Adjuvant platinum based chemotherapy is accepted as standard of care in stage II and III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients and is often considered in patients with stage IB disease who have ...tumors ≥ 4 cm. The survival advantage is modest with approximately 5% at 5 years. Areas covered: This review article presents relevant data regarding chemotherapy use in the perioperative setting for early stage NSCLC. A literature search was performed utilizing PubMed as well as clinical trial.gov. Randomized phase III studies in this setting including adjuvant and neoadjuvant use of chemotherapy as well as ongoing trials on targeted therapy and immunotherapy are also discussed. Expert commentary: With increasing utilization of screening computed tomography scans, it is possible that the percentage of early stage NSCLC patients will increase in the coming years. Benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy in early stage NSCLC patients remain modest. There is a need to better define patients most likely to derive survival benefit from adjuvant therapy and spare patients who do not need adjuvant chemotherapy due to the toxicity of such therapy. Trials for adjuvant targeted therapy, including adjuvant EGFR-TKI trials and trials of immunotherapy drugs are ongoing and will define the role of these agents as adjuvant therapy.
Several targetable genetic alterations have been identified in non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) and drugs targeting these alterations have been approved for the management of advanced NSCLC ...patients. Driver mutations with emerging clinical trial data include
exon 20 insertion mutations,
amplification,
point mutations,
rearrangements,
amplification and mutations, and
amplification and translocations.
We reviewed English-language articles indexed in Medline and PubMed up to the 1
of June 2020. In addition, the proceedings of major conferences were reviewed for relevant abstracts. We report data published regarding targeted therapies which are currently approved and for those which are emerging in advanced or metastatic NSCLC.
While these drugs have been shown to be efficacious and tolerable, resistance almost always develops. Though next-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been developed, the appropriate sequencing of these drugs is not clear. Evaluating combination therapies to prevent or delay the onset of resistance and understanding mechanisms of resistance are critical areas of emerging research.
Summary Background Atezolizumab is a humanised antiprogrammed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody that inhibits PD-L1 and programmed death-1 (PD-1) and PD-L1 and B7-1 interactions, ...reinvigorating anticancer immunity. We assessed its efficacy and safety versus docetaxel in previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial (OAK) in 194 academic or community oncology centres in 31 countries. We enrolled patients who had squamous or non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, were 18 years or older, had measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients had received one to two previous cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens (one or more platinum based combination therapies) for stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients with a history of autoimmune disease and those who had received previous treatments with docetaxel, CD137 agonists, anti-CTLA4, or therapies targeting the PD-L1 and PD-1 pathway were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenously receive either atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks by permuted block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive voice or web response system. Coprimary endpoints were overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1-expression population TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 (≥1% PD-L1 on tumour cells or tumour-infiltrating immune cells). The primary efficacy analysis was done in the first 850 of 1225 enrolled patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02008227. Findings Between March 11, 2014, and April 29, 2015, 1225 patients were recruited. In the primary population, 425 patients were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab and 425 patients were assigned to receive docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly longer with atezolizumab in the ITT and PD-L1-expression populations. In the ITT population, overall survival was improved with atezolizumab compared with docetaxel (median overall survival was 13·8 months 95% CI 11·8–15·7 vs 9·6 months 8·6–11·2; hazard ratio HR 0·73 95% CI 0·62–0·87, p=0·0003). Overall survival in the TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 population was improved with atezolizumab (n=241) compared with docetaxel (n=222; median overall survival was 15·7 months 95% CI 12·6–18·0 with atezolizumab vs 10·3 months 8·8–12·0 with docetaxel; HR 0·74 95% CI 0·58–0·93; p=0·0102). Patients in the PD-L1 low or undetectable subgroup (TC0 and IC0) also had improved survival with atezolizumab (median overall survival 12·6 months vs 8·9 months; HR 0·75 95% CI 0·59–0·96). Overall survival improvement was similar in patients with squamous (HR 0·73 95% CI 0·54–0·98; n=112 in the atezolizumab group and n=110 in the docetaxel group) or non-squamous (0·73 0·60–0·89; n=313 and n=315) histology. Fewer patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events with atezolizumab (90 15% of 609 patients) versus docetaxel (247 43% of 578 patients). One treatment-related death from a respiratory tract infection was reported in the docetaxel group. Interpretation To our knowledge, OAK is the first randomised phase 3 study to report results of a PD-L1-targeted therapy, with atezolizumab treatment resulting in a clinically relevant improvement of overall survival versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer, regardless of PD-L1 expression or histology, with a favourable safety profile. Funding F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech, Inc.
