Christopher G. Azzoli

American Society of Clinical Oncology Treatment of Unresectable Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Guideline: Update 2003

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) previously published evidencebased guidelines for the treatment of unresectable non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [1]. ASCO guidelines are updated periodically by the responsible Expert Panel (Appendix) [2]. For the 2003 update, a methodology similar to that applied in the original ASCO practice guidelines for treatment of unresectable NSCLC was used. Pertinent information published from 1996 through March 2003 was reviewed. The MEDLINE database (1996 through October 2002; National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD) was searched to identify relevant information from the published literature for this update. A series of searches was conducted using the medical subject headings, “carcinoma, non–small-cell lung,” “diagnostic imaging,” “neoplasm staging,” “mediastinoscopy,” “bone neoplasms,” “brain neoplasms,” “liver neoplasms,” “adrenal gland neoplasms,” “non–small-cell lung cancer,” “radionuclide imaging,” “bisphosphonates,” “radiotherapy,” “smoking,” “chemoprevention,” and the text words “chemotherapy,” “bone scan,” “PET,” and “zoledronic acid.” These terms were combined with the study design–related subject headings or text words “meta-analysis” and “randomized controlled trial.” Search results were limited to human studies and English-language articles. The Cochrane Library was searched in October 2002 using the phrase “lung cancer.” Directed searches based on the bibliographies of primary articles were also performed. Randomized trials published in the literature since October 2002, as well as data presented at ASCO Annual Meetings, were added to the evidence for these guidelines at the discretion of members of the Expert Panel. The entire update committee met once to discuss strategy and assign responsibilities for the update. A writing committee subsequently met to further review the literature searches, collate different sections of the update, and refine the manuscript. A draft update was circulated to the full Expert Panel for review and approval. The final document was also reviewed by ASCO’s Health Services Research Committee and the ASCO Board of Directors. Each recommendation from the 1997 guideline is listed below, and is followed by an updated (2003) recommendation, if applicable. “No change” is indicated if a particular recommendation has not been revised. A summary of the evidence follows thereafter. In order to preserve the framework of the 1997 guideline, information and recommendations regarding major topics, such as fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDGPET), have been divided and distributed to the appropriate section of the text. ASCO considers adherence to these guidelines to be voluntary. The ultimate determination regarding their application is to be made by the physician in light of each From the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA.

Bronchioloalveolar Pathologic Subtype and Smoking History Predict Sensitivity to Gefitinib in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE Gefitinib, an inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase, induces radiographic regressions and symptomatic improvement in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Phase II trials suggested female sex and adenocarcinoma were associated with response. We undertook this analysis to identify additional clinical and pathologic features associated with sensitivity to gefitinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS We reviewed medical records, pathologic material, and imaging studies of all 139 NSCLC patients treated on one of three consecutive studies of gefitinib monotherapy performed at our institution. We identified patients experiencing a major objective response and compared their clinical and pathologic features with the others. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed on potential predictive features associated with sensitivity to gefitinib. RESULTS Of 139 patients, 21 (15%; 95% CI, 9% to 21%), experienced a partial radiographic response. Variables identified as significant in univariate analysis included adenocarcinoma versus other NSCLC (19% v 0%; P=.004), adenocarcinoma with bronchioloalveolar features versus other adenocarcinomas (38% v 14%; P<.001), never smoker status versus former/current (36% v 8%; P<.001), and Karnofsky performance status > or =80% versus < or =70% (22% v 8%; P=.03). Multivariable analysis revealed the presence of adenocarcinoma with any bronchioloalveolar features (P=.004) and being a never smoker (P=.006) were independent predictors of response. CONCLUSION Our data suggest that individuals in whom gefitinib is efficacious are more likely to have adenocarcinomas of the bronchioloalveolar subtype and to be never smokers. These observations may provide clues to mechanisms determining sensitivity to this agent and suggest that NSCLC has a different biology in patients who never smoked and those with bronchioloalveolar carcinoma.

