Acute hospitalizations after proton therapy versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer in the durvalumab era.

INTRODUCTION: It was hypothesized that use of proton beam therapy (PBT) in patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiation and consolidative immune checkpoint inhibition is associated with fewer unplanned hospitalizations compared with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). METHODS: Patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated between October 2017 and December 2021 with concurrent chemoradiation with either IMRT or PBT ± consolidative immune checkpoint inhibition were retrospectively identified. Logistic regression was used to assess the association of radiation therapy technique with 90-day hospitalization and grade 3 (G3+) lymphopenia. Competing risk regression was used to compare G3+ pneumonitis, G3+ esophagitis, and G3+ cardiac events. Kaplan-Meier method was used for progression-free survival and overall survival. Inverse probability treatment weighting was applied to adjust for differences in PBT and IMRT groups. RESULTS: Of 316 patients, 117 (37%) received PBT and 199 (63%) received IMRT. The PBT group was older (p < .001) and had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index scores (p = .02). The PBT group received a lower mean heart dose (p < .0001), left anterior descending artery V15 Gy (p = .001), mean lung dose (p = .008), and effective dose to immune circulating cells (p < .001). On inverse probability treatment weighting analysis, PBT was associated with fewer unplanned hospitalizations (adjusted odds ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.38-0.81; p = .002) and less G3+ lymphopenia (adjusted odds ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.37-0.81; p = .003). There was no difference in other G3+ toxicities, progression-free survival, or overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: PBT is associated with fewer unplanned hospitalizations, lower effective dose to immune circulating cells and less G3+ lymphopenia compared with IMRT. Minimizing dose to lymphocytes may be warranted, but prospective data are needed.

Calls to action on lung cancer management and research.

Lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally, remains a pressing health issue despite significant medical advances. The New York Lung Cancer Foundation brought together experts from academia, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries as well as organizational leaders and patient advocates, to thoroughly examine the current state of lung cancer diagnosis, treatment, and research. The goal was to identify areas where our understanding is incomplete and to develop collaborative public health and scientific strategies to generate better patient outcomes, as highlighted in our "Calls to Action." The consortium prioritized 8 different calls to action. These include (1) develop strategies to cure more patients with early-stage lung cancer, (2) investigate carcinogenesis leading to lung cancers in patients without a history of smoking, (3) harness precision medicine for disease interception and prevention, (4) implement solutions to deliver prevention measures and effective therapies to individuals in under-resourced countries, (5) facilitate collaborations with industry to collect and share data and samples, (6) create and maintain open access to big data repositories, (7) develop new immunotherapeutic agents for lung cancer treatment and prevention, and (8) invest in research in both the academic and community settings. These calls to action provide guidance to representatives from academia, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries, organizational and regulatory leaders, and patient advocates to guide ongoing and planned initiatives.

