Second-line nivolumab in relapsed small-cell lung cancer: CheckMate 331☆

Molecular subtyping dictates therapeutic response to anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy in ES-SCLC

Anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy is recommended as standard of care for patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC); however, there are no reliable biomarkers guiding patient selection and the survival benefit of PD-L1 inhibitors in the overall population is limited. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed a total number of 61 cases of ES-SCLC who underwent anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy. Patient demographic characteristics and laboratory findings were processed for univariate and multivariate analysis. Subgrouping of SCLC was performed on IHC platform using antibodies against ASCL1, NEUROD1 and POU2F3. The tumor microenvironment (TME) of ES-SCLC was evaluated by CD8 + T cell infiltration, granzyme B production and PD-L1 expression. We found limited efficacy of defined variable factors conferring therapeutic outcomes of anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy in patients with ES-SCLC. Intriguingly, there was a profound difference in TME and response to anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy when classifying SCLC into A/N/P/I subgroups. Although accounted for a small proportion of SCLC, the SCLC-P and SCLC-I subtypes manifested as T cell-enriched "hot" tumor and elicited more favorable response to immunotherapy, whereas the SCLC-A and SCLC-N subgroups were T cell-absent "cold" tumor. There was also a significant difference in progression free survival and overall survival across these subsets. Moreover, we found the SCLC-P and SCLC-I tumors revealed features of low neuroendocrine (NE) differentiation and showed clinicopathologic features overlapping with the SCLC non-NE lineage. These findings may aid clinicians to select ES-SCLC patients who were more likely to gain higher response rate and longer survival to anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy. Revisiting SCLC according to A/N/P/I subtyping and NE/non-NE differentiation is a reliable approach to guide therapeutic strategy in patients with ES-SCLC.

Engineered exosomes: a promising drug delivery platform with therapeutic potential

Exosomes, small membranous vesicles naturally secreted by living cells, have garnered attention for their role in intercellular communication and therapeutic potential. Their low immunogenicity, high biocompatibility, and efficient biological barrier penetration make them promising drug delivery vehicles. This review spans research developments from 2010 to 2025, covering the engineering of exosomes to optimize cargo loading and targeting specificity. We discuss their applications in treating cardiovascular diseases, liver fibrosis, immune diseases, and neurological diseases, alongside ongoing clinical trials and industry progress. Future challenges include scalability, standardization, and minimizing off-target effects. We propose strategies to address these hurdles, such as bioengineering techniques and improved isolation methods. By synthesizing current knowledge and outlining future directions, this review aims to guide researchers toward harnessing exosomes for disease treatment.

Outcome of temozolomide in relapsed small cell lung cancer: A retrospective single center analysis

OBJECTIVES

Extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC) has a dismal prognosis. Despite initial responsiveness to first-line platinum-etoposide chemotherapy, most patients relapse within six months. Managing disease progression, particularly in platinum-resistant or refractory cases, remains challenging. Topotecan is the only drug approved in the European Union for the second-line treatment of SCLC but is associated with modest clinical activity and high rates of hematological toxicities. Temozolomide, an oral alkylating agent, has been investigated as a viable alternative for treating relapsed SCLC. This study presents the largest real-world cohort of SCLC-patients treated with temozolomide.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with relapsed SCLC treated with temozolomide at a single academic hospital in Belgium. Temozolomide was administered at a fixed dose of 250 mg orally once daily on days 1-5 of each 28-day cycle. Data on activity (overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), median progression-free survival (mPFS) and median overall survival (mOS)) and safety (treatment related adverse events (TRAE)) were collected.

RESULTS

Between February 2011 and May 2023, a total of 48 patients with relapsed SCLC were treated with temozolomide of which 47 patients, median age 61 years, were included in this real-world analysis. The majority of the patients were heavily pretreated with 57.4 % having received two or more prior systemic therapies. An objective response was observed in 14.9 % and the DCR was 23.4 %. The median PFS was 1.7 months (95 % CI 1.5-1.9) and the median OS was 3.2 months (95 % CI 2.3-4.1). Grade 3-4 TRAEs occurred in 34 % of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Temozolomide demonstrated modest clinical activity in this real-world effectiveness analysis of patients with relapsed SCLC. Nevertheless, given its comparable response rate and milder toxicity profile compared to topotecan, temozolomide should be considered as a viable alternative to topotecan for treating relapsed SCLC.

A Population Survival Kinetics Assessment of Extensive Small Cell Lung Cancer and Rationale for Maintenance Therapy

Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) curves generally approximate first-order kinetics. On log-linear plots, convex curves with downward inflection (indicating late acceleration of progression/death) might arise from stopping effective therapies. We digitized published PFS/OS curves for etoposide/platinum-treated extensive small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) and other malignancies and replotted the curves log-linearly. Of 26 SCLC PFS curves, 21 (81%) were highly convex (with a marked late down-turn), and 26 (100%) were moderately or highly convex vs. 35/888 (4%) highly convex and 186 (21%) moderately/highly convex curves for other cancers (p < 0.0001). For SCLC, all 32 OS curves were moderately or highly convex vs. 87/363 (24%) that were moderately/highly convex for other cancers (p < 0.0001). The SCLC PFS curves had an initial downward inflection at a median of 3.1 months (around the completion of first-line chemotherapy), then a second inflection at 5.4 months, with further acceleration of progression. The median PFS half-life was 11.9 months while receiving treatment vs. 1.7 months after the second inflection point. Immunotherapy benefit appeared to be limited to 6-10% of the population. SCLC PFS/OS curves are more often convex than for other cancers, reflecting SCLC chemotherapy sensitivity but rapid progression following the completion of first-line chemotherapy. Effective maintenance strategies are needed.

Current and future therapies for small cell lung carcinoma

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive malignancy characterized by rapid proliferation and high metastatic potential. It is characterized by universal inactivation of and RB1, overexpression of the MYC family and dysregulation of multiple oncogenic signaling pathways. Among different patients, SCLCs are similar at the genetic level but exhibit significant heterogeneity at the molecular level. The classification of SCLC has evolved from a simple neuroendocrine (NE)/non-neuroendocrine (non-NE) classification system to a transcription factor-based molecular subtype system; lineage plasticity adds further complexity and poses challenges for therapeutic development. While SCLC is initially sensitive to platinum-based chemotherapy, resistance develops rapidly, leading to a dismal prognosis. Various antibodies, including PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and antibody‒drug conjugates, have been introduced into clinical practice or are being evaluated in clinical trials. However, their therapeutic benefits for SCLC patients remain limited. This review summarizes SCLC carcinogenic mechanisms, tumor heterogeneity, and the immune microenvironment of SCLC, with a focus on recent advances in metastasis and resistance mechanisms. Additionally, the corresponding clinical progress in tackling these challenges is discussed.

Advances in adoptive cell therapies in small cell lung cancer

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive tumor characterized by early metastasis and resistance to treatment, making it a prime target for therapeutic investigation. The current standard of care for frontline treatment involves a combination of chemotherapeutic agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), though durability of response remains limited. The genetic heterogeneity of SCLC also complicates the development of new therapeutic options. Adoptive cell therapies show promise by targeting specific mutations in order to increase efficacy and minimize toxicity. There has been significant investigation in three therapeutic classes for application towards SCLC: antibody drug conjugates (ADCs), bispecific T-cell engagers (BiTEs), and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies. This review summarizes the recent advances and challenges in the development of adoptive cell therapies. Genetic targets such as delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3), trophoblast cell surface antigen 2 (Trop2), B7-H3 (CD276), gangliosides disialoganglioside GD2 (GD2) and ganglioside GM2 (GM2) have been found to be expressed in SCLC, which makes them prime targets for therapy development. While investigated therapies such as rovalpituzumab tesirine (Rova-T) have failed, several insights from these trials have led to the development of compelling new agents such as sacituzumab govitecan (SG), ifinatamab deruxtecan (I-DXd), tarlatamab, and DLL3-targeted CAR-T cells. Advancing development of molecular testing and improving targeted approaches remain integral to pushing forward the progress of adoptive cell therapies in SCLC.

Current and future perspectives in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly aggressive and rapidly proliferative malignancy that has historically had limited therapeutic advancements. Recent advancements in the understanding of SCLC have led to attempts at subtyping the disease based on transcription factor characteristics, offering new insights into its biology and potential therapeutic targets. In addition, significant progress has been made in developing treatment regimens, providing new hope for improved patient outcomes. The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as atezolizumab and durvalumab, in combination with traditional chemotherapy, has marked a significant advancement, demonstrating improved overall survival and progression-free survival compared to chemotherapy alone. Despite these advancements, the prognosis for extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC), the more advanced form of SCLC, remains poor, highlighting the critical need for ongoing research and the development of novel therapeutic strategies. New treatment modalities, such as lurbinectedin and anti-Delta-like Canonical Notch Ligand 3 antibodies, are now included in the treatment options for refractory SCLC, and many more treatment strategies involving combination therapies are being studied. Advances in molecular profiling and the identification of biomarkers are aiding in the development of personalized treatment approaches. This review focuses on these recent advancements and emerging strategies in the treatment of ES-SCLC.

Clinical efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors plus anlotinib as secondline or subsequent therapy in extensive stage small cell lung cancer: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Treatments are limited for extensive stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) patients in secondline or subsequent setting. This study aimed to explore the clinical efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) plus anlotinib as secondline or subsequent therapy in ES-SCLC.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 116 patients with ES-SCLC at Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital between January 2019 and March 2024. According to the different therapy regimes, they were divided into three groups, ICI plus anlotinib as secondline or subsequent therapy group (ICI + anlotinib group), single ICI as secondline or subsequent therapy group (single ICI therapy group), single chemotherapy as secondline therapy group (single chemotherapy group). Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare the progression-free survival (PFS) and the overall survival time (OS) among these three groups. Cox regression analysis was used to analyze different factors which correlated to PFS and OS. The adverse events were assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0.

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that patients in ICI + anlotinib group had a longer PFS and OS compared to patients in single ICI therapy group (median PFS [mPFS]: 6.7 months vs. 4.6 months, P = 0.007; median OS [mOS]:12.4 months vs. 8.4 months, P = 0.041) and single chemotherapy group (mPFS: 6.7 months vs. 3.0 months, P < 0.001; mOS: 12.4 months vs. 7.2 months, P = 0.002). The Cox regression analysis showed that the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), liver metastasis, brain metastasis and treatment regimes were independent predictors that affecting the PFS and OS of all the enrolled patients. The common adverse events (AEs) were wleukopenia and fatigue. There was no significant statistical difference in other AEs among the three groups except for leukopenia.

CONCLUSION

ICI + anlotinib as secondline or subsequent therapy has better efficacy than single ICI group and single chemotherapy group and with tolerable toxicities for patients with ES-SCLC.

Lung Cancer Therapy: The Role of Personalized Medicine

Lung cancer is the deadliest cancer worldwide, exhibiting the highest incidence rate among all cancer types. Poor outcomes often characterize this cancer as it is commonly diagnosed in advanced stages due to its unspecific symptoms. After diagnosis, the therapeutic choice is a crucial stage that profoundly affects patients' survival. Treatment choices for lung cancer must be made carefully, acknowledging the histological type and genetic characteristics of the tumor. Non-small cell lung cancer, the most common and complex type, has a high mutational burden, making next-generation sequencing (NGS) essential for identifying specific mutations and guiding treatment. With several approved targeted therapies already available, this approach highlights the critical role of personalized medicine in lung cancer care. Despite the current therapeutic pipeline, research trying to develop new tailored drugs considering individual patient characteristics has evolved over the years. This article aims to outline the current therapeutic approach for each type of lung cancer and present the latest insights into emerging therapies, highlighting the role of personalized medicine in enhancing treatment outcomes and improving patients' quality of life.

Lurbinectedin Plus Pembrolizumab in Relapsed SCLC: The Phase I/II LUPER Study

INTRODUCTION

SCLC has limited second-line treatment options after chemotherapy. We assessed the efficacy and safety of lurbinectedin combined with pembrolizumab in relapsed SCLC patients who had not received prior immunotherapy, aiming to prevent early progression and achieve sustained responses.

METHODS

The LUPER trial (NCT04358237) is a phase I/II, single-arm, open-label, multicenter study. Phase I established the recommended phase II dose. The primary endpoint of phase II was the investigator-confirmed objective response rate. Secondary endpoints included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Patients were categorized as platinum-sensitive (chemotherapy-free interval ≥ 90 d) or platinum-resistant (<90 d).

RESULTS

The recommended phase II dose was 3.2 mg/m2 lurbinectedin and 200 mg pembrolizumab IV every three weeks. Phase II included 28 patients, 50% of whom were platinum-resistant. The objective response rate was 46.4% (95% confidence interval: 27.5-66.1, p < 0.001), including three complete responses, with two complete metabolic responses post-treatment completion at 35 cycles. The median duration of response was 7.8 months, with 40% of patients maintaining responses for 12 months or longer. The median PFS was 4.6 months, and the median OS was 10.5 months. Platinum-sensitive patients had significantly better PFS (8.0 versus 2.8 mo, p = 0.012) and numerically superior OS (15.7 versus 7.1 mo, p = 0.058). Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events occurred in 71.4% of patients, with transient neutropenia being the most common. Immune-related adverse events were consistent with prior pembrolizumab studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Lurbinectedin plus pembrolizumab reported promising efficacy in relapsed SCLC, particularly for platinum-sensitive patients, with a known and manageable safety profile. These results support further exploration of this combination in SCLC treatment.

Therapeutic Applications of Programmed Death Ligand 1 Inhibitors in Small Cell Lung Cancer

Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive cancer with rapid progression, limited treatment success, and high relapse rates. Chemotherapy and radiation are standard treatments but often result in chemoresistance. PD-L1 inhibitors have gained attention for their role in enhancing tumor immunity. Methods: This review summarizes clinical trials involving PD-L1 inhibitors, such as atezolizumab, durvalumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab, in SCLC treatment. Key trials include IMpower133, CASPIAN, KEYNOTE-604, and CheckMate 331, focusing on survival outcomes and treatment efficacy. Results: Studies such as IMpower133 and CASPIAN demonstrate improved overall survival when PD-L1 inhibitors were added to platinum-based chemotherapy. However, outcomes in trials such as KEYNOTE-604 and CheckMate 331 varied, showing the need for refined patient selection. Adverse events (AEs) associated with these treatments were also noted. PD-L1 inhibitors offer promise in SCLC treatment, but efficacy varies across trials and patient groups. Future research should focus on better patient selection and overcoming resistance mechanisms. Addressing immune-related AEs is essential for optimizing treatment strategies.

Candidate Biomarker of Response to Immunotherapy In Small Cell Lung Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Small-cell lung cancer accounts for about 15% of lung cancers with an extremely poor prognosis. The incorporation of immunotherapy to platinum-based chemotherapy offers sustained overall survival benefits and become the standard for the first-line setting of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer. However, only a limited number of patients derive prolonged benefits. Although novel immunomodulatory agents and combination strategies are currently under investigation, identifying patients who are likely to obtain clinical benefits from this therapeutic approach is urgently needed. The modest therapeutic response to immunotherapy can be explained by various mechanisms. Traditional biomarkers do not guide immunotherapeutic decision-making in small-cell lung cancer. Notably, recent progress in the understanding of the molecular typing of small-cell lung cancer based on multi-omics data might bring new sights. This review summarizes the potential biomarkers for small-cell lung cancer immunotherapy based on clinical trials and preclinical studies. Moreover, important constraints in identifying biomarkers for small-cell lung cancer treatment are discussed.

Is nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab more effective for treating lung cancer? a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab and ipilimumab combination immunotherapy has become a standard treatment option for certain cancers. However, the benefits of combination therapy compared to nivolumab monotherapy in lung cancer patients are not entirely clear. We aimed to evaluate whether nivolumab plus ipilimumab improves clinical outcomes in lung cancer patients compared to nivolumab monotherapy.

METHODS

A literature search was performed on PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception until November 2024 to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias, the hazard ratio (HR) was calculated for survival, risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for response rate and safety outcomes, and a random effects model meta-analysis was performed to estimate the safety and efficacy of the treatments.

