The phase I/II eNRGy trial: Zenocutuzumab in patients with cancers harboring NRG1 gene fusions.

Neuregulin 1 (NRG1) fusions are oncogenic drivers that have been detected in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and other solid tumors. NRG1 fusions are rare, occurring in less than 1% of solid tumors. Patients with NRG1 fusion positive (NRG1+) cancer have limited therapeutic options. Zenocutuzumab is a novel, bispecific IgG1 antibody that targets both HER2 and HER3 proteins and inhibits NRG1 binding through a 'Dock & Block®' mechanism of action. Here, we describe the rationale and design of the phase II component of the eNRGy trial, part of the overall, open-label phase I/II, multicenter trial exploring the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity and antitumor activity of zenocutuzumab in patients with NRG1+ NSCLC, PDAC or other solid tumors.

eNRGy: a clinical trial of zenocutuzumab for cancer caused by NRG1 gene fusionsNRG1 gene fusions are rare mutations that cause cancer cells to grow. These fusions are found in many different types of cancer. Tumors with NRG1 gene fusions do not respond well to standard treatment options. Zenocutuzumab, or Zeno, is a treatment that is being tested to see if it can stop cancer that is growing because of NRG1 gene fusions. Here, we describe the reasoning for and design of an ongoing clinical trial (eNRGy) designed to study the efficacy (how well it works) and safety of Zeno in patients with cancer that has NRG1 gene fusions. The eNRGy trial is recruiting patients with cancer that has NRG1 gene fusions, including non-small-cell lung cancer, pancreatic cancer and others. Patients who join this trial will receive Zeno once every 2 weeks until their cancer grows. The main goal (primary end point) of this trial is to determine the percentage of patients whose tumors decrease in size by 30% or more. The eNRGy trial is currently enrolling patients. For more information, refer to ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02912949), visit https://nrg1.com/, or call 1-833-NRG-1234.

Mobocertinib in Patients with EGFR Exon 20 Insertion-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (MOON): An International Real-World Safety and Efficacy Analysis.

EGFR exon 20 (EGFR Ex20) insertion mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are insensitive to traditional EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Mobocertinib is the only approved TKI specifically designed to target EGFR Ex20. We performed an international, real-world safety and efficacy analysis on patients with EGFR Ex20-positive NSCLC enrolled in a mobocertinib early access program. We explored the mechanisms of resistance by analyzing postprogression biopsies, as well as cross-resistance to amivantamab. Data from 86 patients with a median age of 67 years and a median of two prior lines of treatment were analyzed. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 95% of patients. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were reported in 38% of patients and included diarrhea (22%) and rash (8%). In 17% of patients, therapy was permanently discontinued, and two patients died due to TRAEs. Women were seven times more likely to discontinue treatment than men. In the overall cohort, the objective response rate to mobocertinib was 34% (95% CI, 24-45). The response rate in treatment-naïve patients was 27% (95% CI, 8-58). The median progression-free and overall survival was 5 months (95% CI, 3.5-6.5) and 12 months (95% CI, 6.8-17.2), respectively. The intracranial response rate was limited (13%), and one-third of disease progression cases involved the brain. Mobocertinib also showed antitumor activity following EGFR Ex20-specific therapy and vice versa. Potential mechanisms of resistance to mobocertinib included amplifications in MET, PIK3CA, and NRAS. Mobocertinib demonstrated meaningful efficacy in a real-world setting but was associated with considerable gastrointestinal and cutaneous toxicity.

Checkpoint Inhibitor Monotherapy in Potentially Trial-Eligible or Trial-Ineligible Patients With Metastatic NSCLC in the German Prospective CRISP Registry Real-World Cohort (AIO-TRK-0315).

