What can platinum offer yet in the treatment of PS2 NSCLC patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Near-Complete Response to Osimertinib for Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in a Pretreated Patient Bearing Rare Compound Exon 20 Mutation (S768I + V774M): A Case Report

Third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors are the first-line gold standard in treating advanced non-small-cell lung cancer bearing common EGFR mutations, but data documenting clinical efficacy in uncommon mutations are currently limited. In this paper, we describe the case of a patient bearing uncommon compound EGFR mutations in exon 20, who experienced a near-complete response to third-line Osimertinib, with metabolic complete response of pulmonary, nodal and ostheolytic lesions. This radiological assessment corresponded to an ECOG PS improvement (from three to one) and a substantial clinical benefit for the patients. Out of two mutations, S768I was associated with poor response to third-generation TKI and V774M had unknown clinical significance, highlighting the complexity of the correct management of these kinds of mutations. We reviewed the literature to document the up-to-date preclinical and clinical data concerning third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the treatment of patients bearing uncommon EGFR mutations.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in "Special" NSCLC Populations: A Viable Approach?

Over the last decade, the therapeutic scenario for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has undergone a major paradigm shift. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown a meaningful clinical and survival improvement in different settings of the disease. However, the real benefit of this therapeutic approach remains controversial in selected NSCLC subsets, such as those of the elderly with active brain metastases or oncogene-addicted mutations. This is mainly due to the exclusion or underrepresentation of these patient subpopulations in most pivotal phase III studies; this precludes the generalization of ICI efficacy in this context. Moreover, no predictive biomarkers of ICI response exist that can help with patient selection for this therapeutic approach. Here, we critically summarize the current state of ICI efficacy in the most common "special" NSCLC subpopulations.

Best first-line therapy for people with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, performance status 2 without a targetable mutation or with an unknown mutation status

BACKGROUND

Most people who are newly diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have advanced disease. For these people, survival is determined by various patient- and tumor-related factors, of which the performance status (PS) is the most important prognostic factor. People with PS 0 or 1 are usually treated with systemic therapies, whereas people with PS 3 or 4 most often receive supportive care. However, treatment for people with PS 2 without a targetable mutation remains unclear. Historically, people with a PS 2 cancer are frequently excluded from (important) clinical trials because of poorer outcomes and increased toxicity. We aim to address this knowledge gap, as this group of people represents a significant proportion (20% to 30%) of the total population with newly diagnosed lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the best first-line therapy for advanced lung cancer in people with performance status 2 without a targetable mutation or with an unknown mutation status.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 17 June 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different chemotherapy (with or without angiogenesis inhibitor) or immunotherapy regimens, specifically designed for people with PS 2 only or studies including a subgroup of these people.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. overall survival (OS), 2. health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and 3. toxicity/adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were 4. tumor response rate, 5. progression-free survival, and 6. survival rates at six and 12 months' treatment. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 trials in this review and identified one ongoing trial. Twenty studies compared chemotherapy with different regimens, of which 11 compared non-platinum therapy (monotherapy or doublet) versus platinum doublet. We found no studies comparing best supportive care with chemotherapy and only two abstracts analyzing chemotherapy versus immunotherapy. We found that platinum doublet therapy showed superior OS compared to non-platinum therapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57 to 0.78; 7 trials, 697 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There were no differences in six-month survival rates (risk ratio [RR] 1.00, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.41; 6 trials, 632 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), whereas 12-month survival rates were improved for treatment with platinum doublet therapy (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.97; 11 trials, 1567 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). PFS and tumor response rate were also better for people treated with platinum doublet therapy, with moderate-certainty evidence (PFS: HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.77; 5 trials, 487 participants; tumor response rate: RR 2.25, 95% CI 1.67 to 3.05; 9 trials, 964 participants). When analyzing toxicity rates, we found that platinum doublet therapy increased grade 3 to 5 hematologic toxicities, all with low-certainty evidence (anemia: RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.00 to 3.92; neutropenia: RR 2.75, 95% CI 1.30 to 5.82; thrombocytopenia: RR 3.96, 95% CI 1.73 to 9.06; all 8 trials, 935 participants). Only four trials reported HRQoL data; however, the methodology was different per trial and we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Although evidence is limited, there were no differences in 12-month survival rates or tumor response rates between carboplatin and cisplatin regimens. With an indirect comparison, carboplatin seemed to have better 12-month survival rates than cisplatin compared to non-platinum therapy. The assessment of the efficacy of immunotherapy in people with PS 2 was limited. There might be a place for single-agent immunotherapy, but the data provided by the included studies did not encourage the use of double-agent immunotherapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review showed that as a first-line treatment for people with PS 2 with advanced NSCLC, platinum doublet therapy seems to be preferred over non-platinum therapy, with a higher response rate, PFS, and OS. Although the risk for grade 3 to 5 hematologic toxicity is higher, these events are often relatively mild and easy to treat. Since trials using checkpoint inhibitors in people with PS 2 are scarce, we identified an important knowledge gap regarding their role in people with advanced NSCLC and PS 2.

