Explore the vast range of titles available.

Although comprehensive biomarker testing is recommended for all patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) before initiation of first-line treatment, tissue availability can limit testing. Genomic testing in liquid biopsies can be utilized to overcome the inherent limitations of tissue sampling and identify the most appropriate biomarker-informed treatment option for patients. The Blood First Assay Screening Trial is a global, open-label, multicohort trial that evaluates the efficacy and safety of multiple therapies in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC and targetable alterations identified by liquid biopsy. We present data from Cohort D ( ROS1 -positive). Patients ≥18 years of age with stage IIIB/IV, ROS1 -positive NSCLC detected by liquid biopsies received entrectinib 600 mg daily. At data cutoff (November 2021), 55 patients were enrolled and 54 had measurable disease. Cohort D met its primary endpoint: the confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by investigator was 81.5%, which was consistent with the ORR from the integrated analysis of entrectinib (investigator-assessed ORR, 73.4%; data cutoff May 2019, ≥12 months of follow-up). The safety profile of entrectinib was consistent with previous reports. These results demonstrate consistency with those from the integrated analysis of entrectinib in patients with ROS1 -positive NSCLC identified by tissue-based testing, and support the clinical value of liquid biopsies to inform clinical decision-making. The integration of liquid biopsies into clinical practice provides patients with a less invasive diagnostic method than tissue-based testing and has faster turnaround times that may expedite the reaching of clinical decisions in the advanced/metastatic NSCLC setting. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03178552 . Results from this single-arm cohort of the BFAST trial showed that the clinical efficacy of entrectinib in patients with ROS1 -positive NSCLC, selected using liquid biopsies, is consistent with that seen in previous reports where patients were selected using tissue-based testing methods.

Background The PET-derived metabolic tumor volume (MTV) is an independent prognosticator in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. We analyzed the prognostic value of residual MTV (rMTV) after completion of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in inoperable stage III NSCLC patients with and without immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI). Methods Fifty-six inoperable stage III NSCLC patients (16 female, median 65.0 years) underwent 18 F-FDG PET/CT after completion of standard CRT. rMTV was delineated on 18 F-FDG PET/CT using a standard threshold (liver SUV mean  + 2 × standard deviation). 21/56 patients underwent additional ICI (CRT-IO, 21/56 patients) thereafter. Patients were divided in volumetric subgroups using median split dichotomization (MTV ≤ 4.3 ml vs. > 4.3 ml). rMTV, clinical features, and ICI-application were correlated with clinical outcome parameters (progression-free survival (PFS), local PFS (LPFS), and overall survival (OS). Results Overall, median follow-up was 52.0 months. Smaller rMTV was associated with longer median PFS (29.3 vs. 10.5 months, p  = 0.015), LPFS (49.9 vs. 13.5 months, p  = 0.001), and OS (63.0 vs. 23.0 months, p  = 0.003). CRT-IO patients compared to CRT patients showed significantly longer median PFS (29.3 vs. 11.2 months, p  = 0.034), LPFS (median not reached vs. 14.0 months, p  = 0.016), and OS (median not reached vs. 25.2 months, p  = 0.007). In the CRT subgroup, smaller rMTV was associated with longer median PFS (33.5 vs. 8.6 months, p  = 0.001), LPFS (49.9 vs. 10.1 months, p  = 0.001), and OS (63.0 vs. 16.3 months, p  = 0.004). In the CRT-IO subgroup, neither PFS, LPFS, nor OS were associated with MTV ( p  > 0.05 each). The findings were confirmed in subsequent multivariate analyses. Conclusion In stage III NSCLC, smaller rMTV is highly associated with superior clinical outcome, especially in patients undergoing CRT without ICI. Patients with CRT-IO show significantly improved outcome compared to CRT patients. Of note, clinical outcome in CRT-IO patients is independent of residual MTV. Hence, even patients with large rMTV might profit from ICI despite extensive tumor load.

In patients with locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer who have undergone concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy, the use of durvalumab in the year after completing treatment significantly prolonged disease-free and overall survival as compared with placebo.

The ALK inhibitor crizotinib as first-line therapy was associated with a significantly better response rate, longer progression-free survival, and greater improvement in quality of life measures than standard chemotherapy in patients with ALK -positive lung cancer. Rearrangements of the anaplastic lymphoma kinase ( ALK ) gene are present in 3 to 5% of non–small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). 1 , 2 They define a distinct subgroup of NSCLC that typically occurs in younger patients who have never smoked or have a history of light smoking and that has adenocarcinoma histologic characteristics. 3 – 5 Crizotinib is an oral small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of ALK, MET, and ROS1 kinases. 6 In phase 1 and 2 studies, crizotinib treatment resulted in objective tumor responses in approximately 60% of patients with ALK -positive NSCLC and in progression-free survival of 7 to 10 months. 7 – 9 In . . .

