The impressive clinical activity of small-molecule receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors for oncogene-addicted subgroups of non-small-cell lung cancer (for example, those driven by activating mutations ...in the gene encoding epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) or rearrangements in the genes encoding the receptor tyrosine kinases anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), ROS proto-oncogene 1 (ROS1) and rearranged during transfection (RET)) has established an oncogene-centric molecular classification paradigm in this disease. However, recent studies have revealed considerable phenotypic diversity downstream of tumour-initiating oncogenes. Co-occurring genomic alterations, particularly in tumour suppressor genes such as TP53 and LKB1 (also known as STK11), have emerged as core determinants of the molecular and clinical heterogeneity of oncogene-driven lung cancer subgroups through their effects on both tumour cell-intrinsic and non-cell-autonomous cancer hallmarks. In this Review, we discuss the impact of co-mutations on the pathogenesis, biology, microenvironmental interactions and therapeutic vulnerabilities of non-small-cell lung cancer and assess the challenges and opportunities that co-mutations present for personalized anticancer therapy, as well as the expanding field of precision immunotherapy.
Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations typically occur in exons 18-21 and are established driver mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
. Targeted therapies are approved for ...patients with 'classical' mutations and a small number of other mutations
. However, effective therapies have not been identified for additional EGFR mutations. Furthermore, the frequency and effects of atypical EGFR mutations on drug sensitivity are unknown
. Here we characterize the mutational landscape in 16,715 patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC, and establish the structure-function relationship of EGFR mutations on drug sensitivity. We found that EGFR mutations can be separated into four distinct subgroups on the basis of sensitivity and structural changes that retrospectively predict patient outcomes following treatment with EGFR inhibitors better than traditional exon-based groups. Together, these data delineate a structure-based approach for defining functional groups of EGFR mutations that can effectively guide treatment and clinical trial choices for patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and suggest that a structure-function-based approach may improve the prediction of drug sensitivity to targeted therapies in oncogenes with diverse mutations.
We previously demonstrated the association between epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and drug response in lung cancer using an EMT signature derived in cancer cell lines. Given the ...contribution of tumor microenvironments to EMT, we extended our investigation of EMT to patient tumors from 11 cancer types to develop a pan-cancer EMT signature.
Using the pan-cancer EMT signature, we conducted an integrated, global analysis of genomic and proteomic profiles associated with EMT across 1,934 tumors including breast, lung, colon, ovarian, and bladder cancers. Differences in outcome and in vitro drug response corresponding to expression of the pan-cancer EMT signature were also investigated.
Compared with the lung cancer EMT signature, the patient-derived, pan-cancer EMT signature encompasses a set of core EMT genes that correlate even more strongly with known EMT markers across diverse tumor types and identifies differences in drug sensitivity and global molecular alterations at the DNA, RNA, and protein levels. Among those changes associated with EMT, pathway analysis revealed a strong correlation between EMT and immune activation. Further supervised analysis demonstrated high expression of immune checkpoints and other druggable immune targets, such as PD1, PD-L1, CTLA4, OX40L, and PD-L2, in tumors with the most mesenchymal EMT scores. Elevated PD-L1 protein expression in mesenchymal tumors was confirmed by IHC in an independent lung cancer cohort.
This new signature provides a novel, patient-based, histology-independent tool for the investigation of EMT and offers insights into potential novel therapeutic targets for mesenchymal tumors, independent of cancer type, including immune checkpoints.
STK11 and KEAP1 mutations (STK11 mutant STK11MUT and KEAP1MUT) are among the most often mutated genes in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). Although STK11MUT has been associated with resistance to ...programmed death-(ligand)1 (PD-L1) inhibition in KRASMUT LUAD, its impact on immunotherapy efficacy in KRAS wild-type (KRASWT) LUAD is currently unknown. Whether KEAP1MUT differentially affects outcomes to PD-(L)1 inhibition in KRASMUT and KRASWT LUAD is also unknown.