First-line atezolizumab monotherapy versus single-agent chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer ineligible for treatment with a platinum-containing regimen (IPSOS): a phase 3, global, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

Despite immunotherapy advancements for patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), pivotal first-line trials were limited to patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-1 and a median age of 65 years or younger. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of first-line atezolizumab monotherapy with single-agent chemotherapy in patients ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

This trial was a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled study conducted at 91 sites in 23 countries across Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. Eligible patients had stage IIIB or IV NSCLC in whom platinum-doublet chemotherapy was deemed unsuitable by the investigator due to an ECOG PS 2 or 3, or alternatively, being 70 years or older with an ECOG PS 0-1 with substantial comorbidities or contraindications for platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Patients were randomised 2:1 by permuted-block randomisation (block size of six) to receive 1200 mg of atezolizumab given intravenously every 3 weeks or single-agent chemotherapy (vinorelbine [oral or intravenous] or gemcitabine [intravenous]; dosing per local label) at 3-weekly or 4-weekly cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were conducted in the safety-evaluable population, which included all randomised patients who received any amount of atezolizumab or chemotherapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03191786.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 11, 2017, and Sept 23, 2019, 453 patients were enrolled and randomised to receive atezolizumab (n=302) or chemotherapy (n=151). Atezolizumab improved overall survival compared with chemotherapy (median overall survival 10·3 months [95% CI 9·4-11·9] vs 9·2 months [5·9-11·2]; stratified hazard ratio 0·78 [0·63-0·97], p=0·028), with a 2-year survival rate of 24% (95% CI 19·3-29·4) with atezolizumab compared with 12% (6·7-18·0) with chemotherapy. Compared with chemotherapy, atezolizumab was associated with stabilisation or improvement of patient-reported health-related quality-of-life functioning scales and symptoms and fewer grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (49 [16%] of 300 vs 49 [33%] of 147) and treatment-related deaths (three [1%] vs four [3%]).

INTERPRETATION

First-line treatment with atezolizumab monotherapy was associated with improved overall survival, a doubling of the 2-year survival rate, maintenance of quality of life, and a favourable safety profile compared with single-agent chemotherapy. These data support atezolizumab monotherapy as a potential first-line treatment option for patients with advanced NSCLC who are ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech Inc, a member of the Roche group.

Immunotherapy in advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients with poor performance status: The role of clinical-pathological variables and inflammatory biomarkers

