Safety of pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy in a pooled analysis of phase 3 clinical trials of melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The safety profile of adjuvant pembrolizumab was evaluated in a pooled analysis of 4 phase 3 clinical trials. METHODS: Patients had completely resected stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC melanoma per American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition, criteria (AJCC-7; KEYNOTE-054); stage IIB or IIC melanoma per AJCC-8 (KEYNOTE-716); stage IB, II, or IIIA non-small cell lung cancer per AJCC-7 (PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091); or postnephrectomy/metastasectomy clear cell renal cell carcinoma at increased risk of recurrence (KEYNOTE-564). Patients received adjuvant pembrolizumab 200 mg (2 mg/kg up to 200 mg for pediatric patients) or placebo every 3 weeks for approximately 1 year. Adverse events (AEs) were summarized for patients who received ≥ 1 dose of treatment. RESULTS: Data were pooled from 4125 patients treated with pembrolizumab (n = 2060) or placebo (n = 2065). Median (range) duration of treatment was 11.1 months (0.0-18.9) with pembrolizumab and 11.2 months (0.0-18.1) with placebo. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 78.6 % (1620/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 16.3 % [336/2060]) and 58.7 % (1212/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 3.5 % [72/2065]). Immune-mediated AEs (e.g. adrenal insufficiency, hypophysitis, and thyroiditis) occurred in 36.2 % (746/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 8.6 % [177/2060]) and 8.4 % (174/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 1.1 % [23/2065]). Of patients with ≥ 1 immune-mediated AE or infusion reaction, systemic corticosteroids were required for 35.2 % (268/761) and 20.2 % (39/193) of patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant pembrolizumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile that was comparable to prior reports in advanced disease.

Primary prophylaxis with mTOR inhibitor enhances T cell effector function and prevents heart transplant rejection during talimogene laherparepvec therapy of squamous cell carcinoma.

The application of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition (mTORi) as primary prophylactic therapy to optimize T cell effector function while preserving allograft tolerance remains challenging. Here, we present a comprehensive two-step therapeutic approach in a male patient with metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and heart transplantation followed with concomitant longitudinal analysis of systemic immunologic changes. In the first step, calcineurin inhibitor/ mycophenolic acid is replaced by the mTORi everolimus to achieve an improved effector T cell status with increased cytotoxic activity (perforin, granzyme), enhanced proliferation (Ki67) and upregulated activation markers (CD38, CD69). In the second step, talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) injection further enhances effector function by switching CD4 and CD8 cells from central memory to effector memory profiles, enhancing Th1 responses, and boosting cytotoxic and proliferative activities. In addition, cytokine release (IL-6, IL-18, sCD25, CCL-2, CCL-4) is enhanced and the frequency of circulating regulatory T cells is increased. Notably, no histologic signs of allograft rejection are observed in consecutive end-myocardial biopsies. These findings provide valuable insights into the dynamics of T cell activation and differentiation and suggest that timely initiation of mTORi-based primary prophylaxis may provide a dual benefit of revitalizing T cell function while maintaining allograft tolerance.

NTRK gene fusion testing and management in lung cancer.

Neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions are recurrent oncogenic drivers found in a variety of solid tumours, including lung cancer. Several tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors have been developed to treat tumours with NTRK gene fusions. Larotrectinib and entrectinib are first-generation TRK inhibitors that have demonstrated efficacy in patients with TRK fusion lung cancers. Genomic testing is recommended for all patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer for optimal drug therapy selection. Multiple testing methods can be employed to identify NTRK gene fusions in the clinic and each has its own advantages and limitations. Among these assays, RNA-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) can be considered a gold standard for detecting NTRK gene fusions; however, several alternatives with minimally acceptable sensitivity and specificity are also available in areas where widespread access to NGS is unfeasible. This review highlights the importance of testing for NTRK gene fusions in lung cancer, ideally using the gold-standard method of RNA-based NGS, the various assays that are available, and treatment algorithms for patients.

Beyond Chemoimmunotherapy in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: New Frontiers, New Challenges.

