Clinical Utility of Circulating Tumor DNA in Patients With Advanced KRASG12C-Mutated NSCLC Treated With Sotorasib.

INTRODUCTION: For patients with KRASG12C-mutated NSCLC who are treated with sotorasib, there is a lack of biomarkers to guide treatment decisions. We therefore investigated the clinical utility of pretreatment and on-treatment circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and treatment-emergent alterations on disease progression. METHODS: Patients with KRASG12C-mutated NSCLC treated with sotorasib were prospectively enrolled in our biomarker study (NCT05221372). Plasma samples were collected before sotorasib treatment, at first-response evaluation and at disease progression. The TruSight Oncology 500 panel was used for ctDNA and variant allele frequency analysis. Tumor response and progression-free survival were assessed per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. RESULTS: Pretreatment KRASG12C ctDNA was detected in 50 of 66 patients (76%). Patients with detectable KRASG12C had inferior progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 2.13 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-4.30], p = 0.031) and overall survival (HR 2.61 [95% CI: 1.16-5.91], p = 0.017). At first-response evaluation (n = 40), 29 patients (73%) had a molecular response. Molecular nonresponders had inferior overall survival (HR 3.58 [95% CI: 1.65-7.74], p = 0.00059). The disease control rate was significantly higher in those with a molecular response (97% versus 64%, p = 0.015). KRAS amplifications were identified as recurrent treatment-emergent alterations. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest detectable pretreatment KRASG12C ctDNA as a marker for poor prognosis and on-treatment ctDNA clearance as a marker for treatment response. We identified KRAS amplifications as a potential recurring resistance mechanism to sotorasib. Identifying patients with superior prognosis could aid in optimizing time of treatment initiation, and identifying patients at risk of early progression could allow for earlier treatment decisions.

Hepatotoxicity in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with sotorasib after prior immunotherapy: a comprehensive clinical and pharmacokinetic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sotorasib given after immunotherapy could put patients at increased risk of hepatotoxicity. Therefore, there is a need to gain insight into the potential correlation between anti-PD-(L)1 treatment, anti-PD-(L)1 concentrations, sotorasib concentrations, and the incidence of hepatotoxicity during sotorasib. METHODS: Patients with KRASG12C-mutated NSCLC treated with sotorasib were prospectively enrolled in our biomarker cohort study (NCT05221372). Plasma samples were collected prior and during sotorasib treatment for anti-PD-1 and sotorasib concentrations. ALT/AST/ALP/GGT increases were collected prospectively and graded according to CTCAEv5.0. Severe hepatotoxicity was defined as grade ≥3 ALT/AST/ALP/GGT increase. FINDINGS: Of the 91 included patients, 80 (88%) received prior anti-PD-(L)1. Prior anti-PD-(L)1 and prior immune-related hepatotoxicity were associated with a higher incidence of severe hepatotoxicity (35% versus 0%, p = 0.016 and 75% versus 31%, p = 0.019, respectively). Patients with an interval of ≤6 weeks between anti-PD-(L)1 and sotorasib (n = 18) had a significantly higher incidence of severe hepatotoxicity than those with a 6-12 week (n = 24) and ≥12 week (n = 38) interval (83% versus 33% versus 13%, respectively, p < 0.0001). Sotorasib trough concentrations did not differ significantly between those with or without severe hepatotoxicity (106 versus 126 ng/mL, p = 0.16). Pembrolizumab concentrations were higher in those with severe hepatotoxicity versus those without (25.6 versus 6.1 µg/mL, p < 0.0001). INTERPRETATION: In this preliminary prospective study, sotorasib after PD-(L)1 blockade was associated with severe hepatotoxicity, especially in patients with a short interval between treatments, prior immune-related hepatitis and higher anti-PD-1 plasma concentrations. Our results suggest a minimum interval of 6 weeks between anti-PD-(L)1 and sotorasib to minimize the risk of hepatotoxicity. FUNDING: None.

