Mutational characteristics and clinical outcomes for lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR germline mutations.

BACKGROUND: Germline mutations driving lung cancer have been infrequently reported in literature, with EGFR T790M being a known germline mutation identified in 1% of NSCLC. Typically, a somatic EGFR mutation is acquired to develop lung adenocarcinoma. Osimertinib has become standard-of-care treatment for EGFR T790M-positive lung cancer. METHODS: We perform a retrospective analysis through the Lung Cancer Moon Shot GEMINI database at the UT MD Anderson Cancer Center. Of the patients that underwent cfDNA analysis, germline mutations were identified by those with high variant allelic fraction (VAF) approximating 50%, followed by further confirmation on genetic testing. RESULTS: We identified 22 patients with germline EGFR mutations, with the majority harboring an EGFR T790M mutation (95.5%) and EGFR L858R somatic mutation (50%). Notably, most patients were female (86.4%), non-smokers (81.8%), Caucasian (86.4%), have family history of lung cancer (59.1%), and stage IV at diagnosis (72.7%). A distinct radiographic pattern of small multifocal ground-glass pulmonary nodules was observed in the majority of our cohort (72.7%). Among the 18 with advanced-stage NSCLC, 12 (66.7%) were treated with first-line osimertinib, demonstrating a median PFS of 16.9 months (95% CI; 6.3-NR). Others were treated with first-line afatinib (11.1%) or chemotherapy (22.2%). Among the 17 patients treated with osimertinib (in first or second-line), mPFS was 20.4 months (95% CI; 6.3-NR) and mOS was 82.0 months (95% CI; 28.4-NR). CONCLUSION: Based on our institutional cohort, NSCLC driven by EGFR germline mutations occur more frequently in non-smoking, Caucasian females with multi-focal pulmonary nodules radiographically. Osimertinib for advanced germline EGFR-mutated NSCLC renders similar PFS compared to somatic T790M EGFR-mutated NSCLC.

Brief Report: Clinical Response, Toxicity, and Resistance Mechanisms to Osimertinib Plus MET Inhibitors in Patients With EGFR-Mutant MET-Amplified NSCLC.

Introduction: MET amplification is a known resistance mechanism to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment in EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Dual EGFR-MET inhibition has been reported with success in overcoming such resistance and inducing clinical benefit. Resistance mechanisms to dual EGFR-MET inhibition require further investigation and characterization. Methods: Patients with NSCLC with both MET amplification and EGFR mutation who have received crizotinib, capmatinib, savolitinib, or tepotinib plus osimertinib (OSI) after progression on OSI at MD Anderson Cancer Center were included in this study. Molecular profiling was completed by means of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and next-generation sequencing (NGS). Radiological response was assessed on the basis of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Results: From March 2016 to March 2022, 23 treatments with dual MET inhibitor and osi were identified with a total of 20 patients included. Three patients received capmatinib plus OSI after progression on crizotinib plus OSI. Median age was 64 (38-89) years old and 75% were female. MET amplification was detected by FISH in 14 patients in the tissue, NGS in 10 patients, and circulating tumor DNA in three patients. Median MET gene copy number was 13.6 (6.4-20). Overall response rate was 34.8% (eight of 23). In assessable patients, tumor shrinkage was observed in 82.4% (14 of 17). Median time on treatment was 27 months. Two of three patients responded to capmatinib plus OSI after progression on crizotinib plus OSI. Dual EGFR-MET inhibition was overall well tolerated. Two patients on crizotinib plus OSI and one pt on capmatinib plus OSI discontinued therapy due to pneumonitis. One pt discontinued crizotinib plus OSI due to gastrointestinal toxicity. Six patients were still on double TKI treatment. At disease progression to dual EGFR-MET inhibition, FISH and NGS on tumor and plasma were completed in six patients. Notable resistance mechanisms observed include acquired MET D1246H (n = 1), acquired EGFR C797S (n = 2), FGFR2 fusion (n = 1, concurrent with C797S), and EGFR G796S (n = 1, concurrent with C797S). Four patients lost MET amplification. Conclusions: Dual EGFR and MET inhibition yielded high clinical response rate after progression on OSI. Resistance mechanisms to EGFR-MET double TKI inhibition include MET secondary mutation, EGFR secondary mutation, or loss of MET amplification.