At the prior data cutoff (February 9, 2017) the ALEX trial showed superior investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) for alectinib versus crizotinib in untreated, anaplastic lymphoma ...kinase (ALK)-positive, advanced NSCLC (hazard ratio = 0.47, 95% confidence interval: 0.34–0.65, p < 0.001). The median PFS in the alectinib arm was not reached versus 11.1 months with crizotinib. Retrospective analyses suggest that the echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 gene-ALK variant (EML4-ALK) may influence ALK-inhibitor treatment benefit. We present updated analyses, including exploratory subgroup analysis by EML4-ALK variant, after an additional 10 months’ follow-up (cutoff December 1, 2017).
Patients were randomized to receive twice-daily alectinib, 600 mg, or crizotinib, 250 mg, until disease progression, toxicity, death, or withdrawal. PFS was determined by the investigators. Baseline plasma and tissue biomarker samples were analyzed by using hybrid-capture, next-generation sequencing to determine EML4-ALK variant.
Baseline characteristics were balanced. Investigator-assessed PFS was prolonged with alectinib (stratified hazard ratio = 0.43, 95% confidence interval: 0.32–0.58). The median PFS times were 34.8 months with alectinib and 10.9 months with crizotinib. EML4-ALK fusions were detectable in 129 patient plasma samples and 124 tissue samples; variants 1, 2, and 3/ab did not affect PFS, objective response rate, or duration of response. Investigator-assessed PFS was longer for alectinib than for crizotinib across EML4-ALK variants 1, 2, and 3a/b in plasma and tissue. Despite longer treatment duration (27.0 months in the case of alectinib versus 10.8 months in the case of crizotinib), the safety of alectinib compared favorably with that of crizotinib.
Alectinib continues to demonstrate superior investigator-assessed PFS versus crizotinib in untreated ALK-positive NSCLC, irrespective of EML4-ALK variant.
Summary Background Limited evidence exists to show that adding a third agent to platinum-doublet chemotherapy improves efficacy in the first-line advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) setting. ...The anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab has shown efficacy as monotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC and has a non-overlapping toxicity profile with chemotherapy. We assessed whether the addition of pembrolizumab to platinum-doublet chemotherapy improves efficacy in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC. Methods In this randomised, open-label, phase 2 cohort of a multicohort study (KEYNOTE-021), patients were enrolled at 26 medical centres in the USA and Taiwan. Patients with chemotherapy-naive, stage IIIB or IV, non-squamous NSCLC without targetable EGFR or ALK genetic aberrations were randomly assigned (1:1) in blocks of four stratified by PD-L1 tumour proportion score (<1% vs ≥1%) using an interactive voice-response system to 4 cycles of pembrolizumab 200 mg plus carboplatin area under curve 5 mg/mL per min and pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 every 3 weeks followed by pembrolizumab for 24 months and indefinite pemetrexed maintenance therapy or to 4 cycles of carboplatin and pemetrexed alone followed by indefinite pemetrexed maintenance therapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response, defined as the percentage of patients with radiologically confirmed complete or partial response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 assessed by masked, independent central review, in the intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients who were allocated to study treatment. Significance threshold was p<0·025 (one sided). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of the assigned study treatment. This trial, which is closed for enrolment but continuing for follow-up, is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02039674. Findings Between Nov 25, 2014, and Jan 25, 2016, 123 patients were enrolled; 60 were randomly assigned to the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group and 63 to the chemotherapy alone group. 33 (55%; 95% CI 42–68) of 60 patients in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group achieved an objective response compared with 18 (29%; 18–41) of 63 patients in the chemotherapy alone group (estimated treatment difference 26% 95% CI 9–42%; p=0·0016). The incidence of grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events was similar between groups (23 39% of 59 patients in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group and 16 26% of 62 in the chemotherapy alone group). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group were anaemia (seven 12% of 59) and decreased neutrophil count (three 5%); an additional six events each occurred in two (3%) for acute kidney injury, decreased lymphocyte count, fatigue, neutropenia, and sepsis, and thrombocytopenia. In the chemotherapy alone group, the most common grade 3 or worse events were anaemia (nine 15% of 62) and decreased neutrophil count, pancytopenia, and thrombocytopenia (two 3% each). One (2%) of 59 patients in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group experienced treatment-related death because of sepsis compared with two (3%) of 62 patients in the chemotherapy group: one because of sepsis and one because of pancytopenia. Interpretation Combination of pembrolizumab, carboplatin, and pemetrexed could be an effective and tolerable first-line treatment option for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC. This finding is being further explored in an ongoing international, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study. Funding Merck & Co.
