Luigi De Petris

Alectinib in Crizotinib-Refractory ALK-Rearranged Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase II Global Study

PURPOSE Crizotinib confers improved progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but progression invariably occurs. We investigated the efficacy and safety of alectinib, a potent and selective ALK inhibitor with excellent CNS penetration, in patients with crizotinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Alectinib 600 mg was administered orally twice daily. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) by central independent review committee (IRC). RESULTS Of the 138 patients treated, 84 patients (61%) had CNS metastases at baseline, and 122 were response evaluable (RE) by IRC. ORR by IRC was 50% (95% CI, 41% to 59%), and the median duration of response (DOR) was 11.2 months (95% CI, 9.6 months to not reached). In 96 patients (79%) previously treated with chemotherapy, the ORR was 45% (95% CI, 35% to 55%). Median IRC-assessed progression-free survival for all 138 patients was 8.9 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 11.3 months). CNS disease control rate was 83% (95% CI, 74% to 91%), and the median CNS DOR was 10.3 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 11.2 months). CNS ORR in 35 patients with baseline measurable CNS lesions was 57% (95% CI, 39% to 74%). Of the 23 patients with baseline CNS metastases (measurable or nonmeasurable) and no prior radiation, 10 (43%) had a complete CNS response. At 12 months, the cumulative CNS progression rate (24.8%) was lower than the cumulative non-CNS progression rate (33.2%) for all patients. Common adverse events were constipation (33%), fatigue (26%), and peripheral edema (25%); most were grade 1 to 2. CONCLUSION Alectinib is highly active and well tolerated in patients with advanced, crizotinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC, including those with CNS metastases.

Predicting Radiation Pneumonitis After Chemoradiation Therapy for Lung Cancer: An International Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Radiation pneumonitis is a dose-limiting toxicity for patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to determine factors predictive of clinically significant pneumonitis. METHODS AND MATERIALS After a systematic review of the literature, data were obtained on 836 patients who underwent CCRT in Europe, North America, and Asia. Patients were randomly divided into training and validation sets (two-thirds vs one-third of patients). Factors predictive of symptomatic pneumonitis (grade ≥2 by 1 of several scoring systems) or fatal pneumonitis were evaluated using logistic regression. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to define risk groups. RESULTS The median radiation therapy dose was 60 Gy, and the median follow-up time was 2.3 years. Most patients received concurrent cisplatin/etoposide (38%) or carboplatin/paclitaxel (26%). The overall rate of symptomatic pneumonitis was 29.8% (n=249), with fatal pneumonitis in 1.9% (n=16). In the training set, factors predictive of symptomatic pneumonitis were lung volume receiving ≥20 Gy (V(20)) (odds ratio [OR] 1.03 per 1% increase, P=.008), and carboplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy (OR 3.33, P<.001), with a trend for age (OR 1.24 per decade, P=.09); the model remained predictive in the validation set with good discrimination in both datasets (c-statistic >0.65). On RPA, the highest risk of pneumonitis (>50%) was in patients >65 years of age receiving carboplatin/paclitaxel. Predictors of fatal pneumonitis were daily dose >2 Gy, V(20), and lower-lobe tumor location. CONCLUSIONS Several treatment-related risk factors predict the development of symptomatic pneumonitis, and elderly patients who undergo CCRT with carboplatin-paclitaxel chemotherapy are at highest risk. Fatal pneumonitis, although uncommon, is related to dosimetric factors and tumor location.

Treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in the elderly: results of an international expert panel.