RESULTS

Seven trials comprising 2134 patients were included. Compared with patients receiving nivolumab monotherapy, non-small cell lung cancer patients who received combination therapy had better progression-free survival (HR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.71; 0.93, P < 0.01, low certainty), and there were no significant differences in overall survival (HR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.86; 1.0, P = 0.31, moderate certainty), or objective response rate (RR = 1.36, 95% CI 0.91; 2.02, P = 0.14 very low certainty). The combination group had a significantly greater risk of grade 3-4 adverse events (RR = 2.77, 95% CI 1.38; 5.56, P < 0.01, low certainty).

CONCLUSION

Although combination treatment significantly improved progression-free survival in NSCLC patients, it was also associated with a greater risk of adverse events and treatment-related mortality than nivolumab monotherapy. The current evidence is insufficient for choosing combination treatment over nivolumab monotherapy.

Association of baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and prognosis in melanoma patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Immunotherapy treatments that target programmed cell death receptor-1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1) have revolutionized the treatment of metastatic melanoma and currently represent the standard first-line treatment for this type of cancer. However, it is still not entirely clear which biomarkers are cost-effective, simple, and highly reliable. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to analyze the predictive value of the baseline neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) regarding disease progression and overall survival of patients with metastatic melanoma undergoing treatment with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies comparing high versus low NLR. We performed the meta-analysis using RStudio v4.4.2 software. A total of 20 studies and 2691 patients were included, all with diagnoses of melanoma. The majority of the individuals were male 2278 (84, 65%). The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) ranged from 5.0 to 44.4 and from 1.8 to 15.0 months, respectively. Compared with the high NLR ratio, the low exposure group achieved better rates of OS [hazard ratio (HR), 2.07; 95% CI, 1.73-2.48; P  < 0.00001; I ² = 47%]. Regarding PFS, there was a statistically significant difference between groups with tendencies toward the low NLR exposure group (HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.39-1.81; P  < 0.00001; I²=31%]. This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed significant lower OS in melanoma patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade who had elevated baseline NLR values. Furthermore, an increased PFS was observed in patients with a lower baseline NLR value. This study highlights NLR as an important prognostic biomarker for patients with metastatic melanoma who are candidates for treatment with PD-1 and PD-L1.

Updated Bayesian network meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of PD-1 versus PD-L1 inhibitors in first-line treatment with chemotherapy for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer

Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety of programmed cell death 1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy (PD-1 + Chemo) and programmed cell death ligand 1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy (PD-L1 + Chemo) for the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).

Methods

We performed a meta-analysis of relevant data using R software, considering overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAES).

Results

PD-1 + Chemo (OS: hazard ratio [HR] 0.71; PFS: HR 0.59) and PD-L1 + Chemo (OS: HR 0.72; PFS: HR 0.73) significantly prolonged survival and did not increase the incidence of grade ≥3 TRAEs compared with chemotherapy. Indirect comparisons showed no significant difference in clinical efficacy (OS: HR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.86-1.1; PFS: HR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.61-1.0) or safety (HR 1.0, 95% CI: 0.93-1.1) between PD-1 + Chemo and PD-L1 + Chemo. Non-cumulative probability ranking plot ranking results showed that PD-1 + Chemo ranked first in OS and PFS. Patients with PD-L1 expression levels < 1%, PD-1 + Chemo showed a trend of disadvantage (OS: HR 1.3; PFS: HR 1.2), whereas for patients with PD-L1 expression levels ≥ 1%, PD-1 + Chemo showed a trend of advantage (OS: HR 0.85; PFS: HR 0.85).

Conclusions

PD-1 + Chemo and PD-L1 + Chemo significantly prolonged OS and PFS in patients with ES-SCLC and did not significantly increase the incidence of grade ≥ 3 TRAES. The efficacy and safety profiles of PD-1 + Chemo and PD-L1 + Chemo appear to be similar.

Immunogenicity of cell death and cancer immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors

While immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has revolutionized the clinical management of various malignancies, a large fraction of patients are refractory to ICIs employed as standalone therapeutics, necessitating the development of combinatorial treatment strategies. Immunogenic cell death (ICD) inducers have attracted considerable interest as combinatorial partners for ICIs, at least in part owing to their ability to initiate a tumor-targeting adaptive immune response. However, compared with either approach alone, combinatorial regimens involving ICD inducers and ICIs have not always shown superior clinical activity. Here, we discuss accumulating evidence on the therapeutic interactions between ICD inducers and immunotherapy with ICIs in oncological settings, identify key factors that may explain discrepancies between preclinical and clinical findings, and propose strategies that address existing challenges to increase the efficacy of these combinations in patients with cancer.

Mechanisms of immunotherapy resistance in small cell lung cancer

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive neuroendocrine tumor with a poor prognosis. Although the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy has modestly improved outcomes, most patients rapidly develop resistance. Resistance to immunotherapy can be broadly categorized into primary resistance and acquired resistance, as proposed by the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) consensus definition. Primary resistance occurs in the setting of failure to respond to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), while acquired resistance develops after initial response. The mechanisms of acquired and primary resistance to ICI are not well understood in SCLC, denoting an area of critical unmet need. Both intrinsic and extrinsic mechanisms play significant roles in immunotherapy resistance. Intrinsic mechanisms include defects in antigen presentation, mutations in key genes, reduced tumor immunogenicity, and epigenetic alterations. Extrinsic mechanisms involve the tumor microenvironment (TME), which is a complex interplay of both tumor- and immunosuppressive immune cells, vasculature, and microbiome. An understanding of these resistance mechanisms is crucial for developing novel therapeutic strategies to advance effective immunotherapy in patients with SCLC, a critical area of unmet need.

Immuno-combined treatment versus radio-combined treatment in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer

Background

Although the approval of immunotherapy in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) has significantly improved the patient's prognosis, synchronous chemoradiotherapy has always been the standard treatment for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC).

Objectives

Immuno-combined and radio-combined therapy in LS-SCLC has been applied in clinical practice, but what is the best for LS-SCLC?

Design

This was a retrospective cohort study.

Methods

Patients with LS-SCLC from January 2019 to December 2023 were retrospectively screened and divided into three groups according to the initial treatment regimen whether included immune-combined and radio-combined treatment. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression were used to analyze the predictors affecting the survival of LS-SCLC, and the progression pattern of patients and the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) were also recorded.

Results

In this study, the median overall survival (OS) was 15.8 months, not yet reached (NR) and NR, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.7, 20.9, and 18.9 months in the immunotherapy combined chemotherapy (N = 34), immune combined chemoradiotherapy (N = 26), and chemoradiotherapy (N = 53) groups, respectively. OS and PFS were significantly prolonged in the radio-combined groups compared with the non-radio-combined group, and there was no significant difference between the radio-combined groups, namely immunotherapy combined chemoradiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy groups. In this study, we also constructed some indexes to predict prognosis for LS-SCLC, derived neutrophil and lymphocyte ratios were significantly associated with worse survival, and systemic inflammatory index and neuron-specific enolase (NSE) levels were significantly associated with shorter PFS. The primary organs of progression remained the lung and brain, the main immune-related AE was hypothyroidism, and the radiation-related AE was pneumonia.

Conclusion

Radiation-combined therapy still plays an important role in LS-SCLC in the era of immunotherapy, and clinicians cannot abandon the use of radiation therapy in the initial treatment plan for LS-SCLC.

Recent treatment patterns and real-world survival following first-line anti-PD-L1 treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The landscape of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) has changed since the 2019 and 2020 approvals of anti-PD-L1 atezolizumab and durvalumab for first-line (1L) treatment in combination with chemotherapy. We studied treatment patterns and real-world overall survival (rwOS) following 1L-3L therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A nationwide electronic health record (EHR)-derived de-identified database was used to describe treatment patterns, characteristics, and survival of patients with extensive-stage (ES)-SCLC by 1L anti-PD-L1 treatment. Patients with ES-SCLC who initiated ≥1 line of systemic therapy from 2013 to 2021, with potential follow-up through 2022, were included.