Lorlatinib is a potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)/ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with robust clinical activity in advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell ...lung cancer, including in patients who have failed prior ALK TKIs. Molecular determinants of response to lorlatinib have not been established, but preclinical data suggest that
resistance mutations may represent a biomarker of response in previously treated patients.
Baseline plasma and tumor tissue samples were collected from 198 patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer from the registrational phase II study of lorlatinib. We analyzed plasma DNA for
mutations using Guardant360. Tumor tissue DNA was analyzed using an
mutation-focused next-generation sequencing assay. Objective response rate, duration of response, and progression-free survival were evaluated according to
mutation status.
Approximately one quarter of patients had
mutations detected by plasma or tissue genotyping. In patients with crizotinib-resistant disease, the efficacy of lorlatinib was comparable among patients with and without
mutations using plasma or tissue genotyping. In contrast, in patients who had failed 1 or more second-generation ALK TKIs, objective response rate was higher among patients with
mutations (62%
32% plasma; 69%
27% tissue). Progression-free survival was similar in patients with and without
mutations on the basis of plasma genotyping (median, 7.3 months
5.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.81) but significantly longer in patients with
mutations identified by tissue genotyping (median, 11.0 months
5.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.47).
In patients who have failed 1 or more second-generation ALK TKIs, lorlatinib shows greater efficacy in patients with
mutations compared with patients without
mutations. Tumor genotyping for
mutations after failure of a second-generation TKI may identify patients who are more likely to derive clinical benefit from lorlatinib.
Oncogenic alterations in RET have been identified in multiple tumour types, including 1–2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and antitumour ...activity of pralsetinib, a highly potent, oral, selective RET inhibitor, in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC.
ARROW is a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study done at 71 sites (community and academic cancer centres) in 13 countries (Belgium, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours, including RET fusion-positive NSCLC, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2 (later limited to 0–1 in a protocol amendment) were enrolled. In phase 2, patients received 400 mg once-daily oral pralsetinib, and could continue treatment until disease progression, intolerance, withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. Phase 2 primary endpoints were overall response rate (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1·1 and assessed by blinded independent central review) and safety. Tumour response was assessed in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC and centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease who had received platinum-based chemotherapy or were treatment-naive because they were ineligible for standard therapy. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03037385, and enrolment of patients with treatment-naive RET fusion-positive NSCLC was ongoing at the time of this interim analysis.
Of 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC enrolled between March 17, 2017, and May 22, 2020 (data cutoff), 92 with previous platinum-based chemotherapy and 29 who were treatment-naive received pralsetinib before July 11, 2019 (efficacy enrolment cutoff); 87 previously treated patients and 27 treatment-naive patients had centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease. Overall responses were recorded in 53 (61%; 95% CI 50–71) of 87 patients with previous platinum-based chemotherapy, including five (6%) patients with a complete response; and 19 (70%; 50–86) of 27 treatment-naive patients, including three (11%) with a complete response. In 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (43 patients 18%), hypertension (26 11%), and anaemia (24 10%); there were no treatment-related deaths in this population.
Pralsetinib is a new, well-tolerated, promising, once-daily oral treatment option for patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC.
Blueprint Medicines.