The best treatment for elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is still debated. To guide clinical management of these patients and suggest the priorities for clinical research in this field, an International Expert Panel met in Naples, Italy, on April 19 to 20, 2004. Results and conclusions based on a review of evidence available in the literature to date are presented in this article. A comprehensive geriatric assessment is recommended to better define prognosis and to predict tolerance to treatment. In the first randomized study dedicated to elderly NSCLC patients, single-agent vinorelbine showed superiority over supportive care alone, both in terms of survival and quality of life. In a large randomized trial, gemcitabine plus vinorelbine failed to show any advantage over either agent alone. Subset analyses suggest that the efficacy of platinum-based combination chemotherapy is similar in fit older and younger patients, with an acceptable increase in toxicity for elderly patients. These data should be interpreted cautiously because retrospective subgroup analyses are encumbered by selection bias; hence, randomized trials dedicated to platinum-based chemotherapy for nonselected elderly patients are warranted. Several promising biologic therapies are under investigation; however, with present data, target-based agents as first-line treatment for elderly NSCLC patients are not yet recommended. Clinical research, with trials specifically designed for elderly patients, is mandatory. With the current evidence, single-agent chemotherapy with a third-generation drug (vinorelbine, gemcitabine, a taxane) should be the recommended option for nonselected elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. Platinum-based chemotherapy is a viable option for fit patients with adequate organ function. Best supportive care remains important, in addition to chemotherapy or as the exclusive option for patients who are unsuitable for more aggressive treatment.

Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

After failure of first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer, many patients remain candidates to receive further antitumor treatment. To guide clinical management of these patients and to suggest priorities for clinical research, an International Panel of Experts met in Naples (Italy) in April 2007. Results and evidence-based conclusions are presented in this article. Single-agent chemotherapy with docetaxel or pemetrexed is the recommended option for unselected patients with performance status 0 to 2 who are candidates for second-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Docetaxel has demonstrated superiority compared with best supportive care. Pemetrexed has been shown to be noninferior to docetaxel, with a more favorable toxicity profile. Erlotinib is effective in pretreated patients, and can be given second-line in patients not suitable or intolerant to chemotherapy, and in all patients as third-line treatment after failure of second-line chemotherapy. Gefitinib failed to show superiority to placebo as second- or third-line treatment, but it has been shown to be noninferior to docetaxel. In selected patients such as lifetime nonsmokers or those of East-Asian ethnicity, erlotinib, or gefitinib (where licensed) may be considered as second-line treatment even if they are fit for chemotherapy. Best supportive care in addition to active treatment remains important for all patients, but may be the exclusive option for patients unsuitable for more aggressive therapy. Further research is mandatory, to find better treatments, and to identify clinical and molecular predictive markers of efficacy, both for chemotherapy and for novel biologic agents.

Recent issues in first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: Results of an International Expert Panel Meeting of the Italian Association of Thoracic Oncology

Platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, randomized trials have recently demonstrated the efficacy of several new drugs (pemetrexed, bevacizumab, cetuximab, erlotinib, gefitinib) in this setting. Hence, the choice of optimal treatment is no longer limited to the different platinum-based doublets. In order to guide clinical management of patients with advanced NSCLC, assess the strengths and limitations of available evidence, and to suggest priorities for clinical research, the Italian Association of Thoracic Oncology organized an International Expert Panel Meeting on the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC, which took place in Sperlonga (Italy) in May 2009. Experts recommended that every effort should be made to obtain adequate tumor tissue before initiating treatment. Tumor histology/cytology subtyping is now important for the correct choice of treatment. In particular, considering efficacy data obtained with pemetrexed and safety concerns with bevacizumab, a division between squamous and non-squamous tumors is necessary. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation analysis, at present, is not recommended in all patients, but should be performed in subgroups of patients characterized by higher prevalence of sensitizing mutations (Asians, never smokers, women, adenocarcinoma). When a mutation is present, first-line treatment with single-agent EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor may be considered. Finally, the potential benefit of maintenance treatment for patients without progression at the end of first-line should be carefully discussed with each patient. Although the number of treatment options for patients with advanced NSCLC has increased recently, their results remain modest and further research is mandatory.