Clinicopathologic and genomic data were collected from September 2013 to September 2020 from patients with advanced LUAD at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Massachusetts General Hospital cohort and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center/MD Anderson Cancer Center cohort. Clinical outcomes to PD-(L)1 inhibition were analyzed according to KRAS, STK11, and KEAP1 mutation status in two independent cohorts. The Cancer Genome Atlas transcriptomic data were interrogated to identify differences in tumor gene expression and tumor immune cell subsets, respectively, according to KRAS/STK11 and KRAS/KEAP1 comutation status.
In the combined cohort (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Massachusetts General Hospital + Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center/MD Anderson Cancer Center) of 1261 patients (median age = 61 y range: 22–92, 708 women 56.1%, 1065 smokers 84.4%), KRAS mutations were detected in 536 cases (42.5%), and deleterious STK11 and KEAP1 mutations were found in 20.6% (260 of 1261) and 19.2% (231 of 1202) of assessable cases, respectively. In each independent cohort and in the combined cohort, STK11 and KEAP1 mutations were associated with significantly worse progression-free (STK11 hazard ratio HR = 2.04, p < 0.0001; KEAP1 HR = 2.05, p < 0.0001) and overall (STK11 HR = 2.09, p < 0.0001; KEAP1 HR = 2.24, p < 0.0001) survival to immunotherapy uniquely among KRASMUT but not KRASWT LUADs. Gene expression ontology and immune cell enrichment analyses revealed that the presence of STK11 or KEAP1 mutations results in distinct immunophenotypes in KRASMUT, but not in KRASWT, lung cancers.
STK11 and KEAP1 mutations confer worse outcomes to immunotherapy among patients with KRASMUT but not among KRASWT LUAD. Tumors harboring concurrent KRAS/STK11 and KRAS/KEAP1 mutations display distinct immune profiles in terms of gene expression and immune cell infiltration.
Summary Background Evidence from retrospective studies suggests that disease progression after first-line chemotherapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) occurs most often at sites of ...disease known to exist at baseline. However, the potential effect of aggressive local consolidative therapy for patients with oligometastatic NSCLC is unknown. We aimed to assess the effect of local consolidative therapy on progression-free survival. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study, eligible patients from three hospitals had histological confirmation of stage IV NSCLC, three or fewer metastatic disease lesions after first-line systemic therapy, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less, had received standard first-line systemic therapy, and had no disease progression before randomisation. First-line therapy was four or more cycles of platinum doublet therapy or 3 or more months of EGFR or ALK inhibitors for patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements, respectively. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either local consolidative therapy (chemoradiotherapy or resection of all lesions) with or without subsequent maintenance treatment or to maintenance treatment alone, which could be observation only. Maintenance treatment was recommended based on a list of approved regimens, and observation was defined as close surveillance without cytotoxic treatment. Randomisation was not masked and was balanced dynamically on five factors: number of metastases, response to initial therapy, CNS metastases, intrathoracic nodal status, and EGFR and ALK status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival analysed in all patients who were treated and had at least one post-baseline imaging assessment. The study is ongoing but not recruiting participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01725165. Findings Between Nov 28, 2012, and Jan 19, 2016, 74 patients were enrolled either during or at the completion of first-line systemic therapy. The study was terminated early after randomisation of 49 patients (25 in the local consolidative therapy group and 24 in the maintenance treatment group) as part of the annual analyses done by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee of all randomised trials at MD Anderson Cancer Center, and before a planned interim analysis of 44 events. At a median follow-up time for all randomised patients of 12·39 months (IQR 5·52–20·30), the median progression-free survival in the local consolidative therapy group was 11·9 months (90% CI 5·7–20·9) versus 3·9 months (2·3–6·6) in the maintenance treatment group (hazard ratio 0·35 90% CI 0·18–0·66, log-rank p=0·0054). Adverse events were similar between groups, with no grade 4 adverse events or deaths due to treatment. Grade 3 adverse events in the maintenance therapy group were fatigue (n=1) and anaemia (n=1) and in the local consolidative therapy group were oesophagitis (n=2), anaemia (n=1), pneumothorax (n=1), and abdominal pain (n=1, unlikely related). Interpretation Local consolidative therapy with or without maintenance therapy for patients with three or fewer metastases from NSCLC that did not progress after initial systemic therapy improved progression-free survival compared with maintenance therapy alone. These findings suggest that aggressive local therapy should be further explored in phase 3 trials as a standard treatment option in this clinical scenario. Funding MD Anderson Lung Cancer Priority Fund, MD Anderson Cancer Center Moon Shot Initiative, and Cancer Center Support (Core), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.