A phase 2 trial combining afatinib with cetuximab in patients with EGFR exon 20 insertion-positive non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertion (ex20ins) mutations are the third most common EGFR mutations in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and are associated with primary resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). There is evidence of activity of combining EGFR TKIs with monoclonal antibodies. This study reports on the efficacy and safety of afatinib in combination with cetuximab. METHODS: In this single-arm phase 2 trial, patients with advanced NSCLC harboring an EGFR ex20ins mutation were treated with afatinib 40 mg once daily in combination with cetuximab 500 mg/m2 every 2 weeks. The primary end point was disease control rate (DCR) at 18 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients started treatment, with a median age of 65 years (range, 40-80 years), 78% female, and 95% White. The study achieved its primary end point with a DCR of 54% at 18 weeks, an overall response rate (ORR) of 43%, and a 32% confirmed ORR. Best responses were partial (n = 16), stable (n = 16), progressive disease (n = 2), or not evaluable (n = 3). Median progression-free survival was 5.5 months (95% CI, 3.7-8.3 months) and median overall survival was 16.8 months (95% CI, 10.7-25.8 months). The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were diarrhea (70%), rash (65%), dry skin (59%), paronychia (54%), and erythema (43%). Grade 3 TRAEs were reported in 54% of all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Combination treatment with afatinib and cetuximab demonstrated antitumor activity with a DCR of 54% at 18 weeks and a 32% confirmed ORR. Toxicity was significant, although manageable, after dose reduction.

Exploring the impact of patient-specific clinical features on osimertinib effectiveness in a real-world cohort of patients with EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer.

Osimertinib is prescribed to patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a sensitizing EGFR mutation. Limited data exists on the impact of patient characteristics or osimertinib exposure on effectiveness outcomes. This was a Dutch, multicenter cohort study. Eligible patients were ≥18 years, with metastatic EGFRm+ NSCLC, receiving osimertinib. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were performed. In total, 294 patients were included. Primary EGFR-mutations were mainly exon 19 deletions (54%) and p.L858R point mutations (30%). Osimertinib was given in first-line (40%), second-line (46%) or beyond (14%), with median PFS 14.4 (95% CI: 9.4-19.3), 13.9 (95% CI: 11.3-16.1) and 8.7 months (95% CI: 4.6-12.7), respectively. Patients with low BMI (<20.0 kg/m2 ) had significantly shorter PFS/OS compared to all other subgroups. Patients with a high plasma trough concentration in steady state (Cmin,SS ; >271 ng/mL) had shorter PFS compared to a low Cmin,SS (<163 ng/mL; aHR 2.29; 95% CI: 1.13-4.63). A significant longer PFS was seen in females (aHR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.45-0.82) and patients with the exon 19 deletion (aHR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.36-0.92). A trend towards longer PFS was seen for TP53 wild-type patients, while age did not impact PFS. Patients with a primary EGFR exon 19 deletion had longer PFS, while a low BMI, male sex and a high Cmin,SS were indicative for shorter PFS and/or OS. Age was not associated with effectiveness outcomes of osimertinib.

In-depth Analysis of Lorlatinib-related neurocognitive Adverse Events in Patients With Non-small-cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Lorlatinib is a potent, brain penetrant, next-generation ALK/ROS1 TKI, with high response rates and durable responses, including the brain. However, a significant drawback is the manifestation of neurocognitive adverse events (NCAEs). Despite being generally low-grade in severity, these NCAEs can be physically and mentally disabling. Extensive neurocognitive testing in this group of patients is lacking; therefore we conducted this study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This observational prospective study was conducted across 3 Dutch university hospitals. Patients with metastatic NSCLC with an ALK- or ROS1-rearrangement and having an indication to start lorlatinib in daily clinical practice were eligible. The primary endpoints were to identify changes in neurocognitive functioning, measured through neurocognitive assessment at intervals of 2 weeks and 2 months after starting lorlatinib, in comparison to baseline. As a secondary endpoint, the correlation between neurocognitive impairment and self-reported neurocognitive dysfunction was examined. RESULTS: Between June 2019 and October 2022, 22 patients were included. Among the various neurocognitive tests administered, only the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised parts b and c demonstrated a significant and clinically relevant decrease in scoring 2 weeks post initiation of lorlatinib (P = .036 and P = .003, respectively). However, these returned to baseline at the 2-month evaluation. The questionnaires did not result in significantly different outcomes over time. CONCLUSION: Lorlatinib treatment did not result in a sustained and significant decline within any of the specified neurocognitive domains.