Necitumumab is a second-generation, recombinant, human immunoglobulin G1 EGFR antibody. In this study, we aimed to compare treatment with necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin versus gemcitabine and cisplatin alone in patients with previously untreated stage IV squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. We did this open-label, randomised phase 3 study at 184 investigative sites in 26 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IV squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–2 and adequate organ function and who had not received previous chemotherapy for their disease were eligible for inclusion. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned centrally 1:1 to a maximum of six 3-week cycles of gemcitabine and cisplastin chemotherapy with or without necitumumab according to a block randomisation scheme (block size of four) by a telephone-based interactive voice response system or interactive web response system. Chemotherapy was gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 30 min on days 1 and 8 of a 3-week cycle and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 120 min on day 1 of a 3-week cycle. Necitumumab 800 mg, administered intravenously over a minimum of 50 min on days 1 and 8, was continued after the end of chemotherapy until disease progression or intolerable toxic side-effects occurred. Randomisation was stratified by ECOG performance status and geographical region. Neither physicians nor patients were masked to group assignment because of the expected occurrence of acne-like rash—a class effect of EGFR antibodies—that would have unmasked most patients and investigators to treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. We report the final clinical analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00981058. Between Jan 7, 2010, and Feb 22, 2012, we enrolled 1093 patients and randomly assigned them to receive necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (n=545) or gemcitabine and cisplatin (n=548). Overall survival was significantly longer in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group than in the gemcitabine and cisplatin alone group (median 11·5 months [95% CI 10·4–12·6]) vs 9·9 months [8·9–11·1]; stratified hazard ratio 0·84 [95% CI 0·74–0·96; p=0·01]). In the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group, the number of patients with at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event was higher (388 [72%] of 538 patients) than in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group (333 [62%] of 541), as was the incidence of serious adverse events (257 [48%] of 538 patients vs 203 [38%] of 541). More patients in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group had grade 3–4 hypomagnesaemia (47 [9%] of 538 patients in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group vs six [1%] of 541 in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group) and grade 3 rash (20 [4%] vs one [<1%]). Including events related to disease progression, adverse events with an outcome of death were reported for 66 (12%) of 538 patients in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group and 57 (11%) of 541 patients in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group; these were deemed to be related to study drugs in 15 (3%) and ten (2%) patients, respectively. Overall, we found that the safety profile of necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin was acceptable and in line with expectations. Our findings show that the addition of necitumumab to gemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy improves overall survival in patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer and represents a new first-line treatment option for this disease. Eli Lilly and Company.

Effective maintenance therapies after chemoradiotherapy for lung cancer are lacking. Our aim was to investigate whether the MUC1 antigen-specific cancer immunotherapy tecemotide improves survival in patients with stage III unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer when given as maintenance therapy after chemoradiation. The phase 3 START trial was an international, randomised, double-blind trial that recruited patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer who had completed chemoradiotherapy within the 4–12 week window before randomisation and received confirmation of stable disease or objective response. Patients were stratified by stage (IIIA vs IIIB), response to chemoradiotherapy (stable disease vs objective response), delivery of chemoradiotherapy (concurrent vs sequential), and region using block randomisation, and were randomly assigned (2:1, double-blind) by a central interactive voice randomisation system to either tecemotide or placebo. Injections of tecemotide (806 μg lipopeptide) or placebo were given every week for 8 weeks, and then every 6 weeks until disease progression or withdrawal. Cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 (before tecemotide) or saline (before placebo) was given once before the first study drug administration. The primary endpoint was overall survival in a modified intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00409188. From Feb 22, 2007, to Nov 15, 2011, 1513 patients were randomly assigned (1006 to tecemotide and 507 to placebo). 274 patients were excluded from the primary analysis population as a result of a clinical hold, resulting in analysis of 829 patients in the tecemotide group and 410 in the placebo group in the modified intention-to-treat population. Median overall survival was 25·6 months (95% CI 22·5–29·2) with tecemotide versus 22·3 months (19·6–25·5) with placebo (adjusted HR 0·88, 0·75–1·03; p=0·123). In the patients who received previous concurrent chemoradiotherapy, median overall survival for the 538 (65%) of 829 patients assigned to tecemotide was 30·8 months (95% CI 25·6–36·8) compared with 20·6 months (17·4–23·9) for the 268 (65%) of 410 patients assigned to placebo (adjusted HR 0·78, 0·64–0·95; p=0·016). In patients who received previous sequential chemoradiotherapy, overall survival did not differ between the 291 (35%) patients in the tecemotide group and the 142 (35%) patients in the placebo group (19·4 months [95% CI 17·6–23·1] vs 24·6 months [18·8–33·0], respectively; adjusted HR 1·12, 0·87–1·44; p=0·38). Grade 3–4 adverse events seen with a greater than 2% frequency with tecemotide were dyspnoea (49 [5%] of 1024 patients in the tecemotide group vs 21 [4%] of 477 patients in the placebo group), metastases to central nervous system (29 [3%] vs 6 [1%]), and pneumonia (23 [2%] vs 12 [3%]). Serious adverse events with a greater than 2% frequency with tecemotide were pneumonia (30 [3%] in the tecemotide group vs 14 [3%] in the placebo group), dyspnoea (29 [3%] vs 13 [3%]), and metastases to central nervous system (32 [3%] vs 9 [2%]). Serious immune-related adverse events did not differ between groups. We found no significant difference in overall survival with the administration of tecemotide after chemoradiotherapy compared with placebo for all patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. However, tecemotide might have a role for patients who initially receive concurrent chemoradiotherapy, and further study in this population is warranted. Merck KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany).

The addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy for metastatic lung cancer without EGFR or ALK mutations resulted in better progression-free and overall survival than chemotherapy alone. Immune-related adverse effects were more common with the combination.

Patients with resected, EGFR -mutated, stage IB to IIIA NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant osimertinib or placebo for 3 years. The 5-year overall survival was 88% with osimertinib and 78% with placebo.

Among patients with lung cancer that expressed programmed death ligand 1, the anti–PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab was compared with chemotherapy in a randomized trial. In the subgroup with the highest PD-L1 expression, the median overall survival was 20.2 months with atezolizumab and 13.1 months with chemotherapy.