Introduction: Patients with metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in clinical practice may often not meet the strict inclusion criteria of clinical trials. Our aim was to assess the trial eligibility of patients with mNSCLC treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy in real-world and to compare the outcome of "trial-ineligible" and "potentially trial-eligible" patients. Methods: Data from the prospective, clinical research platform CRISP were used to compare patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome of patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score greater than or equal to 50% tumors treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy who are deemed either "potentially trial-eligible" or "trial-ineligible" according to inclusion and exclusion criteria of the registrational studies (KEYNOTE-024 and -042). Results: Of 746 patients included, 343 patients (46.0%) were classified as "trial-ineligible" and had significantly worse outcomes compared with "potentially trial-eligible" patients (n = 403, 54.0%): median progression-free survival: 6.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.2-8.4) versus 10.3 (95% CI: 8.4-13.8) months, hazard ratio (trial-ineligible versus potentially trial-eligible) of 1.43 (95% CI: 1.19-1.72), p less than 0.001; median overall survival: 15.9 (95% CI: 11.4-20.3) versus 25.3 (95% CI: 19.8-30.4) months, hazard ratio of 1.36 (95% CI: 1.10-1.67), p equals 0.004. Conclusions: Our data reveal that a considerable proportion of patients with mNSCLC are not eligible to participate in a clinical trial and were found to have worse outcomes than potentially trial-eligible patients, whose outcomes were comparable with those obtained from pivotal clinical trials. This is of substantial clinical relevance for physicians discussing outcomes to be expected with their patients and stresses the need for real-world effectiveness analyses.

Outcome of First-Line Treatment With Pembrolizumab According to KRAS/TP53 Mutational Status for Nonsquamous Programmed Death-Ligand 1-High (≥50%) NSCLC in the German National Network Genomic Medicine Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Programmed death-ligand 1 expression currently represents the only validated predictive biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibition in metastatic NSCLC in the clinical routine, but it has limited value in distinguishing responses. Assessment of KRAS and TP53 mutations (mut) as surrogate for an immunosupportive tumor microenvironment (TME) might help to close this gap. METHODS: A total of 696 consecutive patients with programmed death-ligand 1-high (≥50%), nonsquamous NSCLC, having received molecular testing within the German National Network Genomic Medicine Lung Cancer between 2017 and 2020, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status less than or equal to 1 and pembrolizumab as first-line palliative treatment, were included into this retrospective cohort analysis. Treatment efficacy and outcome according to KRAS/TP53 status were correlated with TME composition and gene expression analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas lung adenocarcinoma cohort. RESULTS: Proportion of KRASmut and TP53mut was 53% (G12C 25%, non-G12C 28%) and 51%, respectively. In KRASmut patients, TP53 comutations increased response rates (G12C: 69.7% versus 46.5% [TP53mut versus wild-type (wt)], p = 0.004; non-G12C: 55.4% versus 39.5%, p = 0.03), progression-free survival (G12C: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59, p = 0.009, non-G12C: HR = 0.7, p = 0.047), and overall survival (G12C: HR = 0.72, p = 0.16, non-G12C: HR = 0.56, p = 0.002), whereas no differences were observed in KRASwt patients. After a median follow-up of 41 months, G12C/TP53mut patients experienced the longest progression-free survival and overall survival (33.7 and 65.3 mo), which correlated with high tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte densities in the TME and up-regulation of interferon gamma target genes. Proinflammatory pathways according to TP53 status (mut versus wt) were less enhanced and not different in non-G12C and KRASwt, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: G12C/TP53 comutations identify a subset of patients with a very favorable long-term survival with immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy, mediated by highly active interferon gamma signaling in a proinflammatory TME.

Small cell transformation in EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: DLL3 expression and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors or tyrosine kinase inhibitors combined with chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Small cell transformation (SCT) is a typical mechanism of adaptive resistance to third generation epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRi) which have become the standard of care for EGFR-driven non-small cell lung cancer (EGFR+ NSCLC). Little is known about the optimal management of SCT patients. This study aimed to compare outcomes under platinum/etoposide chemotherapy alone (chemo) or in combination with EGFR inhibitors (EGFRi+chemo) or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI+chemo). In addition, DLL3 expression was explored as potential novel therapeutic target. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on patients with EGFR+ NSCLC and SCT treated at 19 centers in Europe and the United States. A total of 47 patients were included of whom 17 received chemo, 20 ICI+chemo, and 10 EGFRi+chemo. We analyzed DLL3 expression by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: In the entire cohort, median overall survival (OS) from start of first SCT therapy was 11 months (95 % confidence interval [95 %CI] 9.1-12.9) and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5 months (95 %CI 4.2-5.8). Median PFS was similar in all three groups (chemo and ICI+chemo 4 months, EGFRi+chemo 6 months), and 12-months PFS was 12 % (95 %CI 2 %-31 %), 13 % (95 %CI 0 %-43 %), and 0 % for ICI+chemo, EGFRi+chemo, and chemo, respectively. Median OS in the ICI+chemo group was 13 months (95 %CI 5.5-20.5) compared to 10 months (95 %CI 7.6-12.4) with chemo and EGFRi+chemo (95 %CI 8.1-11.9), respectively. Before and after SCT, 0 % and 93 % of tumors were DLL3-positive. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that ICI+chemo and DLL3-targeting agents are worth further exploration in EGFR+ NSCLC undergoing SCT. PRESENTED ELSEWHERE: Part of this work has been presented at ESMO annual meeting in Madrid, Spain in October 2023 (Poster 1336 P).