Influence of Food With Different Fat Concentrations on Alectinib Exposure: A Randomized Crossover Pharmacokinetic Trial.

BACKGROUND: Alectinib is the keystone treatment in advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). An exposure-response threshold of 435 ng/mL has recently been established, albeit 37% of patients do not reach this threshold. Alectinib is orally administered, and absorption is largely influenced by food. Hence, further investigation into this relationship is needed to optimize its bioavailability. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized 3-period crossover clinical study in ALK+ NSCLC, alectinib exposure was compared among patients with different diets. Every 7 days, the first alectinib dose was taken with either a continental breakfast, 250-g of low-fat yogurt, or a self-chosen lunch, and the second dose was taken with a self-chosen dinner. Sampling for alectinib exposure (Ctrough) was performed at day 8, just prior to alectinib intake, and the relative difference in Ctrough was compared. RESULTS: In 20 evaluable patients, the mean Ctrough was 14% (95% CI, -23% to -5%; P=.009) and 20% (95% CI, -25% to -14%; P<.001) lower when taken with low-fat yogurt compared with a continental breakfast and a self-chosen lunch, respectively. Administration with a self-chosen lunch did not change exposure compared with a continental breakfast (+7%; 95% CI, -2% to +17%; P=.243). In the low-fat yogurt period, 35% of patients did not reach the threshold versus 5% with the other meals (P<.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients and physicians should be warned for a detrimental food-drug interaction when alectinib is taken with low-fat yogurt, because it results in a clinically relevant lower alectinib exposure. Intake with a self-chosen lunch did not change drug exposure and could be a safe and patient-friendly alternative.

Chemotherapy for patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC after progression on EGFR-TKI's: Exploration of efficacy of unselected treatment in a multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: In patients with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung (NSCLC) chemotherapy remains standard of care after progression on EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). With the development of anti-angiogenic agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors the landscape of systemic regimens has changed significantly. This cohort study aims to evaluate the efficacy of chemotherapy regimens after progression on EGFR-TKI in a European population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All consecutive patients treated with chemotherapy after progression on EGFR-TKI for EGFR-mutated NSCLC, were identified in two tertiary centers in the Netherlands. Data on best response, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were extracted from medical records. RESULTS: In total, 171 lines of chemotherapy were identified: platinum/pemetrexed (PP, n = 95), carboplatin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab/atezolizumab (CPBA, n = 32), paclitaxel/bevacizumab (PB, n = 36) and carboplatin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab (CPB, n = 8). Of the 171 lines, 106 were given as first-line after EGFR-TKI. Median PFS did not differ significantly between the first-line regimens (p = 0.50), with the highest PFS in PP (5.2 months [95% CI 4.5-5.9]) and CPBA (5.9 months [95% CI 3.8-80]). The majority of the PB group (n = 32) received this regimen in a second- or later line with a median PFS of 4.9 months (95% CI 3.3-6.6). First-line regimens had a median OS of 15.3 months (95% CI 11.6-18.9) with no significant difference between regimens (p = 0.85). CONCLUSION: After progression on EGFR-TKI, patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC show substantial benefit on different chemotherapy regimens. In particular, favorable outcomes were seen in patients treated with PP and CPBA as first-line chemotherapy, and PB in further lines of chemotherapy.

Cardiac Toxicity of Alectinib in Patients With ALK+ Lung Cancer: Outcomes of Cardio-Oncology Follow-Up.

