Combined, patient-level, analysis of two randomised trials evaluating the addition of denosumab to standard first-line chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC - The ETOP/EORTC SPLENDOUR and AMGEN-249 trials.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of adding denosumab to standard first-line chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC patients has been evaluated in two separate randomised trials (SPLENDOUR and AMGEN-249). In this pooled analysis, we will assess the combination-treatment effect in the largest available population, in order to conclude about the potential impact of denosumab in NSCLC. METHODS: Both trials included in this combined analysis, were randomised (SPLENDOUR 1:1, AMGEN-249 2:1) multi-centre trials stratified by histology, bone metastasis, geographical region and for SPLENDOUR only, ECOG PS. Cox proportional hazards models, were used to assess the treatment effect with respect to overall survival (OS; primary endpoint) and progression-free survival (PFS; secondary endpoint). Heterogeneity between trials was assessed, and subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: The pooled analysis was based on 740 randomised patients (SPLENDOUR:514; AMGEN-249:226), with 407 patients in the chemotherapy-denosumab arm and 333 in the chemotherapy-alone arm. In the chemotherapy-denosumab arm, at a median follow-up of 22.0 months, 277 (68.1%) deaths were reported with median OS 9.2 months (95%CI:[8.0-10.7]), while in the chemotherapy-alone arm, with similar median follow-up of 20.3 months, 230 (69.1%) deaths with median OS 9.9 months (95%CI:[8.2-11.2]). No significant denosumab effect was found (HR = 0.98; 95%CI:[0.82-1.18]; P = 0.85). Among subgroups, interaction was found between treatment and histology subtypes (P = 0.020), with a statistically significant benefit in the squamous group (HR = 0.70; 95%CI:[0.49-0.98]; P = 0.038), from 7.6 to 9.0 months median OS. With respect to PFS, 363 (89.2%) and 298 (89.5%) events were reported in the chemotherapy-denosumab and chemotherapy-alone arms, respectively, with corresponding medians 4.8 months (95%CI:[4.4-5.3]) and 4.9 months (95%CI:[4.3-5.4]). HR for PFS was 0.97(95%CI:[0.83-1.15]; P = 0.76), indicating that no significant denosumab benefit existed for PFS. CONCLUSION: In this pooled analysis, no statistically significant improvement was shown in PFS/OS with the combination of denosumab and chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC and no meaningful benefit in any of the subgroups.

A Randomized Open-Label Phase III Trial Evaluating the Addition of Denosumab to Standard First-Line Treatment in Advanced NSCLC: The European Thoracic Oncology Platform (ETOP) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) SPLENDOUR Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Receptor activator of NF-kB ligand stimulates NF-kB-dependent cell signaling and acts as the primary signal for bone resorption. Retrospective analysis of a large trial comparing denosumab versus zoledronic acid in bone metastatic solid tumors suggested significant overall survival (OS) advantage for patients with lung cancer with denosumab (p = 0.01). The randomized open-label phase III SPLENDOUR trial was designed to evaluate whether the addition of denosumab to standard first-line platinum-based doublet chemotherapy improved OS in advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Patients with stage IV NSCLC were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either chemotherapy with or without denosumab (120 mg every 3-4 wks), stratified by the presence of bone metastases (at diagnosis), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, histology, and region. To detect an OS increase from 9 to 11.25 months (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.80), 847 OS events were required. The trial closed prematurely owing to decreasing accrual rate. RESULTS: A total of 514 patients were randomized, with 509 receiving one or more doses of the assigned treatment (chemotherapy: 252, chemotherapy-denosumab: 257). The median age was 66.1 years, 71% were men, and 59% were former smokers. Bone metastases were identified in 275 patients (53%). Median OS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 8.7 (7.6-11.0) months in the control arm versus 8.2 (7.5-10.4) months in the chemotherapy-denosumab arm (HR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.78-1.19; one-sided p = 0.36). For patients with bone metastasis, HR was 1.02 (95% CI: 0.77-1.35), whereas for those without, HR was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.66-1.23). Adverse events grade 3 or greater were observed in 40.9%, 5.2%, 8.7% versus 45.5%, 10.9%, 10.5% of patients. Conditional power for OS benefit was less than or equal to 10%. CONCLUSIONS: Denosumab was well-tolerated without unexpected safety concerns. There was no OS improvement for denosumab when added to chemotherapy in the intention-to-treat population and the subgroups with and without bone metastases. Our data do not provide evidence of a clinical benefit for denosumab in patients with NSCLC without bone metastases.