Benefits and Harms of CT Screening for Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death. Most patients are diagnosed with advanced disease, resulting in a very low 5-year survival. Screening may reduce the risk of death from lung cancer. OBJECTIVE To conduct a systematic review of the evidence regarding the benefits and harms of lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT). A multisociety collaborative initiative (involving the American Cancer Society, American College of Chest Physicians, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network) was undertaken to create the foundation for development of an evidence-based clinical guideline. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE (Ovid: January 1996 to April 2012), EMBASE (Ovid: January 1996 to April 2012), and the Cochrane Library (April 2012). STUDY SELECTION Of 591 citations identified and reviewed, 8 randomized trials and 13 cohort studies of LDCT screening met criteria for inclusion. Primary outcomes were lung cancer mortality and all-cause mortality, and secondary outcomes included nodule detection, invasive procedures, follow-up tests, and smoking cessation. DATA EXTRACTION Critical appraisal using predefined criteria was conducted on individual studies and the overall body of evidence. Differences in data extracted by reviewers were adjudicated by consensus. RESULTS Three randomized studies provided evidence on the effect of LDCT screening on lung cancer mortality, of which the National Lung Screening Trial was the most informative, demonstrating that among 53,454 participants enrolled, screening resulted in significantly fewer lung cancer deaths (356 vs 443 deaths; lung cancer−specific mortality, 274 vs 309 events per 100,000 person-years for LDCT and control groups, respectively; relative risk, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.93; absolute risk reduction, 0.33%; P = .004). The other 2 smaller studies showed no such benefit. In terms of potential harms of LDCT screening, across all trials and cohorts, approximately 20% of individuals in each round of screening had positive results requiring some degree of follow-up, while approximately 1% had lung cancer. There was marked heterogeneity in this finding and in the frequency of follow-up investigations, biopsies, and percentage of surgical procedures performed in patients with benign lesions. Major complications in those with benign conditions were rare. CONCLUSION Low-dose computed tomography screening may benefit individuals at an increased risk for lung cancer, but uncertainty exists about the potential harms of screening and the generalizability of results.

Cancer Care Ontario and American Society of Clinical Oncology Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Stages I-IIIA Resectable Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Guideline

PURPOSE To determine the role of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy in patients with completely resected stage IA-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS The Cancer Care Ontario Program in Evidence-Based Care and the American Society of Clinical Oncology convened a Joint Expert Panel in August 2006 to review the evidence and draft recommendations for these therapies. RESULTS Available data support the use of adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy in completely resected NSCLC; however, the strength of the data and consequent recommendations vary by disease stage. Adjuvant radiation therapy appears detrimental to survival in stages IB and II, with a possible modest benefit in stage IIIA. CONCLUSION Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is recommended for routine use in patients with stages IIA, IIB, and IIIA disease. Although there has been a statistically significant overall survival benefit seen in several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) enrolling a range of people with completely resected NSCLC, results of subset analyses for patient populations with stage IB disease were not significant, and adjuvant chemotherapy in stage IB disease is not currently recommended for routine use. To date, very few patients with stage IA NSCLC have been enrolled onto RCTs of adjuvant therapy; adjuvant chemotherapy is not recommended in these cases. Evidence from RCTs demonstrates a survival detriment for adjuvant radiotherapy with limited evidence for a reduction in local recurrence. Adjuvant radiation therapy appears detrimental to survival in stage IB and II, and may possibly confer a modest benefit in stage IIIA.

Systemic Therapy for Stage IV Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update

