Liza C. Villaruz

First-Line Nivolumab in Stage IV or Recurrent Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND Nivolumab has been associated with longer overall survival than docetaxel among patients with previously treated non–small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In an open‐label phase 3 trial, we compared first‐line nivolumab with chemotherapy in patients with programmed death ligand 1 (PD‐L1)–positive NSCLC. METHODS We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with untreated stage IV or recurrent NSCLC and a PD‐L1 tumor‐expression level of 1% or more to receive nivolumab (administered intravenously at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight once every 2 weeks) or platinum‐based chemotherapy (administered once every 3 weeks for up to six cycles). Patients receiving chemotherapy could cross over to receive nivolumab at the time of disease progression. The primary end point was progression‐free survival, as assessed by means of blinded independent central review, among patients with a PD‐L1 expression level of 5% or more. RESULTS Among the 423 patients with a PD‐L1 expression level of 5% or more, the median progression‐free survival was 4.2 months with nivolumab versus 5.9 months with chemotherapy (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.45; P=0.25), and the median overall survival was 14.4 months versus 13.2 months (hazard ratio for death, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.30). A total of 128 of 212 patients (60%) in the chemotherapy group received nivolumab as subsequent therapy. Treatment‐related adverse events of any grade occurred in 71% of the patients who received nivolumab and in 92% of those who received chemotherapy. Treatment‐related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 18% of the patients who received nivolumab and in 51% of those who received chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS Nivolumab was not associated with significantly longer progression‐free survival than chemotherapy among patients with previously untreated stage IV or recurrent NSCLC with a PD‐L1 expression level of 5% or more. Overall survival was similar between groups. Nivolumab had a favorable safety profile, as compared with chemotherapy, with no new or unexpected safety signals. (Funded by Bristol‐Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 026 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02041533.)

Clinicopathologic features and outcomes of patients with lung adenocarcinomas harboring BRAF mutations in the Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium

The advent of effective targeted therapy for BRAFV600E‐mutant lung adenocarcinomas necessitates further exploration of the unique clinical features and behavior of advanced‐stage BRAF‐mutant lung adenocarcinomas.

The Clinical Viewpoint: Definitions, Limitations of RECIST, Practical Considerations of Measurement

In selecting an endpoint in clinical trial design, it is important to consider that the endpoint is both reliably measured and clinically meaningful. As such, overall survival (OS) has traditionally been considered the most clinically relevant and convincing endpoint in clinical trial design as long as it is accompanied by preservation in quality of life. However, progression-free survival (PFS) is increasingly more prominent in clinical trial design because of feasibility issues (smaller sample sizes and shorter follow-up). PFS has the advantage of taking into account not only responsive disease, but stable disease as well, an issue of particular importance in the relapsed and refractory setting in which therapies are often associated with a minimal to nil response but may still confer a survival advantage. Finally, PFS has a significant advantage in molecularly selected populations, in whom OS advantages are difficult to detect due to the effects of crossover. With an understanding of the limitations and biases that are introduced with PFS as a primary endpoint, we believe that PFS is not only a viable but also a necessary alternative to OS in assessing the efficacy of selected novel-targeted therapies in molecularly defined cancer populations. Ultimately, the selection of a clinical trial endpoint should not be based on a one-size-fits all approach; rather, it should be based on the specifics of the therapeutic strategy being tested and the population under study. Clin Cancer Res; 19(10); 2629–36. ©2013 AACR.

The prognostic and predictive value of KRAS oncogene substitutions in lung adenocarcinoma

The prognostic and therapeutic implications of the spectrum of v‐Ki‐ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) oncogene substitutions in lung cancer remain poorly understood. The objective of this study was to determine whether KRAS oncogene substitutions differed with regard to prognosis or predictive value in lung adenocarcinoma.

Immunotherapy in lung cancer

Immunotherapy has emerged in recent years as a promising therapeutic approach in lung cancer. Two approaches are of particular interest: immune checkpoint inhibition, which aims to counteract the physiologic mechanisms of immune tolerance co-opted by some tumors, and vaccine therapy, which enables enhanced exposure to tumor antigen. Immune checkpoint therapies include the monoclonal antibody blockade of the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) with ipilimumab, as well as antibody blockade of the programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) receptor and the PD-1 ligand. These immune checkpoint therapies have been evaluated in both non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) with early evidence of activity. Vaccines include antigen specific therapies which induce specific antitumor immunity against relevant tumor-associated antigens. In lung cancer, these include the melanoma-associated antigen-A3 (MAGE-A3), membrane-associated glycoprotein (MUC-1), and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Whole tumor vaccines have also been evaluated in lung cancer and influence the patients immune system to allow recognition of the tumor as foreign creating de novo immunity. This review summarizes the evidence to date for the efficacy and safety of immunotherapies in lung cancer.