Although treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors provides promising benefit for patients with cancer, optimal use is encumbered by high resistance rates and requires a thorough understanding of ...resistance mechanisms. We observed that tumors treated with PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies develop resistance through the upregulation of CD38, which is induced by all-trans retinoic acid and IFNβ in the tumor microenvironment.
and
studies demonstrate that CD38 inhibits CD8
T-cell function via adenosine receptor signaling and that CD38 or adenosine receptor blockade are effective strategies to overcome the resistance. Large data sets of human tumors reveal expression of CD38 in a subset of tumors with high levels of basal or treatment-induced T-cell infiltration, where immune checkpoint therapies are thought to be most effective. These findings provide a novel mechanism of acquired resistance to immune checkpoint therapy and an opportunity to expand their efficacy in cancer treatment.
CD38 is a major mechanism of acquired resistance to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade, causing CD8
T-cell suppression. Coinhibition of CD38 and PD-L1 improves antitumor immune response. Biomarker assessment in patient cohorts suggests that a combination strategy is applicable to a large percentage of patients in whom PD-1/PD-L1 blockade is currently indicated.
.
In the past 10 years, a deeper understanding of the immune landscape of cancers, including immune evasion processes, has allowed the development of a new class of agents. The reactivation of host ...antitumor immune response offers the potential for long-term survival benefit in a portion of patients with thoracic malignancies.
The advent of programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death ligand-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), both as single agents and in combination with chemotherapy, and more recently, the combination of ICI, anti–programmed cell death protein 1, and anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 antibody, have led to breakthrough therapeutic advances for patients with advanced NSCLC, and to a lesser extent, patients with SCLC. Encouraging activity has recently emerged in pretreated patients with thymic carcinoma (TC). Conversely, in malignant pleural mesothelioma, pivotal positive signs of activity have not been fully confirmed in randomized trials. The additive effects of chemoradiation and immunotherapy suggested intriguing potential for therapeutic synergy with combination strategies. This has led to the introduction of ICI consolidation therapy in stage III NSCLC, creating a platform for future therapeutic developments in earlier-stage disease. Despite the definitive clinical benefit observed with ICI, primary and acquired resistance represent well-known biological phenomena, which may affect the therapeutic efficacy of these agents.
The development of innovative strategies to overcome ICI resistance, standardization of new patterns of ICI progression, identification of predictive biomarkers of response, optimal treatment duration, and characterization of ICI efficacy in special populations, represent crucial issues to be adequately addressed, with the aim of improving the therapeutic benefit of ICI in patients with thoracic malignancies.
In this article, an international panel of experts in the field of thoracic malignancies discussed these topics, evaluating currently available scientific evidence, with the final aim of providing clinical recommendations, which may guide oncologists in their current practice and elucidate future treatment strategies and research priorities.