EORTC Lung Cancer Group survey on the definition of NSCLC synchronous oligometastatic disease.

BACKGROUND: Synchronous oligometastatic disease (sOM) has been described as a distinct disease entity; however, there is no consensus on OM definition (OM-d) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A consensus group was formed aiming to agree on a common OM-d that could be used in future clinical trials. A European survey was circulated to generate questions and input for the consensus group meeting. METHODS: A European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Lung Cancer Group (LCG)/sOM-d consensus group survey was distributed to LCG, sOM-d consensus group, and several European thoracic oncology societies' members. RESULTS: 444 responses were analysed (radiation oncologist: 55% [n = 242], pulmonologist: 15% [n = 66], medical oncologist: 14% [n = 64]). 361 physicians (81%) aimed to cure sOM NSCLC patients and 82% (n = 362) included the possibility of radical intent treatment in their sOM-d. The maximum number of metastases considered in sOM-d varied: 12% replied 1 metastasis, 42% ≤ 3, and 17% ≥ 5 metastases. 79% (n = 353) stated that number of organs involved was important for sOM-d, and most (80%, n = 355) considered that only ≤3 involved organs (excluding primary) should be included. 317 (72%) included mediastinal lymph node involvement in the sOM-d and 22% (n = 70/317) counted mediastinal lymph node as a metastatic site. Most physicians completed sOM staging with brain magnetic resonance imaging (91%, n = 403) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (98%, n = 437). Pathology proof of metastatic disease was a requirement to define sOM for 315 (71%) physicians. The preferred primary outcome for sOM clinical trials was overall survival (73%, n = 325). CONCLUSION: Although consensual answers were obtained, several issues remain unresolved and will require further research to agree on a sOM-d.

Targeting EGFR T790M mutation in NSCLC: From biology to evaluation and treatment.

The identification of EGFR mutations and their respectively tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), changed dramatically treatment and survival of patients with EGFR-positive lung cancer. Nowadays, different EGFR TKIs as afatinib, erlotinib and gefitinib are approved worldwide for the treatment of NSCLC harbouring EGFR mutations, in particular exon 19 deletions or exon 21 (Leu858Arg) substitution EGFR mutations. In first-line setting, when comparing with platinum-based chemotherapy, these target drugs improves progression-free survival, response rate and quality of life. Unfortunately, the development of different mechanism of resistance, limits the long term efficacy of these agents. The most clear mechanism of resistance is the development of EGFR Thr790Met mutation. Against this new target, different third-generation EGFR-mutant-selective TKIs, such as osimertinib, rociletinib and olmutinib, showed a great activity. In this review, we summarize the scientific evidences about biology, evaluation and treatment on NSCLC with EGFR T790M mutation.

Personalized treatment in advanced ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer: from bench to clinical practice.

The discovery of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements and the development of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) that target them have achieved unprecedented success in the management of patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Despite the high efficacy of crizotinib, the first oral ALK TKI approved for the treatment of ALK-positive NSCLC, almost all patients inevitably develop acquired resistance, showing disease progression in the brain or in other parenchymal sites. Second- or third-generation ALK TKIs have shown to be active in crizotinib-pretreated or crizotinib-naïve ALK-positive patients, even in those with brain metastases. In this review, the current knowledge regarding ALK-positive NSCLC, focusing on the biology of the disease and the available therapeutic options are discussed.

Afatinib for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic EGFR-positive NSCLC: a look at the data.

