In KEYNOTE-010, pembrolizumab versus docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) in patients with programmed death-1 protein (PD)-L1-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A prespecified ...exploratory analysis compared outcomes in patients based on PD-L1 expression in archival versus newly collected tumor samples using recently updated survival data.
PD-L1 was assessed centrally by immunohistochemistry (22C3 antibody) in archival or newly collected tumor samples. Patients received pembrolizumab 2 or 10 mg/kg Q3W or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 Q3W for 24 months or until progression/intolerable toxicity/other reason. Response was assessed by RECIST v1.1 every 9 weeks, survival every 2 months. Primary end points were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and ≥1%; pembrolizumab doses were pooled in this analysis.
At date cut-off of 24 March 2017, median follow-up was 31 months (range 23–41) representing 18 additional months of follow-up from the primary analysis. Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel continued to improve OS in patients with previously treated, PD-L1-expressing advanced NSCLC; hazard ratio (HR) was 0.66 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57, 0.77. Of 1033 patients analyzed, 455(44%) were enrolled based on archival samples and 578 (56%) on newly collected tumor samples. Approximately 40% of archival samples and 45% of newly collected tumor samples were PD-L1 TPS ≥50%. For TPS ≥50%, the OS HRs were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.91) and 0.40 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.56) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In patients with TPS ≥1%, OS HRs were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.93) and 0.59 (95% CI: 0.48, 0.73) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In TPS ≥50%, PFS HRs were similar across archival 0.63 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.89) and newly collected samples 0.53 (95% CI: 0.38, 0.72). In patients with TPS ≥1%, PFS HRs were similar across archival 0.82 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.02) and newly collected samples 0.83 (95% CI: 0.68, 1.02).
Pembrolizumab continued to improve OS over docetaxel in intention to treat population and in subsets of patients with newly collected and archival samples.
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01905657.
BRAF mutations occurring in 1%–5% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are therapeutic targets for these cancers but the impact of the exact mutation on clinical activity is unclear. ...The French National Cancer Institute (INCA) launched the AcSé vemurafenib trial to assess the efficacy and safety of vemurafenib in cancers with various BRAF mutations. We herein report the results of the NSCLC cohort.
Tumour samples were screened for BRAF mutations in INCA-certified molecular genetic centres. Patients with BRAF-mutated tumours progressing after ≥1 line of treatment were proposed vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily. Between October 2014 and July 2018, 118 patients were enrolled in the NSCLC cohort. The primary outcome was the objective response rate (ORR) assessed every 8 weeks (RECIST v1.1). A sequential Bayesian approach was planned with an inefficacy bound of 10% for ORR. If no early stopping occurred, the treatment was of interest if the estimated ORR was ≥30% with a 90% probability. Secondary outcomes were tolerance, response duration, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).
Of the 118 patients enrolled, 101 presented with a BRAFV600 mutation and 17 with BRAFnonV600 mutations; the median follow-up was 23.9 months. In the BRAFnonV600 cohort, no objective response was observed and this cohort was stopped. In the BRAFV600 cohort, 43/96 patients had objective responses. The mean Bayesian estimated success rate was 44.9% 95% confidence intervals (CI) 35.2%–54.8%. The ORR had a 99.9% probability of being ≥30%. Median response duration was 6.4 months, median PFS was 5.2 months (95% CI 3.8–6.8), and OS was 10 months (95% CI 6.8–15.7). The vemurafenib safety profile was consistent with previous publications.
Routine biomarker screening of NSCLC should include BRAFV600 mutations. Vemurafenib monotherapy is effective for treating patients with BRAFV600-mutated NSCLC but not those with BRAFnonV600 mutations.
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02304809.
•Vemurafenib monotherapy is effective for BRAFV600-mutated NSCLC.•Vemurafenib monotherapy is not effective for BRAFnonV600-mutated NSCLC.•Vemurafenib is a treatment option for BRAFV600-mutated NSCLC patients when the dabrafenib/trametinib combination is not feasible or not reimbursed.•Routine biomarker screening of NSCLC should include BRAFV600 mutations.
Malignant mesothelioma is a rare tumour, usually the result of asbestos exposure. Several cases of familial aggregation have been reported and recently shown to be associated with constitutional ...mutations of the BAP1 gene. BAP1 is a deubiquitinating enzyme implicated in several different cellular mechanisms such as the repair or differentiation of DNA. About a half of malignant mesotheliomas present a somatic, bi-allelic inactivation of BAP1, demonstrated by nuclear extinction on histochemistry. Constitutional alterations of BAP1 are extremely rare. Present in the heterozygous state they are transmitted as an autosomal dominant. They are associated with a risk of developing other tumours such as uveal and cutaneous melanomas, benign melanocytic tumours (melanocytic BAP1-mutated atypical intradermal tumour or MBAITS) and clear cell renal carcinomas. The causal link between mesothelioma and germinal mutations of BAP1 has still not been clearly identified. At present there is, in France, no consensus on recommendations for the management of patients with these mutations. This article is a synthesis of the literature on the functions of the BAP1 gene, the tumour risks related to its alteration and the follow up of patients bearing a constitutional mutation.