Tumor Treating Fields therapy with standard systemic therapy versus standard systemic therapy alone in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer following progression on or after platinum-based therapy (LUNAR): a randomised, open-label, pivotal phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are electric fields that disrupt processes critical for cancer cell survival, leading to immunogenic cell death and enhanced antitumour immune response. In preclinical models of non-small-cell lung cancer, TTFields amplified the effects of chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors. We report primary results from a pivotal study of TTFields therapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, pivotal phase 3 study recruited patients at 130 sites in 19 countries. Participants were aged 22 years or older with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer progressing on or after platinum-based therapy, with squamous or non-squamous histology and ECOG performance status of 2 or less. Previous platinum-based therapy was required, but no restriction was placed on the number or type of previous lines of systemic therapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to TTFields therapy and standard systemic therapy (investigator's choice of immune checkpoint inhibitor [nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab] or docetaxel) or standard therapy alone. Randomisation was performed centrally using variable blocked randomisation and an interactive voice-web response system, and was stratified by tumour histology, treatment, and region. Systemic therapies were dosed according to local practice guidelines. TTFields therapy (150 kHz) was delivered continuously to the thoracic region with the recommendation to achieve an average of at least 18 h/day device usage. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The safety population included all patients who received any study therapy and were analysed according to the actual treatment received. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02973789. FINDINGS: Between Feb 13, 2017, and Nov 19, 2021, 276 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive TTFields therapy with standard therapy (n=137) or standard therapy alone (n=139). The median age was 64 years (IQR 59-70), 178 (64%) were male and 98 (36%) were female, 156 (57%) had non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, and 87 (32%) had received a previous immune checkpoint inhibitor. Median follow-up was 10·6 months (IQR 6·1-33·7) for patients receiving TTFields therapy with standard therapy, and 9·5 months (0·1-32·1) for patients receiving standard therapy. Overall survival was significantly longer with TTFields therapy and standard therapy than with standard therapy alone (median 13·2 months [95% CI 10·3-15·5] vs 9·9 months [8·1-11·5]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·56-0·98]; p=0·035). In the safety population (n=267), serious adverse events of any cause were reported in 70 (53%) of 133 patients receiving TTFields therapy plus standard therapy and 51 (38%) of 134 patients receiving standard therapy alone. The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were leukopenia (37 [14%] of 267), pneumonia (28 [10%]), and anaemia (21 [8%]). TTFields therapy-related adverse events were reported in 95 (71%) of 133 patients; these were mostly (81 [85%]) grade 1-2 skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders. There were three deaths related to standard therapy (two due to infections and one due to pulmonary haemorrhage) and no deaths related to TTFields therapy. INTERPRETATION: TTFields therapy added to standard therapy significantly improved overall survival compared with standard therapy alone in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer after progression on platinum-based therapy without exacerbating systemic toxicities. These data suggest that TTFields therapy is efficacious in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer and should be considered as a treatment option to manage the disease in this setting. FUNDING: Novocure.

A Phase II Open-Label Trial of Binimetinib and Hydroxychloroquine in Patients With Advanced KRAS-Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In RAS-mutant tumors, combined MEK and autophagy inhibition using chloroquine demonstrated synthetic lethality in preclinical studies. This phase II trial evaluated the safety and activity of the MEK inhibitor binimetinib combined with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in patients with advanced KRAS-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Eligibility criteria included KRAS-mutant NSCLC, progression after first-line therapy, ECOG PS 0-1, and adequate end-organ function. Binimetinib 45 mg was administered orally (p.o.) bid with HCQ 400 mg p.o. bid. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). A Simon's 2-stage phase II clinical trial design was used, with an α error of 5% and a power ß of 80%, anticipating an ORR of 30% to proceed to the 2-stage expansion. RESULTS: Between April 2021 and January 2022, 9 patients were enrolled to stage I: median age 64 years, 44.4% females, 78% smokers. The best response was stable disease in one patient (11.1%). The median progression free survival (PFS) was 1.9 months, and median overall survival (OS) was 5.3 months. Overall, 5 patients (55.6%) developed a grade 3 adverse event (AE). The most common grade 3 toxicity was rash (33%). Pre-specified criteria for stopping the trial early due to lack of efficacy were met. CONCLUSION: The combination of B + HCQ in second- or later-line treatment of patients with advanced KRAS-mutant NSCLC did not show significant antitumor activity. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04735068).

Neoadjuvant Gene-Mediated Cytotoxic Immunotherapy for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Safety and Immunologic Activity.

Gene-mediated cytotoxic immunotherapy (GMCI) is an immuno-oncology approach involving local delivery of a replication-deficient adenovirus expressing herpes simplex thymidine kinase (AdV-tk) followed by anti-herpetic prodrug activation that promotes immunogenic tumor cell death, antigen-presenting cell activation, and T cell stimulation. This phase I dose-escalation pilot trial assessed bronchoscopic delivery of AdV-tk in patients with suspected lung cancer who were candidates for surgery. A single intra-tumoral AdV-tk injection in three dose cohorts (maximum 1012 viral particles) was performed during diagnostic staging, followed by a 14-day course of the prodrug valacyclovir, and subsequent surgery 1 week later. Twelve patients participated after appropriate informed consent. Vector-related adverse events were minimal. Immune biomarkers were evaluated in tumor and blood before and after GMCI. Significantly increased infiltration of CD8+ T cells was found in resected tumors. Expression of activation, inhibitory, and proliferation markers, such as human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DR, CD38, Ki67, PD-1, CD39, and CTLA-4, were significantly increased in both the tumor and peripheral CD8+ T cells. Thus, intratumoral AdV-tk injection into non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) proved safe and feasible, and it effectively induced CD8+ T cell activation. These data provide a foundation for additional clinical trials of GMCI for lung cancer patients with potential benefit if combined with other immune therapies.