Pooled analysis of CNS response to alectinib in two studies of pretreated patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer

Purpose Alectinib has shown activity in the CNS in phase I and II studies. To further evaluate this activity, we pooled efficacy and safety data from two single-arm phase II studies (NP28761 and NP28673; ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01871805 and NCT01801111, respectively) in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Both studies included patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who had previously received crizotinib; all patients received alectinib 600 mg twice per day. The primary end point in both studies was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed objective response rate (ORR; by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST] version 1.1). Additional end points (all by IRC) included CNS ORR (CORR), CNS disease control rate (CDCR), and CNS duration of response (CDOR). Results One hundred thirty-six patients had baseline CNS metastases (60% of the overall study populations); 50 patients (37%) had measurable CNS disease at baseline. Ninety-five patients (70%) had prior CNS radiotherapy; 55 patients completed the CNS radiotherapy more than 6 months before starting alectinib. Median follow-up time was 12.4 months (range, 0.9 to 19.7 months). For patients with baseline measurable CNS disease, IRC CORR was 64.0% (95% CI, 49.2% to 77.1%), CDCR was 90.0% (95% CI, 78.2% to 96.7%), and median CDOR was 10.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 14.1 months). For patients with measurable and/or nonmeasurable baseline CNS disease, IRC CORR was 42.6% (95% CI, 34.2% to 51.4%), CDCR was 85.3% (95% CI, 78.2% to 90.8%), and median CDOR was 11.1 months (95% CI, 10.3 months to not evaluable). CORR was 35.8% (95% CI, 26.2% to 46.3%) for patients with prior radiotherapy (n = 95) and 58.5% (95% CI, 42.1% to 73.7%) for patients without prior radiotherapy (n = 41). As previously reported, alectinib was well tolerated, regardless of baseline CNS disease. Conclusion Alectinib showed good efficacy against CNS metastases, in addition to systemic activity, in crizotinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC.

Tumor expression of S100A6 correlates with survival of patients with stage I non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND In a previously published in vitro study based on top-down proteomics we found that the calcium-binding proteins S100A6 and S100A4 were affected by exposure to ionizing radiation in a p53-dependent fashion. Both proteins showed post-translational modification changes, and S100A6 also showed increased expression and translocation in response to irradiation. Aim of the present study was to evaluate the expression of S100A6 and S100A4 in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS S100A6 expression on archival tumor cell lysates from 39 patients with radically resected NSCLC was assessed with SELDI-TOF-MS. S100A6 identity was confirmed using a SELDI-based antibody-capture method on lysates from the A549 lung cancer cell line, cell lysates from two freshly prepared NSCLC samples, four plasma samples and one pleural effusion sample. Immunostainings for S100A6, S100A4 and p53 were performed on tissue microarrays containing 103 stage I surgically resected NSCLC cases and 14 normal lung parenchyma specimens. RESULTS The presence of post-translationally modified S100A6 forms was confirmed with SELDI-MS on enriched tumor cell lysates, as well as in plasma and pleural effusion samples. In addition, high S100A6 peak intensity was associated with longer median survival (35 months vs. 18 months for high and low peak intensity, respectively; p=n.s.). The immunohistochemical analysis showed that 25% of tumors were S100A6 positive. S100A6 expression correlated directly with non-squamous histology (p<0.0001) and S100A4 expression (p=0.005), and inversely with p53 expression (p=0.01). S100A6-positive cases showed a trend of longer survival compared with S100A6-negative cases (p=0.07). This difference became significant when the analysis was restricted to p53-negative cases (n=72). In this subgroup of patients, whose tumors likely exhibit a functional p53, S100A6 was an independent prognostic factor of improved survival at multivariate analysis (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.27-0.81, p=0.017). CONCLUSIONS In this study we have validated on clinical material our previous findings on cell lines in terms of S100A6 expression and post-translational modifications pattern in NSCLC. Moreover, the survival results obtained in p53-negative stage I NSCLC cases support the proposed pro-apoptotic function of S100A6 and suggest the hypothesis of a cross regulation between these two proteins.

