25.0% of the patients, respectively, had tumor shrinkage (<30% decrease in tumor size, nonirradiated). Enrollment was stopped owing to lack of objective responses. In the two patients with initial tumor shrinkage in part A, a strong serum induction of C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 10 was observed. Conclusions: Vidutolimod and atezolizumab with and without RT had a manageable safety profile, with minimal clinical activity in heavily pretreated patients with programmed cell death protein 1 or programmed death-ligand 1 blockade-resistant NSCLC.

Tumor thickness in mesothelioma predicts differential response to neoadjuvant therapy and survival.

OBJECTIVE: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy in resectable malignant pleural mesothelioma remains controversial and demonstrates variable responses. We sought to evaluate tumor thickness as a predictor of response to neoadjuvant therapy and as a prognostic marker for overall survival. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy followed by cytoreductive surgery from 2002 to 2019 were reviewed. Baseline and postneoadjuvant therapy tumor thickness were measured on computed tomography. Radiological tumor response was categorized as progressive disease (≥20% increase), partial response (≥30% decrease), or stable disease (in between). Tumor response outcomes were modeled using logistic regression and multinomial regression models. Overall survival was evaluated based on tumor thickness and tumor response. RESULTS: Of the 143 patients reviewed, 36 (25%) had progressive disease, 54 (38%) had stable disease, and 56 (39%) had partial response. The baseline tumor thickness of the progressive disease group (36 mm) was lower than in both stable disease and partial response groups (both 63 mm; P < .001). Both logistic regression and multinomial regression analyses demonstrated that thicker baseline tumor thickness was associated with decreased probability of progressive disease and increased probability of partial response. In a multivariable Cox model, thicker postneoadjuvant therapy tumor thickness was associated with worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.01, 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.01, P = .008). The same trend was observed for thicker baseline tumor thickness (hazard ratio, 1.02, 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.04, P = .008), and the risk was decreased in tumors with partial response (hazard ratio, 0.98, 95% confidence interval, 0.96-0.100, P = .014). CONCLUSIONS: We present the first study demonstrating the relationship between baseline tumor thickness and differential radiographic response to neoadjuvant therapy and survival. Further studies are needed to validate tumor thickness as both a prognostic and predictive biomarker.

Final efficacy outcomes of atezolizumab with chemoradiation for unresectable NSCLC: The phase II DETERRED trial.

INTRODUCTION: The phase II DETERRED trial assessed the safety and efficacy of consolidation and concurrent immunotherapy with chemoradiation in unresectable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. We present updated efficacy analysis of this trial. METHODS: The trial was conducted in 2 parts with patients in part 1 (n = 10) receiving chemoradiation with consolidation atezolizumab, while patients in part 2 (n = 30) received concurrent and consolidation atezolizumab. Progression-free survival (PFS), time to second progression (PFS2), and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Subset analyses were performed by programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) status and targetable driver oncogene mutation status. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 39.2 months, the median PFS for part 1 was 18.9 months and 15.1 months for part 2. Median OS for part 1 was 26.5 months and was not reached for part 2. For the cohort, 3-year OS was 53.8%, while 4-year OS was 47.4%. Patients with targetable driver oncogene mutations had a median PFS of 9.4 months and OS of not reached compared to 16.6 months (HR: 3.49, p = 0.02) and 26.9 months (HR: 0.40, p = 0.12) respectively compared to those without targetable driver oncogene mutations. Patients with PD-L1 < 1% had median PFS of 11.0 months and OS of 26.5 months compared to 27.4 months (HR: 2.01, p = 0.10) and not reached (HR: 1.49, p = 0.41) respectively for those with PD-L1 ≥ 1%. CONCLUSIONS: In the DETERRED trial, chemoradiation with concurrent and/or consolidative atezolizumab led to comparable efficacy as consolidative durvalumab in the PACIFIC trial. The presence of targetable driver oncogene mutations led to worse PFS, while PD-L1 < 1% trended to worse PFS.

Poziotinib for EGFR exon 20-mutant NSCLC: Clinical efficacy, resistance mechanisms, and impact of insertion location on drug sensitivity.