Background: Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocations in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (3% to 7%) predict for response to ALK-inhibitors (eg, alectinib, first line), resulting in a 5-year survival rate of ∼60% and median progression-free survival of 34.8 months. Although the overall toxicity rate of alectinib is acceptable, unexplained adverse events, including edema and bradycardia, may indicate potential cardiac toxicity. Objectives: This study's aim was to investigate the cardiotoxicity profile and exposure-toxicity relationship of alectinib. Methods: Between April 2020 and September 2021, 53 patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer treated with alectinib were included. Patients starting with alectinib after April 2020 underwent a cardiac work-up at start, at 6 months and at 1 year at the cardio-oncology outpatients' clinic. Patients already receiving alectinib >6 months underwent 1 cardiac evaluation. Bradycardia, edema, and severe alectinib toxicity (grade ≥3 and grade ≥2 adverse events leading to dose modifications) data were collected. Alectinib steady-state trough concentrations were used for exposure-toxicity analyses. Results: Left ventricular ejection fraction remained stable in all patients who underwent an on-treatment cardiac evaluation (n = 34; median 62%; IQR: 58%-64%). Twenty-two patients (42%) developed alectinib-related bradycardia (6 symptomatic bradycardia). One patient underwent a pacemaker implantation for severe symptomatic bradycardia. Severe toxicity was significantly associated with a 35% higher alectinib mean Ctrough (728 vs 539 ng/mL, SD = 83 ng/mL; 1-sided P = 0.015). Conclusions: No patients showed signs of a diminished left ventricular ejection fraction. Alectinib caused more bradycardia than previously reported (42%) with some instances of severe symptomatic bradycardia. Patients with severe toxicity generally had an elevated exposure above the therapeutic threshold.

Analysis of Serious Weight Gain in Patients Using Alectinib for ALK-Positive Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Alectinib is a standard-of-care treatment for metastatic ALK+ NSCLC. Weight gain is an unexplored side effect reported in approximately 10%. To prevent or intervene alectinib-induced weight gain, more insight in its extent and etiology is needed. METHODS: Change in body composition was analyzed in a prospective series of 46 patients with ALK+ NSCLC, treated with alectinib. Waist circumference, visceral adipose tissue (VAT), subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT), and skeletal muscle were quantified using sliceOmatic software on computed tomography images at baseline, 3 months (3M), and 1 year (1Y). To investigate an exposure-toxicity relationship, alectinib plasma concentrations were quantified. Four patients with more than 10 kg weight gain were referred to Erasmus MC Obesity Center CGG for in-depth analysis (e.g., assessments of appetite, dietary habits, other lifestyle, medical and psychosocial factors, and extensive metabolic and endocrine assessments, including resting energy expenditure). RESULTS: Mean increase in waist circumference was 9 cm (9.7%, p < 0.001) in 1Y with a 40% increase in abdominal obesity (p = 0.014). VAT increased to 10.8 cm2 (15.0%, p = 0.003) in 3M and 35.7 cm2 (39.0%, p < 0.001) in 1Y. SAT increased to 18.8 cm2 (12.4%, p < 0.001) in 3M and 45.4 cm2 (33.3%, p < 0.001) in 1Y. The incidence of sarcopenic obesity increased from 23.7% to 47.4% during 1Y of treatment. Baseline waist circumference was a positive predictor of increase in VAT (p = 0.037). No exposure-toxicity relationship was found. In-depth analysis (n = 4) revealed increased appetite in two patients and metabolic syndrome in all four patients. CONCLUSIONS: Alectinib may cause relevant increased sarcopenic abdominal obesity, with increases of both VAT and SAT, quickly after initiation. This may lead to many serious metabolic, physical, and mental disturbances in long-surviving patients.

Therapeutic drug monitoring guided dosing versus standard dosing of alectinib in advanced ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer patients: Study protocol for an international, multicenter phase IV randomized controlled trial (ADAPT ALEC).

Background: Alectinib is first-line therapy in patients with stage IV non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) and an anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fusion. A shorter median progression-free survival (mPFS) was observed when alectinib minimum plasma concentrations during steady state (Cmin,SS) were below 435 ng/mL. This may suggest that patients should have an alectinib Cmin,SS ≥ 435 ng/mL for a more favorable outcome. This potential target could be attained by using therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), i.e. adjusting the dose based on measured plasma trough concentrations. Hypothetically, this will increase mPFS, but this has not yet been evaluated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Therefore, the ADAPT ALEC trial is designed, with the primary objective to prolong mPFS in NSCLC patients treated with alectinib by using TDM. Methods: ADAPT ALEC is a multicenter, phase IV RCT, in which patients aged ≥ 18 years with advanced ALK positive (+) NSCLC eligible for alectinib in daily care are enrolled. Participants will be randomized (1:1 ratio) into intervention arm A (TDM) or B (control), stratified by brain metastases and prior ALK treatments. Starting dose in both arms is the approved flat fixed dose of alectinib 600 mg taken twice daily with food. In case of alectinib Cmin,SS < 435 ng/mL, arm A will receive increased doses of alectinib till Cmin,SS ≥ 435 ng/mL when considered tolerable. The primary outcome is mPFS, where progressive disease is defined according to RECIST v1.1 or all-cause death and assessed by CT-scans and MRI brain. Secondary endpoints are feasibility and tolerability of TDM, patient and physician adherence, overall response rate, median overall survival, intracranial PFS, quality of life, toxicity, alectinib-M4 concentrations and cost-effectiveness of TDM. Exploratory endpoints are circulating tumor DNA and body composition. Discussion: The ADAPT ALEC will show whether treatment outcomes of patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC improve when using TDM-guided dosing of alectinib instead of fixed dosing. The results will provide high quality evidence for deciding whether TDM should be implemented as standard of care and this will have important consequences for the prescribing of alectinib. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05525338.

Influence of esomeprazole on the bioavailability of afatinib: A pharmacokinetic cross-over study in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Afatinib is an oral small-molecule kinase inhibitor (SMKI) approved for treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) driver mutation. Although oral administration is convenient, most SMKIs experience pH-dependent solubility. A drug-drug interaction between afatinib and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) has, however, never been studied in humans. Hence, we performed a randomized, three-period cross-over study. Afatinib (30 mg or 40 mg) was administered without PPI (period A), concomitantly with esomeprazole (period B) and three hours after esomeprazole intake (period C). Primary objective was the area under the curve (AUC0-24 h) comparing period A to period B and period A to period C. Secondary objectives were other pharmacokinetic parameters and toxicity. Linear mixed effect modelling was performed for differences in AUC0-24 h and Cmax between periods A and B and periods A and C. In 18 evaluable NSCLC patients, concomitant use of 40 mg esomeprazole decreased the steady-state afatinib AUC0-24 h with 10.2% (95% CI -29.2 to +14.0%; p = 0.564) compared to afatinib administration without PPI. Esomeprazole intake three hours prior to afatinib did not significantly influence afatinib AUC0-24 h (-0.6%; 95% CI -14.9 to +16.1%; p = 1.0). No differences in toxicity were observed. To conclude, esomeprazole did not change the exposure to afatinib in patients with NSCLC. Since there is no clinically relevant drug-drug interaction, esomeprazole can safely be co-administered with afatinib. This is important for clinical practice, because other EGFR-SMKIs (e.g. erlotinib and gefitinib) do experience clinically relevant drug-drug interactions with acid-suppressive agents.

Real-World Approach for Molecular Analysis of Acquired EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Resistance Mechanisms in NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: With the approval of first-line osimertinib treatment in stage IV EGFR-mutated NSCLC, detection of resistance mechanisms will become increasingly important-and complex. Clear guidelines for analyses of these resistance mechanisms are currently lacking. Here, we provide our recommendations for optimal molecular diagnostics in the post-EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) resistance setting. METHODS: We compared molecular workup strategies from three hospitals of 161 first- or second-generation EGFR TKI-treated cases and 159 osimertinib-treated cases. Laboratories used combinations of DNA next-generation sequencing (NGS), RNA NGS, in situ hybridization (ISH), and immunohistochemistry (IHC). RESULTS: Resistance mechanisms were identified in 72 first-generation TKI cases (51%) and 85 osimertinib cases (57%). RNA NGS, when performed, revealed fusions or exon-skipping events in 4% of early TKI cases and 10% of osimertinib cases. Of the 30 MET and HER2 amplifications, 10 were exclusively detected by ISH or IHC, and not detected by DNA NGS, mostly owing to low tumor cell percentage (<30%) and possibly tumor heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world data support a method for molecular diagnostics, consisting of a parallel combination of DNA NGS, RNA NGS, MET ISH, and either HER2 ISH or IHC. Combining RNA and DNA isolation into one step limits dropout rates. In case of financial or tissue limitations, a sequential approach is justifiable, in which RNA NGS is only performed in case no resistance mechanisms are identified. Yet, this is suboptimal as-although rare-multiple acquired resistance mechanisms may occur.

Early Cost Effectiveness of Whole-Genome Sequencing as a Clinical Diagnostic Test for Patients with Inoperable Stage IIIB,C/IV Non-squamous Non-small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbours many genetic aberrations that can be targeted with systemic treatments. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) can simultaneously detect these (and possibly new) molecular targets. However, the exact added clinical value of WGS is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the early cost effectiveness of using WGS in diagnostic strategies compared with currently used molecular diagnostics for patients with inoperable stage IIIB,C/IV non-squamous NSCLC from a Dutch healthcare perspective. METHODS: A decision tree represented the diagnostic pathway, and a cohort state transition model represented disease progression. Three diagnostic strategies were modelled: standard of care (SoC) alone, WGS as a diagnostic test, and SoC followed by WGS. Treatment effectiveness was based on a systematic review. Probabilistic cost-effectiveness analyses were performed, and threshold analyses (using €80,000 per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) was used to explore the early cost effectiveness of WGS. RESULTS: WGS as a diagnostic test resulted in more QALYs (0.002) and costs (€1534 [incremental net monetary benefit -€1349]), and SoC followed by WGS resulted in fewer QALYs (-0.002) and more costs (€1059 [-€1194]) compared with SoC alone. WGS as a diagnostic test was only cost effective if it was priced at €2000 per patient and identified 2.7% more actionable patients than SoC alone. Treating these additional identified patients with new treatments costing >€4069 per month decreased the probability of cost effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that providing WGS as a diagnostic test is cost effective compared with SoC followed by WGS and SoC alone if costs for WGS decrease and additional patients with actionable targets are identified. This cost-effectiveness model can be used to incorporate new findings iteratively and to support ongoing decision making regarding the use of WGS in this rapidly evolving field.

Defining oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer: concept versus biology, a literature review.

OBJECTIVE: In this review, the concept of (synchronous) oligometastatic disease in patients with non-oncogene-driven non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) will be placed in the context of tumor biology and metastatic growth patterns. We will also provide considerations for clinical practice and future perspectives, which will ultimately lead to better patient selection and oligometastatic disease outcome. BACKGROUND: The treatment landscape of metastasized NSCLC has moved from "one-size fits all" to a personalized approach. Prognosis has traditionally been poor but new treatment options, such as immunotherapy and targeted therapy, brighten future perspectives. Another emerging development is the recognition of patients with so-called "oligometastatic" state of disease. Oligometastatic disease has been recognized as a distinct clinical presentation in which the tumor is stated to be early in its evolution of metastatic potential. It is suggested that this stage of disease has an indolent course, comes with a better prognosis and therefore could be considered for radical multimodality treatment. METHODS: Narrative overview of the literature synthesizing the findings of literature retrieved from searches of computerized databases, hand searches, and authoritative texts. CONCLUSIONS: Oligometastatic NSCLC is a broad spectrum disease, with a variable prognosis. Although the biology and behavior of "intermediate state" of metastatic disease are not fully understood, there is evidence that a subgroup of patients can benefit from local radical treatment when integrated into a multimodality regime. The consensus definition of oligometastatic NSCLC, including accurate staging, may help to uniform future trials. The preferable treatment strategy seems to sequential systemic treatment with subsequent local radical treatment in patients with a partial response or stable disease. Prognostic factors such as N-stage, number and site of distant metastases, tumor volume, performance status, age, and tumor type should be considered. The local radical treatment strategy has to be discussed in a multidisciplinary team meeting, taking into account patient characteristics and invasiveness of the procedure. However, many aspects remain to be explored and learned about the cancer biology and characteristics of intermediate state tumors.

Antibodies Against Angiotensin II Receptor Type 1 and Endothelin A Receptor Are Associated With an Unfavorable COVID19 Disease Course.

Background: Lung histopathology demonstrates vasculopathy in a subset of deceased COVID19 patients, which resembles histopathology observed in antibody-mediated lung transplant rejection. Autoantibodies against angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) and Endothelin receptor Type A (ETAR) have been demonstrated in antibody-mediated rejection and may also be associated with severe COVID19 infection. Objective To assess AT1R and ETAR auto-antibodies in COVID19 patients and controls, and explore their association with disease course. Methods: 65 hospitalized patients with COVID19 infection were included. Clinical and laboratory findings were retrospectively assessed. Patients with unfavorable disease course, admitted at the intensive care unit and/or deceased during hospital admission (n=33) were compared to admitted COVID19 patients with favorable disease course (n=32). The presence of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) and auto-antibodies against AT1R or ETAR in peripheral blood were compared between COVID19 with unfavorable and favorable disease course and age matched controls (n=20). Results: The presence of ANA was not significantly different between COVID19 patients with unfavorable (n=7/33; 21%) and favorable disease course (n=6/32; 19%) (p= 0.804) and controls (n=3/20; 15%). Auto-antibodies against AT1R were significantly increased in unfavorable disease course (median 14.59 U/mL, IQR 11.28 - 19.89) compared to favorable disease course (median 10.67 U/mL, IQR 8.55 - 13.0, p< 0.01). ETAR antibody titers were also significantly increased in unfavorable disease course (median 7.21, IQR 5.0 - 10.45) as compared to favorable disease course (median 4.0, IQR 3.0 - 6.0, p <0.05). Conclusion: Auto-antibodies against AT1R and ETAR are significantly increased in COVID19 patients with an unfavorable disease course.

Do-not-intubate status and COVID-19 mortality in patients admitted to Dutch non-ICU wards.

Mortality from COVID-19 has been particularly high in elderly patients on mechanical ventilation. Treatment outcomes for patients with do-not-intubate (DNI) status are unknown. One hundred patients admitted to the non-ICU ward during the "first wave" were retrospectively analyzed. Mortality rate was 49% in patients with a DNI order. This subgroup was characterized by significantly higher age, more comorbidity, and care dependency. Mortality among DNI patients was three times higher than other patients, but not higher than some of the published mortality rates for elderly mechanically ventilated patients. Advanced care planning is essential in COVID-19 to assist patient autonomy and prevent non-beneficial medical interventions.

