Background
To evaluate the effects of administering chemotherapy following surgery, or following surgery plus radiotherapy (known as adjuvant chemotherapy) in patients with early stage non‐small cell ...lung cancer (NSCLC),we performed two systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of all randomised controlled trials using individual participant data. Results were first published in The Lancet in 2010.
Objectives
To compare, in terms of overall survival, time to locoregional recurrence, time to distant recurrence and recurrence‐free survival:
A. Surgery versus surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy
B. Surgery plus radiotherapy versus surgery plus radiotherapy plus adjuvant chemotherapy
in patients with histologically diagnosed early stage NSCLC.
(2)To investigate whether or not predefined patient subgroups benefit more or less from cisplatin‐based chemotherapy in terms of survival.
Search methods
We supplemented MEDLINE and CANCERLIT searches (1995 to December 2013) with information from trial registers, handsearching relevant meeting proceedings and by discussion with trialists and organisations.
Selection criteria
We included trials of a) surgery versus surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy; and b) surgery plus radiotherapy versus surgery plus radiotherapy plus adjuvant chemotherapy, provided that they randomised NSCLC patients using a method which precluded prior knowledge of treatment assignment.
Data collection and analysis
We carried out a quantitative meta‐analysis using updated information from individual participants from all randomised trials. Data from all patients were sought from those responsible for the trial. We obtained updated individual participant data (IPD) on survival, and date of last follow‐up, as well as details of treatment allocated, date of randomisation, age, sex, histological cell type, stage, and performance status. To avoid potential bias, we requested information for all randomised patients, including those excluded from the investigators' original analyses. We conducted all analyses on intention‐to‐treat on the endpoint of survival. For trials using cisplatin‐based regimens, we carried out subgroup analyses by age, sex, histological cell type, tumour stage, and performance status.
Main results
We identified 35 trials evaluating surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy versus surgery alone. IPD were available for 26 of these trials and our analyses are based on 8447 participants (3323 deaths) in 34 trial comparisons. There was clear evidence of a benefit of adding chemotherapy after surgery (hazard ratio (HR)= 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI)= 0.81 to 0.92, p< 0.0001), with an absolute increase in survival of 4% at five years.
We identified 15 trials evaluating surgery plus radiotherapy plus chemotherapy versus surgery plus radiotherapy alone. IPD were available for 12 of these trials and our analyses are based on 2660 participants (1909 deaths) in 13 trial comparisons. There was also evidence of a benefit of adding chemotherapy to surgery plus radiotherapy (HR= 0.88, 95% CI= 0.81 to 0.97, p= 0.009). This represents an absolute improvement in survival of 4% at five years.
For both meta‐analyses, we found similar benefits for recurrence outcomes and there was little variation in effect according to the type of chemotherapy, other trial characteristics or patient subgroup.
We did not undertake analysis of the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on quality of life and adverse events. Quality of life information was not routinely collected during the trials, but where toxicity was assessed and mentioned in the publications, it was thought to be manageable. We considered the risk of bias in the included trials to be low.
Authors' conclusions
Results from 47 trial comparisons and 11,107 patients demonstrate the clear benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for these patients, irrespective of whether chemotherapy was given in addition to surgery or surgery plus radiotherapy. This is the most up‐to‐date and complete systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta‐analysis that has been carried out.
For patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), the last decade has been characterized by critical progress that has contributed to substantially improved survival. In particular, ...the development of specific antibodies against the programmed death (PD-1) receptor, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), and the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 receptor in the therapeutic strategy of mNSCLC either in first- or in second-line settings have led to unprecedented prolonged survival for a proportion of these patients. Although clinical development of immune checkpoint inhibitors with anti-PD-1 and PD-L1 therapies largely began as monotherapy in the second-line setting, the more recent progress has shifted toward combination approaches in first-line settings as well as the integration of immunotherapy into the clinical paradigm in earlier stages. Today, with the exception of mNSCLC harboring targetable oncogenes, nearly all patients with mNSCLC receive PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy in first-line settings. Here we report the current status of first-line immunotherapy in mNSCLC together with current challenges in selecting the best immunotherapeutic approach for the individual patient.