RESULTS

Among 9952 patients with SCLC, there were 4308 patients with ES-SCLC treated during the study period who met eligibility criteria. Etoposide + platinum (EP) chemotherapy was most common in the 1L, with addition of anti-PD-L1 therapy to most regimens by 2019. Second-line regimens varied by platinum sensitivity status and shifted from topotecan to lurbinectedin over time. Median rwOS following 1L therapy was 8.3 months (95% CI, 7.9-8.8) in those treated with 1L anti-PD-L1 and 8.0 months (95% CI, 7.8-8.2) in those who were not. Following 2L and 3L, median rwOS was 5.6 (95% CI, 4.9-6.3) and 4.9 months (95% CI, 3.4-6.0), respectively, among 1L anti-PD-L1-treated, and 4.5 (95% CI, 4.2-4.9) and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.7-4.5), respectively, among those who were not.

CONCLUSION

Despite the introduction of frontline anti-PD-L1 therapy, survival remains dismal among patients with ES-SCLC treated in the real-world setting.

Combination therapy using low-dose anlotinib and immune checkpoint inhibitors for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer

Background

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of low-dose anlotinib combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors as second-line or later treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).

Methods

The study included 42 patients with ES-SCLC who were treated with low-dose anlotinib combined with programmed cell death protein 1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 inhibitors at Henan Cancer Hospital between March 2019 and August 2022. We retrospectively analyzed the efficacy and safety data for these patients. Indicators assessed included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), the overall response rate (ORR), the disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs). Prognostic factors were identified in univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

Median PFS was 11.0 months (95% CI: 7.868-14.132) and median OS was 17.3 months (95% CI: 11.517-23.083). The ORR was 28.5% and the DCR was 95.2%. Treatment-related AEs were noted in 27 patients (64.3%), the most common of which was thyroid dysfunction (26.2%). Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs were observed in two patients (4.8%).

Conclusions

A combination of low-dose anlotinib and immune checkpoint inhibitors as second-line or later treatment for ES-SCLC may achieve longer PFS and OS and have manageable AEs.

Efficacy and Safety Evaluation of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Combination With Chemotherapy for Extensive Small Cell Lung Cancer: Real-World Evidence

INTRODUCTION

Extensive small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) are currently managed using first-line chemotherapy options, including atezolizumab (Atezo) plus etoposide and carboplatin (CE) or durvalumab (Durva) plus etoposide with either cisplatin (PE) or carboplatin (CE). However, a definitive distinction in therapeutic effects between Atezo and Durva in these regimens remains unestablished.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 100 patients diagnosed with ES-SCLC who received immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as first-line chemotherapy. Among them, 70 were administered Atezo + CE, 12 received Durva + PE, and 18 received Durva + CE. We assessed the efficacy of the two ICIs across various factors.

RESULTS

The progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) did not significantly differ between Atezo + CE and Durva + CE/PE as first-line chemotherapy treatments for SCLC. We observed no significant differences in age, sex, performance status (PS), liver metastasis, bone metastasis, or platinum-based agent usage between the treatment cohorts. However, a marked improvement in PFS and OS was observed in the solitary patient with brain metastasis treated with Atezo + CE.

CONCLUSION

The primary distinction between these treatments was observed in the management of patients with brain metastasis. The literature lacks comparative studies on the effects of first-line ICI treatment on the central nervous system, rendering our findings significant in clinical practice. Despite the retrospective nature of this study and the potential for various biases, we recommend the preferential use of Atezo + CE in patients with brain metastasis to potentially enhance prognosis.

Small cell lung cancer with liver metastases: from underlying mechanisms to treatment strategies

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) represents an aggressive neuroendocrine (NE) tumor within the pulmonary region, characterized by very poor prognoses. Druggable targets for SCLC remain limited, thereby constraining treatment options available to patients. Immuno-chemotherapy has emerged as a pivotal therapeutic strategy for extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC), yet it fails to confer significant efficacy in cases involving liver metastases (LMs) originating from SCLC. Therefore, our attention is directed towards the challenging subset of SCLC patients with LMs. Disease progression of LM-SCLC patients is affected by various factors in the tumor microenvironment (TME), including immune cells, blood vessels, inflammatory mediators, metabolites, and NE substances. Beyond standard immuno-chemotherapy, ongoing efforts to manage LMs in SCLC encompass anti-angiogenic therapy, radiotherapy, microwave ablation (MWA) / radiofrequency ablation (RFA), trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE), and systemic therapies in conjunction with local interventions. Prospective experimental and clinical investigations into SCLC should prioritize precise and individualized approaches to enhance the prognosis across distinct patient cohorts.

A Phase I First-in-Human Study of ABBV-011, a Seizure-Related Homolog Protein 6-Targeting Antibody-Drug Conjugate, in Patients with Small Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

Seizure-related homolog protein 6 (SEZ6) is a novel target expressed in small cell lung cancer (SCLC). ABBV-011, a SEZ6-targeted antibody conjugated to calicheamicin, was evaluated in a phase I study (NCT03639194) in patients with relapsed/refractory SCLC. We report initial outcomes of ABBV-011 monotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ABBV-011 was administered intravenously once every 3 weeks during dose escalation (0.3-2 mg/kg) and expansion. Patients with SEZ6-positive tumors (≥25% of tumor cells with ≥1+ staining intensity by IHC) were preselected for expansion. Safety, tolerability, antitumor activity, and pharmacokinetics were evaluated.

RESULTS

As of August 2022, 99 patients received ABBV-011 monotherapy [dose escalation, n = 36; Japanese dose evaluation, n = 3; dose expansion, n = 60 (1 mg/kg, n = 40)]; the median age was 63 years (range, 41-79 years). Also, 32%, 41%, and 26% of patients received 1, 2, and ≥3 prior therapies, respectively. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached through 2.0 mg/kg. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (50%), nausea (42%), and thrombocytopenia (41%). The most common hepatic treatment-emergent adverse events were increased aspartate aminotransferase (22%), increased γ-glutamyltransferase (21%), and hyperbilirubinemia (17%); two patients experienced veno-occlusive liver disease. The objective response rate was 19% (19/98). In the 1-mg/kg dose-expansion cohort (n = 40), the objective response rate was 25%; the median response duration was 4.2 months (95% confidence interval, 2.6-6.7); and the median progression-free survival was 3.5 months (95% confidence interval, 1.5-4.2).

CONCLUSIONS

ABBV-011 1.0 mg/kg every 3 weeks monotherapy was well tolerated and demonstrated encouraging antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory SCLC. SEZ6 is a promising novel SCLC target and warrants further investigation.

Recent advances in immunotherapy for small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to provide an overview of recent advances in immunotherapy for small cell lung cancer (SCLC), with a focus on the current status of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), novel combination strategies, and key biomarkers.

RECENT FINDINGS

The integration of ICIs into standard chemotherapy has established them as the first-line treatment for extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). The ADRIATIC trial further demonstrated the efficacy of ICI maintenance therapy in limited-stage SCLC. Additionally, combining radiotherapy with ICIs has shown promising synergistic effects, including the abscopal and radscopal effects. Ongoing investigations into the combination of ICIs with targeted therapies, such as antiangiogenic agents and DNA damage response inhibitors, have yielded encouraging preliminary results. Notably, the novel therapeutic agent tarlatamab, the first bispecific DLL3-directed CD3 T-cell engager, has recently received FDA approval for second-line treatment of ES-SCLC. Advances in omics technologies have shed light on the intra-tumor and inter-tumor heterogeneity of SCLC, leading to the identification of new molecular subtypes and biomarkers, thereby paving the way for precision medicine.

SUMMARY

Despite the improved outcomes associated with immunotherapy in SCLC, the overall clinical benefit remains modest. Further preclinical and clinical studies are essential to identify optimal treatment regimens and enhance therapeutic efficacy.

Efficacy and toxicity of lurbinectedin in subsequent systemic therapy of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to systematically analyze the efficacy and toxicity of lurbinectedin as a second-line or subsequent treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).