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy with or without immunotherapy for early-stage or isolated lung parenchymal recurrent node-negative non-small-cell lung cancer: an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is the standard treatment for medically inoperable early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but regional or distant relapses, or both, are common. Immunotherapy reduces recurrence and improves survival in people with stage III NSCLC after chemoradiotherapy, but its utility in stage I and II cases is unclear. We therefore conducted a randomised phase 2 trial of SABR alone compared with SABR with immunotherapy (I-SABR) for people with early-stage NSCLC. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial comparing SABR to I-SABR, conducted at three different hospitals in TX, USA. People aged 18 years or older with histologically proven treatment-naive stage IA-IB (tumour size ≤4 cm, N0M0), stage IIA (tumour size ≤5 cm, N0M0), or stage IIB (tumour size >5 cm and ≤7 cm, N0M0) as per the American Joint Committee on Cancer version 8 staging system or isolated parenchymal recurrences (tumour size ≤7 cm) NSCLC (TanyNanyM0 before definitive surgery or chemoradiotherapy) were included in this trial. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1; using the Pocock & Simon method) to receive SABR with or without four cycles of nivolumab (480 mg, once every 4 weeks, with the first dose on the same day as, or within 36 h after, the first SABR fraction). This trial was unmasked. The primary endpoint was 4-year event-free survival (local, regional, or distant recurrence; second primary lung cancer; or death). Analyses were both intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03110978) and is closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: From June 30, 2017, to March 22, 2022, 156 participants were randomly assigned, and 141 participants received assigned therapy. At a median 33 months' follow-up, I-SABR significantly improved 4-year event-free survival from 53% (95% CI 42-67%) with SABR to 77% (66-91%; per-protocol population, hazard ratio [HR] 0·38; 95% CI 0·19-0·75; p=0·0056; ITT population, HR 0·42; 95% CI 0·22-0·80; p=0·0080). There were no grade 3 or higher adverse events associated with SABR. In the I-SABR group, ten participants (15%) had grade 3 immunologial adverse events related to nivolumab; none had grade 3 pneumonitis or grade 4 or higher toxicity. INTERPRETATION: Compared with SABR alone, I-SABR significantly improved event-free survival at 4 years in people with early-stage treatment-naive or lung parenchymal recurrent node-negative NSCLC, with tolerable toxicity. I-SABR could be a treatment option in these participants, but further confirmation from a number of currently accruing phase 3 trials is required. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb and MD Anderson Cancer Center Alliance, National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health through Cancer Center Core Support Grant and Clinical and Translational Science Award to The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Safety, tolerability, and clinical activity of selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab in treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: In lung cancer, overexpression of nuclear export proteins can result in inactivation of critical tumor suppressor proteins and cell-cycle regulators. Selective suppression of nuclear export proteins has immunomodulatory activities. Here, clinical safety and early efficacy data are presented on the combination of pembrolizumab and an oral selective nuclear export inhibitor, selinexor, for the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). METHODS: The primary objective of this prospective investigator-initiated study was to determine the safety and tolerability of selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with mNSCLC. Secondary objectives included determination of objective tumor response rate, disease control rate, and progression-free survival duration. RESULTS: A total of 17 patients were included in the final analysis. Fifteen (88%) received more than two lines of prior systemic therapy and 10 (59%) had prior exposure to anti-PD-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapy. The median age was 67.5 years. Ten patients had grade ≥3 adverse events related to selinexor treatment. Responses to treatment occurred in patients who did and did not undergo previous anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy and in patients with activating driver mutations. The median overall survival and progression-free survival were 11.4 months (95% CI, 3.4-19.8 months) and 3.0 months (95% CI, 1.7-5.7 months), respectively. The overall response rate was 18% and the 6-month disease control rate was 24%. CONCLUSIONS: Selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab demonstrated promising antitumor activity in patients with mNSCLC, including those who had previously received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. The therapy-related toxic effects were consistent with the prior safety data for both drugs, and no overlapping toxic effects were observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02419495. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: New strategies to prevent or reverse resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors are under investigation. Selective inhibitors of nuclear export proteins, such as selinexor, can induce restoration of tumor-suppressing pathways and induce potent immunomodulatory activities. This article contains the clinical safety and early efficacy data on the combination of pembrolizumab and selinexor in treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Pemetrexed Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Previously Treated With Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and toxicity of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had a performance status 0 to 2, previous treatment with one prior chemotherapy regimen for advanced NSCLC, and adequate organ function. Patients received pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) day 1 with vitamin B12, folic acid, and dexamethasone or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV day 1 with dexamethasone every 21 days. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Five hundred seventy-one patients were randomly assigned. Overall response rates were 9.1% and 8.8% (analysis of variance P = .105) for pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 2.9 months for each arm, and median survival time was 8.3 versus 7.9 months (P = not significant) for pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. The 1-year survival rate for each arm was 29.7%. Patients receiving docetaxel were more likely to have grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (40.2% v 5.3%; P < .001), febrile neutropenia (12.7% v 1.9%; P < .001), neutropenia with infections (3.3% v 0.0%; P = .004), hospitalizations for neutropenic fever (13.4% v 1.5%; P < .001), hospitalizations due to other drug related adverse events (10.5% v 6.4%; P = .092), use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support (19.2% v 2.6%, P < .001) and all grade alopecia (37.7% v 6.4%; P < .001) compared with patients receiving pemetrexed. CONCLUSION: Treatment with pemetrexed resulted in clinically equivalent efficacy outcomes, but with significantly fewer side effects compared with docetaxel in the second-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC and should be considered a standard treatment option for second-line NSCLC when available.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in operable non-small cell lung cancer: the phase 2 platform NEOSTAR trial.