PURPOSE To provide evidence-based recommendations to update the American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on systemic therapy for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS An Update Committee of the American Society of Clinical Oncology NSCLC Expert Panel based recommendations on a systematic review of randomized controlled trials from January 2007 to February 2014. RESULTS This guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous guideline. RECOMMENDATIONS There is no cure for patients with stage IV NSCLC. For patients with performance status (PS) 0 to 1 (and appropriate patient cases with PS 2) and without an EGFR-sensitizing mutation or ALK gene rearrangement, combination cytotoxic chemotherapy is recommended, guided by histology, with early concurrent palliative care. Recommendations for patients in the first-line setting include platinum-doublet therapy for those with PS 0 to 1 (bevacizumab may be added to carboplatin plus paclitaxel if no contraindications); combination or single-agent chemotherapy or palliative care alone for those with PS 2; afatinib, erlotinib, or gefitinib for those with sensitizing EGFR mutations; crizotinib for those with ALK or ROS1 gene rearrangement; and following first-line recommendations or using platinum plus etoposide for those with large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. Maintenance therapy includes pemetrexed continuation for patients with stable disease or response to first-line pemetrexed-containing regimens, alternative chemotherapy, or a chemotherapy break. In the second-line setting, recommendations include docetaxel, erlotinib, gefitinib, or pemetrexed for patients with nonsquamous cell carcinoma; docetaxel, erlotinib, or gefitinib for those with squamous cell carcinoma; and chemotherapy or ceritinib for those with ALK rearrangement who experience progression after crizotinib. In the third-line setting, for patients who have not received erlotinib or gefitinib, treatment with erlotinib is recommended. There are insufficient data to recommend routine third-line cytotoxic therapy. Decisions regarding systemic therapy should not be made based on age alone. Additional information can be found at http://www.asco.org/guidelines/nsclc and http://www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.

2011 Focused Update of 2009 American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update on Chemotherapy for Stage IV Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE An American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) focused update updates a single recommendation (or subset of recommendations) in advance of a regularly scheduled guideline update. This document updates one recommendation of the ASCO Guideline Update on Chemotherapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) regarding switch maintenance chemotherapy. CLINICAL CONTEXT Recent results from phase III clinical trials have demonstrated that in patients with stage IV NSCLC who have received four cycles of first-line chemotherapy and whose disease has not progressed, an immediate switch to alternative, single-agent chemotherapy can extend progression-free survival and, in some cases, overall survival. Because of limitations in the data, delayed treatment with a second-line agent after disease progression is also acceptable. RECENT DATA Seven randomized controlled trials of carboxyaminoimidazole, docetaxel, erlotinib, gefitinib, gemcitabine, and pemetrexed have evaluated outcomes in patients who received an immediate, non-cross resistant alternative therapy (switch maintenance) after first-line therapy. RECOMMENDATION In patients with stage IV NSCLC, first-line cytotoxic chemotherapy should be stopped at disease progression or after four cycles in patients whose disease is stable but not responding to treatment. Two-drug cytotoxic combinations should be administered for no more than six cycles. For those with stable disease or response after four cycles, immediate treatment with an alternative, single-agent chemotherapy such as pemetrexed in patients with nonsquamous histology, docetaxel in unselected patients, or erlotinib in unselected patients may be considered. Limitations of this data are such that a break from cytotoxic chemotherapy after a fixed course is also acceptable, with initiation of second-line chemotherapy at disease progression.

Prognostic and therapeutic implications of EGFR and KRAS mutations in resected lung adenocarcinoma

Background: Somatic mutations in EGFR (exons 19 and 21) and KRAS (exon 2) are found in lung adenocarcinomas and have potential prognostic value in patients with advanced disease. These mutations also have therapeutic significance, as they predict for sensitivity and resistance, respectively, to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. Whether EGFR and KRAS mutations also have an impact on survival in patients who undergo lung resection for curative intent in the absence of targeted therapy has not been established. Methods: We analyzed the clinical characteristics and outcomes data for 296 patients who underwent resection at our institution for stage I–III lung adenocarcinoma. Tumors were assessed for both EGFR and KRAS mutations by established methods. Results: EGFR and KRAS mutations were found in tumors from 40 (14%) and 50 (17%) patients, respectively. Patients with EGFR mutant tumors were more likely to be never smokers (48%), present with stage I disease (88%), and had a 90% (95% confidence interval [CI] 70–97%) 3-year overall survival, whereas patients with KRAS mutant tumors were more likely to be former/current smokers (92%), present with locally advanced disease (40%), and had a 66% (95% CI 48–79%) 3-year overall survival. Conclusions: EGFR and KRAS mutations define distinct molecular subsets of resected lung adenocarcinoma. Because EGFR and KRAS mutations also predict whether tumors are sensitive or resistant, respectively, to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors, they can readily be used in clinical trials to help guide the administration of specific types of adjuvant therapy.