BACKGROUND

The introduction of immunotherapy has improved the prognosis of patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). However, data in poor ECOG Performance Status (PS) patients remain scant due to their exclusion from randomized trials.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed data of patients with advanced NSCLC treated with immunotherapy in two Italian Centers, to evaluate the impact of PS (0-1 vs 2) on disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Chi-square test was used to compare clinical-pathological variables, their impact on survival was evaluated through Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Among 404 patients included, PS was 0 in 137 (33.9 %), 1 in 208 (51.5 %) and 2 in 59 (14.6 %) patients; 143 were female and 90 had squamous NSCLC. Clinical-pathological variables were uniformly distributed except for higher prevalence of liver metastases in patients with poor PS. We found that PS2 patients showed worse outcomes in terms of DCR (21.8 % vs 50.3 %, p = 0.001), PFS [2.0 (95 % CI 1.6-3.0) vs 3.0 (95 % CI 2.7-4.0) months, p < 0.0001] and OS [4.0 (95 % CI 2.8-5.7) vs 13.2 (95 % CI 11.0-15.8) months, p < 0.0001]. PS2 status, negative PDL1 expression and early corticosteroids exposure as well as higher Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio and LDH at baseline were associated with worse outcomes at univariate and multivariable analysis. Subgroup analysis confirmed poor outcomes in PS2 patients with high LDH and concomitant corticosteroid therapies. The incidence of Grade 3/4 adverse events was 11.3 % in PS 0-1 and 10.2 % in PS 2 patients (p = 0.81).

CONCLUSION

Our data confirm reduced efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with poor PS even though a good safety. Despite PS remains the most powerful independent prognostic factor for NSCLC, LDH levels and steroids exposure could support the decision making in PS2 patients.

Treatment of advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer: First line, maintenance and second line - Indian consensus statement update

The management of advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients is becoming increasingly complex with the identification of driver mutations/rearrangements and development/availability of appropriate targeted therapies. In 2017, an expert group of medical oncologists with expertise in treating lung cancer used data from published literature and experience to arrive at practical consensus recommendations on treatment of advanced NSCLC for use by the community oncologists. This was published subsequently in the Indian Journal of Cancer with a plan to be updated annually. The present document is an update to the 2017 document.

Recommendations for detection, prioritization, and treatment of thoracic oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: the THOCOoP cooperative group

The world currently faces a pandemic due to SARS-CoV-2. Relevant information has emerged regarding the higher risk of poor outcomes in lung cancer patients. As such, lung cancer patients must be prioritized in terms of prevention, detection and treatment. On May 7th, 45 experts in thoracic cancers from 11 different countries were invited to participate. A core panel of experts regarding thoracic oncology care amidst the pandemic gathered virtually, and a total of 60 initial recommendations were drafted based on available evidence, 2 questions were deleted due to conflicting evidence. By May 16th, 44 experts had agreed to participate, and voted on each of the 58 recommendation using a Delphi panel on a live voting event. Consensus was reached regarding the recommendations (>66 % strongly agree/agree) for 56 questions. Strong consensus (>80 % strongly agree/agree) was reached for 44 questions. Patients with lung cancer represent a particularly vulnerable population during this time. Special care must be taken to maintain treatment while avoiding exposure.

Treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: The 2019 AIOM (Italian Association of Medical Oncology) clinical practice guidelines

The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the current paper a panel of AIOM experts in the field of thoracic malignancies discussed the available scientific evidences, with the final aim of providing a summary of clinical recommendations, which may guide physicians in their current practice.

Cytotoxic chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer with poor performance status: A retrospective analysis from routine clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Platinum-based combination chemotherapy is recommended as the standard treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its benefit is limited to patients with performance status (PS) of 0 or 1. However, it is not clear whether these benefits apply to patients with poor performance status (PS 2 and above) and there are no predictors of outcome to suggest whom to treat. The patients with poor performance status (PS 2 and above) accounts for a significant portion (up to 30%) of patients of our practice. In this retrospective analysis, we have analyzed our experience of chemotherapy in patients with poor performance status.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of patients of advanced NSCLC with poor PS (ECOG PS 2 or more), treated with chemotherapy from October, 2016 to June, 2018 was done. Patients with driver mutations who were treated with first line tyrosine kinase inhibitors were excluded. Hospital case records were reviewed for baseline characteristics, treatment details, and outcome data. Kaplan-Meier curves were drawn to estimate progression free survival. Log-rank test was used to assess factors affecting survival. Data was analyzed using STATA ver 11 (StataCorp. 2009. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP). P value <0.05 was taken as significant.