Summary Lung cancer is the most frequent cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Every year, 1·8 million people are diagnosed with lung cancer, and 1·6 million people die as a result of the ...disease. 5-year survival rates vary from 4–17% depending on stage and regional differences. In this Seminar, we discuss existing treatment for patients with lung cancer and the promise of precision medicine, with special emphasis on new targeted therapies. Some subgroups, eg—patients with poor performance status and elderly patients—are not specifically addressed, because these groups require special treatment considerations and no frameworks have been established in terms of new targeted therapies. We discuss prevention and early detection of lung cancer with an emphasis on lung cancer screening. Although we acknowledge the importance of smoking prevention and cessation, this is a large topic beyond the scope of this Seminar.
Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. In the past decade, significant advances have been made in the science of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Screening ...has been introduced with the goal of early detection. The National Lung Screening Trial found a lung cancer mortality benefit of 20% and a 6.7% decrease in all-cause mortality with the use of low-dose chest computed tomography in high-risk individuals. The treatment of lung cancer has also evolved with the introduction of several lines of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and NTRK mutations. Similarly, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically changed the landscape of NSCLC treatment. Furthermore, the results of new trials continue to help us understand the role of these novel agents and which patients are more likely to benefit; ICIs are now part of the first-line NSCLC treatment armamentarium as monotherapy, combined with chemotherapy, or after definite chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage III unresectable NSCLC. Expression of programmed cell death protein-ligand 1 in malignant cells has been studied as a potential biomarker for response to ICIs. However, important drawbacks exist that limit its discriminatory potential. Identification of accurate predictive biomarkers beyond programmed cell death protein-ligand 1 expression remains essential to select the most appropriate candidates for ICI therapy. Many questions remain unanswered regarding the proper sequence and combinations of these new agents; however, the field is moving rapidly, and the overall direction is optimistic.
Important advancements in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been achieved over the past two decades, increasing our understanding of the disease biology and mechanisms of ...tumour progression, and advancing early detection and multimodal care. The use of small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immunotherapy has led to unprecedented survival benefits in selected patients. However, the overall cure and survival rates for NSCLC remain low, particularly in metastatic disease. Therefore, continued research into new drugs and combination therapies is required to expand the clinical benefit to a broader patient population and to improve outcomes in NSCLC.
Osimertinib is standard-of-care therapy for previously untreated epidermal growth factor receptor (
) mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The efficacy and safety of ...osimertinib as adjuvant therapy are unknown.
In this double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with completely resected
mutation-positive NSCLC in a 1:1 ratio to receive either osimertinib (80 mg once daily) or placebo for 3 years. The primary end point was disease-free survival among patients with stage II to IIIA disease (according to investigator assessment). The secondary end points included disease-free survival in the overall population of patients with stage IB to IIIA disease, overall survival, and safety.
A total of 682 patients underwent randomization (339 to the osimertinib group and 343 to the placebo group). At 24 months, 90% of the patients with stage II to IIIA disease in the osimertinib group (95% confidence interval CI, 84 to 93) and 44% of those in the placebo group (95% CI, 37 to 51) were alive and disease-free (overall hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.17; 99.06% CI, 0.11 to 0.26; P<0.001). In the overall population, 89% of the patients in the osimertinib group (95% CI, 85 to 92) and 52% of those in the placebo group (95% CI, 46 to 58) were alive and disease-free at 24 months (overall hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.20; 99.12% CI, 0.14 to 0.30; P<0.001). At 24 months, 98% of the patients in the osimertinib group (95% CI, 95 to 99) and 85% of those in the placebo group (95% CI, 80 to 89) were alive and did not have central nervous system disease (overall hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.33). Overall survival data were immature; 29 patients died (9 in the osimertinib group and 20 in the placebo group). No new safety concerns were noted.
In patients with stage IB to IIIA
mutation-positive NSCLC, disease-free survival was significantly longer among those who received osimertinib than among those who received placebo. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ADAURA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02511106.).
Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In two phase III trials (CheckMate 017 and CheckMate 057), nivolumab showed an improvement in overall ...survival (OS) and favorable safety versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated, advanced squamous and nonsquamous NSCLC, respectively. We report 5-year pooled efficacy and safety from these trials.
Patients (N = 854; CheckMate 017/057 pooled) with advanced NSCLC, ECOG PS ≤ 1, and progression during or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m
once every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point for both trials was OS; secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Exploratory landmark analyses were investigated.
After the minimum follow-up of 64.2 and 64.5 months for CheckMate 017 and 057, respectively, 50 nivolumab-treated patients and nine docetaxel-treated patients were alive. Five-year pooled OS rates were 13.4% versus 2.6%, respectively; 5-year PFS rates were 8.0% versus 0%, respectively. Nivolumab-treated patients without disease progression at 2 and 3 years had an 82.0% and 93.0% chance of survival, respectively, and a 59.6% and 78.3% chance of remaining progression-free at 5 years, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 8 of 31 (25.8%) nivolumab-treated patients between 3-5 years of follow-up, seven of whom experienced new events; one (3.2%) TRAE was grade 3, and there were no grade 4 TRAEs.