INTRODUCTION: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations are detected in about 10-15% of Caucasian and 30-40% of Asian patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In patients harbouring EGFR mutations, the treatment with different available EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) showed to be more effective and safe than platinum-based chemotherapy regimens. Areas covered: The current evidences about the role of afatinib for patients with EGFR-positive NSCLC are reviewed and discussed. We report a review based on a MEDLINE/PubMed, searched for randomized phase II or III trials evaluating afatinib in EGFR-positive NSCLC. Expert commentary: Afatinib is the third EGFR TKI approved for the treatment of NSCLC harbouring EGFR mutations, showing high efficacy in this setting of patients.

Afatinib in first-line setting for NSCLC harbouring common EGFR mutations: new light after the preliminary results of LUX-Lung 7?

The development of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) changed dramatically the history of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring EGFR sensitive mutations. Several randomized prospective trials confirmed the superiority of these target agents about survival and response rate when comparing with platinum-based chemotherapy. Knowledge about EGFR mutations increased gradually during the development of target agents and different clinical trials. EGFR mutations cannot be considered all equal, but different entities should be considered in our clinical practice: exon 19 deletions, exon 21 mutation (L858R) and uncommon mutation (exon 20, exon 18 and double mutation). Nowadays, we dispose of three different EGFR TKIs (afatinib, erlotinib and gefitinib) approved for the treatment for first-line treatment of patients di NSCLC carrying EGFR, that was compared only by indirect analysis, producing data not always clear and convincing. This research highlight is an overview of data about EGFR TKIs in first-line setting, focusing on differences about exon 19 deletions and L585R mutation in patients treated with different TKIs. In addition, we report the preliminary results of the first head-to-head randomized clinical trial between two different EGFR TKIs, the LUX-Lung 7 (LL7) that compared afatinib and gefitinib showing interesting results.

[Immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: evolution of knowledge and clinical advances]. / L'immunoterapia nel NSCLC: evoluzione delle conoscenze e dei progressi clinici.

Lung cancer represent the leading cause of cancer related-death worldwide. Although cytotoxic chemotherapy and targeted agents improved survival, the median overall survival for patients with metastatic disease remains poor. Docetaxel is still the corner stone of the second-line treatment, although associated with an unfavourable safety profile. Recent advances in the understanding of cancer immune escape system lead to the development of novel immunotherapies agent that can restore patient's immune response to cancer cells. Unlike vaccines, immune checkpoints inhibitors have shown promising results in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Especially, nivolumab and pembrolizumab, monoclonal antibodies against PD-1, provides as single agent therapy in chemotherapy refractory patients objective response rates ranging from 15%-25%, the majority of which arose quickly and were ongoing 1 year after starting treatment. Furthermore, the toxicity profile differs from that of cytotoxic chemotherapy and is much better tolerated. PD-L1 expression is a promising biomarker for selection and stratification of patients, although its prognostic and predictive role remains to be defined. Several trials are currently ongoing to define the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer, their combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy or targeted agents and the efficacy and safety of double blockage of PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA4. We report a review based on a MEDLINE/PubMed, searched for randomized phase II or III trials evaluating immune checkpoint inhibitors and NSCLC, considering the measured outcomes as progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and the overall response rate (ORR).

Erlotinib and gefitinib for elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Erlotinib and gefitinib are tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) associated with the EGFR, which is involved in cell proliferation, growth, migration, invasion and survival, and has been found to be overexpressed in non-small-cell lung cancer. Erlotinib was the first target agent approved for the treatment of NSCLC in second- and third line, in patients unselected for EGFR mutations; gefitinib was the first EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of NSCLC in all lines of setting in patients harbouring EGFR mutations. In elderly patients, with a poor prognosis, and different co-morbidities, erlotinib and gefitinib could be considered as valid therapeutic options. This paper reviews the role of both drugs, in the management of elderly patients affected by advanced NSCLC based on an update analysis of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials.