Background
Response patterns with immune checkpoint inhibitors may be different from those with chemotherapy. Therefore, assessment of response to immunotherapy with the Response Evaluation Criteria ...in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, could result in premature treatment termination. The randomized, open‐label, phase 3 CheckMate 141 trial (NCT02105636), which evaluated nivolumab in recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck after platinum therapy, allowed treatment beyond first RECIST‐defined progression (TBP) according to protocol‐specified criteria.
Methods
In CheckMate 141, patients with RECIST‐defined progression who had a stable performance status and demonstrated clinical benefit without rapid disease progression were permitted to receive TBP with nivolumab at 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until further progression, which was defined as an additional ≥10% increase in tumor volume. This post hoc analysis evaluated outcomes for patients who received TBP with nivolumab.
Results
Of 240 patients randomized to nivolumab, 146 experienced RECIST‐defined progression. Sixty‐two of these patients received TBP, and 84 discontinued treatment (no TBP). Among the 60 TBP patients evaluable for response, 15 (25%) had no change in their tumor burden, and 15 (25%) had reductions in target lesion size; 3 patients (5%) had reductions >30%. The median overall survival among TBP patients was 12.7 months (95% confidence interval, 9.7‐14.6 months). No new safety signals were observed with TBP. Exploratory analyses of immune cell biomarkers suggested a potential relationship with initial and TBP responses.
Conclusions
Tumor burden reduction was noted in a proportion of patients who received TBP with nivolumab in CheckMate 141. Additional research is warranted to identify factors predictive of a TBP benefit in this population.
In the randomized, open‐label, phase 3 CheckMate 141 trial in patients with recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck after platinum therapy, patients with a stable performance status and the potential for clinical benefit were permitted to receive treatment beyond first Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors–defined progression (TBP) with nivolumab; tumor burden reduction was noted in a proportion of these patients. Additional research is warranted to identify factors predictive of benefit with TBP in this population.
Summary Background We aimed to compare overall survival after standard-dose versus high-dose conformal radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy and the addition of cetuximab to concurrent ...chemoradiation for patients with inoperable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods In this open-label randomised, two-by-two factorial phase 3 study in 185 institutions in the USA and Canada, we enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, a Zubrod performance status of 0–1, adequate pulmonary function, and no evidence of supraclavicular or contralateral hilar adenopathy. We randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) patients to receive either 60 Gy (standard dose), 74 Gy (high dose), 60 Gy plus cetuximab, or 74 Gy plus cetuximab. All patients also received concurrent chemotherapy with 45 mg/m2 paclitaxel and carboplatin once a week (AUC 2); 2 weeks after chemoradiation, two cycles of consolidation chemotherapy separated by 3 weeks were given consisting of paclitaxel (200 mg/m2 ) and carboplatin (AUC 6). Randomisation was done with permuted block randomisation methods, stratified by radiotherapy technique, Zubrod performance status, use of PET during staging, and histology; treatment group assignments were not masked. Radiation dose was prescribed to the planning target volume and was given in 2 Gy daily fractions with either intensity-modulated radiation therapy or three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. The use of four-dimensional CT and image-guided radiation therapy were encouraged but not necessary. For patients assigned to receive cetuximab, 400 mg/m2 cetuximab was given on day 1 followed by weekly doses of 250 mg/m2 , and was continued through consolidation therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All analyses were done by modified intention-to-treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00533949. Findings Between Nov 27, 2007, and Nov 22, 2011, 166 patients were randomly assigned to receive standard-dose chemoradiotherapy, 121 to high-dose chemoradiotherapy, 147 to standard-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab, and 110 to high-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab. Median follow-up for the radiotherapy comparison was 22·9 months (IQR 27·5–33·3). Median overall survival was 28·7 months (95% CI 24·1–36·9) for patients who received standard-dose radiotherapy and 20·3 months (17·7–25·0) for those who received high-dose radiotherapy (hazard ratio HR 1·38, 95% CI 1·09–1·76; p=0·004). Median follow-up for the cetuximab comparison was 21·3 months (IQR 23·5–29·8). Median overall survival in patients who received cetuximab was 25·0 months (95% CI 20·2–30·5) compared with 24·0 months (19·8–28·6) in those who did not (HR 1·07, 95% CI 0·84–1·35; p=0·29). Both the radiation-dose and cetuximab results crossed protocol-specified futility boundaries. We recorded no statistical differences in grade 3 or worse toxic effects between radiotherapy groups. By contrast, the use of cetuximab was associated with a higher rate of grade 3 or worse toxic effects (205 86% of 237 vs 160 70% of 228 patients; p<0·0001). There were more treatment-related deaths in the high-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab groups (radiotherapy comparison: eight vs three patients; cetuximab comparison: ten vs five patients). There were no differences in severe pulmonary events between treatment groups. Severe oesophagitis was more common in patients who received high-dose chemoradiotherapy than in those who received standard-dose treatment (43 21% of 207 patients vs 16 7% of 217 patients; p<0·0001). Interpretation 74 Gy radiation given in 2 Gy fractions with concurrent chemotherapy was not better than 60 Gy plus concurrent chemotherapy for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, and might be potentially harmful. Addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation and consolidation treatment provided no benefit in overall survival for these patients. Funding National Cancer Institute and Bristol-Myers Squibb.
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.
Display omitted
•Poziotinib yields a 32% response rate in EGFR exon 20-mutant NSCLC•Poziotinib sensitivity is highly dependent on insertion location•Near-loop exon 20 insertions are more sensitive to poziotinib than far-loop insertions•Mechanisms of acquired poziotinib resistance include EGFR T790M and MET amplifications
Elamin et al. show that poziotinib is active in EGFR exon 20-mutant non-small cell lung cancer. The activity of poziotinib is influenced by insertion location in exon 20, with near-loop insertion being more sensitive than far-loop insertion. Poziotinib acquired resistance is mediated via EGFR-dependent and -independent mechanisms.
To evaluate cMET (mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor gene) and phospho-cMET (p-cMET) levels in breast cancer subtypes and its impact on survival outcomes.
We measured protein levels of cMET and ...p-cMET in 257 breast cancers using reverse phase protein array. Regression tree method and Martingale residual plots were applied to find best cutoff point for high and low levels. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to estimate relapse-free (RFS) and overall (OS) survival. Cox proportional hazards models were fit to determine associations of cMET/p-cMET with outcomes after adjustment for other characteristics.
Median age was 51 years. There were 140 (54.5%) hormone receptor (HR) positive, 53 (20.6%) HER2 positive, and 64 (24.9%) triple-negative tumors. Using selected cutoffs, 181 (70.4%) and 123 (47.9%) cancers had high levels of cMET and p-cMET, respectively. There were no significant differences in mean expression of cMET (P < 0.128) and p-cMET (P < 0.088) by breast cancer subtype. Dichotomized cMET and p-cMET level was a significant prognostic factor for RFS HR: 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.34-4.44, P = 0.003 and HR: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.04-2.60, P = 0.033 and OS (HR: 3.18, 95% CI: 1.43-7.11, P = 0.003 and HR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.08-3.44, P = 0.025). Within breast cancer subtypes, high cMET levels were associated with worse RFS (P = 0.014) and OS (P = 0.006) in HR-positive tumors, and high p-cMET levels were associated with worse RFS (P = 0.019) and OS (P = 0.014) in HER2-positive breast cancers. In multivariable analysis, patients with high cMET had a significantly higher risk of recurrence (HR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.08-3.94, P = 0.028) and death (HR: 2.81, 95% CI: 1.19-6.64, P = 0.019). High p-cMET level was associated with higher risk of recurrence (HR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.08-2.95.77, P = 0.020).
High levels of cMET and p-cMET were seen in all breast cancer subtypes and correlated with poor prognosis.
Background
Mutations in the v-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) play a critical role in cancer cell growth and resistance to therapy. Most mutations occur at codons 12 and 13. ...In colorectal cancer, the presence of any mutant KRas amino acid substitution is a negative predictor of patient response to targeted therapy. However, in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the evidence that KRAS mutation is a predictive factor is conflicting.
Methods
We used data from a molecularly targeted clinical trial for 215 patients with tissues available out of 268 evaluable patients with refractory NSCLC to examine associations between specific mutant KRas proteins and progression-free survival and tumor gene expression. Transcriptome microarray studies of patient tumor samples and reverse-phase protein array studies of a panel of 67 NSCLC cell lines with known substitutions in KRas and in immortalized human bronchial epithelial cells stably expressing different mutant KRas proteins were used to investigate signaling pathway activation. Molecular modeling was used to study the conformations of wild-type and mutant KRas proteins. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression were used to analyze survival data. All statistical tests were two-sided.
Results
Patients whose tumors had either mutant KRas-Gly12Cys or mutant KRas-Gly12Val had worse progression-free survival compared with patients whose tumors had other mutant KRas proteins or wild-type KRas (P = .046, median survival = 1.84 months) compared with all other mutant KRas (median survival = 3.35 months) or wild-type KRas (median survival = 1.95 months). NSCLC cell lines with mutant KRas-Gly12Asp had activated phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI-3-K) and mitogen-activated protein/extracellular signal-regulated kinase kinase (MEK) signaling, whereas those with mutant KRas-Gly12Cys or mutant KRas-Gly12Val had activated Ral signaling and decreased growth factor-dependent Akt activation. Molecular modeling studies showed that different conformations imposed by mutant KRas may lead to altered association with downstream signaling transducers.
Conclusions
Not all mutant KRas proteins affect patient survival or downstream signaling in a similar way. The heterogeneous behavior of mutant KRas proteins implies that therapeutic interventions may need to take into account the specific mutant KRas expressed by the tumor.
Abstract Purpose Prompt staging and treatment are crucial for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We determined if predictors of treatment delay after diagnosis were associated with prognosis. ...Materials and methods Medicare claims from 28,732 patients diagnosed with NSCLC in 2004–2007 were used to establish the diagnosis-to-treatment interval (ideally ⩽35 days) and identify staging studies during that interval. Factors associated with delay were identified with multivariate logistic regression, and associations between delay and survival by stage were tested with Cox proportional hazard regression. Results Median diagnosis-to-treatment interval was 27 days. Receipt of PET was associated with delays (57.4% of patients with PET delayed n = 6646/11,583 versus 22.8% of those without n = 3908/17,149; adjusted OR = 4.48, 95% CI 4.23–4.74, p < 0.001). Median diagnosis-to-PET interval was 15 days; PET-to-clinic, 5 days; and clinic-to-treatment, 12 days. Diagnosis-to-treatment intervals <35 days were associated with improved survival for patients with localized disease and those with distant disease surviving ⩾1 year but not for patients with distant disease surviving <1 year. Conclusion Delays between diagnosing and treating NSCLC are common and associated with use of PET for staging. Reducing time to treatment may improve survival for patients with manageable disease at diagnosis.
•CheckMate 141 evaluated nivolumab in patients with R/M SCCHN post-platinum therapy.•We present a post hoc analysis of CheckMate 141 evaluating patient subgroups by age.•OS was higher with nivolumab ...vs chemotherapy irrespective of age (<65 and ≥65 years)•Nivolumab had a consistent safety profile across age groups.•These data are consistent with results seen in the overall patient population.
Many patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) are ≥65 years old; comorbidities and other age-related factors may affect their ability to tolerate traditional chemotherapy. Nivolumab is the only immunotherapy to significantly improve overall survival (OS) versus investigator’s choice (IC) of single-agent chemotherapy at primary analysis in a phase 3 trial (CheckMate 141) in patients with recurrent/metastatic SCCHN post-platinum therapy. In this post hoc analysis, we report efficacy and safety by age.
Eligible patients were randomized 2:1 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n = 240) or IC (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab n = 121). The primary endpoint of the trial was OS. For this analysis, outcomes were analyzed by age < 65 and ≥65 years. The data cut-off date was September 2017 (minimum follow-up 24.2 months).
At baseline, 68 patients (28.3%) receiving nivolumab and 45 patients (37.2%) receiving IC were ≥65 years. Baseline characteristics were generally similar across age groups. OS and tumor response benefits with nivolumab versus IC were maintained regardless of age. The 30-month OS rates of 11.2% (<65 years) and 13.0% (≥65 years) with nivolumab were more than tripled versus corresponding IC rates of 1.4% and 3.3%, respectively. The nivolumab arm had a lower rate of treatment-related adverse events versus IC regardless of age, consistent with the overall patient population.
In CheckMate 141, nivolumab resulted in a higher survival versus IC in patients <65 and ≥65 years, with a manageable safety profile in both age groups.
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02105636.
Despite initial effectiveness of ALK receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with ALK+ NSCLC, therapeutic resistance will ultimately develop. Serial tracking of genetic alterations ...detected in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can be an informative strategy to identify response and resistance. This study evaluated the utility of analyzing ctDNA as a function of response to ensartinib, a potent second-generation ALK TKI.
Pre-treatment plasma was collected from 76 patients with ALK+ NSCLC who were ALK TKI–naive or had received prior ALK TKI, and analyzed for specific genetic alterations. Longitudinal plasma samples were analyzed from a subset (n = 11) of patients. Analysis of pre-treatment tumor biopsy specimens from 22 patients was compared with plasma.
Disease-associated genetic alterations were detected in 74% (56 of 76) of patients, the most common being EML4-ALK. Concordance of ALK fusion between plasma and tissue was 91% (20 of 22 blood and tissue samples). Twenty-four ALK kinase domain mutations were detected in 15 patients, all had previously received an ALK TKI; G1269A was the most prevalent (4 of 24). Patients with a detectable EML4-ALK variant 1 (V1) fusion had improved response (9 of 17 patients; 53%) to ensartinib compared to patients with EML4-ALK V3 fusion (one of seven patients; 14%). Serial changes in ALK alterations were observed during therapy.
Clinical utility of ctDNA was shown, both at pre-treatment by identifying a potential subgroup of ALK+ NSCLC patients who may derive more benefit from ensartinib and longitudinally by tracking resistance. Prospective application of this technology may translate to improved outcomes for NSCLC patients treated with ALK TKIs.
Bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA) is a recombinant, humanized anti-vascular endothelial growth factor monoclonal antibody. Erlotinib HCl (Tarceva, OSI-774; OSI ...Pharmaceuticals, New York, NY) is a potent, reversible, highly selective and orally available HER-1/epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Preclinical data in various xenograft models produced greater growth inhibition than with either agent alone. Additionally, both agents have demonstrated benefit in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
A phase I/II study in two centers examined erlotinib and bevacizumab (A+T) in patients with nonsquamous stage IIIB/IV NSCLC with > or = one prior chemotherapy. In phase I, erlotinib 150 mg/day orally plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously every 21 days was established as the phase II dose, although no dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Phase II assessed the efficacy and tolerability of A+T at this dose. Pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated. ResultsForty patients were enrolled and treated in this study (34 patients at phase II dose); the median age was 59 years (range, 36 to 72 years), 21 were female, 30 had adenocarcinoma histology, nine were never-smokers, and 22 had > or = two prior regimens (three patients had > or = four prior regimens). The most common adverse events were mild to moderate rash, diarrhea, and proteinuria. Preliminary data showed no pharmacokinetic interaction between A + T. Eight patients (20.0%; 95% CI, 7.6% to 32.4%) had partial responses and 26 (65.0%; 95% CI, 50.2% to 79.8%) had stable disease as their best response. The median overall survival for the 34 patients treated at the phase II dose was 12.6 months, with progression-free survival of 6.2 months.
Encouraging antitumor activity and safety of A + T support further development of this combination for patients with advanced NSCLC and other solid tumors.
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.
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.
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.
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.
US National Cancer Institute.
PDF