Summary Background The irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib and the reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib are approved for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive ...non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of afatinib and gefitinib in this setting. Methods This multicentre, international, open-label, exploratory, randomised controlled phase 2B trial (LUX-Lung 7) was done at 64 centres in 13 countries. Treatment-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a common EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or Leu858Arg) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or gefitinib (250 mg per day) until disease progression, or beyond if deemed beneficial by the investigator. Randomisation, stratified by EGFR mutation type and status of brain metastases, was done centrally using a validated number generating system implemented via an interactive voice or web-based response system with a block size of four. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival by independent central review, time-to-treatment failure, and overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01466660. Findings Between Dec 13, 2011, and Aug 8, 2013, 319 patients were randomly assigned (160 to afatinib and 159 to gefitinib). Median follow-up was 27·3 months (IQR 15·3–33·9). Progression-free survival (median 11·0 months 95% CI 10·6–12·9 with afatinib vs 10·9 months 9·1–11·5 with gefitinib; hazard ratio HR 0·73 95% CI 0·57–0·95, p=0·017) and time-to-treatment failure (median 13·7 months 95% CI 11·9–15·0 with afatinib vs 11·5 months 10·1–13·1 with gefitinib; HR 0·73 95% CI 0·58–0·92, p=0·0073) were significantly longer with afatinib than with gefitinib. Overall survival data are not mature. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (20 13% of 160 patients given afatinib vs two 1% of 159 given gefitinib) and rash or acne (15 9% patients given afatinib vs five 3% of those given gefitinib) and liver enzyme elevations (no patients given afatinib vs 14 9% of those given gefitinib). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 17 (11%) patients in the afatinib group and seven (4%) in the gefitinib group. Ten (6%) patients in each group discontinued treatment due to drug-related adverse events. 15 (9%) fatal adverse events occurred in the afatinib group and ten (6%) in the gefitinib group. All but one of these deaths were considered unrelated to treatment; one patient in the gefitinib group died from drug-related hepatic and renal failure. Interpretation Afatinib significantly improved outcomes in treatment-naive patients with EGFR -mutated NSCLC compared with gefitinib, with a manageable tolerability profile. These data are potentially important for clinical decision making in this patient population. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim.
Lung cancer in women is on the rise, with a higher proportion occurring in lifelong never-smokers. Lung cancer in never-smokers (LCINS) exhibits a high frequency of driver oncogene alterations. In ...this study, we aimed to investigate whether exposure to reproductive factors in women with LCINS may modulate the molecular pattern.
All newly diagnosed LCINSs were included in a prospective, observational study (IFCT-1002 BioCAST). Each patient responded to a questionnaire including reproductive factors. Biomarker test results were also collected.
Two hundred and sixty women were included in this analysis, and 166 alterations were characterized. EGFR mutation frequency proved greater among patients with late menarche (74% in age>14 vs. 40% and 41% for 12–14 and ≤12 years, respectively; P=0.020) and tended to decrease with increasingly late age at menopause. In multivariate analysis, EGFR mutation frequency increased by 23% per increment of 1 year of age at menarche (P=0.048), and by 9% for each year at age at first birth (P=0.035). ALK alteration frequency was greater in women with high parity (50% in≥5 vs. 12% and 7% for 1–4 and nulliparity, respectively; P=0.021).
In a cohort of women LCINSs, female hormonal factors appear to impact molecular pattern.
Purpose
In the randomized phase IIb LUX-Lung 7 trial, afatinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and time-to-treatment failure vs gefitinib in patients with treatment-naïve ...epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer. We report post hoc analyses of tolerability-guided dose adjustment for afatinib and summarize the clinical characteristics of patients who continued afatinib/gefitinib beyond initial radiological progression in LUX-Lung 7.
Methods
Patients received afatinib 40 mg/day or gefitinib 250 mg/day until investigator-assessed progression or beyond if beneficial. In case of selected treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), the afatinib dose could be reduced by 10-mg decrements to minimum 20 mg (only dose interruptions were permitted with gefitinib).
Results
All randomized patients were treated (afatinib,
n
= 160; gefitinib,
n
= 159). Sixty-three patients had afatinib dose reduction (< 40 mg/day; 47 within first 6 months). Dose reduction decreased TRAE incidence/severity (before vs after; all grade/grade 3: 100.0%/63.5% vs 90.5%/23.8%). There was no evidence of significant difference in PFS for patients who received < 40 mg/day vs ≥ 40 mg/day for the first 6 months median: 12.8 vs 11.0 months; hazard ratio 1.34 (95% confidence interval 0.90–2.00). Twenty-four and 26 patients continued afatinib and gefitinib, respectively, beyond progression in target lesions; median time from nadir of target lesion diameters to initial progression was 6.7 months and 5.6 months. Of these patients, ~ 70% had objective response or non-complete response/non-progressive disease in non-target lesions at initial progression.
Conclusions
Protocol-defined dose adjustment of afatinib may allow patients to remain on treatment longer, maximizing clinical benefit even in the presence of radiological progression.
PDF