Neoadjuvant ipilimumab + nivolumab (Ipi+Nivo) and nivolumab + chemotherapy (Nivo+CT) induce greater pathologic response rates than CT alone in patients with operable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The impact of adding ipilimumab to neoadjuvant Nivo+CT is unknown. Here we report the results and correlates of two arms of the phase 2 platform NEOSTAR trial testing neoadjuvant Nivo+CT and Ipi+Nivo+CT with major pathologic response (MPR) as the primary endpoint. MPR rates were 32.1% (7/22, 80% confidence interval (CI) 18.7-43.1%) in the Nivo+CT arm and 50% (11/22, 80% CI 34.6-61.1%) in the Ipi+Nivo+CT arm; the primary endpoint was met in both arms. In patients without known tumor EGFR/ALK alterations, MPR rates were 41.2% (7/17) and 62.5% (10/16) in the Nivo+CT and Ipi+Nivo+CT groups, respectively. No new safety signals were observed in either arm. Single-cell sequencing and multi-platform immune profiling (exploratory endpoints) underscored immune cell populations and phenotypes, including effector memory CD8+ T, B and myeloid cells and markers of tertiary lymphoid structures, that were preferentially increased in the Ipi+Nivo+CT cohort. Baseline fecal microbiota in patients with MPR were enriched with beneficial taxa, such as Akkermansia, and displayed reduced abundance of pro-inflammatory and pathogenic microbes. Neoadjuvant Ipi+Nivo+CT enhances pathologic responses and warrants further study in operable NSCLC. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03158129 .).

Integration of Remote Symptom and Biometric Monitoring Into the Care of Adult Patients With Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy-A Decentralized Feasibility Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: Although electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are efficacious in symptom management, much is unknown about the utility of vital signs surveillance. We examined the feasibility of a remote patient monitoring platform that integrates ePROs and biometrics into the ambulatory management of symptom burden. METHODS: Using a decentralized workflow, patients with gastrointestinal or thoracic cancer were approached for a 1-month study. Patients reported symptom burden via ePROs and biometrics (blood pressure, oxygen saturation, pulse, weight, and temperature) using bluetooth-enabled devices daily. Alerts on the basis of prespecified thresholds were managed via nurse-led triage. Adherence was defined as the completion of > 70% of daily symptom and biometric reporting requirements. Pilot acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility were measured using validated instruments. Net promoter score, system usability scale, and emergency department (ED) admission rates were collected. RESULTS: Over 8 months, 36 patients were enrolled and 25 (60% gastrointestinal) completed the study. Participants had a mean age of 58.0 years, mean Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0.88, were 52% female, and predominantly had stage IV or recurrent disease (72%). Program adherence was 73% and associated with high acceptability (4.63), feasibility (4.56), and appropriateness (4.46). System usability scale and net promoter score scores were 88 and 55, respectively. Seventy percent of alerts were generated by biometrics, 28% for symptoms, and 2% were patient-initiated communication. Finally, the ED visitation rate over the pilot period was 8%. CONCLUSION: Our remote patient monitoring pilot program was highly acceptable, feasible, and appropriate. It had high rates of patient adherence and satisfaction and was associated with low ED visitation rates.

