Recommendations for radiological diagnosis and assessment of treatment response in lung cancer: a national consensus statement by the Spanish Society of Medical Radiology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology

Unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer: Insights from a Portuguese expert panel

INTRODUCTION

The management of unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is clinically challenging and there is no current consensus on optimal strategies. Herein, a panel of Portuguese experts aims to present practical recommendations for the global management of unresectable stage III NSCLC patients.

METHODS

A group of Portuguese lung cancer experts debated aspects related to the diagnosis, staging and treatment of unresectable stage III NSCLC in light of current evidence. Recent breakthroughs in immunotherapy as part of a standard therapeutic approach were also discussed. This review exposes the major conclusions obtained.

RESULTS

Practical recommendations for the management of unresectable stage III NSCLC were proposed, aiming to improve the pathways of diagnosis and treatment in the Portuguese healthcare system. Clinical heterogeneity of patients with stage III NSCLC hinders the development of single standardised algorithm where all fit.

CONCLUSIONS

A timely diagnosis and a proper staging contribute to the best management of each patient, optimizing treatment tolerance and effectiveness. The expert panel considered chemoradiotherapy as the preferable approach when surgery is not possible. Management of adverse events and immunotherapy as a consolidation therapy are also essential steps for a successful strategy.

Twenty Years On: RECIST as a Biomarker of Response in Solid Tumours an EORTC Imaging Group - ESOI Joint Paper

Response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) v1.1 are currently the reference standard for evaluating efficacy of therapies in patients with solid tumours who are included in clinical trials, and they are widely used and accepted by regulatory agencies. This expert statement discusses the principles underlying RECIST, as well as their reproducibility and limitations. While the RECIST framework may not be perfect, the scientific bases for the anticancer drugs that have been approved using a RECIST-based surrogate endpoint remain valid. Importantly, changes in measurement have to meet thresholds defined by RECIST for response classification within thus partly circumventing the problems of measurement variability. The RECIST framework also applies to clinical patients in individual settings even though the relationship between tumour size changes and outcome from cohort studies is not necessarily translatable to individual cases. As reproducibility of RECIST measurements is impacted by reader experience, choice of target lesions and detection/interpretation of new lesions, it can result in patients changing response categories when measurements are near threshold values or if new lesions are missed or incorrectly interpreted. There are several situations where RECIST will fail to evaluate treatment-induced changes correctly; knowledge and understanding of these is crucial for correct interpretation. Also, some patterns of response/progression cannot be correctly documented by RECIST, particularly in relation to organ-site (e.g. bone without associated soft-tissue lesion) and treatment type (e.g. focal therapies). These require specialist reader experience and communication with oncologists to determine the actual impact of the therapy and best evaluation strategy. In such situations, alternative imaging markers for tumour response may be used but the sources of variability of individual imaging techniques need to be known and accounted for. Communication between imaging experts and oncologists regarding the level of confidence in a biomarker is essential for the correct interpretation of a biomarker and its application to clinical decision-making. Though measurement automation is desirable and potentially reduces the variability of results, associated technical difficulties must be overcome, and human adjudications may be required.

Technical Evaluation of the COBAS EGFR Semiquantitative Index (SQI) for Plasma cfDNA Testing in NSCLC Patients with EGFR Exon 19 Deletions

The cobas^® EGFR Test provides a semiquantitative index (SQI) that reflects the proportion of mutated versus wild-type copies of the EGFR gene in plasma. The significance of SQI as an indirect measure of the variant allele frequency (VAF) or mutated copies/mL remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation of SQI with the VAF and the number of mutated copies/mL obtained by a digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) test in NSCLC samples. The study included 118 plasma samples from a retrospective cohort of 25 stage IV adenocarcinoma patients with EGFR exon 19 deletions (Ex19Del), obtained before and during tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment. Both SQI and VAF and SQI and mutated copies/mL showed the same significant correlation (r² = 0.79, p < 0.00001) across the whole study cohort. We found better correlation in samples collected at the baseline between SQI and VAF (r² = 0.94, p < 0.00001) and SQI and mutated copies/mL (r² = 0.97, p < 0.00001) compared to samples collected during TKI treatment: r² = 0.76; p < 0.00001 for SQI and VAF and r² = 0.75; p < 0.00001 for SQI and mutated copies/mL. The study indicates that SQI is a robust quantitative indirect measure of VAF and the number of mutated copies/mL in plasma from patients with an EGFR Ex19Del mutation. Further studies are desirable to assess the SQI cut-off values related to the clinical status of the patient.