A grading system of lung adenocarcinomas based on histologic pattern is predictive of disease recurrence in stage I tumors.

Currently no objective grading system for pulmonary adenocarcinomas exists. To determine whether specific histologic patterns or combinations thereof could be linked to an objective grading system, the histologic patterns in metastatic tumor deposits was compared with the patterns seen in the corresponding 73 primary tumor to determine whether a specific pattern had higher propensity to metastasize. The concordance of the predominant histologic pattern in the primary tumor and the metastases was of 100% for micropapillary, 86% for solid, 42% for acinar, and 23% for papillary types of adenocarcinoma. Informed by these results, a 3-tier grading system based on the histologic subtypes was established. Grade I, a pattern with low metastatic potential (BAC); Grade II, patterns with intermediate metastatic potential (acinar and papillary); and Grade III, patterns with high metastatic potential (solid and micropapillary). These grades were combined into a number of different scoring systems, whose ability to predict recurrence or death from disease was tested in 366 stage 1 adenocarcinomas. A score based on the 2 most predominant grades was able to stratify patients into low-to-high risk for recurrence or death of disease (P=0.001). The 5-years disease-free survival for patients in the highest score group was of 0.73, compared with 0.84 and 0.92 in the intermediate and lowest score groups. Concordance probability estimate was 0.65 (95% confidence interval 0.57-0.73). Therefore, this scoring system provides valuable information in discriminating patients with different risk of disease-recurrence in a highly homogeneous population of patients with stage I cancer.

EGFR Mutations and ALK Rearrangements Are Associated with Low Response Rates to PD-1 Pathway Blockade in Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis

Purpose: PD-1 inhibitors are established agents in the management of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, only a subset of patients derives clinical benefit. To determine the activity of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors within clinically relevant molecular subgroups, we retrospectively evaluated response patterns among EGFR-mutant, anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive, and EGFR wild-type/ALK-negative patients. Experimental Design: We identified 58 patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Objective response rates (ORR) were assessed using RECIST v1.1. PD-L1 expression and CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) were evaluated by IHC. Results: Objective responses were observed in 1 of 28 (3.6%) EGFR-mutant or ALK-positive patients versus 7 of 30 (23.3%) EGFR wild-type and ALK-negative/unknown patients (P = 0.053). The ORR among never- or light- (≤10 pack years) smokers was 4.2% versus 20.6% among heavy smokers (P = 0.123). In an independent cohort of advanced EGFR-mutant (N = 68) and ALK-positive (N = 27) patients, PD-L1 expression was observed in 24%/16%/11% and 63%/47%/26% of pre–tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) biopsies using cutoffs of ≥1%, ≥5%, and ≥50% tumor cell staining, respectively. Among EGFR-mutant patients with paired, pre- and post-TKI–resistant biopsies (N = 57), PD-L1 expression levels changed after resistance in 16 (28%) patients. Concurrent PD-L1 expression (≥5%) and high levels of CD8+ TILs (grade ≥2) were observed in only 1 pretreatment (2.1%) and 5 resistant (11.6%) EGFR-mutant specimens and was not observed in any ALK-positive, pre- or post-TKI specimens. Conclusions: NSCLCs harboring EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements are associated with low ORRs to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Low rates of concurrent PD-L1 expression and CD8+ TILs within the tumor microenvironment may underlie these clinical observations. Clin Cancer Res; 22(18); 4585–93. ©2016 AACR. See related commentary by Gettinger and Politi, p. 4539

Imatinib mesylate lacks activity in small cell lung carcinoma expressing c-kit protein : A phase II clinical trial

Imatinib inhibits the c‐kit tyrosine kinase, which, accounts for its activity in gastrointestinal stromal tumors. The presence of c‐kit protein expression in small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) tumor specimens, as well as in vitro data supporting the role of c‐kit in autocrine and paracrine growth stimulation specifically in SCLC, provided a rationale for studying imatinib in this disease. The authors conducted a Phase II single‐institution study of imatinib in patients with recurrent SCLC whose tumor specimens expressed c‐kit protein.