Is Dementia Associated with COVID-19 Mortality? A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study Conducted in 50 Hospitals in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Dementia has been identified as a major predictor of mortality associated with COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the association between dementia and mortality in COVID-19 inpatients in Germany across a longer interval during the pandemic. METHODS: This retrospective study was based on anonymized data from 50 hospitals in Germany and included patients with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis hospitalized between March 11, 2020 and July, 20, 2022. The main outcome of the study was the association of mortality during inpatient stays with dementia diagnosis, which was studied using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidities as well as univariate logistic regression for matched pairs. RESULTS: Of 28,311 patients diagnosed with COVID-19, 11.3% had a diagnosis of dementia. Prior to matching, 26.5% of dementia patients and 11.5% of non-dementia patients died; the difference decreased to 26.5% of dementia versus 21.7% of non-dementia patients within the matched pairs (n = 3,317). This corresponded to an increase in the risk of death associated with dementia (OR = 1.33; 95% CI: 1.16-1.46) in the univariate regression conducted for matched pairs. CONCLUSION: Although dementia was associated with COVID-19 mortality, the association was weaker than in previously published studies. Further studies are needed to better understand whether and how pre-existing neuropsychiatric conditions such as dementia may impact the course and outcome of COVID-19.

High In-Hospital Mortality in SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients with Active Cancer Disease during Omicron Phase of the Pandemic: Insights from the CORONA Germany Study.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with cancer have a worse outcome including a significant higher mortality, compared to non-cancer patients. However, limited data are available regarding in-hospital mortality during the Omicron phase of the pandemic. Therefore, the aim of the study was the comparison of mortality in patients with history of cancer and patients with active cancer disease during the different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the current Omicron variant of concern. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, observational, epidemiological cohort study at 45 hospitals in Germany. Until July 20, 2022, all adult hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 positive patients were included. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality regarding cancer status (history of cancer and active cancer disease) and SARS-CoV-2 virus type. RESULTS: From March 11, 2020, to July 20, 2022, a total of 27,490 adult SARS-CoV-2 positive patients were included in the study. 2,578 patients (9.4%) had diagnosis of cancer, of whom 1,065 (41.3%) had history of cancer, whereas 1,513 (58.7%) had active cancer disease. Overall 3,749 out of the total of 27,490 patients (13.6%) died during the hospital stay. Patients with active cancer disease had a significantly higher mortality compared to patients without cancer diagnosis, in both phases of the pandemic (wild-type to Delta: OR 1.940 [1.646-2.285]); Omicron: 2.864 [2.354-3.486]). After adjustment to co-variables, SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with active cancer disease had the highest risk for in-hospital mortality compared to the other groups, in both phases of the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The CORONA Germany study indicates that hospitalized patients with active cancer disease are at high risk of death during a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Mortality of patients with history of cancer improved to nearly the level of non-cancer patients during Omicron phase.