Use of narrow-range peptide IEF to improve detection of lung adenocarcinoma markers in plasma and pleural effusion.

In this study we applied narrow‐range peptide IEF to plasma or pleural effusion prior to LC/MS/MS. Two methods for narrow‐range IEF were run; IPG strips and free‐flow electrophoresis. Data from this study was compared with cell line data to evaluate the method performance in body fluids. To test the methods potential in quantitative biomarker discovery studies, plasma and pleural effusion from patients with lung adenocarcinoma (n=3) were compared with inflammatory pleuritis (n=3) using iTRAQ quantification. Using narrow‐range IEF on the peptide level we were able to identify and quantify 282 proteins in plasma and 300 proteins in pleural effusion. These body fluid proteomes demonstrated high degree of overlap; however, more proteins significantly differently altered levels related to adenenocarcinoma were found in pleural effusion compared with plasma, suggesting enrichment of lung tissue‐related proteins in pleural effusion. Nine proteins were chosen for initial validation with Western blot, and one protein (NPC2) was chosen for further validation using imunohistochemistry. Overall, the quantitative results from IEF/LC/MS/MS showed good correlation with the results from Western blot and imunohistochemistry, showing the potential of this methodology in quantitative biomarker discovery studies.

Lung cancer proteomics, clinical and technological considerations

The overall survival of lung cancer patients is disappointingly low. This is due to several factors, including the lack of an effective screening strategy to detect tumors at a potentially curable early stage, a marked resistance of lung cancer cells to drug treatment and a still superficial knowledge about the multifactorial cellular networks that are activated or suppressed during cancer progression. Furthermore, the armamentarium of clinicians and researchers in the field does not yet include reliable biomarkers to predict tumor response to treatment and foresee the natural history of the disease. In the present situation, a potential breakthrough is presented by proteomics technologies with the potential to discover relevant biomarkers which can be accurately quantified in multiplexed assays. Proteomics field can also contribute greatly in the understanding of mechanisms in tumor progression and treatment response. In this review we will describe the work that is being done in the field of lung cancer proteomics, focusing on clinically relevant questions that need to be addressed and on the possible applications of novel technologies.

Diagnostic and prognostic role of plasma levels of two forms of cytokeratin 18 in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE Cytokeratin 18 (CK18) can be used as a serum biomarker for carcinoma cell death, whereas caspase-cleaved (ccCK18) fragments reflect tumour apoptosis. We explored the potential diagnostic and prognostic role of circulating CK18 and ccCK18 in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in comparison with Cyfra 21.1, a fragment of cytokeratin 19. METHODS Subject cohorts consisted of 200 healthy blood donors (HBD), 113 patients with benign lung diseases (BLD) and 179 NSCLC cases. Plasma levels of ccCK18, total CK18 and Cyfra 21.1 were determined with ELISA assays. RESULTS Plasma levels of ccCK18 and total CK18 were higher in the NSCLC group compared to the HBD and BLD cohorts (p<0.0001). Using a cut-off of 104 U/L for ccCK18 and 302 U/L for total CK18 (95% specificity in the HBD group) the diagnostic accuracy of both CK18 forms to distinguish between NSCLC and BLD cases was 56%, whereas it was 94% for Cyfra 21.1. Multivariate survival analysis showed that total CK18 was a stronger prognostic factor than both ccCK18 and Cyfra 21.1 (HR 0.64 for low versus high total CK18 levels, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-0.82; p=0.0004) in the entire NSCLC cohort and in 78 patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease treated with chemoradiotherapy or first-line chemotherapy (HR 0.70 95% CI 0.52-0.94; p=0.018). CONCLUSIONS Cyfra 21.1 is a useful diagnostic biomarker for NSCLC. Total CK18 shows a promising potential as prognostic marker in NSCLC patients, independently of the therapeutical intervention. In contrast, ccCK18 was not of prognostic value in NSCLC, suggesting that tumour necrosis is of particular importance in this disease.