We report a phase II study of 50 advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with point mutations or insertions in EGFR exon 20 treated with poziotinib (NCT03066206). The study achieved its primary endpoint, with confirmed objective response rates (ORRs) of 32% and 31% by investigator and blinded independent review, respectively, with a median progression-free survival of 5.5 months. Using preclinical studies, in silico modeling, and molecular dynamics simulations, we found that poziotinib sensitivity was highly dependent on the insertion location, with near-loop insertions (amino acids A767 to P772) being more sensitive than far-loop insertions, an observation confirmed clinically with ORRs of 46% and 0% observed in near versus far-loop, respectively (p = 0.0015). Putative mechanisms of acquired resistance included EGFR T790M, MET amplifications, and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Our data demonstrate that poziotinib is active in EGFR exon 20-mutant NSCLC, although this activity is influenced by insertion location.

Medical and Surgical Care of Patients With Mesothelioma and Their Relatives Carrying Germline BAP1 Mutations.

The most common malignancies that develop in carriers of BAP1 germline mutations include diffuse malignant mesothelioma, uveal and cutaneous melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, and less frequently, breast cancer, several types of skin carcinomas, and other tumor types. Mesotheliomas in these patients are significantly less aggressive, and patients require a multidisciplinary approach that involves genetic counseling, medical genetics, pathology, surgical, medical, and radiation oncology expertise. Some BAP1 carriers have asymptomatic mesothelioma that can be followed by close clinical observation without apparent adverse outcomes: they may survive many years without therapy. Others may grow aggressively but very often respond to therapy. Detecting BAP1 germline mutations has, therefore, substantial medical, social, and economic impact. Close monitoring of these patients and their relatives is expected to result in prolonged life expectancy, improved quality of life, and being cost-effective. The co-authors of this paper are those who have published the vast majority of cases of mesothelioma occurring in patients carrying inactivating germline BAP1 mutations and who have studied the families affected by the BAP1 cancer syndrome for many years. This paper reports our experience. It is intended to be a source of information for all physicians who care for patients carrying germline BAP1 mutations. We discuss the clinical presentation, diagnostic and treatment challenges, and our recommendations of how to best care for these patients and their family members, including the potential economic and psychosocial impact.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy for the treatment of unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma: patient-reported outcomes in CheckMate 743.

OBJECTIVE: In CheckMate 743 (NCT02899299), nivolumab + ipilimumab significantly prolonged overall survival in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). We present patient-reported outcomes (PROs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients (N = 605) were randomized to nivolumab + ipilimumab or chemotherapy. Changes in disease-related symptom burden and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were evaluated descriptively using the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)-Mesothelioma (Meso) average symptom burden index (ASBI), LCSS-Meso 3-item global index (3-IGI), 3-level EuroQol 5-dimensional (EQ-5D-3L) visual analog score (VAS), and EQ-5D-3L utility index. PROs were assessed at baseline and every 2 (nivolumab + ipilimumab) or 3 weeks (chemotherapy) through 12 weeks, every 6 weeks through 12 months, every 12 weeks thereafter, and at specified follow-ups. Mixed-effect model repeated measures (MMRM) and time to deterioration analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Completion rates were generally >80%. LCSS-Meso ASBI mean changes from baseline trended to improve over time with nivolumab + ipilimumab and deteriorate with chemotherapy, but did not meet clinically important difference thresholds [±10 score change]. EQ-5D-3L VAS mean scores improved over time with nivolumab + ipilimumab; by week 60, patients had scores consistent with United Kingdom normal population values. MMRM analyses favored nivolumab + ipilimumab for all individual symptoms except cough. Nivolumab + ipilimumab delayed time to definitive deterioration in HRQoL (hazard ratio 0.52 [95% confidence interval 0.36-0.74]) and showed a trend in symptom delay versus chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab + ipilimumab decreased the risk of deterioration in disease-related symptoms and HRQoL versus chemotherapy and maintained QoL in patients with unresectable MPM.

Surgical outcomes after neoadjuvant nivolumab or nivolumab with ipilimumab in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgical outcomes for non-small cell lung cancer after neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors continue to be debated. We assessed perioperative outcomes of patients treated with Nivolumab or Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab (NEOSTAR) and compared them with patients treated with chemotherapy or previously untreated patients with stage I-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: Forty-four patients with stage I to IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, seventh edition) were randomized to nivolumab (N; 3 mg/kg intravenously on days 1, 15, and 29; n = 23) or nivolumab with ipilimumab (NI; I, 1 mg/kg intravenously on day 1; n = 21). Curative-intent operations were planned between 3 and 6 weeks after the last dose of neoadjuvant N. Patients who completed resection upfront or after chemotherapy from the same time period were used as comparison. RESULTS: In the N arm, 21 (91%) were resected on-trial, 1 underwent surgery off-trial, and one was not resected (toxicity-related). In the NI arm, 16 (76%) resections were performed on-trial, one off-trial, and 4 were not resected (none toxicity-related). Median time to operation was 31 days, and consisted of 2 (5%) pneumonectomies, 33 (89%) lobectomies, and 1 (3%) each of segmentectomy and wedge resection. The approach was 27 (73%) thoracotomy, 7 (19%) thoracoscopy, and 3 (8%) robotic-assisted. Conversion occurred in 17% (n = 2/12) of minimally invasive cases. All 37 achieved R0 resection. Pulmonary, cardiac, enteric, neurologic, and wound complications occurred in 9 (24%), 4 (11%), 2 (5%), 1 (3%), and 1 (3%) patient, respectively. The 30- and 90-day mortality rate was 0% and 2.7% (n = 1), respectively. Postoperative complication rates were comparable with lung resection upfront or after chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Operating after neoadjuvant N or NI is overall safe and effective and yields perioperative outcomes similar to those achieved after chemotherapy or upfront resection.

