National Cancer Institute Basket/Umbrella Clinical Trials: MATCH, LungMAP, and Beyond.

With advances in genetic testing and its common usage, the field of precision medicine has exploded in the field of oncology. The National Cancer Institute is uniquely positioned to lead in this area of research through its wide network of investigators, partnerships with pharmaceutical companies in drug development, and laboratory capabilities. It has developed a portfolio of trials as part of a Precision Medicine Initiative that uses various basket/umbrella designs to increase the understanding of treatment of cancer through genetic selection and targeted therapies. This article describes these trials, ALCHEMIST, LungMAP, NCI/NRG ALK Trial, MPACT, NCI-MATCH, and pediatric MATCH, and their contributions to the area of precision medicine.

A Proposed System Toward Standardizing Surgical-Based Treatments for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma, From the Joint National Cancer Institute-International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer-Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation Taskforce.

This article is a joint effort arising from a task force formed at a National Cancer Institute-International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer-Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation Mesothelioma Clinical Trials Planning Meeting, held at the NIH in March 2017. Malignant pleural mesothelioma remains one of the most virulent and recalcitrant malignancies, still considered incurable, and in desperate need of clinical trials in order to make progress for our patients. Although not standard of care, there is compelling evidence that a select subgroup of mesothelioma patients benefit from a surgery-based multimodal approach. As it is not possible to achieve a microscopically complete resection with mesothelioma, there appears to be no role for surgery alone. Thus, it is anticipated that significant strides in the surgery-based treatment of this cancer will require trials that determine which complementary treatments best augment the cytoreductive efficacy of surgery. Although lung-sacrificing surgery for mesothelioma is fairly standardized, approaches to lung-sparing surgery are highly variable and lung sparing surgery is emerging internationally as the dominant extirpative procedure for this cancer. It is not currently possible to rigorously assess the contribution of the adjuvant treatments combined with surgery because of the variability in procedures used to debulk this cancer, the extreme variability of the cancer itself, the variability in patient selection, the variability in treatment of the inevitable recurrence, and even the variability in follow up schedules. This article is an effort to address these problems by suggesting a more uniform approach to the surgical procedure and also proposing a series of data collection forms that could be adopted immediately, with any eye toward collecting the information that will be necessary to facilitate patient selection and determine which aspects of mesothelioma surgery can and should be standardized - with the goal being extension of life while maintaining quality of life as an equal priority. Furthermore, a completely original contribution in this manuscript is the proposal of a grading system that takes the information from the surgical procedure data forms and generates a completeness of resection score. This is the initial effort to establish a common denominator for mesothelioma surgery that will allow for more accurate comparison between surgical series and better assessment of the impact of the treatments combined with surgery.

The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer consensus statement on immunotherapy for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounting for over 85% of all cases. Until recently, chemotherapy - characterized by some benefit but only rare durable responses - was the only treatment option for patients with NSCLC whose tumors lacked targetable mutations. By contrast, immune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated distinctly durable responses and represent the advent of a new treatment approach for patients with NSCLC. Three immune checkpoint inhibitors, pembrolizumab, nivolumab and atezolizumab, are now approved for use in first- and/or second-line settings for selected patients with advanced NSCLC, with promising benefit also seen in patients with stage III NSCLC. Additionally, durvalumab following chemoradiation has been approved for use in patients with locally advanced disease. Due to the distinct features of cancer immunotherapy, and rapid progress in the field, clinical guidance is needed on the use of these agents, including appropriate patient selection, sequencing of therapies, response monitoring, adverse event management, and biomarker testing. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened an expert Task Force charged with developing consensus recommendations on these key issues. Following a systematic process as outlined by the National Academy of Medicine, a literature search and panel voting were used to rate the strength of evidence for each recommendation. This consensus statement provides evidence-based recommendations to help clinicians integrate immune checkpoint inhibitors into the treatment plan for patients with NSCLC. This guidance will be updated following relevant advances in the field.

Temporal patterns of care and outcomes of non-small cell lung cancer patients in the United States diagnosed in 1996, 2005, and 2010.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer remains a common and deadly cancer in the United States. This study evaluated factors associated with stage-specific cancer therapy and survival focusing on temporal trends and sociodemographic disparities. METHODS: A random sample (n=3,318) of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients diagnosed in 1996, 2005 and 2010, and reported to the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program was analyzed. Logistic regression was utilized to identify factors associated with receipt of surgery among stage I/II patients and chemotherapy among stage IIIB/IV patients. Cox proportional hazard regression was utilized to assess factors associated with all-cause mortality, stratified by stage. RESULTS: Surgery among stage I/II patients decreased non-significantly overtime (1996: 78.8%; 2010: 68.5%; p=0.18), whereas receipt of chemotherapy among stage IIIB/IV patients increased significantly overtime (1996: 36.1%; 2010: 51.2%; p<0.01). Receipt of surgery (70-79 and ≥80 vs. <70: Odds Ratio(OR):0.31; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.16-0.63 and OR:0.04; 95% CI: 0.02-0.10, respectively) and chemotherapy (≥80 vs. <70: OR: 0.26; 95% CI:0.15-0.45) was less likely among older patients. Median survival improved non-significantly among stage I/II patients from 51 to 64 months (p=0.75) and significantly among IIIB/IV patients from 4 to 5 months (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: Treatment disparities were observed in both stage groups, notably among older patients. Among stage I/II patients, survival did not change significantly possibly due to stable surgery utilization. Among stage IIIB/IV patients, although the use of chemotherapy increased and survival improved, the one-month increase in median survival highlights the need for addition research.