Final efficacy outcomes of atezolizumab with chemoradiation for unresectable NSCLC: The phase II DETERRED trial.

INTRODUCTION: The phase II DETERRED trial assessed the safety and efficacy of consolidation and concurrent immunotherapy with chemoradiation in unresectable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. We present updated efficacy analysis of this trial. METHODS: The trial was conducted in 2 parts with patients in part 1 (n = 10) receiving chemoradiation with consolidation atezolizumab, while patients in part 2 (n = 30) received concurrent and consolidation atezolizumab. Progression-free survival (PFS), time to second progression (PFS2), and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Subset analyses were performed by programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) status and targetable driver oncogene mutation status. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 39.2 months, the median PFS for part 1 was 18.9 months and 15.1 months for part 2. Median OS for part 1 was 26.5 months and was not reached for part 2. For the cohort, 3-year OS was 53.8%, while 4-year OS was 47.4%. Patients with targetable driver oncogene mutations had a median PFS of 9.4 months and OS of not reached compared to 16.6 months (HR: 3.49, p = 0.02) and 26.9 months (HR: 0.40, p = 0.12) respectively compared to those without targetable driver oncogene mutations. Patients with PD-L1 < 1% had median PFS of 11.0 months and OS of 26.5 months compared to 27.4 months (HR: 2.01, p = 0.10) and not reached (HR: 1.49, p = 0.41) respectively for those with PD-L1 ≥ 1%. CONCLUSIONS: In the DETERRED trial, chemoradiation with concurrent and/or consolidative atezolizumab led to comparable efficacy as consolidative durvalumab in the PACIFIC trial. The presence of targetable driver oncogene mutations led to worse PFS, while PD-L1 < 1% trended to worse PFS.

Effect of dexamethasone on dyspnoea in patients with cancer (ABCD): a parallel-group, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Systemic corticosteroids are commonly prescribed for palliation of dyspnoea in patients with cancer, despite scarce evidence to support their use. We aimed to assess the effect of high-dose dexamethasone versus placebo on cancer-related dyspnoea. METHODS: The parallel-group, double-blind, randomised, controlled ABCD (Alleviating Breathlessness in Cancer Patients with Dexamethasone) trial was done at the at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and the general oncology clinic at Lyndon B Johnson General Hospital (both in Houston, TX, USA). Ambulatory patients with cancer, aged 18 years or older, and with an average dyspnoea intensity score on an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS; 0=none, 10=worst) over the past week of 4 or higher were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive dexamethasone 8 mg orally every 12 h for 7 days followed by 4 mg orally every 12 h for 7 days, or matching placebo capsules for 14 days. Pharmacists did permuted block randomisation with a block size of six, and patients were stratified by baseline dyspnoea score (4-6 vs 7-10) and study site. Patients, research staff, and clinicians were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was change in dyspnoea NRS intensity over the past 24 h from baseline to day 7 (±2 days). Analyses were done by modified intention-to-treat (ie, including all patients who were randomly assigned and started the study treatment, regardless of whether they completed the study). Enrolment was stopped after the second preplanned interim analysis, when the futility criterion was met. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03367156) and is now completed. FINDINGS: Between Jan 11, 2018, and April 23, 2021, we screened 2867 patients, enrolled 149 patients, and randomly assigned 128 to dexamethasone (n=85) or placebo (n=43). The mean change in dyspnoea NRS intensity from baseline to day 7 (±2 days) was -1·6 (95% CI -2·0 to -1·2) in the dexamethasone group and -1·6 (-2·3 to -0·9) in the placebo group, with no significant between-group difference (mean 0 [95% CI -0·8 to 0·7]; p=0·48). The most common all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events were infections (nine [11%] of 85 patients in the dexamethasone group vs three [7%] of 43 in the placebo group), insomnia (seven [8%] vs one [2%]), and neuropsychiatric symptoms (three [4%] vs none [0%]). Serious adverse events, all resulting in hospital admissions, were reported in 24 (28%) of 85 patients in the dexamethasone group and in three (7%) of 43 patients in the placebo group. No treatment-related deaths occurred in either group. INTERPRETATION: High-dose dexamethasone did not improve dyspnoea in patients with cancer more effectively than placebo and was associated with a higher frequency of adverse events. These data suggest that dexamethasone should not be routinely given to unselected patients with cancer for palliation of dyspnoea. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute.