Influence of Cow's Milk and Esomeprazole on the Absorption of Erlotinib: A Randomized, Crossover Pharmacokinetic Study in Lung Cancer Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Erlotinib's gastrointestinal solubility and absorption are decreased by proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Since erlotinib is a lipophilic drug, we hypothesized that concomitant intake with the fatty beverage milk may be a feasible way to increase erlotinib uptake. We performed a two-period, randomized, crossover study to investigate the influence of cow's milk with 3.9% fat on the exposure of erlotinib with and without the PPI esomeprazole in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The effect of esomeprazole was studied in an additional intrapatient comparison. METHOD: Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed on days 7 and 14 during 24 consecutive hours. During the 7 days prior to pharmacokinetic sampling, erlotinib was taken daily with 250 mL of either water or milk. In the PPI arm, esomeprazole (40 mg once daily 3 h prior to erlotinib) was taken for 3 days. RESULTS: Erlotinib area under the curve from time zero to 24 h (AUC24) did not significantly change when administered with milk, compared with water, in both non-PPI users (n = 14; - 3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 12 to 8%; p = 0.57) and patients who used esomeprazole (n = 15; 0%; 95% CI - 15 to 17%; p = 0.95). Esomeprazole decreased erlotinib AUC24 by 47% (n = 9; 95% CI - 57 to - 34%; p < 0.001) and Cmax by 56% (95% CI - 64 to - 46%; p < 0.001). No differences in toxicities were observed between milk and water. CONCLUSION: Milk with 3.9% fat has no effect on the exposure to erlotinib in NSCLC patients, independent of PPI use. The combination with milk is safe and well tolerated. Concomitant esomeprazole treatment strongly decreased both erlotinib AUC24 and Cmax and should be avoided if possible.

Multicenter Comparison of Molecular Tumor Boards in The Netherlands: Definition, Composition, Methods, and Targeted Therapy Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) provide rational, genomics-driven, patient-tailored treatment recommendations. Worldwide, MTBs differ in terms of scope, composition, methods, and recommendations. This study aimed to assess differences in methods and agreement in treatment recommendations among MTBs from tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MTBs from all tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands were invited to participate. A survey assessing scope, value, logistics, composition, decision-making method, reporting, and registration of the MTBs was completed through on-site interviews with members from each MTB. Targeted therapy recommendations were compared using 10 anonymized cases. Participating MTBs were asked to provide a treatment recommendation in accordance with their own methods. Agreement was based on which molecular alteration(s) was considered actionable with the next line of targeted therapy. RESULTS: Interviews with 24 members of eight MTBs revealed that all participating MTBs focused on rare or complex mutational cancer profiles, operated independently of cancer type-specific multidisciplinary teams, and consisted of at least (thoracic and/or medical) oncologists, pathologists, and clinical scientists in molecular pathology. Differences were the types of cancer discussed and the methods used to achieve a recommendation. Nevertheless, agreement among MTB recommendations, based on identified actionable molecular alteration(s), was high for the 10 evaluated cases (86%). CONCLUSION: MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational cancer profiles. We propose a "Dutch MTB model" for an optimal, collaborative, and nationally aligned MTB workflow. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Interpretation of genomic analyses for optimal choice of target therapy for patients with cancer is becoming increasingly complex. A molecular tumor board (MTB) supports oncologists in rationalizing therapy options. However, there is no consensus on the most optimal setup for an MTB, which can affect the quality of recommendations. This study reveals that the eight MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational profiles. The Dutch MTB model is based on a collaborative and nationally aligned workflow with interinstitutional collaboration and data sharing.

Differentiation of COVID-19 Pneumonitis and ICI Induced Pneumonitis.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have become the standard of care treatment for several tumor types. ICI-induced pneumonitis is a serious complication seen with treatment with these agents. Cancer has been reported to be one of the risk factors for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), that has engulfed the world in the last couple of months. In patients with cancer treated with ICI who present at the emergency department with respiratory symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic, correct diagnosis can be challenging. Symptoms and radiological features of ICI pneumonitis can be overlapping with those of COVID-19 related pneumonia. For the latter, dexamethasone and remdesivir have shown encouraging results, while vaccines are currently being evaluated in phase III trials. The mainstay of treatment in ICI pneumonitis is immunosuppressive therapy, as this is a potentially fatal adverse event. It has been speculated that immunosuppression may be associated with increased risk of progression to severe COVID-19, especially during the early stage of infection with SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, distinction between these two entities is warranted. We summarize the clinical, radiological features as well as additional investigations of both entities, and suggest a diagnostic algorithm for distinction between the two. This algorithm may be a supportive tool for clinicians to diagnose the underlying cause of the pneumonitis in patients treated with ICI during this COVID-19 pandemic.