Chemoimmunotherapy is currently the preferred first-line treatment option for the majority of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer without driver genetic alterations. Most of these patients, however, will experience disease progression within the first year after treatment initiation and both patients and their physicians will be confronted with the dilemma of the optimal second-line treatment. Identification of molecular targets, such as KRASG12C, BRAFV600X, METexon14, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 mutations, and RET rearrangements offer therapeutic opportunities in pretreated patients with corresponding alterations. For those tumors that do not harbor oncogenic drivers, second-line treatment with docetaxel remains the current standard of care despite modest efficacy. Strategies to challenge docetaxel include the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with tyrosine inhibitors of multiple kinases or with DNA damage response inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, and locoregional treatments for oligoprogressive disease. Next-generation immunotherapy strategies, such as T-cell engagers, immune-mobilizing monoclonal T-cell receptors, chimeric antigen receptor cell therapy, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes, and T-cell receptor cell therapy are being currently investigated in the quest to reverse resistance to ICIs. Importantly, the advent of these new agents heralds a novel spectrum of toxicities that require both the physician's and the patient's education. Herein, we review current and future strategies aiming to outperform docetaxel after chemoimmunotherapy failure, and we provide practical information on how to best communicate to our patients the unique toxicity aspects associated with immunotherapy.

Long-Term Results of Stereotactic Radiotherapy in Patients with at Least 10 Brain Metastases at Diagnosis.

PURPOSE: to evaluate an SRT approach in patients with at least 10 lesions at the time of BM initial diagnosis. METHODS: This is a monocentric prospective cohort of patients treated by SRT, followed by a brain MRI every two months. Subsequent SRT could be delivered in cases of new BMs during follow-up. The main endpoints were local control rate (LCR), overall survival (OS), and strategy success rate (SSR). Acute and late toxicity were evaluated. RESULTS: Seventy patients were included from October 2014 to January 2019, and the most frequent primary diagnosis was non-small-cell lung cancer (N = 36, 51.4%). A total of 1174 BMs were treated at first treatment, corresponding to a median number of 14 BMs per patient. Most of the patients (N = 51, 72.6%) received a single fraction of 20-24 Gy. At 1 year, OS was 62.3%, with a median OS of 19.2 months, and SSR was 77.8%. A cumulative number of 1537 BM were treated over time, corresponding to a median cumulative number of 16 BM per patient. At 1-year, the LCR was 97.3%, with a cumulative incidence of radio-necrosis of 2.1% per lesion. Three patients (4.3%) presented Grade 2 toxicity, and there was no Grade ≥ 3 toxicity. The number of treated BMs and the treatment volume did not influence OS or SSR (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: SRT was highly efficient in controlling the BM, with minimal side effects. In this setting, an SRT treatment should be proposed even in patients with ≥10 BMs at diagnosis.

Cancer biomarkers: Emerging trends and clinical implications for personalized treatment.

The integration of cancer biomarkers into oncology has revolutionized cancer treatment, yielding remarkable advancements in cancer therapeutics and the prognosis of cancer patients. The development of personalized medicine represents a turning point and a new paradigm in cancer management, as biomarkers enable oncologists to tailor treatments based on the unique molecular profile of each patient's tumor. In this review, we discuss the scientific milestones of cancer biomarkers and explore future possibilities to improve the management of patients with solid tumors. This progress is primarily attributed to the biological characterization of cancers, advancements in testing methodologies, elucidation of the immune microenvironment, and the ability to profile circulating tumor fractions. Integrating these insights promises to continually advance the precision oncology field, fostering better patient outcomes.

