Non-small-cell lung cancer is one of the leading causes of deaths from cancer worldwide. Therefore, improvements in diagnostics and treatments are urgently needed. In this review, we will discuss the ...evolution of lung cancer staging towards more non-invasive, endoscopy-based, and image-based methods, and the development of stage-adapted treatment. A special focus will be placed on the role of novel surgical approaches and modern radiotherapy strategies for early stages of disease, the effect of multimodal treatment in locally advanced disease, and ongoing developments in the treatment of patients with metastatic disease. In particular, we will include an emphasis on targeted therapies, which are based on the assumption that a treatable driver mutation or gene rearrangement is present within the tumour. Finally, the position of lung cancer treatment on the pathway to personalised therapy will be discussed.
Summary Background The efficacy of ceritinib in patients with untreated anaplastic lymphoma kinase ( ALK )-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not known. We assessed the efficacy and ...safety of ceritinib versus platinum-based chemotherapy in these patients. Methods This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study in untreated patients with stage IIIB/IV ALK -rearranged non-squamous NSCLC was done in 134 centres across 28 countries. Eligible patients were assigned via interactive response technology to oral ceritinib 750 mg/day or platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin AUC 5–6 plus pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by maintenance pemetrexed); randomisation was stratified by World Health Organization performance status (0 vs 1–2), previous neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, and presence of brain metastases as per investigator's assessment at screening. Investigators and patients were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was blinded independent review committee assessed progression-free survival, based on all randomly assigned patients (the full analysis set). Efficacy analyses were done based on the full analysis set. All safety analyses were done based on the safety set, which included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01828099. Findings Between Aug 19, 2013, and May 11, 2015, 376 patients were randomly assigned to ceritinib (n=189) or chemotherapy (n=187). Median progression-free survival (as assessed by blinded independent review committee) was 16·6 months (95% CI 12·6–27·2) in the ceritinib group and 8·1 months (5·8–11·1) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio 0·55 95% CI 0·42–0·73; p<0·00001). The most common adverse events were diarrhoea (in 160 85% of 189 patients), nausea (130 69%), vomiting (125 66%), and an increase in alanine aminotransferase (114 60%) in the ceritinib group and nausea (in 97 55% of 175 patients), vomiting (63 36%), and anaemia (62 35%) in the chemotherapy group. Interpretation First-line ceritinib showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced ALK -rearranged NSCLC. Funding Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.
Summary Background Optimum management strategies for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with acquired resistance to EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors are undefined. We aimed to ...assess the efficacy and safety of continuing gefitinib combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with EGFR -mutation-positive advanced NSCLC with acquired resistance to first-line gefitinib. Methods The randomised, phase 3, multicentre IMPRESS study was done in 71 centres in 11 countries in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed, chemotherapy-naive, stage IIIB–IV EGFR -mutation-positive advanced NSCLC with previous disease control with first-line gefitinib and recent disease progression (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by central block randomisation to oral gefitinib 250 mg or placebo once daily in tablet form; randomisation did not include stratification factors. All patients also received the platinum-based doublet chemotherapy cisplatin 75 mg/m2 plus pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 on the first day of each cycle. After completion of a maximum of six chemotherapy cycles, patients continued their randomly assigned treatment until disease progression or another discontinuation criterion was met. All study investigators and participants were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The study has completed enrolment, but patients are still in follow-up for overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01544179. Findings Between March 29, 2012, and Dec 20, 2013, 265 patients were randomly assigned: 133 to the gefitinib group and 132 to the placebo group. At the time of data cutoff (May 5, 2014), 98 (74%) patients had disease progression in the gefitinib group compared with 107 (81%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·65–1·13; p=0·27; median progression-free survival 5·4 months in both groups 95% CI 4·5–5·7 in the gefitinib group and 4·6–5·5 in the placebo group). The most common adverse events of any grade were nausea (85 64% of 132 patients in the gefitinib group and 81 61% of 132 patients in the placebo group) and decreased appetite (65 49% and 45 34%). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or worse were anaemia (11 8% of 132 patients in the gefitinib group and five 4% of 132 patients in the placebo group) and neutropenia (nine 7% and seven 5%). 37 (28%) of 132 patients in the gefitinib group and 28 (21%) of 132 patients in the placebo group reported serious adverse events. Interpretation Continuation of gefitinib after radiological disease progression on first-line gefitinib did not prolong progression-free survival in patients who received platinum-based doublet chemotherapy as subsequent line of treatment. Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy remains the standard of care in this setting. Funding AstraZeneca.