Poziotinib for EGFR exon 20-mutant NSCLC: Clinical efficacy, resistance mechanisms, and impact of insertion location on drug sensitivity.

We report a phase II study of 50 advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with point mutations or insertions in EGFR exon 20 treated with poziotinib (NCT03066206). The study achieved its primary endpoint, with confirmed objective response rates (ORRs) of 32% and 31% by investigator and blinded independent review, respectively, with a median progression-free survival of 5.5 months. Using preclinical studies, in silico modeling, and molecular dynamics simulations, we found that poziotinib sensitivity was highly dependent on the insertion location, with near-loop insertions (amino acids A767 to P772) being more sensitive than far-loop insertions, an observation confirmed clinically with ORRs of 46% and 0% observed in near versus far-loop, respectively (p = 0.0015). Putative mechanisms of acquired resistance included EGFR T790M, MET amplifications, and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Our data demonstrate that poziotinib is active in EGFR exon 20-mutant NSCLC, although this activity is influenced by insertion location.

Phase I Trial of Definitive Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy and Trametinib for KRAS-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This phase I trial (NCT01912625) evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetics of definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) and the radiosensitizer trametinib (MEK1/2 inhibitor) for KRAS-mutated nonmetastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients received cCRT (carboplatin/paclitaxel and 60 Gy/30 fractions radiotherapy); oral trametinib (7 days/week) commenced on day 1 and completed on the final day of radiotherapy. Dose-finding of trametinib was done using the time-to-event continual reassessment method (TiTE-CRM); dose levels were 0.5mg (level -1), 1mg (initial, level 1), 1.5mg (level 2), and 2mg (level 3). Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times were also recorded. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (stage III, variety of KRAS mutations) were treated, with 1/5/4/5 at dose levels -1/1/2/3, respectively. Five patients received dose reductions (n=2, levels 2 and 3; n=1, level 1). Twelve patients completed the full cCRT course. One patient (following 12d trametinib) was taken off protocol for an unrelated/unresolved grade 1 event and later experienced grade 5 sepsis/respiratory failure. There was one grade 4 retinal detachment; grade 3 events included skin rash (n=2) and ventricular dysfunction, pneumonitis, pain, fatigue, and diarrhea (n=1 each). The final dose selected by the TiTE-CRM of trametinib was 1.5 mg. Pharmacokinetic profiles were elucidated and extensively described. At median follow-up of 70 months, median PFS was 11 months and median OS was 38 months. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD for trametinib when combined with cCRT is 1.5 mg, with encouraging preliminary outcomes. This combination merits further study to combine with consolidation durvalumab in non-metastatic KRAS mutant NSCLC.

Poziotinib for Patients With HER2 Exon 20 Mutant Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From a Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: Targeted therapies against non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring HER2 mutations remain an unmet need. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of poziotinib in patients with HER2 exon 20 mutant advanced NSCLC in a single-arm, open-label, phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced HER2 exon 20 mutant NSCLC were enrolled to receive poziotinib at a dose of 16 mg/d for 28-day cycles. The primary end point was objective response rate per RECIST version 1.1. Confirmatory scans were performed at least 28 days from initial radiologic response. RESULTS: Thirty patients received poziotinib treatment. At baseline, 90% of patients received prior platinum-based chemotherapy and 53% had two lines or more prior systemic therapies. As of data cutoff on March 1, 2021, the confirmed objective response rate was 27% (95% CI, 12 to 46). Responses were observed across HER2 exon 20 mutation subtypes. The median duration of response was 5.0 months (95% CI, 4.0 to not estimable). The median progression-free survival was 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 7.0). The median overall survival was 15 months (95% CI, 9.0 to not estimable). The most common grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were skin rash (47%) and diarrhea (20%). There was one possible treatment-related death because of pneumonitis. CONCLUSION: Poziotinib showed promising antitumor activity in patients with HER2 exon 20 mutant NSCLC including patients who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy.

Clinical Outcomes in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated With EGFR-Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Other Targeted Therapies Based on Tumor Versus Plasma Genomic Profiling.

PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes in a cohort of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with targetable genomic alterations detected using plasma-based circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) or tumor-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays treated with US Food and Drug Administration-approved therapies at a large academic research cancer center. METHODS: A retrospective review from our MD Anderson GEMINI database identified 2,224 blood samples sent for ctDNA NGS testing from 1971 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of advanced NSCLC. Clinical, treatment, and outcome information were collected, reviewed, and analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 27% of the ctDNA tests identified at least one targetable mutation and 73% of targetable mutations were EGFR-sensitizing mutations. Among patients treated with first-line epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapies, there were no significant differences in progression-free survival of 379 days and 352 days (P value = .41) with treatment based on tissue (n = 40) or ctDNA (n = 40), respectively. Additionally, there were no differences in progression-free survival or objective response rate among those with low (n = 8, 0.01%-0.99%) versus high (n = 16, ≥ 1%) levels of ctDNA of the targetable mutation as measured by variant allele frequency (VAF). Overall, there was excellent testing concordance (n = 217 tests) of > 97%, sensitivity of 91.7%, and specificity of 99.7% between blood-based ctDNA NGS and tissue-based NGS assays. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes among patients treated with approved EGFR-TKIs whose mutations were identified using either tumor- or plasma-based comprehensive profiling and those with very low VAF as compared with high VAF, supporting the use of plasma-based profiling to guide initial TKI use in patients with metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC.

High-dose irradiation in combination with non-ablative low-dose radiation to treat metastatic disease after progression on immunotherapy: Results of a phase II trial.

AIM: To report early findings from a phase II trial of high-dose radiotherapy (HD-RT) with or without low-dose RT (LD-RT) for metastatic cancer. METHODS: Eligible patients had metastatic disease that progressed on immunotherapy within 6 months. Patients were given either HD-RT (20-70 Gy total; 3-12.5 Gy/f), or HD-RT + LD-RT (0.5-2 Gy/f up to 1-10 Gy total) to separate lesions, with continued immunotherapy. Radiographic response was assessed per RECIST 1.1 and Immune-Related Response Criteria (irRC). Primary endpoints: (1) 4-month disease control (DCR, complete/partial response [CR/PR] or stable disease [SD]) or an overall response (ORR, CR/PR) at any point in ≥10% of patients, per RECIST 1.1; (2) dose-limiting toxicity within 3 months not exceeding 30%. Secondary endpoint was lesion-specific response. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients (NSCLC, n = 38; melanoma n = 21) were analyzed (39 HD-RT and 35 HD-RT + LD-RT). The median follow-up time was 13.6 months. The primary endpoint was met for 72 evaluable patients, with a 4-month DCR of 42% (47% [16/34] vs. 37% [14/38] in HD-RT + LD-RT vs. HD-RT, P = 0.38), and 19% ORR at any time (26% [9/34] vs. 13% [5/38] in HD-RT + LD-RT vs. HD-RT, P = 0.27). Three patients had toxicity ≥grade 3. LD-RT lesion response (53%) was improved compared to nonirradiated lesions in HD-RT + LD-RT (23%, P = 0.002) and HD-RT (11%, P < 0.001). T- and NK cell infiltration was enhanced in lesions treated with LD-RT. CONCLUSIONS: HD-RT plus LD-RT safely improved lesion-specific response in patients with immune resistant solid tumors by promoting infiltration of effector immune cells into the tumor microenvironment.

Neoadjuvant nivolumab or nivolumab plus ipilimumab in operable non-small cell lung cancer: the phase 2 randomized NEOSTAR trial.

Ipilimumab improves clinical outcomes when combined with nivolumab in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its efficacy and impact on the immune microenvironment in operable NSCLC remain unclear. We report the results of the phase 2 randomized NEOSTAR trial (NCT03158129) of neoadjuvant nivolumab or nivolumab + ipilimumab followed by surgery in 44 patients with operable NSCLC, using major pathologic response (MPR) as the primary endpoint. The MPR rate for each treatment arm was tested against historical controls of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The nivolumab + ipilimumab arm met the prespecified primary endpoint threshold of 6 MPRs in 21 patients, achieving a 38% MPR rate (8/21). We observed a 22% MPR rate (5/23) in the nivolumab arm. In 37 patients resected on trial, nivolumab and nivolumab + ipilimumab produced MPR rates of 24% (5/21) and 50% (8/16), respectively. Compared with nivolumab, nivolumab + ipilimumab resulted in higher pathologic complete response rates (10% versus 38%), less viable tumor (median 50% versus 9%), and greater frequencies of effector, tissue-resident memory and effector memory T cells. Increased abundance of gut Ruminococcus and Akkermansia spp. was associated with MPR to dual therapy. Our data indicate that neoadjuvant nivolumab + ipilimumab-based therapy enhances pathologic responses, tumor immune infiltrates and immunologic memory, and merits further investigation in operable NSCLC.