RESULT

A total of 96 patients were included in the analysis. The median age of the patients was 62 years (range 30-84 years). Majority (67.7%) was males and 65% patients were smokers (current or former). Patients with ECOG PS (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status) of 2 constituted 64.5% of this cohort and 34 patients (33.5%) had an ECOG PS of 3 or 4. The most common chemotherapy regimen used was combination of weekly paclitaxel (60 mg/m²) and carboplatin (AUC2) in 57.8%. Most patients (64%) could complete 4 or more cycles of chemotherapy, however, 15 patients (15.7%) could receive only 1 cycle. Grade 3⁄4 toxicities were observed in 22 (23%) % patients, which were hematological in most cases (anemia and thrombocytopenia). At least one point improvement in ECOG PS from baseline during chemotherapy was observed in 43 patients (45%) after 4 cycles of chemotherapy. Objective response and disease control rates were 20% and 48.42%, respectively. After a median follows-up of 11.2 months, median progression free survival was 6.3 months (95% confidence interval 5-10.63). On univariate analysis, we found that male sex and use of weekly paclitaxel-carboplatin were associated with better progression-free survival PFS.

CONCLUSION

Systemic chemotherapy in modified doses and schedules in advanced NSCLC patients with PS 2 and above is feasible and may be associated with better symptom palliation with clinical benefit and improved survival.

Heterogeneous tumor features and treatment outcome between males and females with lung cancer (LC): Do gender and sex matter?

Lung cancer (LC) is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, despite a decreasing incidence rate in recent years, especially in men. Most risk factors for LC could be linked to an individual's reproductive system and secondary sex characteristics ('sex-related') and/or to some physical, behavioral and personality traits ('gender-related') peculiar to males rather than females or vice versa. An imbalance of these etiologic factors could explain why some LC features may differ between sexes. For this review, an extended literature data collection was performed, using keywords to identify 'sex/gender' and 'LC'. Differences between genders in LC epidemiology, pathological and molecular characteristics, loco-regional and/or systemic treatments outcome and prognosis were systematically analyzed. The possible predictive role of physio-pathological factors in males and females paves the way for a personalized therapeutic approach, emphasizing the need to include gender as a stratification factor in future clinical trials design.

Pan-Asian adapted Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a CSCO-ESMO initiative endorsed by JSMO, KSMO, MOS, SSO and TOS

The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was published in 2016. At the ESMO Asia Meeting in November 2017 it was decided by both ESMO and the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) to convene a special guidelines meeting immediately after the Chinese Thoracic Oncology Group Annual Meeting 2018, in Guangzhou, China. The aim was to adapt the ESMO 2016 guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences associated with the treatment of metastatic NSCLC cancer in Asian patients. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC representing the oncological societies of China (CSCO), Japan (JSMO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), Singapore (SSO) and Taiwan (TOS). The voting was based on scientific evidence, and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the six participating Asian countries. During the review process, the updated ESMO 2018 Clinical Practice Guidelines for metastatic NSCLC were released and were also considered, during the final stages of the development of the Pan-Asian adapted Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Indian consensus statement for treatment of advanced non small cell lung cancer: First line, maintenance, and second line

The management of advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients is becoming complex with the identification of driver mutations and targeted therapies. The expert group of academic medical oncologists used data from published literature, practical experience to arrive at practical consensus recommendations to treat advanced NSCLC for use by the community oncologists.

Development and validation of a claims-based approach to proxy ECOG performance status across ten tumor groups

Aim: To develop a claims-based prediction model of poor performance status (PS) in commercially insured and Medicare supplemental beneficiaries with cancer. Patients & methods: Retrospective analysis was conducted of electronic medical records (EMR) from community oncology practices linked to MarketScan claims. Multivariable logistic regression predicted PS scores from the EMR using claims-based diagnostic and procedure codes. Results: The study included 8442 patients diagnosed with cancer from 2007 to 2015. Overall, 8.1% of patients had poor EMR-based PS. Bootstrapping results from the final model showed sensitivity and specificity of approximately 75% with a predicted probability cutpoint = 0.078, c-statistic = 0.821 and pseudo-R2 = 0.25. Conclusion: Patients with poor PS can be identified in claims data. This prediction model enables future studies evaluating cancer treatments and outcomes to account for PS.