BRCA1 Protein Expression Predicts Survival in Glioblastoma Patients from an NRG Oncology RTOG Cohort.

PURPOSE: Glioblastoma, the most common malignant brain tumor, was associated with a median survival of <1 year in the pre-temozolomide (TMZ) era. Despite advances in molecular and genetic profiling studies identifying several predictive biomarkers, none has been translated into routine clinical use. Our aim was to investigate the prognostic significance of a panel of diverse cellular molecular markers of tumor formation and growth in an annotated glioblastoma tissue microarray (TMA). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A TMA composed of archived glioblastoma tumors from patients treated with surgery, radiation, and non-TMZ chemother-apy, was provided by RTOG. RAD51, BRCA-1, phosphatase and tensin homolog tumor suppressor gene (PTEN), and miRNA-210 expression levels were assessed using quantitative in situ hybridization and automated quantitative protein analysis. The objectives of this analysis were to determine the association of each biomarker with overall survival (OS), using the Cox proportional hazard model. Event-time distributions were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by the log-rank test. RESULTS: A cohort of 66 patients was included in this study. Among the 4 biomarkers assessed, only BRCA1 expression had a statistically significant correlation with survival. From univariate analysis, patients with low BRCA1 protein expression showed a favorable outcome for OS (p = 0.04; hazard ratio = 0.56) in comparison with high expressors, with a median survival time of 18.9 versus 4.8 months. CONCLUSIONS: BRCA1 protein expression was an important survival predictor in our cohort of glioblastoma patients. This result may imply that low BRCA1 in the tumor and the consequent low level of DNA repair cause vulnerability of the cancer cells to treatment.

Impact of telemedicine adoption on accessibility and time to treatment in patients with thoracic malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: To ensure safe delivery of oncologic care during the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has been rapidly adopted. However, little data exist on the impact of telemedicine on quality and accessibility of oncologic care. This study assessed whether conducting an office visit for thoracic oncology patients via telemedicine affected time to treatment initiation and accessibility. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with thoracic malignancies seen by a multidisciplinary team during the first surge of COVID-19 cases in Philadelphia (March 1 to June 30, 2020). Patients with an index visit for a new phase of care, defined as a new diagnosis, local recurrence, or newly discovered metastatic disease, were included. RESULTS: 240 distinct patients with thoracic malignancies were seen: 132 patients (55.0%) were seen initially in-person vs 108 (45.0%) via telemedicine. The majority of visits were for a diagnosis of a new thoracic cancer (87.5%). Among newly diagnosed patients referred to the thoracic oncology team, the median time from referral to initial visit was significantly shorter amongst the patients seen via telemedicine vs. in-person (median 5.0 vs. 6.5 days, p < 0.001). Patients received surgery (32.5%), radiation (24.2%), or systemic therapy (30.4%). Time from initial visit to treatment initiation by modality did not differ by telemedicine vs in-person: surgery (22 vs 16 days, p = 0.47), radiation (27.5 vs 27.5 days, p = 0.86, systemic therapy (15 vs 13 days, p = 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Rapid adoption of telemedicine allowed timely delivery of oncologic care during the initial surge of the COVID19 pandemic by a thoracic oncology multi-disciplinary clinic.

Patient-reported outcomes with durvalumab by PD-L1 expression and prior chemoradiotherapy-related variables in unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.