New Era for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Updates on Therapeutic Options.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare malignancy with few treatment options. Recent advances have led to US Food and Drug Administration approvals and changes in the standard of care with a novel biomedical device approved for use with platinum-pemetrexed, and also for immunotherapy agents to be included as a frontline treatment option in unresectable disease. Although predictive biomarkers for systemic therapy are not currently in use in clinical practice, it is essential to correctly identify the MPM histology to determine an optimal treatment plan. Patients with nonepithelioid MPM may have a greater magnitude of benefit to dual immunotherapy checkpoint inhibitors and this regimen should be preferred in the frontline setting for these patients. However, all patients with MPM can derive benefit from immunotherapy treatments, and these agents should ultimately be used at some point during their treatment journey. There are ongoing studies in the frontline unresectable setting that may further define the frontline therapy space, but a critical area of research will need to focus on the immunotherapy refractory population. This review article will describe the new developments in the areas of biology with genomics and chromothripsis, and also focus on updates in treatment strategies in radiology, surgery, radiation, and medical oncology with cellular therapies. These recent innovations are generating momentum to find better therapies for this disease.

Phase I Trial of Definitive Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy and Trametinib for KRAS-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This phase I trial (NCT01912625) evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetics of definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) and the radiosensitizer trametinib (MEK1/2 inhibitor) for KRAS-mutated nonmetastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients received cCRT (carboplatin/paclitaxel and 60 Gy/30 fractions radiotherapy); oral trametinib (7 days/week) commenced on day 1 and completed on the final day of radiotherapy. Dose-finding of trametinib was done using the time-to-event continual reassessment method (TiTE-CRM); dose levels were 0.5mg (level -1), 1mg (initial, level 1), 1.5mg (level 2), and 2mg (level 3). Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times were also recorded. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (stage III, variety of KRAS mutations) were treated, with 1/5/4/5 at dose levels -1/1/2/3, respectively. Five patients received dose reductions (n=2, levels 2 and 3; n=1, level 1). Twelve patients completed the full cCRT course. One patient (following 12d trametinib) was taken off protocol for an unrelated/unresolved grade 1 event and later experienced grade 5 sepsis/respiratory failure. There was one grade 4 retinal detachment; grade 3 events included skin rash (n=2) and ventricular dysfunction, pneumonitis, pain, fatigue, and diarrhea (n=1 each). The final dose selected by the TiTE-CRM of trametinib was 1.5 mg. Pharmacokinetic profiles were elucidated and extensively described. At median follow-up of 70 months, median PFS was 11 months and median OS was 38 months. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD for trametinib when combined with cCRT is 1.5 mg, with encouraging preliminary outcomes. This combination merits further study to combine with consolidation durvalumab in non-metastatic KRAS mutant NSCLC.

Extrapleural Pneumonectomy Versus Pleurectomy/Decortication for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: Whether extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) or extended pleurectomy/decortication (P/D) is the optimal resection for malignant pleural mesothelioma remains controversial. We therefore compared perioperative outcomes and long-term survival of patients who underwent EPP versus P/D. METHODS: Patients with the diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma who underwent either EPP or P/D from 2000 to 2019 were identified from our departmental database. Propensity score matching was performed to minimize potential confounders for EPP or P/D. Survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Of 282 patients, 187 (66%) underwent EPP and 95 (34%) P/D. Even with propensity score matching, perioperative mortality was significantly higher for EPP than for P/D (11% vs 0%; P = .031); when adjusted for perioperative mortality, median overall survival between EPP and P/D was 15 versus 22 months, respectively (P = .276). Cox multivariable analysis for the matched cohort identified epithelioid histology (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; P = .029), macroscopic complete resection (HR, 0.41; P = .004), adjuvant radiation therapy (HR, 0.57; P = .019), and more recent operative years (HR, 0.93; P = .011)-but not P/D-to be associated with better survival. Asbestos exposure (HR, 2.35; P = .003) and pathologic nodal disease (HR, 1.61; P = .048) were associated with worse survival. CONCLUSIONS: In a multimodality treatment setting, P/D and EPP had comparable long-term oncologic outcomes, although P/D had much lower perioperative mortality. The goal of surgical cytoreduction should be macroscopic complete resection achieved by the safest operation a patient can tolerate.