Addressing the elephant in the room, therapeutic resistance in non-small cell lung cancer, with epigenetic therapies

Like Chinese boxes nesting inside each other, the classification of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is subdivided into smaller and smaller subtypes on the basis of histological and molecular attributes. The latter characterizes NSCLC by its molecular alterations and the identification of inhibitors that target these cancer-specific "driver" mutations. Despite the initial promise of precision-guided therapies to inhibit a finer and finer array of molecular subcategories, despite even the curative potential of immunotherapeutic checkpoint blockade, in particular, casualties still abound and true clinical success stories are few and far between; the ever-present, if sometimes unmentioned, "elephant in the room", is the acquisition of resistance, which, sooner or later, rears its ugly head to undermine treatment success and shorten survival. Emerging data suggests that epigenetic therapies are able to reprogram the aberrant tumor-associated epigenome and 'tame the beast of resistance', thereby prolonging survival. This article reviews the role of epigenetic dysregulation in NSCLC, explores PFS2 as a possible surrogate endpoint, briefly mentions possible biomarkers and highlights combinatorial treatment epigenetic strategies to "prime" tumors and reverse resistance.

The comparison of outcomes from tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy in second- or third-line for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients with wild-type or unknown EGFR status

BACKGROUND

Second-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients includes monotherapy with a third-generation cytotoxic drug (CT) or a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). These options are the actual standard for EGFR wild-type (WT) status, as patients with EGFR mutations achieve greater benefit by the use of TKI in first-line treatment. Some clinical trials and meta-analyses investigated the comparison between CT and TKI in second-line, but data are conflicting.

METHODS

We designed a retrospective trial to gather information about TKI sensitivity in comparison with CT. We selected from clinical records patients treated with at least 1 line of CT and at least 1 line of TKI. We collected data about age, sex, performance status, comorbidity, smoking status, histotype, metastatic sites, EGFR status, treatment schedule, better response and time-to-progression (TTP) for each line of treatment and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

93 patients met selection criteria. Mean age 66,7 (range: 46-84). M/F ratio is 3:1. 39 EGFR-WT and 54 EGFR-UK. All patients received erlotinib or gefitinib as second-line treatment or erlotinib as third-line treatment. No TTP differences were observed for both second-line (HR:0,91; p = 0,6333) and third-line (HR:1.1; p = 0,6951) treatment (TKI vs CT). A trend of a benefit in OS in favor of 3rd-line TKI (HR:0,68; p = 0,11).

CONCLUSIONS

This study explores the role of TKIs in EGFR non-mutated NSCLC patients. OS analysis highlights a trend to a benefit in patients who received TKI in third-line, even if this result is statistically non-significant. Further analysis are needed to find an explanation for this observation.

Platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: optimal number of treatment cycles

Platinum-based chemotherapy remains the standard-of-care for most patients affected by advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The platinum compounds currently used in NSCLC are cisplatin and carboplatin. The availability of new generation drugs has led to the adoption of schedules with lower doses of platinum compounds leading to increased tolerability. Several data suggest that third generation cisplatin-based regimens are slightly superior to carboplatin-based chemotherapy, with a different safety profile, and so cisplatin should remain the standard reference for the treatment of selected patients with advanced NSCLC. Recent evidence emphasized that the optimal number of first-line platinum cycles should be four for any NSCLC histology. New platinum compounds and the use of functional genomics to deliver platinum drugs as personalised medicine, are being investigated. Here we review the current status of cisplatin and carboplatin regimens looking to the future role of platinum compounds in advanced NSCLC patients.

Enhancing tumor-targeting monoclonal antibodies therapy by PARP inhibitors

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have become a successful therapeutic approach in cancer. However, some patients do not achieve long-term clinical benefit and most mAbs only exert modest effects as monotherapies. Therefore, combinations with chemotherapy are currently being investigated. Emerging studies have shown a synergistic therapeutic effect of PARP inhibitors and mAbs in cancer. PARP enzymes catalytically cleave β-NAD⁺ and transfer the ADP-ribose moiety to acceptor proteins, modifying their function. In here, we update recent data about the therapeutic effect of the combination of PARP inhibitors with mAbs in cancer treatment and discuss the molecular mechanisms involved in this synergy.