BackgroundIn this phase I/II trial, we evaluated the safety and effectiveness of pembrolizumab, with or without concurrent radiotherapy (RT), for lung and liver lesions from metastatic non-small cell ...lung cancer (mNSCLC).MethodsPatients with lung or liver lesions amenable to RT plus at least one additional non-contiguous lesion were included regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) status. Pembrolizumab was given at 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 32 cycles with or without concurrent RT. Metastatic lesions were treated with stereotactic body RT (SBRT; 50 Gy in 4 fractions) if clinically feasible or with traditionally fractionated RT (45 Gy in 15 fractions) if not. The primary end point was the best out-of-field lesion response, and a key secondary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsThe median follow-up time was 20.4 months. One hundred patients (20 phase I, 80 phase II) were evaluable for toxicity, and 72 phase II patients were evaluable for treatment response. No patients in the phase I group experienced grade 4–5 events; in the phase II group, two had grade 4 events and nine had grade 3 events. The ORR in the combined-modality cohort (irrespective of RT schema) was 22%, vs 25% in the pembrolizumab group (irrespective of receipt of salvage RT) (p=0.99). In the concurrent pembrolizumab+RT groups, the out-of-field ORRs were 38% in the pembrolizumab+SBRT group and 10% in the pembrolizumab+traditional RT group. When examining the pembrolizumab-alone patients, the out-of-field ORRs were 33% in those designated to receive salvage SBRT (if required) and 17% for salvage traditional RT. In all patients, the median PFS for pembrolizumab alone was 5.1 months (95% CI 3.4 to 12.7 months), and pembrolizumab/RT (regardless of schema) was 9.1 months (95% CI 3.6 to 18.4 months) (p=0.52). An exploratory analysis revealed that for patients with low PD-L1 expression, the median PFS was 4.6 vs 20.8 months for pembrolizumab with and without RT, respectively (p=0.004).ConclusionsConcurrent immunoradiotherapy for mNSCLC is safe, although larger trials are required to address which patients benefit most from RT.Trial registration numberNCT02444741.
BackgroundNon-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients bearing targetable oncogene alterations typically derive limited benefit from immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), which has been attributed to low ...tumor mutation burden (TMB) and/or PD-L1 levels. We investigated oncogene-specific differences in these markers and clinical outcome.MethodsThree cohorts of NSCLC patients with oncogene alterations (n=4189 total) were analyzed. Two clinical cohorts of advanced NSCLC patients treated with ICB monotherapy MD Anderson (MDACC; n=172) and Flatiron Health-Foundation Medicine Clinico-Genomic Database (CGDB; n=894 patients) were analyzed for clinical outcome. The FMI biomarker cohort (n=4017) was used to assess the association of oncogene alterations with TMB and PD-L1 expression.ResultsHigh PD-L1 expression (PD-L1 ≥50%) rate was 19%–20% in classic EGFR, EGFR exon 20 and HER2-mutant tumors, and 34%–55% in tumors with ALK, BRAF V600E, ROS1, RET, or MET alterations. Compared with KRAS-mutant tumors, BRAF non-V600E group had higher TMB (9.6 vs KRAS 7.8 mutations/Mb, p=0.003), while all other oncogene groups had lower TMB (p<0.001). In the two clinical cohorts treated with ICB, molecular groups with EGFR, HER2, ALK, ROS1, RET, or MET alterations had short progression-free survival (PFS; 1.8–3.7 months), while BRAF V600E group was associated with greater clinical benefit from ICB (CGDB cohort: PFS 9.8 months vs KRAS 3.7 months, HR 0.66, p=0.099; MDACC cohort: response rate 62% vs KRAS 24%; PFS 7.4 vs KRAS 2.8 months, HR 0.36, p=0.026). KRAS G12C and non-G12C subgroups had similar clinical benefit from ICB in both cohorts. In a multivariable analysis, BRAF V600E mutation (HR 0.58, p=0.041), PD-L1 expression (HR 0.57, p=0.022), and high TMB (HR 0.66, p<0.001) were associated with longer PFS.ConclusionsHigh TMB and PD-L1 expression are predictive for benefit from ICB treatment in oncogene-driven NSCLCs. NSCLC harboring BRAF mutations demonstrated superior benefit from ICB that may be attributed to higher TMB and higher PD-L1 expression in these tumors. Meanwhile EGFR and HER2 mutations and ALK, ROS1, RET, and MET fusions define NSCLC subsets with minimal benefit from ICB despite high PD-L1 expression in NSCLC harboring oncogene fusions. These findings indicate a TMB/PD-L1-independent impact on sensitivity to ICB for certain oncogene alterations.
PDF