Aim: We retrospectively investigated the impact of tumor PD-L1 expression and prior chemoradiotherapy (CRT)-related variables on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from PACIFIC. Patients & methods: PACIFIC was a Phase III study of durvalumab versus placebo after CRT in patients with unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. If available, pre-CRT tumor tissue was tested for PD-L1 tumor-cell expression, scored at prespecified (25%) and post-hoc (1%) cut-offs. PROs were assessed using EORTC QLQ C30/-LC13. Results: Similar to the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, most PROs remained stable over time across PD-L1 and CRT subgroups, with few clinically relevant differences between treatment arms. Time to deterioration was generally similar to the ITT population. Conclusion: Neither PD-L1 expression nor prior CRT-related variables influenced PROs with durvalumab therapy. Clinical trial registration: NCT02125461 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer without tumor PD-L1 expression: A pooled analysis of 3 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes over chemotherapy alone in patients with previously untreated advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. This study pooled data from 3 randomized controlled trials to evaluate outcomes with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC negative for PD-L1 (ie, a tumor proportion score < 1%). METHODS: Individual patient data were pooled from KEYNOTE-021 cohort G (nonsquamous; NCT02039674), KEYNOTE-189 (nonsquamous; NCT02578680 and NCT03950674), and KEYNOTE-407 (squamous; NCT02775435). Treatment comprised pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (pemetrexed and platinum for nonsquamous histology and carboplatin and paclitaxel/nab-paclitaxel for squamous histology) or chemotherapy alone. Responses were assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 by blinded, independent, central review. No α was assigned to this descriptive, exploratory analysis. RESULTS: Four hundred forty-four of the 1328 patients (33.4%) who were enrolled across the 3 trials had PD-L1-negative tumors (256 on pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy [nonsquamous, n = 155; squamous, n = 94; other, n = 7] and 188 on chemotherapy alone [nonsquamous, n = 83; squamous, n = 99; other, n = 6]). The median time from randomization to the data cutoff was 28.0 months (range, 14.7-55.4 months). Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy improved overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50-0.79) and progression-free survival (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83) over chemotherapy. Sixteen patients in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy arm completed 2 years of treatment; the objective response rate was 87.5% (95% CI, 61.7%-98.4%), and the 3-year OS rate was 100%. Adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 99.2% of the patients who received pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and by 98.9% of the patients who received chemotherapy alone, with grade 3 or higher AEs occurring in 71.4% and 72.0%, respectively; immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions were experienced by 29.0% and 12.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated response and survival improvements with manageable safety in comparison with chemotherapy alone in PD-L1-negative advanced/metastatic NSCLC, and it is a standard-of-care first-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression. LAY SUMMARY: Some tumors produce a protein called programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which interacts with the body's immune system and prevents an immune response against cancer. Antibody therapies such as pembrolizumab block interactions between tumor PD-L1 and the immune system and enable an immune response. Used alone, pembrolizumab provides benefit for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors that produce PD-L1. However, when it is combined with chemotherapy, which can stimulate anticancer immune responses, pembrolizumab provides a benefit, regardless of tumor PD-L1 production. This article shows that among patients with NSCLC whose tumors produce no PD-L1, outcomes are better with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in comparison with chemotherapy alone.

Cisplatin versus cetuximab with definitive concurrent radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: An analysis of Veterans Health Affairs data.

BACKGROUND: The addition of cisplatin or cetuximab to radiation therapy (RT) improves outcomes in comparison with RT alone in the nonoperative management of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), but limited data exist for comparing these approaches. Using Veterans Health Affairs data, this study compared the outcomes of patients treated with RT plus cisplatin or cetuximab. METHODS: Patients with stage III to IVb HNSCC who had been treated nonsurgically with RT and cisplatin or cetuximab from 2000 to 2016 within the Veterans Health Affairs system were identified. Patients were analyzed by the drug used in the first treatment cycle (intent to treat). Overall survival (OS) was compared by treatment group with Cox regression models, and propensity score (PS) methods were used to account for a treatment allocation bias. The risk of toxicities was determined, with logistic regression models fit into propensity-matched cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 4520 patients were included in the analysis with a median follow-up of 3 years: 83% received cisplatin. Cisplatin patients were younger (P < .001) and had fewer comorbidities (P < .001). In an unmatched analysis, cetuximab was associated with inferior OS (P < .001). After PS matching, cetuximab treatment remained statistically significantly associated with inferior OS (1.7 vs 4.1 years; hazard ratio, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-1.79; P < .001). These differences remained significant across all primary HNSCC subsites and in comparison with low- and high-dose cisplatin. CONCLUSIONS: Cetuximab with RT yields inferior OS in comparison with cisplatin for the nonoperative management of stage III to IVb HNSCC. According to this study, cisplatin may be the most appropriate partner for RT in this setting.