Obinutuzumab Pretreatment as a Novel Approach to Mitigate Formation of Anti-Drug Antibodies Against Cergutuzumab Amunaleukin in Patients with Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: The immunocytokine cergutuzumab amunaleukin (CEA-IL2v) showed manageable safety and favorable pharmacodynamics in phase I/Ib trials in patients with advanced/metastatic carcinoembryonic antigen-positive (CEA+) solid tumors, but this was accompanied by a high incidence of anti-drug antibodies (ADA). We examined B-cell depletion with obinutuzumab as a potential mitigation strategy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Preclinical data comparing B-cell depletion with rituximab versus obinutuzumab are summarized. Substudies of phase I/Ib trials investigated the effect of obinutuzumab pretreatment on ADA development, safety, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of CEA-IL2v ± atezolizumab in patients with advanced/metastatic or unresectable CEA+ solid tumors who had progressed on standard of care. RESULTS: Preclinical data showed superior B-cell depletion with obinutuzumab versus rituximab. In clinical studies, patients received CEA-IL2v monotherapy with (n = 16) or without (n = 6) obinutuzumab pretreatment (monotherapy study), or CEA-IL2v + atezolizumab + obinutuzumab pretreatment (n = 5; combination study). In the monotherapy study, after four cycles (every 2 weeks treatment), 0/15 evaluable patients administered obinutuzumab pretreatment had ADAs versus 4/6 patients without obinutuzumab. Obinutuzumab pretreatment with CEA-IL2v monotherapy showed no new safety signals and pharmacodynamic data suggested minimal impact on T cells and natural killer cells. Conversely, increased liver toxicity was observed in the combination study (CEA-IL2v + atezolizumab + obinutuzumab pretreatment). CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings suggest that obinutuzumab pretreatment before CEA-IL2v administration in patients with CEA+ solid tumors may be a feasible and potent ADA mitigation strategy, with an acceptable safety profile, supporting broader investigation of obinutuzumab pretreatment for ADA mitigation in other settings.

[Oncology: what's new in 2023]. / Oncologie: ce qui a changé en 2023.

The oncology field continues its remarkable evolution over the years, with promising advances leading to innovative and individualized treatments. The development of new molecules, the identification of new therapeutic targets and the search for new sequences or combinations promise to revolutionize cancer treatments and contribute to improving survival rates, patients' quality of life and to open new perspective in oncology research. In this article, the newest data released in 2023 are reviewed.

Le domaine de l'oncologie poursuit son évolution remarquable au fil des années, avec des avancées prometteuses ouvrant la voie à des traitements novateurs et individualisés. L'élaboration de nouvelles molécules, l'identification de nouvelles cibles thérapeutiques et la recherche de nouvelles séquences ou combinaisons de traitements promettent de révolutionner la prise en charge du cancer et de contribuer à améliorer les taux de survie, la qualité de vie des patients et à ouvrir de nouvelles perspectives dans la recherche en oncologie. Dans cet article, les nouveautés parues en 2023 sont passées en revue.

Lurbinectedin in patients with small cell lung cancer with chemotherapy-free interval ≥30 days and without central nervous metastases.

OBJECTIVES: This report focuses on lurbinectedin activity and safety in a subgroup of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients from a Basket phase 2 study (Trigo et al. Lancet Oncology 2020;21:645-654) with chemotherapy-free interval (CTFI) ≥ 30 days. This pre-planned analysis was requested for obtaining regulatory approval of lurbinectedin in Switzerland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with extensive-stage SCLC, no central nervous system (CNS) metastases, and disease progression after platinum-containing therapy were included. Topotecan data from a contemporary, randomized, controlled phase 3 study (ATLANTIS) were used as indirect external control in a matched patient population (n = 98 patients). RESULTS: Lurbinectedin showed a statistically significant higher overall response rate (ORR) by investigator assessment (IA) compared to topotecan subgroup (41.0 % vs. 25.5 %; p = 0.0382); higher ORR by Independent Review Committee (IRC) (33.7 % vs. 25.5 %); longer median duration of response (IA: 5.3 vs. 3.9 months; IRC: 5.1 vs. 4.3 months), and longer median overall survival (10.2 vs. 7.6 months). Grade ≥ 3 hematological abnormalities were remarkably lower with lurbinectedin: anemia 12.0 % vs. 54.1 %; leukopenia 30.1 % vs. 68.4 %; neutropenia 47.0 % vs. 75.5 %, and thrombocytopenia 6.0 % vs. 52.0 %. Febrile neutropenia was observed at a higher incidence with topotecan (6.1 % vs. 2.4 % with lurbinectedin) despite that the use of growth-colony stimulating factors was mandatory with topotecan. CONCLUSION: With the limitations of an indirect comparison, however using recent and comparable SCLC datasets, this post hoc analysis shows that SCLC patients with CTFI ≥ 30 days and no CNS metastases have a positive benefit/risk ratio with lurbinectedin, superior to that observed with topotecan.

First-Line Dual Immunotherapy, a Treatment Option in First-Line Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Are We Ready to Use It?