NSCLC with uncommon EGFR mutations treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: For refractory NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations, recent studies have demonstrated a favorable response to the combination of anti-angiogenic therapy and checkpoint inhibition but included only very few patients with uncommon EGFR mutations for which treatment options are still limited despite new targeted treatments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen stage IV NSCLC patients with uncommon EGFR mutations from 9 different German centers were treated in first or further line with Atezolizumab, Bevacizumab, Carboplatin and (nab-)Paclitaxel (ABCP). PFS was evaluated from start of ABCP and OS from time of initial diagnosis of stage IV. RESULTS: Patients with either an Exon 20 insertion (n = 9) or other uncommon EGFR mutations (n = 7) received ABCP in first, second or further line. Nine patients had received a TKI therapy in first line with an ORR of 66.7 % and a median time-to-next-treatment of 6.7 months. After a median number of 4 ABCP cycles, 4 patients (25.0 %) required a dose reduction of chemotherapy and 5 patients (31.3 %) suffered from grade 3 or 4 toxicity. Overall response rate was 81.3 % and disease control rate 87.5 %. 14 patients (87.5 %) received a maintenance with AB and the median follow-up after initial diagnosis was 24.3 months. Median PFS was 13.6 months for both the entire cohort and for Exon 20 insertions. Corresponding median OS was either not reached or 30.7 months. Landmark analysis at 12 months gave a PFS of 42.8 % and an OS of 93.3 %. Four patients were rechallenged with ABCP while progressing under maintenance and responded again. In further line therapy, clinical benefit was achieved in all of 3 patients receiving Amivantamab, but in only one of four patients receiving mobocertinib. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective analysis, ABCP achieves an encouraging outcome for patients with uncommon EGFR mutations and is a valuable option in the early treatment course.

The impact of TP53 co-mutations and immunologic microenvironment on outcome of lung cancer with EGFR exon 20 insertions.

BACKGROUND: EGFR exon20 insertions (ex20ins) are targeted by novel compounds in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, data about outcome under conventional therapies and the influence of molecular features are scarce. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 118 patients with evaluation of radiologic response based on RECIST v1.1. TP53 status was available for 88 cases. RESULTS: Platinum doublets and chemoimmunotherapy showed similar response rates (20-25%), disease control rates (80%) and median progression-free survival (mPFS, ≈7 months), which were longer compared to monochemotherapy (9%, 59%, 4.1 months), EGFR inhibitors (0%, 46%, 3.0) and PD-(L)1 inhibitors (0%, 30%, 2.1; p < 0.05). Overall survival (OS) was not dependent on the choice of first-line treatment, but related to more lines of systemic therapy (p < 0.05). TP53 mutations and brain metastases were associated with shorter PFS under platinum doublets and EGFR inhibitors (HR 3.3-6.1, p < 0.01), and shorter OS for patients receiving both treatments (p < 0.05). More tumour CD8+ and less Th1 cells were associated with longer OS independent of brain and TP53 status (p < 0.01). No difference in outcome was noted according to the ex20ins site and use of pemetrexed (vs. other cytotoxics) or bevacizumab. Long-lasting responses (>1 year) occasionally occurred under EGFR inhibitors for both 'near-' and 'far-loop' variants. CONCLUSIONS: Platinum doublets and chemoimmunotherapy have the highest activity with ORR of 20-25% and mPFS of approximately 7 months, regardless of the cytotoxic partner, while PD-(L)1 inhibitors show limited efficacy. TP53 mutations, brain metastases and a lower tumour CD8/Th1-cell ratio are independently associated with shorter survival.

Clinical outcome, risk assessment, and seasonal variation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients-Results from the CORONA Germany study.

BACKGROUND: After one year of the pandemic and hints of seasonal patterns, temporal variations of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 are widely unknown. Additionally, heterogeneous data regarding clinical indicators predicting disease severity has been published. However, there is a need for a risk stratification model integrating the effects on disease severity and mortality to support clinical decision-making. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, observational, prospective, epidemiological cohort study at 45 hospitals in Germany. Until 1 January 2021, all hospitalized SARS CoV-2 positive patients were included. A comprehensive data set was collected in a cohort of seven hospitals. The primary objective was disease severity and prediction of mild, severe, and fatal cases. Ancillary analyses included a temporal analysis of all hospitalized COVID-19 patients for the entire year 2020. FINDINGS: A total of 4704 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized with a mortality rate of 19% (890/4704). Rates of mortality, need for ventilation, pneumonia, and respiratory insufficiency showed temporal variations, whereas age had a strong influence on the course of mortality. In cohort conducting analyses, prognostic factors for fatal/severe disease were: age (odds ratio (OR) 1.704, CI:[1.221-2.377]), respiratory rate (OR 1.688, CI:[1.222-2.333]), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (OR 1.312, CI:[1.015-1.695]), C-reactive protein (CRP) (OR 2.132, CI:[1.533-2.965]), and creatinine values (OR 2.573, CI:[1.593-4.154]. CONCLUSIONS: Age, respiratory rate, LDH, CRP, and creatinine at baseline are associated with all cause death, and need for ventilation/ICU treatment in a nationwide series of COVID 19 hospitalized patients. Especially age plays an important prognostic role. In-hospital mortality showed temporal variation during the year 2020, influenced by age. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04659187.