METHODS

Candidate studies were identified in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, CNKI, and Wanfang databases up to 1 May 2024. Objective remission rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were extracted, respectively. The efficacy and toxicity of lurbinectedin in ES-SCLC were analyzed by meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Six eligible prospective studies were included in this meta-analysis, including 536 patients with ES-SCLC who received second-line or subsequent treatment. In pooled analysis, the ORR of lurbinectedin was 35% (95% confidence interval [CI] 29-41), DCR was 67% (95%CI 58-76), DOR was 5.33 months (95%CI 4.51-6.16), PFS was 3.38 months (95%CI 2.59-4.17), and OS was 7.49 months (95%CI 5.11-9.87). The incidence of AEs and severe adverse events (SAEs) was 92% (95%CI 78-100) and 37% (95%CI 19-57), respectively. The most common AEs were leukopenia, neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia, with incidences of 81% (68-91), 74% (57-88), 73% (35-98) and 57% (46-68), respectively.

CONCLUSION

As a promising alternative for second-line treatment for ES-SCLC, lurbinectedin has a certain level of efficacy and a favorable safety profile. The integration of lurbinectedin with other therapeutic modalities presents an emerging area warranting further investigation.

CAR-T cell therapy: Challenge and opportunity for effective treatment of small cell lung cancer

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a devastating malignancy characterized by rapid metastasis, drug resistance, and frequent recurrence. Owing to the paucity of existing therapeutic options, the prognosis of SCLC remains poor. Recently, the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy has resulted in modest improvements in treatment responses. In this review, we characterize the biological signature of SCLC and outline the obstacles to current treatment, including impaired antigen presentation and T cell infiltration. These obstacles may potentially be overcome by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy. For the first time, we summarize the available data and discuss the future prospects of CAR-T cell therapy for the treatment of SCLC. Given the high heterogeneity and immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment of SCLC, structural modifications of CAR-T cells and combination therapy may be required to elicit a successful antitumor response. Further research, including clinical trials, is needed to determine the suitability of CAR-T cell therapy as a treatment for SCLC.

Clinical Benefits of new Systemic Therapy for Small-Cell Lung Cancer Over Two Decades: A Cross-Sectional Study

INTRODUCTION

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is one of the most lethal malignancies worldwide. This study aimed to examine the clinical benefits of new systemic therapies derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 2002 to 2023 based on the magnitude of clinical benefit scale developed by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO-MCBS).

METHODS

We searched PubMed for Phase 3 RCTs on systemic therapy for SCLC published between January 2002 and December 2023. Therapeutic benefit was graded from 5 to 1 according to the ESMO-MCBS framework, with a score of 4 or 5 representing a meaningful clinical benefit. The statistical power of the trial design was also assessed using ESMO-MCBS.

RESULTS

Sixty-four RCTs with 23 683 participants were eligible for inclusion. The number of RCTs related to molecular targeted therapy or immunotherapy has increased over the years. Among the 62 RCTs for which statistical power could be evaluated, 38 (61.3%) were designed to identify an effect size that would meet the ESMO-MCBS benefit threshold and were less likely to investigate second- or subsequent-line treatment (15.8% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.004), have noninferiority design (0% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.002) and set PFS (0% vs. 16.7%) or response rate (0% vs. 16.7%) as the only primary endpoint (p = 0.002). The ESMO-MCBS framework was applied in 29 RCTs reporting positive results, and only 8 (27.6%) met the threshold for a clinical benefit. The RCTs designed to detect differences that would meet the thresholds were more likely to demonstrate meaningful clinical benefit (87.5% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.099).

CONCLUSION

Most positive SCLC-RCTs did not meet the ESMO-MCBS threshold for meaningful clinical benefits. Strict power calculations should be adopted in the design of future RCTs.

Patients with Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer Harboring Less Than 4 Metastatic Sites May Benefit from Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Rechallenge by Reshaping Tumor Microenvironment

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has prolonged survival in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) as first-line treatment. However, whether ICI rechallenge could bring survival benefit to patients with ES-SCLC following its failure as first-line treatment remains unknown. Therefore, we aim to address the issue and identify the cohort of patients that may derive such benefit.

Methods

Patients with ES-SCLC from both the IMpower133 study and Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute (shanzhong cohort) who failed first-line ICI were included. Kaplan Meier analysis was performed to compare overall survival (OS). Both univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were conducted to identify factors affecting survival. Tumor immune cell infiltration was evaluated by the CIBERSORT algorithm and detected by multiplex immunofluorescence (mIF).

Results

A total of 125 ES-SCLC patients undergoing atezolizumab and 161 patients undergoing ICI as first-line treatment were recruited from IMpower133 and shanzhong cohort. Those receiving ICI rechallenge had a longer OS than those without in IMpower133 (P = 0.08) and shanzhong cohort (P = 0.013). In IMpower133 cohort, subgroup analyses found that patients with <4 metastatic sites derived more survival benefit from atezolizumab (P = 0.008). For patients with ES-SCLC harboring <4 metastatic sites, there was significant OS difference between atezolizumab versus non-atezolizumab as retreatment (P = 0.036). Moreover, for ES-SCLC patients with <4 metastatic sites, atezolizumab improved survival compared with non-atezolizumab (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.457; 95% CI: 0.256-0.817; P = 0.008). These findings were confirmed in shanzhong cohort. Those harboring <4 metastatic sites had fewer M2 macrophage and more CD4 naïve T cells infiltration, which was further confirmed by mIF of ES-SCLC samples from shanzhong cohort.

Conclusion

Our study provides rationale for ICI rechallenge among ES-SCLC patients with <4 metastatic sites, suggesting beneficial outcome by reshaping TME.

Real-world efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with advanced pulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma: a single-center analysis

Background

Immunotherapy blocking programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) has revolutionized the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), but only with limited real-world efficacy data; evidence from immunotherapy for other pulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma (PNEC) is scarce.

Objective

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of receiving PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with advanced PNEC and explore factors related to survival prognosis, providing clues for treatment for patients with advanced PNEC.

Methods

In all, 203 patients with advanced PNEC who received PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors between January 2019 and December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

For the 203 patients, the objective response rate (ORR) was 48.3%, the disease control rate (DCR) was 83.3%, the median PFS (mPFS) was 6.0 months, and the median OS (mOS) was 13.1 months. Among them, the histology was 166 SCLC, 13 large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, and 24 other unspecified PNEC. Histologically, no significant difference was observed in PFS (p = 0.240) or OS (p = 0.845). In first-line (1L) treatment (N = 125), patients received chemoimmunotherapy and had an ORR of 64.8%, DCR of 92.0%, mPFS of 6.6 months, and mOS of 14.9 months. In second-line (2L) or later-line setting, the ORR, DCR, mPFS, and mOS were 21.8%, 69.2%, 4.4, and 9.4 months; immunotherapy plus small-molecule antiangiogenic agents showed significantly greater PFS than immunotherapy monotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy (6.4 vs 1.4 vs 3.7 months, p = 0.041). Patients without liver metastasis had superior PFS (7.0 vs 5.1 months, p < 0.001) and OS (19.2 vs 9.6 months, p < 0.001) than those with liver metastasis.

Conclusion

In clinical practice, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors are effective in patients with advanced PNEC, regardless of the pathological histology. The efficacy of 1L immunochemotherapy is worthy of recognition, and the addition of small-molecule antiangiogenic agents to immunotherapy in 2L or later-line treatment provides a better survival trend.

Design

Retrospective study.

Strategies to Target Chemoradiotherapy Resistance in Small Cell Lung Cancer

Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a lethal form of lung cancer with few treatment options and a high rate of relapse. While SCLC is initially sensitive to first-line DNA-damaging chemo- and radiotherapy, relapse disease is almost universally therapy-resistant. As a result, there has been interest in understanding the mechanisms of therapeutic resistance in this disease. Conclusions: Progress has been made in elucidating these mechanisms, particularly as they relate to the DNA damage response and SCLC differentiation and transformation, leading to many clinical trials investigating new therapies and combinations. Yet there remain many gaps in our understanding, such as the effect of epigenetics or the tumor microenvironment on treatment response, and no single mechanism has been found to be ubiquitous, suggesting a significant heterogeneity in the mechanisms of acquired resistance. Nevertheless, the advancement of techniques in the laboratory and the clinic will improve our ability to study this disease, especially in patient populations, and identify methods to surmount therapeutic resistance.