Outcomes of Critically Ill Lung Cancer Patients Initiating Targeted Therapy or Immunotherapy in the Intensive Care Unit: A Single-Center Report.

Introduction: Targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have drastically improved outcomes of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in outpatient settings. Because trials on critically ill patients are improbable, little is known about their efficacy among patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical outcomes of critically-ill NSCLC patients receiving either ICI or targeted therapy during ICU admission at the MD Anderson Cancer Center from April 2016 to August 2020. We collected data on ICU admission diagnoses, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), previous cancer therapies, tumor gene mutations or translocations, and PD-L1 expression. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of drug initiation using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Of 9898 ICU admissions, 9 patients with metastatic NSCLC who received either targeted therapy (5) or PD-1 ICI (4) during ICU admission were included. The most common reasons for ICU admissions were tumor visceral crisis (3/9) and sepsis (3/9). The median (range) admission SOFA was 4 (2-11). Six patients were naïve to systemic therapy. Five patients required mechanical ventilation. The median OS was 77 days (95%CI, 36-NA), and 5 patients were discharged alive (all received targeted therapy). The median OS of patients who received ICI was 25.5 days (95%CI, 8-NA) and for those who received targeted therapy was 218 days (95%CI, 77-NA). At 6 and 12 months follow-up, 3 and 2 patients who received targeted therapy were still alive, respectively. Conclusions: Our exploratory findings indicate a possible benefit of targeted therapy but suggest a lack of clinical utility of PD-1 ICI for critically ill metastatic NSCLC patients. Because of the small sample size, further studies are needed to expand on this topic.

Encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients with BRAFV600-mutant non-small cell lung cancer: phase II PHAROS study design.

BRAFV600 oncogenic driver mutations occur in 1-2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) and have been shown to be a clinically relevant target. Preclinical/clinical evidence support the efficacy and safety of BRAF and MEK inhibitor combinations in patients with NSCLC with these mutations. We describe the design of PHAROS, an ongoing, open-label, single-arm, phase II trial evaluating the BRAF inhibitor encorafenib plus the MEK inhibitor binimetinib in patients with metastatic BRAFV600-mutant NSCLC, as first- or second-line treatment. The primary end point is objective response rate, based on independent radiologic review (per RECIST v1.1); secondary objectives evaluated additional efficacy end points and safety. Results from PHAROS will describe the antitumor activity/safety of encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients with metastatic BRAFV600-mutant NSCLC.

Plain language summary Some people with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have changes in a gene called BRAF (known as 'gene mutations'). One common BRAF mutation is called 'V600'. Combinations of medicines that block proteins encoded by mutant BRAF and another gene called MEK can shrink tumors and slow their progression. We describe the design of PHAROS, a clinical trial investigating encorafenib (mutant BRAF inhibitor) combined with binimetinib (MEK inhibitor) in people with BRAF^V600-mutant NSCLC that had spread to other parts of the body ('metastatic disease'). People are monitored for side effects and to see if their tumor shrunk. PHAROS includes people treated with encorafenib plus binimetinib as their first treatment for metastatic disease, and people whose cancer progressed after previous anticancer therapy. Clinical trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03915951) and EudraCT (2019-000417-37).