Multidisciplinary consensus statement on the clinical management of patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer

Stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a very heterogeneous disease that encompasses patients with resected, potentially resectable and unresectable tumours. To improve the prognostic capacity of the TNM classification, it has been agreed to divide stage III into sub-stages IIIA, IIIB and IIIC that have very different 5-year survival rates (36, 26 and 13%, respectively). Currently, it is considered that both staging and optimal treatment of stage III NSCLC requires the joint work of a multidisciplinary team of expert physicians within the tumour committee. To improve the care of patients with stage III NSCLC, different scientific societies involved in the diagnosis and treatment of this disease have agreed to issue a series of recommendations that can contribute to homogenise the management of this disease, and ultimately to improve patient care.

Lung cancer staging: a concise update

Diagnosis and clinical staging of lung cancer are fundamental to planning therapy. The techniques for clinical staging, i.e anatomic and metabolic imaging, endoscopies and minimally invasive surgical procedures, should be performed sequentially and with an increasing degree of invasiveness. Intraoperative staging, assessing the magnitude of the primary tumour, the involved structures, and the loco-regional lymphatic spread by means of systematic nodal dissection, is essential in order to achieve a complete resection. In resected tumours, pathological staging, with the systematic study of the resected specimens, is the strongest prognostic indicator and is essential to make further decisions on therapy. In the present decade, the guidelines on lung cancer staging of the American College of Chest Physicians and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons are based on the best available evidence and are widely followed. Recent advances in the classification of the adenocarcinoma of the lung, with the definition of adenocarcinoma in situ, minimally invasive adenocarcinoma and lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma, and the publication of the eighth edition of the tumour, node and metastasis classification of lung cancer, have to be integrated into the staging process. The present review complements the latest guidelines on lung cancer staging by providing an update of all these issues.

Clinical and radiological features driving patient selection for antiangiogenic therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

BACKGROUND

The use of antiangiogenic therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) requires thorough evaluation of patient characteristics in order to avoid potential safety issues, particularly pulmonary haemorrhage (PH). The aim of this consensus by a panel of experts was to identify important criteria for the selection of patients with NSCLC who would benefit from antiangiogenic therapy.

METHODS

Radiologists and oncologists were selected for the expert panel. The nominal group technique (NGT) and the Delphi questionnaire were used for consensus generation. The NGT consisted of four steps, the result of which was used to set the Delphi questionnaire. A final report was generated based on the opinions of the experts from the panel.

RESULTS

An extremely important prerequisite for the evaluation of an antiangiogenic therapeutic approach in patients with NSCLC was thorough clinical and radiological analysis of the relationships between tumour and vascular or anatomical structures (performed in close co-operation by oncologists and radiologists). The panel identified major parameters to be considered before the use of antiangiogenic treatment, collectively agreeing on the relevance of tumour cavitation, vascular infiltration, endobronchial growth and thromboembolism for chest tumour sites, and of the presence of aneurysms, extra-thoracic bleeding, brain metastases or thrombi for extra-thoracic sites. Moreover, a structured report containing information not only on the tumour but also on the general vascular status is essential to guide the treatment choice The experts agreed that tumour localization in the absence of vessel infiltration, cavitation, and the use of antiplatelet therapy are relevant parameters to be assessed, but their presence should not necessarily exclude a patient from receiving antiangiogenic therapy.

CONCLUSION

Close co-operation between oncologists and radiologists in the diagnosis, treatment selection, and assessment of response is essential for ensuring therapeutic appropriateness in the NSCLC setting. It should be noted that neither the use of antiplatelet therapy nor tumour localisation are to be considered as contraindications to antiangiogenic treatment.

Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors for lung cancer: novel agents, biomarkers and paradigms

Despite recent advances, prognosis of patients with advanced lung cancer remains dismal. Owing to a better understanding of the interactions between immune system and tumor cells, immunotherapy has emerged as a promising therapeutic strategy. After the recent approval of nivolumab and the promising results with other immune checkpoint inhibitors, combination strategies are now subject of intensive research. Notwithstanding these successes, immunotherapy still holds significant drawbacks. As the target shifts from tumor cells to the tumor microenvironment, treatment paradigms are changing and several improvements are needed for optimal use in clinical practice. Robust biomarkers for patient selection and a reliable way of evaluating treatment response are high priorities. Herein we review current data on immune checkpoint inhibitors for lung cancer treatment.