Recent advances in lung cancer organoid (tumoroid) research (Review)

Lung cancer is the most critical type of malignant tumor that threatens human health. Traditional preclinical models have certain defects; for example, they cannot accurately reflect the characteristics of lung cancer and their development is costly and time-consuming. Through self-organization, cancer stem cells (CSCs) generate cancer organoids that have a structure similar to that of lung cancer tissues, overcoming to some extent the aforementioned challenges, thus enabling them to have broader application prospects. Lung cancer organoid (LCO) development methods can be divided into three broad categories based on the source of cells, which include cell lines, patient-derived xenografts and patient tumor tissue/pleural effusion. There are 17 different methods that have been described for the development of LCOs. These methods can be further merged into six categories based on the source of cells, the pre-treatment method used, the composition of the medium and the culture scaffold. These categories are: i) CSCs induced by defined transcription factors; ii) suspension culture; iii) relative optimal culture medium; iv) suboptimal culture medium; v) mechanical digestion and suboptimal culture medium; and vi) hydrogel scaffold. In the current review, the advantages and disadvantages of each of the aforementioned methods are summarized, and references for supporting studies are cited.

Efficacy and safety of anlotinib plus penpulimab as second-line treatment for small cell lung cancer: A multicenter, open-label, single-arm phase II trial

BACKGROUND

Currently, the need for new therapeutic strategies involving programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibodies in the second-line setting of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is urgent. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anlotinib plus penpulimab as a second-line treatment for patients with SCLC who progressed after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

This study included the patients from Cohort 4 of a single-arm, open-label, multicenter, phase II clinical trial. A safety run-in phase was performed under anlotinib (10/12 mg quaque die [QD], days 1-14) plus penpulimab (200 mg intravenously [IV], day 1) in a 21-day cycle, followed by the formal trial in which the patients received anlotinib (12 mg QD, days 1-14) plus penpulimab (200 mg IV, day 1) in a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint of the safety run-in phase was safety. The primary endpoint of the formal trial phase was the objective response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

From April 28, 2020, to November 24, 2020, 21 patients were enrolled from 11 hospitals, including 2 in the safety run-in phase and 19 in the formal trial phase. In the formal trial phase, the ORR was 42.1% (8/19; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 17.7-66.6%). The median progression-free survival was 4.8 months (95% CI: 2.9-11.3 months), and the median overall survival was 13.0 months (95% CI: 4.6-not applicable [NA] months). The incidence of ≥grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) was 52.4% (11/21), and the incidence of treatment-related serious adverse events (AEs) was 28.6% (6/21). Two AE-related deaths occurred. The most common AEs were hypertension (57.1%, 12/21), hypothyroidism (42.9%, 9/21), and hypertriglyceridemia (38.1%, 8/21).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with SCLC who progressed after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, the second-line anlotinib plus penpulimab treatment demonstrates promising anti-cancer activity and a manageable safety profile, which warrants further investigation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

No. NCT04203719, https://clinicaltrials.gov/.

A simulated trial with reinforcement learning for the efficacy of Irinotecan and Ifosfamide versus Topotecan in relapsed, extensive stage small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

Synthetic data may proxy clinical data. At the absence of direct clinical data, this study aimed to compare Irinotecan and Ifosfamide (II) with Topotecan in synthetic, recurrent small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients within a simulated clinical trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two simulation stages were conducted. Initially, 200 recurrent SCLC cases were simulated to replicate a previous phase 3 trial, testing the utility of Cox proportional hazards model and simulation methodology together, where patients were randomized to receive Cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin, Vincristine (CAV) or Topotecan. In the second stage, 600 recurrent SCLC patients were simulated and randomized to compare Topotecan versus II in terms of overall survival (OAS), using Reinforcement Learning (RL) and Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

CAV versus Topotecan comparison showed no statistical difference in overall survival (hazard ratio (HR): 0.89, 95% CI: 0.67-1.18, P = 0.418), aligning with the original clinical trial. For the Topotecan versus II comparison, the RL framework significantly favored the II arm (mean reward points: 193.43 versus - 251.82, permutation P < 0.0001). Likewise, II arm exhibited superior median OAS compared to Topotecan arm (11.12 versus 6.30 months). HR was 0.44 (95% CI: 0.38-0.52) with P < 0.0001, in favor of II.

CONCLUSION

Artificial trial results for CAV versus Topotecan matched the original trial, confirming indifference of OAS. Additionally, II yielded superior overall survival compared to Topotecan in recurrent SCLC patients. These demonstrate the potential of RL and simulation in conjunction with Cox modelling for similar studies. However, definitive conclusions necessitate a randomized clinical trial between II and Topotecan in this patient cohort.

Anlotinib plus oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 in refractory or relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SALTER TRIAL): a multicenter, single-arm, phase II trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) have few treatment options and dismal overall survival (OS) after failed platinum-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

The eligibility criteria of this phase II clinical trial included patients with measurable disease, age of 18 to 75 years, a confirmed diagnosis of disease progression or recurrence after prior platinum-based chemotherapy with a pathologically proven diagnosis of SCLC. Patients were treated with anlotinib at a dosage of 12 mg once daily (QD) and S-1 at 60 mg twice daily (BID) for 2 weeks, followed by a 1-week treatment-free interval. After six cycles of the above treatment, patients continued the maintenance therapy using S-1 monotherapy at 60 mg/ BID for 2 weeks, followed by a 1-week treatment-free interval until disease progression.

RESULTS

From March 2019 to June 2020, a total of 71 patients were initially assessed for eligibility in this study. Out of these, 52 patients who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled, and 48 patients received at least two doses of the study drug. The median follow-up time was 25.1 months. The ORR was seen in 21 patients (43.8%). The median PFS was 4.5 months (95% CI, 3.5-5.5 months), and the median OS was 5.9 months (95% CI, 4.6-7.3 months). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were thrombocytopenia (16.7%), anemia (14.6%), neutropenia (14.6%), and hypertension (10.4%). No treatment-related death occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of anlotinib with oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 demonstrated notable activity in relapsed or refractory SCLC, showing a favorable ORR and an acceptable, manageable safety profile.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered with ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT03823118) on 3 January 2019.

Advances in predictive biomarkers associated with immunotherapy in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly malignant and poor-prognosis cancer, with most cases diagnosed at the extensive stage (ES). Amidst a landscape marked by limited progress in treatment modalities for ES-SCLC over the past few decades, the integration of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with platinum-based chemotherapy has provided a milestone approach for improving prognosis, emerging as the new standard for initial therapy in ES-SCLC. However, only a minority of SCLC patients can benefit from ICIs, which frequently come with varying degrees of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Therefore, it is crucial to investigate predictive biomarkers to screen potential beneficiaries of ICIs, mitigate the risk of side effects, and improve treatment precision. This review summarized potential biomarkers for predicting ICI response in ES-SCLC, with a primary focus on markers sourced from tumor tissue or peripheral blood samples. The former mainly included PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden (TMB), along with cellular or molecular components related to the tumor microenvironment (TME) and antigen presentation machinery (APM), molecular subtypes of SCLC, and inflammatory gene expression profiles. Circulating biomarkers predominantly comprised circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), circulating tumor cells (CTCs), cytokines, plasma autoantibodies, inflammation-related parameters, and blood TMB. We synthesized and analyzed the research progress of these potential markers. Notably, investigations into PD-L1 expression and TMB have been the most extensive, exhibiting preliminary predictive efficacy in salvage immunotherapy; however, consistent conclusions have yet to be reached across studies. Additionally, novel predictive markers developed based on TME composition, APM, transcriptomic and genomic features provide promising tools for precision immunotherapy. Circulating biomarkers offer the advantages of convenience, non-invasiveness, and a comprehensive reflection of tumor molecular characteristics. They may serve as alternative options for predicting immunotherapy efficacy in SCLC. However, there is a scarcity of studies, and the significant heterogeneity in research findings warrants attention.