Inhibition of DNA repair with MGMT pseudosubstrates: phase I study of lomeguatrib in combination with dacarbazine in patients with advanced melanoma and other solid tumours

Background:The DNA repair protein O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) reverses the O6-methylguanine (O6-meG) lesion induced by dacarbazine. Depletion of MGMT can be achieved using O6-meG pseudosubstrates. Herein, we report the first phase I experience of the novel O6-meG pseudosubstrate lomeguatrib, combined with dacarbazine.Methods:This is a phase I dose-escalation study to determine the maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of lomeguatrib combined with a single dose of dacarbazine on a 21-day schedule.Results:The vast majority of the 41 patients enrolled had metastatic melanoma (36/41) and most had no previous chemotherapy (30/41). The most frequent non-hematological adverse events (AEs) were nausea (52%), and fatigue (42%). The most frequent AEs of grade 3–4 severity were neutropaenia (42%), leukopaenia (17%), and thrombocytopaenia (12%). Only 1 patient had a partial response and 10 patients had stable disease.Conclusion:The RP2D of lomeguatrib was 40 mg orally twice daily for 10 days combined with 400 mg m−2 of dacarbazine IV on day 2. Oral administration of lomeguatrib substantially increases the haematological toxicity of dacarbazine consistent with experience with other O6-meG pseudosubstrates.

Management of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with Oligometastasis

Patients with oligometastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) present a potential opportunity for curative therapy; however, the challenge remains the definitive treatment of their localized disease and ablation of their limited overt metastatic sites of disease. In selecting patients with oligometastatic NSCLC for definitive therapy, proper staging through radiographic studies, including PET and brain MRI, and the pathologic staging of the mediastinal lymph nodes and potential sites of metastatic disease, are critical. With that in mind, the available literature suggests that in highly selected patients with solitary metastases to the brain, adrenals and other organs, long term survival may be achieved with combined definitive therapy of both the primary lung tumor and the solitary metastatic site.

ALK FISH patterns and the detection of ALK fusions by next generation sequencing in lung adenocarcinoma

Break-apart ALK FISH probe is the FDA approved approach for detection of ALK rearrangements in lung carcinoma patients who may benefit from ALK kinase inhibitors. The FISH assay can be technically challenging and difficult to interpret. ALK immunohistochemistry and next generation sequencing have been proposed as alternative approaches. In this study, we compared various ALK –FISH patterns to next –generation sequencing (NGS) for gene fusion detection, ALK immunohistochemistry (IHC) and tumor responses to crizotinib. 72 (4%) of 2116 lung adenocarcinoma were positive by ALK- FISH. Of 28 ALK-FISH positive cases selected for the study, FISH patterns included 15 (54%) cases with split signal, 10 (36%) with single orange signal and 3 (10%) with “mixed pattern”. 12 (80%) cases with split signal and 4 (40%) cases with single orange signal were positive by NGS and IHC, while mixed cases were all negative. Mutation analysis of discordant cases revealed multiple mutations including oncogenic mutations in EGFR, KRAS, BRAF and ATM genes. All discordant cases in groups with split and mixed signal showed a lower number of cells with rearrangement (mean 28.5%; range 20.5-36.9%). No statistically significant association between response to crizotinib and FISH patterns was observed (p=0.73). In contrast, NGS fusion positive cases were associated with more responses to crizotinib than NGS negative cases (p= 0.016). Our study suggests that ALK FISH alone may not be the most reliable assay for detection of ALK gene rearrangements, and probably should be used in parallel with ALK IHC and NGS for detection of gene fusions and mutations.

Management of normal tissue toxicity associated with chemoradiation (primary skin, esophagus, and lung).

Nearly one quarter of patients with lung cancer present with locally advanced disease where concurrent chemoradiotherapy is the current standard of care for patients with good performance status. Cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy consistently showed an improvement in survival compared with sequential chemoradiotherapy, at the expense of an increase in the toxicity profile. Over the past decades, several encouraging biomarkers such as transforming growth factor-beta and radioprotective agents such as amifostine were studied but without reaching approval for patient care. We reviewed the prevalence and risk factors for different adverse effects associated with the combined chemoradiotherapy modality, especially dermatitis, mucositis, esophagitis, and pneumonitis. These adverse effects can further be divided into acute, subacute, and chronic. Dermatitis is usually rare and responds well to topical steroids and usual skin care. Acute esophagitis occurs in 30% of patients and is treated with proton pump inhibitors, promotility agents, local anesthetic, and dietary changes. Radiation pneumonitis is a subacute complication seen in 15% of patients and is usually managed with steroids. Chronic adverse effects such as radiation fibrosis and esophageal stricture occur approximately 6 months after completion of radiation therapy and are usually permanent. In this review, complications of chemoradiotherapy for patients with locally advanced lung cancer are delineated, and approaches to their management are described. Given that treatment interruption is associated with a worse outcome, patients are aggressively treated with a curative intent. Therefore, planning for treatment adverse effects improves patient tolerance, compliance, and outcome.

The Role of Anti-angiogenesis in Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: an Update

Recognition of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway as a key mediator of angiogenesis has led to the clinical study of several VEGF and VEGF receptor (VEGFR) targeted therapies in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). These targeted therapies include neutralizing antibodies to VEGF (bevacizumab and aflibercept) and VEGFR-2 (ramucirumab) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with selectivity for the VEGFRs. Bevacizumab and ramucirumab are associated with survival advantages in the treatment of advanced NSCLC: bevacizumab in the first-line setting in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel and ramucirumab in combination with docetaxel in the second-line setting. The VEGFR-2 TKIs have been associated with responses and improved progression-free survival in selected NSCLC settings; however, this level of activity has thus far been insufficient to confer significant survival advantages. This review will focus on the current state of VEGF targeted therapies in NSCLC.