Efficacy of docetaxel plus ramucirumab as palliative second-line therapy following first-line chemotherapy plus immune-checkpoint-inhibitor combination treatment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) UICC stage IV.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy plus immune-checkpoint inhibitor (CTx+ICI) therapy has become the preferred 1st line treatment in patients with metastatic NSCLC without oncogenic driven mutations. However, the optimal subsequent 2nd line treatment is not defined and several alternatives exist. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of 2nd line docetaxel plus ramucirumab (D+R) initiated after failure of 1st line CTx+ICI. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected during routine care from German thoracic oncology centers. Only patients who had received at least one course of 2nd line D+R were included. ORR, PFS, OS and numbers of courses of D+R were investigated with PFS after initiation of D+R being the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients met the inclusion criteria. 2nd line treatment with D+R achieved an ORR and DCR of 32.5% and 62.4%, respectively. Median PFS for 2nd line therapy was 3.9 months with a DOR of 6.4 months. Median OS of 15.5 and 7.5 months were observed from the start of 1st line therapy and 2nd line treatment, respectively. No unexpected toxicities occurred. Presence of KRAS mutations was associated with significantly worse median PFS to D+R (2.8 vs. 4.5 months in wild-type cases; P=0.021) and was an independent predictor of inferior PFS in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: D+R is an effective and safe 2nd line treatment after failure of 1st line CTx+ICI irrespective of NSCLC histology. However, patients with a KRAS mutation did not benefit from D+R in terms of PFS and will require further investigations.

Prognostic Impact of Acute Cardiovascular Events in COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients-Results from the CORONA Germany Study.

BACKGROUND: Acute myocardial injury (AMJ), assessed by elevated levels of cardiac troponin, is associated with fatal outcome in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the role of acute cardiovascular (CV) events defined by clinical manifestation rather than sole elevations of biomarkers is unclear in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate acute clinically manifest CV events in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: From 1 March 2020 to 5 January 2021, we conducted a multicenter, prospective, epidemiological cohort study at six hospitals from Hamburg, Germany (a portion of the state-wide 45-center CORONA Germany cohort study) enrolling all hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Primary endpoint was occurrence of a clinically manifest CV-event. RESULTS: In total, 132 CV-events occurred in 92 of 414 (22.2%) patients in the Hamburg-cohort: cardiogenic shock in 10 (2.4%), cardiopulmonary resuscitation in 12 (2.9%), acute coronary syndrome in 11 (2.7%), de-novo arrhythmia in 31 (7.5%), acute heart-failure in 43 (10.3%), myocarditis in 2 (0.5%), pulmonary-embolism in 11 (2.7%), thrombosis in 9 (2.2%) and stroke in 3 (0.7%). In the Hamburg-cohort, mortality was 46% (42/92) for patients with a CV-event and 33% (27/83) for patients with only AMJ without CV-event (OR 1.7, CI: (0.94-3.2), p = 0.077). Mortality was higher in patients with CV-events (Odds ratio(OR): 4.8, 95%-confidence-interval(CI): [2.9-8]). Age (OR 1.1, CI: (0.66-1.86)), atrial fibrillation (AF) on baseline-ECG (OR 3.4, CI: (1.74-6.8)), systolic blood-pressure (OR 0.7, CI: (0.53-0.96)), potassium (OR 1.3, CI: (0.99-1.73)) and C-reactive-protein (1.4, CI (1.04-1.76)) were associated with CV-events. CONCLUSION: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients with clinical manifestation of acute cardiovascular events show an almost five-fold increased mortality. In this regard, the emergence of arrhythmias is a major determinant.

Efficacy of Docetaxel Plus Ramucirumab as Palliative Third-Line Therapy Following Second-Line Immune-Checkpoint-Inhibitor Treatment in Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Stage IV.