Integration of clinical and blood parameters in risk prognostication for patients receiving immunochemotherapy for extensive stage small cell lung cancer: real-world data from two centers

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) had modest advances in the treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in clinical trials, but there is a lack of biomarkers for prognosis in clinical practice.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data from ES-SCLC patients who received ICIs combined chemotherapy from two centers in China, integrated clinical and blood parameters, and constructed risk prognostication for immunochemotherapy. The population was divided into high- and low-risk groups, and the performance of the model was assessed separately in the training and validation cohorts.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty and 43 patients were included in the training and validation groups, respectively. The important predictors were screened including body mass index, liver metastases, coefficient variation of red blood cell distribution width, lactate dehydrogenase, albumin, and C-reactive protein. Predicting 1-year overall survival (OS), the AUC values under ROC for the model under training, internal validation, and external validation were 0.760, 0.732, and 0.722, respectively, and the calibration curve and clinical decision curve performed well. Applied the model to divide patients into low-risk and high-risk groups, and the median OS was 23.7 months and 9.1 months, and the median progression-free survival was 8.2 months and 4.8 months, respectively; furthermore, this ability to discriminate survival was also observed in the validation cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

We constructed a novel prognostic model for ES-SCLC to predict survival employing baseline tumor burden, nutritional and inflammatory parameters, it is easily measured to screen high-risk patient populations.

Lactic acid: The culprit behind the immunosuppressive microenvironment in hepatocellular carcinoma

As a solid tumor with high glycolytic activity, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) produces excess lactic acid and increases extracellular acidity, thus forming a unique immunosuppressive microenvironment. L-lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs) play a very important role in glycolysis. LDH is the key enzyme for lactic acid (LA) production, and MCT is responsible for the cellular import and export of LA. The synergistic effect of the two promotes the formation of an extracellular acidic microenvironment. In the acidic microenvironment of HCC, LA can not only promote the proliferation, survival, transport and angiogenesis of tumor cells but also have a strong impact on immune cells, ultimately leading to an inhibitory immune microenvironment. This article reviews the role of LA in HCC, especially its effect on immune cells, summarizes the progress of LDH and MCT-related drugs, and highlights the potential of immunotherapy targeting lactate combined with HCC.

Phase 2 dose-ranging study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of liposomal irinotecan (LY01610) as a second-line treatment for patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer

Background

This was a multicenter, single-arm dose-ranging phase 2 study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of LY01610, a liposomal irinotecan, at various doses for patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

Methods

This study (NCT04381910) enrolled patients with relapsed SCLC at 10 hospitals across China, who have failed with previous platinum-based treatments. LY01610 was administered at doses of 60 mg/m2, 80 mg/m2, and 100 mg/m2. Primary endpoints were investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) and investigator-assessed duration of response (DoR). Secondary endpoints included investigator-assessed disease control rate (DCR), investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.

Findings

From September 3, 2020 to March 3, 2022, a total of 66 patients were enrolled, with 6, 30, and 30 allocated to the 60 mg/m2, 80 mg/m2, and 100 mg/m2 dose groups, respectively, with 68% (45/66) having a chemotherapy-free interval <90 days. In all 66 patients, the ORR was 32% (21/66, 95% confidence interval [CI], 21-44), with a median DoR of 5.2 months (95% CI, 3.0-8.3). Median PFS and OS were 4.0 (95% CI, 2.9-5.5) and 9.7 (95% CI, 7.2-12.3) months, respectively. The ORR of 60 mg/m2, 80 mg/m2, and 100 mg/m2 dose group were 33% (2/6), 33% (10/30), and 30% (9/30), respectively. The median DoR of 60 mg/m2, 80 mg/m2, and 100 mg/m2 dose group were 4.2 (95% CI, 2.8-not reached), 6.9 (95% CI, 2.5-9.9), and 4.0 (95% CI, 2.7-6.8) months, respectively. The incidence of ≥ grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) in the 60 mg/m2, 80 mg/m2, and 100 mg/m2 dose group were 33% (2/6), 47% (14/30), and 50% (15/30), respectively. The most common ≥ grade 3 TRAEs of all 66 patients were neutropenia (27%), leukopenia (24%) and anemia (15%).

Interpretation

LY01610 exhibited promising clinical efficacy and manageable safety profiles in patients with relapsed SCLC, the 80 mg/m2 dose group had the best benefit-risk ratio.

Funding

This study was supported by Luye Pharma Group Ltd.

Effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors at different treatment time periods on prognosis of patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in treating patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) has brought us new hope, but the real-world outcome is relatively lacking. Our aim was to investigate the clinical use, efficacy, and survival benefit of ICIs in ES-SCLC from real-world data analysis.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of ES-SCLC patients was conducted between 2012 and 2022. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed between groups to evaluate the value of ICIs at different lines of treatment. PFS1 was defined as the duration from initial therapy to disease progression or death. PFS2 was defined as the duration from the first disease progression to the second disease progression or death.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty patients with ES-SCLC were included. We performed landmark analysis, which showed that compared to the second-line and subsequent-lines ICIs-combined therapy group (2SL-ICIs) and non-ICIs group, the first-line ICIs-combined therapy group (1L-ICIs) prolonged OS and PFS1. There was a trend toward prolonged OS in the 2SL-ICIs group than in the non-ICIs group, but the significance threshold was not met (median OS 11.94 months vs. 11.10 months, P = 0.14). A longer PFS2 was present in the 2SL-ICIs group than in the non-ICIs group (median PFS2 4.13 months vs. 2.60 months, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

First-line ICIs plus chemotherapy should be applied in clinical practice. If patients did not use ICIs plus chemotherapy in first-line therapy, the use of ICIs in the second line or subsequent lines of treatment could prolong PFS2.

Small cell lung cancer: emerging subtypes, signaling pathways, and therapeutic vulnerabilities

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a recalcitrant cancer characterized by early metastasis, rapid tumor growth and poor prognosis. In recent decades, the epidemiology, initiation and mutation characteristics of SCLC, as well as abnormal signaling pathways contributing to its progression, have been widely studied. Despite extensive investigation, fewer drugs have been approved for SCLC. Recent advancements in multi-omics studies have revealed diverse classifications of SCLC that are featured by distinct characteristics and therapeutic vulnerabilities. With the accumulation of SCLC samples, different subtypes of SCLC and specific treatments for these subtypes were further explored. The identification of different molecular subtypes has opened up novel avenues for the treatment of SCLC; however, the inconsistent and uncertain classification of SCLC has hindered the translation from basic research to clinical applications. Therefore, a comprehensives review is essential to conclude these emerging subtypes and related drugs targeting specific therapeutic vulnerabilities within abnormal signaling pathways. In this current review, we summarized the epidemiology, risk factors, mutation characteristics of and classification, related molecular pathways and treatments for SCLC. We hope that this review will facilitate the translation of molecular subtyping of SCLC from theory to clinical application.

Small Cell Lung Cancer-An Update on Chemotherapy Resistance

OPINION STATEMENT

Compared to other types of lung cancer, small cell lung cancer (SCLC) exhibits aggressive characteristics that promote drug resistance. Despite platinum-etoposide chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy being the current standard treatment, the rapid development of drug resistance has led to unsatisfactory clinical outcomes. This review focuses on the mechanisms contributing to the chemotherapy resistance phenotype in SCLC, such as increased intra-tumoral heterogeneity, alterations in the tumor microenvironment, changes in cellular metabolism, and dysregulation of apoptotic pathways. A comprehensive understanding of these drug resistance mechanisms in SCLC is imperative for ushering in a new era in cancer research, which will promise revolutionary advancements in cancer diagnosis and treatment methodologies.

Women patients with small-cell lung cancer using immunotherapy in a real-world cohort achieved long-term survival

BACKGROUND

Usage of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has prolonged the overall survival (OS) of patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). In clinical trials, males accounted for a large proportion, leading to the uncertainty of its efficacy in female patients. We therefore conducted this study to explore the efficacy and safety of using ICIs in female patients with ES-SCLC.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled female SCLC patients and subdivided them into two groups. Group A (n = 40) was defined as ES-SCLC patients who received first-line standard chemotherapy with or without ICIs. Group B (n = 47) included relapsed SCLC patients who were administered with second-line therapies. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to calculate survival analysis. Chi-squared tests were used to analyze the incidence of adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Median progression-free survival (PFS) and median OS favored the ICI-contained cohorts (Group A PFS: 8.3 vs. 6.1 months; OS: not reached vs. 11.3 months; Group B PFS: 15.1 vs. 3.3 months; OS: 35.3 vs. 8.3 months), especially in those patients who received second-line immunotherapies. Patients who received immunotherapy had a slightly higher incidence rate of grade ≥3 AEs (Group A: 71.4% vs. 46.2%; Group B: 44.5% vs. 13.2%). Those who developed grade ≥3 AEs in first-line ICIs cohort had a more favorable survival (PFS: 8.3 vs. 3.2 months; OS: not reached vs. 5.1 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggested that female ES-SCLC patients treated with immunotherapy tended to achieve a relatively longer survival. The incidence of AEs (grade ≥3) was higher in women patients receiving ICIs, which requires monitoring more closely.