Summary Background The molecular profiling of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for known oncogenic drivers is recommended during routine care. Nationally, however, the ...feasibility and effects on outcomes of this policy are unknown. We aimed to assess the characteristics, molecular profiles, and clinical outcomes of patients who were screened during a 1-year period by a nationwide programme funded by the French National Cancer Institute. Methods This study included patients with advanced NSCLC, who were routinely screened for EGFR mutations, ALK rearrangements, as well as HER2 (ERBB2), KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA mutations by 28 certified regional genetics centres in France. Patients were assessed consecutively during a 1-year period from April, 2012, to April, 2013. We measured the frequency of molecular alterations in the six routinely screened genes, the turnaround time in obtaining molecular results, and patients' clinical outcomes. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01700582. Findings 18 679 molecular analyses of 17 664 patients with NSCLC were done (of patients with known data, median age was 64·5 years range 18–98, 65% were men, 81% were smokers or former smokers, and 76% had adenocarcinoma). The median interval between the initiation of analysis and provision of the written report was 11 days (IQR 7–16). A genetic alteration was recorded in about 50% of the analyses; EGFR mutations were reported in 1947 (11%) of 17 706 analyses for which data were available, HER2 mutations in 98 (1%) of 11 723, KRAS mutations in 4894 (29%) of 17 001, BRAF mutations in 262 (2%) of 13 906, and PIK3CA mutations in 252 (2%) of 10 678; ALK rearrangements were reported in 388 (5%) of 8134 analyses. The median duration of follow-up at the time of analysis was 24·9 months (95% CI 24·8–25·0). The presence of a genetic alteration affected first-line treatment for 4176 (51%) of 8147 patients and was associated with a significant improvement in the proportion of patients achieving an overall response in first-line treatment (37% 95% CI 34·7–38·2 for presence of a genetic alteration vs 33% 29·5–35·6 for absence of a genetic alteration; p=0·03) and in second-line treatment (17% 15·0–18·8 vs 9% 6·7–11·9; p<0·0001). Presence of a genetic alteration was also associated with improved first-line progression-free survival (10·0 months 95% CI 9·2–10·7 vs 7·1 months 6·1–7·9; p<0·0001) and overall survival (16·5 months 15·0–18·3 vs 11·8 months 10·1–13·5; p<0·0001) compared with absence of a genetic alteration. Interpretation Routine nationwide molecular profiling of patients with advanced NSCLC is feasible. The frequency of genetic alterations, acceptable turnaround times in obtaining analysis results, and the clinical advantage provided by detection of a genetic alteration suggest that this policy provides a clinical benefit. Funding French National Cancer Institute (INCa).
Summary Background There is a major unmet need for effective treatments in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. LUX-Lung 8 compared afatinib (an irreversible ErbB family blocker) with ...erlotinib (a reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor), as second-line treatment for patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. Methods We did this open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial at 183 cancer centres in 23 countries worldwide. We enrolled adults with stage IIIB or IV squamous cell carcinoma of the lung who had progressed after at least four cycles of platinum-based-chemotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or erlotinib (150 mg per day) until disease progression. The randomisation was done centrally with an interactive voice or web-based response system and stratified by ethnic origin (eastern Asian vs non-eastern Asian). Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by independent central review (intention-to-treat population). The key secondary endpoint was overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01523587. Findings 795 eligible patients were randomly assigned (398 to afatinib, 397 to erlotinib). Median follow-up at the time of the primary analysis of progression-free survival was 6·7 months (IQR 3·1–10·2), at which point enrolment was not complete. Progression free-survival at the primary analysis was significantly longer with afatinib than with erlotinib (median 2·4 months 95% CI 1·9–2·9 vs 1·9 months 1·9–2·2; hazard ratio HR 0·82 95% CI 0·68–1·00, p=0·0427). At the time of the primary analysis of overall survival (median follow-up 18·4 months IQR 13·8–22·4), overall survival was significantly greater in the afatinib group than in the erloinib group (median 7·9 months 95% CI 7·2–8·7 vs 6·8 months 5·9–7·8; HR 0·81 95% CI 0·69–0·95, p=0·0077), as were progression-free survival (median 2·6 months 95% CI 2·0–2·9 vs 1·9 months 1·9–2·1; HR 0·81 95% CI 0·69–0·96, p=0·0103) and disease control (201 51% of 398 patients vs 157 40% of 397; p=0·0020). The proportion of patients with an objective response did not differ significantly between groups (22 6% vs 11 3%; p=0·0551). Tumour shrinkage occurred in 103 (26%) of 398 patients versus 90 (23%) of 397 patients. Adverse event profiles were similar in each group: 224 (57%) of 392 patients in the afatinib group versus 227 (57%) of 395 in the erlotinib group had grade 3 or higher adverse events. We recorded higher incidences of treatment-related grade 3 diarrhoea with afatinib (39 10% vs nine 2%), of grade 3 stomatitis with afatinib (16 4% vs none), and of grade 3 rash or acne with erlotinib (23 6% vs 41 10%). Interpretation The significant improvements in progression-free survival and overall survival with afatinib compared with erlotinib, along with a manageable safety profile and the convenience of oral administration suggest that afatinib could be an additional option for the treatment of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim.
PDF