Impact of Checkpoint Inhibitor Immunotherapy, Primarily Pembrolizumab, on Infection Risk in Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer: A Comparative Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) immunotherapy has revolutionized cancer treatment. However, immune-related adverse events and the risk of infections are not well studied. To assess the infectious risk of CPIs, we evaluated the incidence of infections in lung cancer patients treated with CPIs plus conventional chemotherapy (CC) vs CC alone. METHODS: We performed a retrospective comparative study of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer who received CPIs combined with CC and those treated with CC alone at our institution during January 2016 to February 2019. We compared clinical characteristics, treatments, and outcomes including infection rate and mortality between the groups. RESULTS: We identified 123 patients for the CPI group and 147 patients for the control (CC) group. Eighteen patients (15%) in the CPI group and 33 patients (22%) in the control group developed infections (P = .1). Pneumonia was the most common infection encountered in both groups. Urinary tract infection was higher in the CC group (40%) than in the CPI group (9%) (P = .01). On multivariable analysis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P = .024), prior use of corticosteroids (P = .021), and neutropenia (P < .001) were independent risk factors for infection and severe infection requiring hospital admission. Chronic kidney disease (P = .02), prior cancer treatment (P = .023), and neutropenia (P < .0001) were identified as independent risk factors for all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Lung cancer patients treated with CPIs combined with CC have a comparable risk of infection to those treated with CC alone, although there is a trend towards fewer infections in those given CPIs, particularly when it comes to urinary tract infections.

Toxicity and Survival After Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy Versus Passive Scattering Proton Therapy for NSCLC.

OBJECTIVE: Although intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMPT) is dosimetrically superior to passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) for locally advanced NSCLC (LA-NSCLC), direct comparisons of clinical outcomes are lacking. Here, we compare toxicity profiles and clinical outcomes after IMPT versus PSPT for LA-NSCLC. METHODS: This is a nonrandomized, comparative study of two independent cohorts with LA-NSCLC (stage II-IIIB, stage IV with solitary brain metastasis) treated with concurrent chemotherapy and proton beam therapy. Toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0) and outcomes were prospectively collected as part of a clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00915005) or prospective registry (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00991094). RESULTS: Of 139 patients, 86 (62%) received PSPT and 53 (38%) IMPT; median follow-up times were 23.9 and 29.0 months, respectively. IMPT delivered lower mean radiation doses to the lungs (PSPT 16.0 Gy versus IMPT 13.0 Gy, p < 0.001), heart (10.7 Gy versus 6.6 Gy, p = 0.004), and esophagus (27.4 Gy versus 21.8 Gy, p = 0.005). Consequently, the IMPT cohort had lower rates of grade 3 or higher pulmonary (17% versus 2%, p = 0.005) and cardiac (11% versus 0%, p = 0.01) toxicities. Six patients (7%) with PSPT and zero patients (0%) with IMPT experienced grade 4 or 5 toxicity. Lower rates of pulmonary (28% versus 3%, p = 0.006) and cardiac (14% versus 0%, p = 0.05) toxicities were observed in the IMPT cohort even after propensity score matching for baseline imbalances. There was also a trend toward longer median overall survival in the IMPT group (23.9 mo versus 36.2 mo, p = 0.09). No difference was found in the 3-year rates of local (25% versus 20%, p = 0.44), local-regional (29% versus 36%, p = 0.56) and distant (52% versus 51%, p = 0.71) recurrences. CONCLUSIONS: IMPT is associated with lower radiation doses to the lung, heart, and esophagus, and lower rates of grade 3 or higher cardiopulmonary toxicity; additional clinical studies will be needed to assess the potential differences in survival between the two techniques.

Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Heterogeneity and Its Impact on Benefit From Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression may vary in different disease sites and at different time points of the disease course. We aimed to investigate PD-L1 heterogeneity and its usefulness as a predictive value for immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in patients with NSCLC. METHODS: PD-L1 expression was analyzed in 1398 patients with NSCLC. The predictive value of PD-L1 for ICIs in 398 patients with metastatic NSCLC was assessed. RESULTS: PD-L1 was significantly associated with biopsy sites (p = 0.004). Adrenal, liver, and lymph node (LN) metastases had the highest PD-L1 expression as a continuous variable and at 1% or 50% cutoff. PD-L1 expression was lower in bone and brain metastases. Among 112 patients with two specimens tested, 55 (49%) had major changes in PD-L1 falling into different clinically relevant categories (<1%, 1%-49%, ≥50%) at different time points. Previous ICI therapy was associated with significant decrease in PD-L1 compared with treatment-naive counterparts (p = 0.015). Patients with metastatic NSCLC treated with ICI (n = 398) were divided into three cohorts on the basis of biopsy sites: lung (n = 252), LN (n = 85), and distant metastasis (n = 61). Higher PD-L1 in lung or distant metastasis specimens was associated with higher response rate, longer progression-free survival, and overall survival. However, PD-L1 in LN biopsies was not associated with either response or survival. CONCLUSIONS: PD-L1 varies substantially across different anatomical sites and changes during the clinical course. PD-L1 from different biopsy sites may have different predictive values for benefit from ICIs in NSCLC.

A Phase I/II Study of Neoadjuvant Cisplatin, Docetaxel, and Nintedanib for Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Nintedanib enhances the activity of chemotherapy in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this phase I/II study, we assessed safety and efficacy of nintedanib plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy, using major pathologic response (MPR) as primary endpoint. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had stage IB (≥4 cm)-IIIA resectable NSCLC. A safety run-in phase was followed by an expansion phase with nintedanib 200 mg orally twice a day (28 days), followed by three cycles of cisplatin (75 mg/m2), docetaxel (75 mg/m2) every 21 days plus nintedanib, followed by surgery. With 33 planned patients, the study had 90% power to detect an MPR increase from 15% to 35%. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients (stages I/II/III, N = 1/8/12) were treated. One of 15 patients treated with nintedanib 200 mg achieved MPR [7%, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.2%-32%]. Best ORR in 20 evaluable patients was 30% (6/20, 95% CI, 12%-54%). Twelve-month recurrence-free survival and overall survival were 66% (95% CI, 47%-93%) and 91% (95% CI, 79%-100%), respectively. Most frequent treatment-related grade 3-4 toxicities were transaminitis and electrolyte abnormalities. On the basis of an interim analysis the study was discontinued for futility. Higher levels of CD3+ and cytotoxic CD3+CD8+ T cells were found in treated tumors of patients who were alive than in those who died (652.8 vs. 213.4 cells/mm2, P = 0.048; 142.3 vs. 35.6 cells/mm2, P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Although tolerated, neoadjuvant nintedanib plus chemotherapy did not increase MPR rate compared with chemotherapy historical controls. Additional studies of the combination in this setting are not recommended. Posttreatment levels of tumor-infiltrating T cells were associated with patient survival. Use of MPR facilitates the rapid evaluation of neoadjuvant therapies.See related commentary by Blakely and McCoach, p. 3499.

Phase II Trial of Concurrent Atezolizumab With Chemoradiation for Unresectable NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Consolidation durvalumab after chemoradiation (CRT) is the current standard of care for locally advanced NSCLC. We hypothesized that adding immunotherapy concurrently with CRT (cCRT) would increase efficacy without additive toxicity. METHODS: This phase II study was conducted in two parts. Part 1 (n = 10) involved administration of conventionally fractionated CRT followed by consolidation chemotherapy (atezolizumab [two cycles] and maintenance atezolizumab up to 1 y). Part 2 (n = 30) involved administration of cCRT with atezolizumab followed by the same consolidation and maintenance therapies as in part 1. Programmed cell death ligand-1 staining cutoffs (1% or 50%) using Dako 22C3 immunohistochemistry were correlated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The overall toxicities for part 1/2 were overall adverse events of grade 3 and above of 80%/80%; immune-related adverse events of grade 3 and above of 30%/20%; and pneumonitis of grade 2 and above of 10%/16%, respectively. In part 1, for preliminary efficacy results, with a median follow-up of 22.5 months, the median progression-free survival was 18.6 months, and the overall survival was 22.8 months. In part 2, with a median follow-up time of 15.1 months, the median progression-free survival was 13.2 months, and the overall survival was not reached. There was no difference in cancer recurrence regardless of programmed cell death ligand-1 status. CONCLUSIONS: Atezolizumab with cCRT is safe and feasible and has no added toxicities compared with historical rates.