This article provides valuable insights into the use of dual immunotherapy for patients with metastatic NSCLC.

Face to face among different chemo-immunotherapy combinations in the first line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Results of an international expert panel meeting by the italian association of thoracic oncology (AIOT).

BACKGROUND: The combination of platinum-based chemotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is a standard of care option in the front-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Positive efficacy and safety results have been demonstrated with different chemo-ICI combinations in the corresponding clinical trials, however no randomized prospective comparison is available and there is no evidence on how to choose among the available regimens. METHODS: A virtual International Expert Panel took place in July 2023 to review data on chemo-ICI regimens available in the first-line setting in patients with NSCLC, and reach common considerations both in clinical practice and in research setting. RESULTS: Overall, all panelists agreed that safety of the chemo-immunotherapy combination regimens is supported by reviewed data, showing no additional toxicity concerns over those of the individual components of each regimen and highlighting differences in toxicity profile based on ICI component (single anti-PD-1 versus double anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4). Among disease characteristics, PD-L1 value (<1%) but not histology was considered a potential selection factor in favor of the combination with dual ICI. With regards to clinical features, the panelists agreed that chemotherapy, whichever the ICI combination regimen, remains the backbone to counteract disease-related symptoms included those conditioning worse performance status. The panelists defined high, medium, and low priorities in clinical research. High priority was attributed to prospectively evaluating the impact of the addition of anti-CTLA-4 on brain metastasis, biomarker subgroups, and the optimal duration and schedule of combination regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available evidence, the panelists reached common considerations on strengths and differences between chemotherapy plus single agent ICI and chemotherapy plus double agent ICIs in patients with advanced NSCLC. In the absence of direct comparison, different toxicity profile and subgroup analysis by PD-L1 are considered as the main potential features to select among the two regimens, however to be confirmed by recommended prospective randomized clinical research.

[Lung cancer screening : towards the implementation of a pilot project in Switzerland]. / Dépistage du cancer pulmonaire : vers l'implémentation d'un projet pilote en Suisse.

Lung cancer is responsible for one in five cancer-related deaths. Screening for lung cancer using low-dose chest CT (LDCT) is supported by several international studies targeting the at-risk population as part of an organised programme. Given the organisational challenges for the healthcare systems of the countries concerned, this involves setting up pilot screening projects. This requires close collaboration between the players involved, with a multidisciplinary approach structured around the participant, aiming to offer the expertise of the pulmonologist and the radiologist on the LDCT performed, interpreted with the help of artificial intelligence. Here we set out the elements needed to develop a screening programme, starting with the implementation of a pilot project.

Le cancer pulmonaire est responsable d'un décès lié au cancer sur cinq. Le dépistage du cancer pulmonaire par le scanner thoracique à faible dose (LDCT) est soutenu par plusieurs études internationales ciblant la population à risque dans le cadre d'un programme organisé. Vu les enjeux organisationnels pour le système de santé des pays concernés, cela passe par la mise en place de projets pilotes de dépistage. Cela requiert une collaboration étroite entre les différents acteurs, avec une approche multidisciplinaire structurée autour du participant visant à offrir l'expertise du pneumologue et du radiologue sur le LDCT effectué, interprété avec l'aide de l'intelligence artificielle. Nous exposons ici les éléments nécessaires à l'élaboration d'un programme de dépistage, en passant d'abord par la mise en place d'un projet pilote.

Patient-Reported Health-Related Quality of Life in KEYNOTE-604: Pembrolizumab or Placebo Added to Etoposide and Platinum as First-Line Therapy for Extensive-Stage SCLC.