BACKGROUND: Antiangiogenic agents have been shown to stimulate the immune system and cause synergistic effects with chemotherapy. Effects might be even stronger after immune-checkpoint-inhibitor (ICI) therapy. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of ramucirumab plus docetaxel (R + D) as third-line treatment after failure of a first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and a second-line ICI treatment in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stage IV. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected from 9 German thoracic oncology centers. Only patients who had received at least 1 cycle of third-line R + D were included. The numbers of cycles, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were investigated. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients met the criteria for inclusion. Third-line treatment with R + D achieved an ORR of 36% and a disease control rate (DCR) of 69%. Median PFS for third-line therapy was 6.8 months with a duration of response (DOR) of 10.2 months. A median OS of 29 months was observed from the start of first-line therapy with a median OS of 11.0 months from the start of third-line treatment. No unexpected toxicities occurred. CONCLUSION: R + D is a highly effective and safe third-line treatment after failure of second-line programmed cell death protein 1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD1/PD-L1)-derived ICI therapy irrespective of NSCLC histology. As there may be synergistic effects of second- and third-line treatments, this sequence is a very suitable option for patients not treated with first-line ICI. In addition, R + D should continue to be investigated as a second-line treatment option after failure of chemotherapy plus ICI in the palliative first-line treatment.

Integration of Tumor Mutation Burden and PD-L1 Testing in Routine Laboratory Diagnostics in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

In recent years, Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has evolved into a prime example for precision oncology with multiple FDA-approved "precision" drugs. For the majority of NSCLC lacking targetable genetic alterations, immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) has become standard of care in first-line treatment or beyond. PD-L1 tumor expression represents the only approved predictive biomarker for PD-L1/PD-1 checkpoint inhibition by therapeutic antibodies. Since PD-L1-negative or low-expressing tumors may also respond to ICI, additional factors are likely to contribute in addition to PD-L1 expression. Tumor mutation burden (TMB) has emerged as a potential candidate; however, it is the most complex biomarker so far and might represent a challenge for routine diagnostics. We therefore established a hybrid capture (HC) next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay that covers all oncogenic driver alterations as well as TMB and validated TMB values by correlation with the assay (F1CDx) used for the CheckMate 227 study. Results of the first consecutive 417 patients analyzed in a routine clinical setting are presented. Data show that fast reliable comprehensive diagnostics including TMB and targetable alterations are obtained with a short turn-around time. Thus, even complex biomarkers can easily be implemented in routine practice to optimize treatment decisions for advanced NSCLC.

A Randomized Phase III Study of Abemaciclib Versus Erlotinib in Patients with Stage IV Non-small Cell Lung Cancer With a Detectable KRAS Mutation Who Failed Prior Platinum-Based Therapy: JUNIPER.

INTRODUCTION: JUNIPER compared the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib, a selective cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, with erlotinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring a Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) mutation. METHODS: JUNIPER was a Phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial of abemaciclib versus erlotinib in patients with stage IV NSCLC and a detectable mutation in codons 12 or 13 of the KRAS oncogene, who progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy and 1 additional therapy (could include immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy). Randomized patients (3:2) received either 200 mg abemaciclib twice daily or 150 mg erlotinib once daily with best supportive care until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. RESULTS: Between December 2014 and April 2017, 453 patients were randomly assigned to receive abemaciclib (N = 270) or erlotinib (N = 183). Median OS was 7.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.5, 8.8) with abemaciclib and 7.8 months (95% CI: 6.4, 9.5) with erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.968 [95% CI: 0.768, 1.219]; p = .77). Median PFS was 3.6 months (95% CI: 2.8, 3.8) with abemaciclib and 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.9, 2.0) with erlotinib (HR = 0.583 [95% CI: 0.470, 0.723]; p <.000001). ORR was 8.9% and 2.7% (p = .010), and the disease control rate was 54.4% and 31.7% (p <.001) with abemaciclib and erlotinib, respectively. Safety results reflected the known safety profiles of abemaciclib and erlotinib. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the primary endpoint of OS was not met; PFS and ORR were improved with manageable toxicity in the abemaciclib arm. The increases in response rates and PFS support further investigation of abemaciclib in other NSCLC subpopulations or in combination with other agents. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02152631.