Opinion statement
Approximately 15% of the over 220,000 new lung cancers diagnosed each year in the USA are small cell lung cancer (SCLC). The standard of care for SCLC patients has not changed for ...many years. Therefore, there remains a need to evaluate novel drugs for the management of SCLC patients. In recent years, there is a greater understanding of the molecular alterations that occur in SCLC. There is an expectation that targeting these molecular alterations could provide clinical benefit. Targeting angiogenesis by inhibiting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway has been evaluated in SCLC patients and has shown only limited clinical benefit. Alterations in DNA repair make these tumors susceptible to DNA repair pathway inhibitors and formed the basis for PARP inhibitor trials. Initial trials with PARP inhibitors have shown promising activity in some SCLC patients. Due to increased expression of anti-apoptotic Bcl-2 proteins, drugs targeting these proteins may also provide clinical benefit. Pre-clinical studies have shown that pathways of self-renewal such as the hedgehog and NOTCH pathways may be altered in SCLCs and could be targeted for therapeutic benefit. Initial trials with drugs targeting these pathways, including drugs-targeting DLL3, a NOTCH ligand, suggest the need for appropriate biomarkers to identify SCLC patients most likely to benefit from these strategies. Trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown that these agents may have therapeutic role in SCLC. As is true in other tumor types, these agents benefit only a proportion of patients but the benefit when observed can be sustained. Tumor mutational burden and PD-L1 expression may predict for clinical benefit with these agents. Ongoing trials will define the role of these agents in management of SCLC patients.
Summary Background Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and ALK rearrangements generally have a progression-free survival of 8–11 months while on treatment with the ALK inhibitor ...crizotinib. However, resistance inevitably develops, with the brain a common site of progression. More potent ALK inhibitors with consistently demonstrable CNS activity and good tolerability are needed urgently. Alectinib is a novel, highly selective, and potent ALK inhibitor that has shown clinical activity in patients with crizotinib-naive ALK -rearranged NSCLC. We did a phase 1/2 study of alectinib to establish the recommended phase 2 dose of the drug and examine its activity in patients resistant or intolerant to crizotinib. Methods We enrolled patients with ALK -rearranged NSCLC who progressed on or were intolerant to crizotinib. We administered various oral doses of alectinib (300–900 mg twice a day) during the dose-escalation portion of the study (phase 1), to ascertain the recommended dose for phase 2. We used Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria (version 1.1) to investigate the activity of alectinib in all patients with a baseline scan and at least one post-treatment scan (CT or MRI), with central radiological review of individuals with brain metastases. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of alectinib. Here, we present data for the phase 1 portion of the study, the primary objective of which was to establish the recommended phase 2 dose; phase 2 is ongoing. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01588028. Findings 47 patients were enrolled. Alectinib was well tolerated, with the most common adverse events being fatigue (14 30%; all grade 1–2), myalgia (eight 17%; all grade 1–2), and peripheral oedema (seven 15% grade 1–2, one 2% grade 3). Dose-limiting toxic effects were recorded in two patients in the cohort receiving alectinib 900 mg twice a day; one individual had grade 3 headache and the other had grade 3 neutropenia. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were increased levels of γ-glutamyl transpeptidase (two 4%), a reduction in the number of neutrophils (two 4%), and hypophosphataemia (two 4%). Three patients reported four grade 4 serious adverse events that were deemed unrelated to alectinib: acute renal failure; pleural effusion and pericardial effusion; and brain metastasis. At data cut-off (median follow-up 126 days IQR 84–217), 44 patients could be assessed for activity. Investigator-assessed objective responses were noted in 24 (55%) patients, with a confirmed complete response in one (2%), a confirmed partial response in 14 (32%), and an unconfirmed partial response in nine (20%). 16 (36%) patients had stable disease; the remaining four (9%) had progressive disease. Of 21 patients with CNS metastases at baseline, 11 (52%) had an objective response; six (29%) had a complete response (three unconfirmed) and five (24%) had a partial response (one unconfirmed); eight (38%) patients had stable disease and the remaining two (10%) had progressive disease. Pharmacokinetic data indicated that mean exposure (AUC0–10 ) after multiple doses of alectinib (300–600 mg twice a day) was dose-dependent. Interpretation Alectinib was well tolerated, with promising antitumour activity in patients with ALK -rearranged NSCLC resistant to crizotinib, including those with CNS metastases. On the basis of activity, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic data, we chose alectinib 600 mg twice a day as the recommended dose for phase 2. Funding Chugai Pharmaceuticals, F Hoffmann La-Roche.
PDF