At 5 years, nivolumab continued to demonstrate a survival benefit versus docetaxel, exhibiting a five-fold increase in OS rate, with no new safety signals. These data represent the first report of 5-year outcomes from randomized phase III trials of a programmed death-1 inhibitor in previously treated, advanced NSCLC.
Summary Background Afatinib—an oral irreversible ErbB family blocker—improves progression-free survival compared with pemetrexed and cisplatin for first-line treatment of patients with EGFR ...mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We compared afatinib with gemcitabine and cisplatin—a chemotherapy regimen widely used in Asia—for first-line treatment of Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced NSCLC. Methods This open-label, randomised phase 3 trial was done at 36 centres in China, Thailand, and South Korea. After central testing for EGFR mutations, treatment-naive patients (stage IIIB or IV cancer American Joint Committee on Cancer version 6, performance status 0–1) were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either oral afatinib (40 mg per day) or intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on day 1 and day 8 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 3-week schedule for up to six cycles. Randomisation was done centrally with a random number-generating system and an interactive internet and voice-response system. Randomisation was stratified by EGFR mutation (Leu858Arg, exon 19 deletions, or other; block size three). Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment assignment, but the independent central imaging review group were. Treatment continued until disease progression, intolerable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by independent central review (intention-to-treat population). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01121393. Findings 910 patients were screened and 364 were randomly assigned (242 to afatinib, 122 to gemcitabine and cisplatin). Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the afatinib group (11·0 months, 95% CI 9·7–13·7) than in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group (5·6 months, 5·1–6·7; hazard ratio 0·28, 95% CI 0·20–0·39; p<0·0001). The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the afatinib group were rash or acne (35 14·6% of 239 patients), diarrhoea (13 5·4%), and stomatitis or mucositis (13 5·4%), compared with neutropenia (30 26·5% of 113 patients), vomiting (22 19·5%), and leucopenia (17 15·0%) in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 15 (6·3%) patients in the afatinib group and nine (8·0%) patients in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group. Interpretation First-line afatinib significantly improves progression-free survival with a tolerable and manageable safety profile in Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced lung NSCLC. Afatinib should be considered as a first-line treatment option for this patient population. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim.
In an early-phase study involving patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the response rate was better with nivolumab plus ipilimumab than with nivolumab monotherapy, particularly ...among patients with tumors that expressed programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1). Data are needed to assess the long-term benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with NSCLC.
In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with stage IV or recurrent NSCLC and a PD-L1 expression level of 1% or more in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab alone, or chemotherapy. The patients who had a PD-L1 expression level of less than 1% were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy alone. All the patients had received no previous chemotherapy. The primary end point reported here was overall survival with nivolumab plus ipilimumab as compared with chemotherapy in patients with a PD-L1 expression level of 1% or more.
Among the patients with a PD-L1 expression level of 1% or more, the median duration of overall survival was 17.1 months (95% confidence interval CI, 15.0 to 20.1) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 14.9 months (95% CI, 12.7 to 16.7) with chemotherapy (P = 0.007), with 2-year overall survival rates of 40.0% and 32.8%, respectively. The median duration of response was 23.2 months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 6.2 months with chemotherapy. The overall survival benefit was also observed in patients with a PD-L1 expression level of less than 1%, with a median duration of 17.2 months (95% CI, 12.8 to 22.0) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 12.2 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 14.3) with chemotherapy. Among all the patients in the trial, the median duration of overall survival was 17.1 months (95% CI, 15.2 to 19.9) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 13.9 months (95% CI, 12.2 to 15.1) with chemotherapy. The percentage of patients with grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events in the overall population was 32.8% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 36.0% with chemotherapy.
First-line treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab resulted in a longer duration of overall survival than did chemotherapy in patients with NSCLC, independent of the PD-L1 expression level. No new safety concerns emerged with longer follow-up. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 227 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02477826.).
Highlights • Higher expression of UCA1 is significantly associated with poorer survival time. • UCA1 overexpression enhanced the proliferation and colony formation of NSCLC cells. • ERBB4 is ...upregulated by UCA1 through competitively ‘spongeing’ miR-193a-3p.
PDF