Poziotinib for Patients With HER2 Exon 20 Mutant Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From a Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: Targeted therapies against non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring HER2 mutations remain an unmet need. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of poziotinib in patients with HER2 exon 20 mutant advanced NSCLC in a single-arm, open-label, phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced HER2 exon 20 mutant NSCLC were enrolled to receive poziotinib at a dose of 16 mg/d for 28-day cycles. The primary end point was objective response rate per RECIST version 1.1. Confirmatory scans were performed at least 28 days from initial radiologic response. RESULTS: Thirty patients received poziotinib treatment. At baseline, 90% of patients received prior platinum-based chemotherapy and 53% had two lines or more prior systemic therapies. As of data cutoff on March 1, 2021, the confirmed objective response rate was 27% (95% CI, 12 to 46). Responses were observed across HER2 exon 20 mutation subtypes. The median duration of response was 5.0 months (95% CI, 4.0 to not estimable). The median progression-free survival was 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 7.0). The median overall survival was 15 months (95% CI, 9.0 to not estimable). The most common grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were skin rash (47%) and diarrhea (20%). There was one possible treatment-related death because of pneumonitis. CONCLUSION: Poziotinib showed promising antitumor activity in patients with HER2 exon 20 mutant NSCLC including patients who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy.

Clinical Outcomes in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated With EGFR-Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Other Targeted Therapies Based on Tumor Versus Plasma Genomic Profiling.

PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes in a cohort of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with targetable genomic alterations detected using plasma-based circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) or tumor-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays treated with US Food and Drug Administration-approved therapies at a large academic research cancer center. METHODS: A retrospective review from our MD Anderson GEMINI database identified 2,224 blood samples sent for ctDNA NGS testing from 1971 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of advanced NSCLC. Clinical, treatment, and outcome information were collected, reviewed, and analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 27% of the ctDNA tests identified at least one targetable mutation and 73% of targetable mutations were EGFR-sensitizing mutations. Among patients treated with first-line epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapies, there were no significant differences in progression-free survival of 379 days and 352 days (P value = .41) with treatment based on tissue (n = 40) or ctDNA (n = 40), respectively. Additionally, there were no differences in progression-free survival or objective response rate among those with low (n = 8, 0.01%-0.99%) versus high (n = 16, ≥ 1%) levels of ctDNA of the targetable mutation as measured by variant allele frequency (VAF). Overall, there was excellent testing concordance (n = 217 tests) of > 97%, sensitivity of 91.7%, and specificity of 99.7% between blood-based ctDNA NGS and tissue-based NGS assays. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes among patients treated with approved EGFR-TKIs whose mutations were identified using either tumor- or plasma-based comprehensive profiling and those with very low VAF as compared with high VAF, supporting the use of plasma-based profiling to guide initial TKI use in patients with metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC.

Activity and Safety of Mobocertinib (TAK-788) in Previously Treated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with EGFR Exon 20 Insertion Mutations from a Phase I/II Trial.

Mobocertinib, an oral epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor targeting EGFR gene mutations, including exon 20 insertions (EGFRex20ins), in non-small cell lung cancer, was evaluated in a phase I/II dose-escalation/expansion trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02716116). Dose escalation identified 160 mg/d as the recommended phase 2 dose and maximum tolerated dose. Among 136 patients treated with 160 mg/d, the most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAE; >25%) were diarrhea (83%), nausea (43%), rash (33%), and vomiting (26%), with diarrhea (21%) the only grade ≥3 TRAE >5%. Among 28 EGFRex20ins patients treated at 160 mg/d, the investigator-assessed confirmed response rate was 43% (12/28; 95% confidence interval, 24%-63%) with median duration of response of 14 months (5.0-not reached) and median progression-free survival of 7.3 months (4.4-15.6). Mobocertinib demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with diverse EGFRex20ins variants with a safety profile consistent with other EGFR inhibitors. SIGNIFICANCE: No oral EGFR-targeted therapies are currently approved for patients with EGFRex20ins NSCLC. Mobocertinib demonstrated antitumor activity with manageable toxicity in patients with advanced EGFRex20ins NSCLC in this study, supporting additional development of mobocertinib in this patient population.See related commentary by Pacheco, p. 1617.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1601.

Identification of distinct immune landscapes using an automated nine-color multiplex immunofluorescence staining panel and image analysis in paraffin tumor tissues.