Facts and Hopes on Cancer Immunotherapy for Small Cell Lung Cancer

Platinum-based chemotherapy plus PD1 axis blockade is the standard of care in the first-line treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Despite the robust and consistent increase in long-term survival with PD1 axis inhibition, the magnitude of the benefit from immunotherapy seems lower than that for other solid tumors. Several immune evasive mechanisms have been shown to be prominently altered in human SCLC, including T-cell exclusion, downregulation of components of the MHC class I antigen processing and presentation machinery, or upregulation of macrophage inhibitory checkpoints, among others. New immunotherapies aiming to target some of these dominant immune suppressive features are being intensively evaluated preclinically and clinically in SCLC. They include strategies to enhance the efficacy and/or reverse features that promote intrinsic resistance to PD1 axis inhibition (e.g., restoring MHC class I deficiency and targeting DNA damage response) and novel immunomodulatory agents beyond T-cell checkpoint blockers (e.g., T cell-redirecting strategies, antibody-drug conjugates, or macrophage checkpoint blockers). Among them, delta-like ligand 3-targeted bispecific T-cell engagers have shown the most compelling preliminary evidence of clinical efficacy and hold promise as therapies that might contribute to further improve patient outcomes in this disease. In this study, we first provide a brief overview of key tumor microenvironment features of human SCLC. Then, we update the current clinical evidence with immune checkpoint blockade and review other emerging immunotherapy strategies that are gaining increasing attention in SCLC. We finally summarize our future perspective on immunotherapy and precision oncology for this disease.

Beyond monotherapy: An era ushering in combinations of PARP inhibitors with immune checkpoint inhibitors for solid tumors

The introduction of PARP inhibitors (PARPis) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has marked a significant shift in the treatment landscape for solid tumors. Emerging preclinical evidence and initial clinical trials have indicated that the synergistic application of PARPis and ICIs may enhance treatment efficacy and potentially improve long-term patient outcomes. Nonetheless, how to identify specific tumor types and molecular subgroups most likely to benefit from this combination remains an area of ongoing research. This review thoroughly examines current studies on the co-administration of PARPis and ICIs across various solid tumors. It explores the underlying mechanisms of action, evaluates clinical efficacy, identifies potential responder populations, and delineates common adverse events alongside strategic management approaches. The aim is to offer a detailed understanding of this combination therapy, potentially guiding future therapeutic strategies for solid tumors.

Association of PD-L1 expression with survival benefit from PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in advanced cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis of phase III randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Whether PD-L1 testing is needed to identify patients receiving PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors is an area of debate.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched for phase III randomized clinical trials. We assessed the heterogeneity of overall survival (OS) between patients with high and low PD-L1 expression using an interaction test.

RESULTS

Seventy studies representing 44791 patients were included. Both the CPS and TPS can predict better survival from anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in patients with high PD-L1 expression. However, only CPS 1 has the ability to select patients who are unlikely to respond to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy, while an OS advantage can be obtained from PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors both in patients with high and low PD-L1 expression defined by CPS 5, CPS 10 and TPS.

CONCLUSION

CPS 1 is recommended to select patients with the likelihood of benefiting from PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors while excluding patients who may not respond.

Oncology's trial and error: Analysis of the FDA withdrawn accelerated approvals

Launched in 1992, the FDA accelerated approval program grants drugs indicated in rare/life threatening diseases the ability to be marketed at a faster pace than through the traditional track. Each manufacturing company presents its drug to the FDA, and within 60 days it will determine if the drug is eligible for this path. Many drugs that were initially approved through this route, subsequently did not demonstrate their clinical benefits. With cancer being a leading cause of death, a vast majority of drugs that have been approved/withdrawn from this pathway are indicated within oncology. There are a wide variety of cancer subtypes and therapeutic target sites that these drugs have been evaluated for. Herein, is an overview of the 17 oncology drugs, spanning 22 cancer-related indications, that had been approved within the accelerated route and subsequently withdrawn.

Big Decisions on Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Focus on Clinical Care Updates and Patient Perspectives

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an uncommon, aggressive high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma, associated with tobacco use. It is a highly chemosensitive disease that initially responds quickly to systemic therapy, although patients with SCLC tend to develop relapse. Although the landscape of SCLC treatment has remained stagnant for many decades, the field has seen notable advances in the past few years, including the use of immunotherapy, the development of further lines of systemic therapy, the refinement of thoracic and intracranial radiotherapy, and-most recently-the promise of more targeted therapies. Patients with SCLC also must face unique psychosocial burdens in their experience with their cancer, distinct from patients with other lung cancer. In this article, we review the latest literature and future directions in the management and investigation of SCLC, as well as the critical decisions that providers and patients must navigate in the current landscape. We also present the perspectives of several patients with SCLC in conjunction with this summary, to spotlight their individual journeys in the context of this challenging disease.

The Evolving Scenario of ES-SCLC Management: From Biology to New Cancer Therapeutics

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive neuroendocrine carcinoma accounting for 15% of lung cancers with dismal survival outcomes. Minimal changes in therapy and prognosis have occurred in SCLC for the past four decades. Recent progress in the treatment of extensive-stage disease (ES-SCLC) has been marked by incorporating immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) into platinum-based chemotherapy, leading to modest improvements. Moreover, few second-line-and-beyond treatment options are currently available. The main limitation for the molecular study of SCLC has been the scarcity of samples, because only very early diseases are treated with surgery and biopsies are not performed when the disease progresses. Despite all these difficulties, in recent years we have come to understand that SCLC is not a homogeneous disease. At the molecular level, in addition to the universal loss of retinoblastoma (RB) and TP53 genes, a recent large molecular study has identified other mutations that could serve as targets for therapy development or patient selection. In recent years, there has also been the identification of new genetic subtypes which have shown us how intertumor heterogeneity exists. Moreover, SCLC can also develop intratumoral heterogeneity linked mainly to the concept of cellular plasticity, mostly due to the development of resistance to therapies. The aim of this review is to quickly present the current standard of care of ES-SCLC, to focus on the molecular landscapes and subtypes of SCLC, subsequently present the most promising therapeutic strategies under investigation, and finally recap the future directions of ongoing clinical trials for this aggressive disease which still remains a challenge.

Uncommon Adverse Events of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review of Case Reports

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to systematically review case reports documenting rare adverse events in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) following the administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify case reports detailing previously unreported adverse drug reactions to ICIs in patients with SCLC. The scope of the literature reviewed was restricted to case studies on SCLC published up to 31 December 2023.

RESULTS

We analyzed twenty-four studies on ICI use for patients with SCLC. There were six reports on atezolizumab, four on durvalumab, and three on adverse events from monotherapy with nivolumab. Reports involving combination treatments were the most frequent, with a total of six, predominantly involving using nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab. Additionally, there was one report each on using pembrolizumab, nofazinilimab, sintilimab, tislelizumab, and toripalimab. We collected detailed information on the clinical course, including patient and disease characteristics, symptoms, treatment for each adverse event, and recovery status. Among the patients included in the case reports, 21 out of 24 (87.5%) had extensive-stage SCLC when initiating ICI therapy, with only 1 patient diagnosed with limited-stage SCLC. Respiratory system adverse events were most common, with seven cases, followed by neurological, endocrinological, and gastroenterological events. Three case reports documented adverse events across multiple systems in a single patient. In most cases, patients showed symptom improvement; however, four studies reported cases where patients either expired without symptom improvement or experienced sequelae.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to develop reliable biomarkers for predicting irAEs continue, with ongoing research to enhance predictive precision. Immunotherapy presents diverse and unpredictable adverse events, underscoring the need for advanced diagnostic tools and a multidisciplinary approach to improve patient management.