Introduction: In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-604 study (NCT03066778), pembrolizumab plus etoposide and platinum chemotherapy (EP) significantly (p = 0.0023) improved progression-free survival versus placebo plus EP in previously untreated extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). We present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) results from KEYNOTE-604. Methods: Patients with stage IV SCLC were randomized 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks for 35 cycles plus four cycles of EP. Secondary end points included mean change from baseline to week 18 in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) scale and time to deterioration in the composite outcome of cough, chest pain, or dyspnea from QLQ-C30 and QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13. Two-sided, nominal p values are reported. Results: A total of 439 patients completed at least one QLQ-C30 and QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 assessment (pembrolizumab + EP, n = 221; placebo + EP, n = 218). GHS/QoL scores improved from baseline to week 18: least squares mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) changes were 8.7 (5.3-12.1) for pembrolizumab plus EP and 4.2 (0.9-7.5) for placebo plus EP. Between-group differences in least squares mean scores were improved for pembrolizumab plus EP (4.4 [95% CI: 0.2-8.7], p = 0.040]). Median time to deterioration for the composite end point was not reached and 8.7 (95% CI: 5.9-not reached) months, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.80 [95% CI: 0.56-1.14], p = 0.208). Conclusions: First-line pembrolizumab plus EP therapy maintained HRQoL in patients with ES-SCLC and may be associated with greater improvement than placebo plus EP. Together with the efficacy and safety findings in KEYNOTE-604, HRQoL data support the benefit of pembrolizumab in ES-SCLC.

Dostarlimab or pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in previously untreated metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: the randomized PERLA phase II trial.

PERLA is a global, double-blind, parallel phase II trial (NCT04581824) comparing efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1 antibodies dostarlimab and pembrolizumab, plus chemotherapy (DCT and PCT, respectively) as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC without known targetable genomic aberrations. Patients stratified by PD-L1 tumor proportion score and smoking status were randomized 1:1, receiving ≤35 cycles 500 mg dostarlimab or 200 mg pembrolizumab, ≤35 cycles 500 mg/m2 pemetrexed and ≤4 cycles cisplatin (75 mg/m2) or carboplatin (AUC 5 mg/ml/min) Q3W. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) (blinded independent central review). Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival (PFS) based on investigator assessment, overall survival (OS) and safety. Exploratory endpoints include ORR by PD-L1 subgroup and duration of response. PERLA met its pre-specified endpoint. ORR (n/N; 95% CI) is 45% (55/121; 36.4-54.8) for DCT and 39% (48/122; 30.6-48.6) for PCT (data cut-off: 07 July 23), numerically favoring dostarlimab in PD-L1-positive subgroups. Median PFS (months [95% CI]) is 8.8 (6.7-10.4) for DCT and 6.7 (4.9-7.1) for PCT (HR 0.70 [95% CI: 0.50-0.98]; data cut-off: 04 August 22). Median OS (months [95% CI]) is 19.4 (14.5-NR) for DCT and 15.9 (11.6-19.3) for PCT (HR 0.75 [95% CI: 0.53-1.05]) (data cut-off: 07 July 23). Safety profiles are similar between groups. In this study, DCT shows similar efficacy to PCT and demonstrates clinical efficacy as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC.

Disparities in outcomes between Black and White patients in North America with thoracic malignancies and COVID-19 infection (TERAVOLT).

BACKGROUND: Patients with thoracic malignancies who develop COVID-19 infection have a higher hospitalization rate compared to the general population and to those with other cancer types, but how this outcome differs by race and ethnicity is relatively understudied. METHODS: The TERAVOLT database is an international, multi-center repository of cross-sectional and longitudinal data studying the impact of COVID-19 on individuals with thoracic malignancies. Patients from North America with thoracic malignancies and confirmed COVID-19 infection were included for this analysis of racial and ethnic disparities. Patients with missing race data or races and ethnicities with fewer than 50 patients were excluded from analysis. Multivariable analyses for endpoints of hospitalization and death were performed on these 471 patients. RESULTS: Of the 471 patients, 73% were White and 27% were Black. The majority (90%) were non-Hispanic ethnicity, 5% were Hispanic, and 4% were missing ethnicity data. Black patients were more likely to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status ≥ 2 (p-value = 0.04). On multivariable analysis, Black patients were more likely than White patients to require hospitalization (Odds Ratio (OR): 1.69, 95% CI: 1.01-2.83, p-value = 0.044). These differences remained across different waves of the pandemic. However, no statistically significant difference in mortality was found between Black and White patients (OR 1.29, 95% CI: 0.69-2.40, p-value = 0.408). CONCLUSIONS: Black patients with thoracic malignancies who acquire COVID-19 infection are at a significantly higher risk of hospitalization compared to White patients, but there is no significant difference in mortality. The underlying drivers of racial disparity among patients with thoracic malignancies and COVID-19 infection require ongoing investigation.