Immune profiling is becoming a vital tool for identifying predictive and prognostic markers for translational studies. The study of the tumor microenvironment (TME) in paraffin tumor tissues such as malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) could yield insights to actionable targets to improve patient outcome. Here, we optimized and tested a new immune-profiling method to characterize immune cell phenotypes in paraffin tissues and explore the co-localization and spatial distribution between the immune cells within the TME and the stromal or tumor compartments. Tonsil tissues and tissue microarray (TMA) were used to optimize an automated nine-color multiplex immunofluorescence (mIF) panel to study the TME using eight antibodies: PD-L1, PD-1, CD3, CD8, Foxp3, CD68, KI67, and pancytokeratin. To explore the potential role of the cells into the TME with this mIF panel we applied this panel in twelve MPM cases to assess the multiple cell phenotypes obtained from the image analysis and well as their spatial distribution in this cohort. We successful optimized and applied an automated nine-color mIF panel to explore a small set of MPM cases. Image analysis showed a high degree of cell phenotype diversity with immunosuppression patterns in the TME of the MPM cases. Mapping the geographic cell phenotype distribution in the TME, we were able to identify two distinct, complex immune landscapes characterized by specific patterns of cellular distribution as well as cell phenotype interactions with malignant cells. Successful we showed the optimization and reproducibility of our mIF panel and their incorporation for comprehensive TME immune profiling into translational studies that could refine our ability to correlate immunologic phenotypes with specific patterns of cells distribution and distance analysis. Overall, this will improve our ability to understand the behavior of cells within the TME and predict new treatment strategies to improve patient outcome.

Neoadjuvant nivolumab or nivolumab plus ipilimumab in operable non-small cell lung cancer: the phase 2 randomized NEOSTAR trial.

Ipilimumab improves clinical outcomes when combined with nivolumab in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its efficacy and impact on the immune microenvironment in operable NSCLC remain unclear. We report the results of the phase 2 randomized NEOSTAR trial (NCT03158129) of neoadjuvant nivolumab or nivolumab + ipilimumab followed by surgery in 44 patients with operable NSCLC, using major pathologic response (MPR) as the primary endpoint. The MPR rate for each treatment arm was tested against historical controls of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The nivolumab + ipilimumab arm met the prespecified primary endpoint threshold of 6 MPRs in 21 patients, achieving a 38% MPR rate (8/21). We observed a 22% MPR rate (5/23) in the nivolumab arm. In 37 patients resected on trial, nivolumab and nivolumab + ipilimumab produced MPR rates of 24% (5/21) and 50% (8/16), respectively. Compared with nivolumab, nivolumab + ipilimumab resulted in higher pathologic complete response rates (10% versus 38%), less viable tumor (median 50% versus 9%), and greater frequencies of effector, tissue-resident memory and effector memory T cells. Increased abundance of gut Ruminococcus and Akkermansia spp. was associated with MPR to dual therapy. Our data indicate that neoadjuvant nivolumab + ipilimumab-based therapy enhances pathologic responses, tumor immune infiltrates and immunologic memory, and merits further investigation in operable NSCLC.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (CheckMate 743): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Approved systemic treatments for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) have been limited to chemotherapy regimens that have moderate survival benefit with poor outcomes. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab has shown clinical benefit in other tumour types, including first-line non-small-cell lung cancer. We hypothesised that this regimen would improve overall survival in MPM. METHODS: This open-label, randomised, phase 3 study (CheckMate 743) was run at 103 hospitals across 21 countries. Eligible individuals were aged 18 years and older, with previously untreated, histologically confirmed unresectable MPM, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to nivolumab (3 mg/kg intravenously once every 2 weeks) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg intravenously once every 6 weeks) for up to 2 years, or platinum plus pemetrexed chemotherapy (pemetrexed [500 mg/m2 intravenously] plus cisplatin [75 mg/m2 intravenously] or carboplatin [area under the concentration-time curve 5 mg/mL per min intravenously]) once every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival among all participants randomly assigned to treatment, and safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02899299, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Nov 29, 2016, and April 28, 2018, 713 patients were enrolled, of whom 605 were randomly assigned to either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=303) or chemotherapy (n=302). 467 (77%) of 605 participants were male and median age was 69 years (IQR 64-75). At the prespecified interim analysis (database lock April 3, 2020; median follow-up of 29·7 months [IQR 26·7-32·9]), nivolumab plus ipilimumab significantly extended overall survival versus chemotherapy (median overall survival 18·1 months [95% CI 16·8-21·4] vs 14·1 months [12·4-16·2]; hazard ratio 0·74 [96·6% CI 0·60-0·91]; p=0·0020). 2-year overall survival rates were 41% (95% CI 35·1-46·5) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and 27% (21·9-32·4) in the chemotherapy group. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 91 (30%) of 300 patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 91 (32%) of 284 treated with chemotherapy. Three (1%) treatment-related deaths occurred in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group (pneumonitis, encephalitis, and heart failure) and one (<1%) in the chemotherapy group (myelosuppression). INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab provided significant and clinically meaningful improvements in overall survival versus standard-of-care chemotherapy, supporting the use of this first-in-class regimen that has been approved in the USA as of October, 2020, for previously untreated unresectable MPM. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb.