Stereotatic radiotherapy in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: Combining immunotherapy and radiotherapy with a focus on liver metastases

Evolving landscape of treatments targeting the microenvironment of liver metastases in non-small cell lung cancer

ABSTRACT

Liver metastases (LMs) are common in lung cancer. Despite substantial advances in diagnosis and treatment, the survival rate of patients with LM remains low as the immune-suppressive microenvironment of the liver allows tumor cells to evade the immune system. The impact of LMs on the outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with solid tumors has been the main focus of recent translational and clinical research. Growing evidence indicates that the hepatic microenvironment delivers paracrine and autocrine signals from non-parenchymal and parenchymal cells. Overall, these microenvironments create pre- and post-metastatic conditions for the progression of LMs. Herein, we reviewed the epidemiology, physiology, pathology and immunology, of LMs associated with non-small cell lung cancer and the role and potential targets of the liver microenvironment in LM in each phase of metastasis. Additionally, we reviewed the current treatment strategies and challenges that should be overcome in preclinical and clinical investigations. These approaches target liver elements as the basis for future clinical trials, including combinatorial interventions reported to resolve hepatic immune suppression, such as immunotherapy plus chemotherapy, immunotherapy plus radiotherapy, immunotherapy plus anti-angiogenesis therapy, and surgical resection.

Progress of immune checkpoint inhibitors therapy for non-small cell lung cancer with liver metastases

Nearly one-fifth of patients with non-small cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) will develop liver metastases (LMs), and the overall treatment strategy of LMs will directly affect the survival of patients. However, some retrospective studies have found that patients receiving chemotherapy or targeted therapy have a poorer prognosis once LMs develop. In recent years, multiple randomised controlled trials (RCTS) have shown significant improvements in outcomes for patients with advanced lung cancer following the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) compared to conventional chemotherapy. ICIs is safe and effective in patients with LMs, although patients with LMs are mostly underrepresented in randomised clinical trials. However, NSCLC patients with LMs have a significantly worse prognosis than those without LMs when treated with ICIs, and the mechanism by which LMs induce systemic anti-tumour immunity reduction is unknown, so the management of LMs in patients with NSCLC is a clinical challenge that requires more optimised therapies to achieve effective disease control. In this review, we summarised the mechanism of ICIs in the treatment of LMs, the clinical research and treatment progress of ICIs and their combination with other therapies in patients with LMs from NSCLC.

Yttrium-90 Transarterial Radioembolization of Primary Lung Cancer Metastases to the Liver

PURPOSE

To assess whether yttrium-90 transarterial radioembolization (TARE) is safe and effective in the treatment of primary lung cancer metastases to the liver (LCML).

METHODS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 57 patients with LCML who were treated with 79 TARE treatments. Histology included non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (n = 27), small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (n = 17), and lung carcinoid (LC) (n = 13). Survival was calculated using Kaplan-Meier method; differences between groups were estimated using log rank test. Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine factors influencing survival. Adverse events were graded using the Society of Interventional Radiology Adverse Events Classification.

RESULTS

Median overall survival (OS) was as follows: NSCLC, 8.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.3-16.4 months); SCLC, 4.1 months (95% CI, 1.9-6.6 months); and LC, 43.5 months (95% CI, 7.8-61.4 months). For NSCLC, presence of bilobar vs unilobar disease (hazard ratio [HR], 5.24; 95% CI, 1.64-16.79; P = .002); more tumors, 2-5 vs 1 (HR, 4.88; 95% CI, 1.17-20.37; P = .003) and >5 vs 1 (HR, 3.75; 95% CI, 0.95-6.92; P = .05); and lobar vs segmental treatment (HR, 2.56; 95% CI, 0-NA; P = .002) were negative predictors of OS. For SCLC, receipt of >2 lines of chemotherapy vs ≤2 lines (HR, 3.16; 95% CI, 0.95-10.47; P = .05) was a negative predictor of OS. For LC, tumor involvement of >50% was a negative predictor of OS (HR, 3.77 × 1015; 95% CI, 0-NA; P = .002). There were 11 of 79 severe or life-threatening adverse events within 30 days (abdominal pain, altered mental status, nausea/vomiting, acalculous/aseptic cholecystitis, hyponatremia, pancreatitis, renal failure, and death from pneumonia).

CONCLUSIONS

TARE has an acceptable safety profile for the treatment of LCML, with survival benefits best seen in LC tumors.

Effect of liver metastasis on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Liver metastasis is a frequent phenomenon in advanced tumor disease. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a new class of therapeutics that can improve the prognosis of cancer patients. The purpose of this study is to elucidate the relationship between liver metastasis and survival outcomes of patients receiving ICIs treatment. We searched four main databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were the survival outcomes of our concern. Hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate the relationship between liver metastasis and OS/ PFS. Finally, 163 articles were included in the study. The pooled results showed that patients with liver metastasis receiving ICIs treatment had worse OS (HR=1.82, 95%CI:1.59-2.08) and PFS (HR=1.68, 95%CI:1.49-1.89) than patients without liver metastasis. The effect of liver metastasis on ICIs efficacy differed in different tumor types, and patients with urinary system tumors (renal cell carcinoma OS: HR=2.47, 95%CI:1.76-3.45; urothelial carcinoma OS: HR=2.37, 95%CI:2.03-2.76) had the worst prognosis, followed by patients with melanoma (OS: HR=2.04, 95%CI:1.68-2.49) or non-small cell lung cancer (OS: HR=1.81, 95%CI:1.72-1.91). ICIs efficacy in digestive system tumors (colorectal cancer OS: HR=1.35, 95%CI:1.07-1.71; gastric cancer/ esophagogastric cancer OS: HR=1.17, 95%CI:0.90-1.52) was less affected, and peritoneal metastasis and the number of metastases have a greater clinical significance than liver metastasis based on univariate data. For cancer patients receiving ICIs treatment, the occurrence of liver metastasis is associated with poor prognosis. Different cancer types and metastatic sites may hold a different prognostic effect on the efficacy of ICIs treatment in cancer patients.

Five-year overall survival with ipilimumab and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for metastatic disease

PURPOSE

Ipilimumab plus stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) demonstrate satisfactory short-term clinical benefit and low toxicities in metastatic cancers. Here, we report the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates for patients with metastatic disease treated with this combined-modality therapy in a phase II trial (NCT02239900).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

SABR was delivered to patients with metastatic lesions in the liver and lung either during the first dose (concurrent) or 1 week after the second dose (sequential) of ipilimumab (every 3 weeks for 4 cycles). SABR was administered to liver or lung metastases as 50 Gy in 4 fractions or 60 Gy in 10 fractions, considering the tumor location. The OS rates at 12, 36, and 60 months were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method; subgroup analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) and OS by SABR-targeted lesions (liver/lung) were performed by log-rank tests.

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients were enrolled in this long-term follow-up analysis. At the median follow-up time of 15.32 months (range, 0.97-82.13 months), the median PFS was 6.52 months (95% CI, 5.86-7.14) and the median OS was 15.32 months (95% CI,13.03-17.23). The 12-, 36-, and 60-month OS rates were 61%, 23%, and 15%, respectively. There was a significant difference in OS between cohorts (P = 0.039), with a stronger response observed in lung-treated subgroups. Patients who had received sequential fractions (50 Gy/4f) to the lung had improved OS compared to those who had received sequential fractions (18.29 vs 8.9 months, P = 0.043) to the liver. Subgroup analysis of SABR-targeted lesions showed that lung-targeted groups had significantly longer PFS (6.87 months vs. 5.63 months, P = 0.034) and OS (18.67 months vs. 13.63 months, P = 0.013) compared to liver-targeted groups. The sequence did not affect the outcomes of PFS and OS. Exploratory analyses showed that SABR-targeted lesions and smoking history comprised an independent risk factor for OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Updated 5-year OS data from the phase II trial demonstrate the long-term clinical benefit of ipilimumab and SABR, which warrants further research and cumulative data.

Prognostic factors and survival prediction for patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma: A population-based study

The prognosis of metastatic lung adenocarcinoma (MLUAD) varies greatly. At present, no studies have constructed a satisfactory prognostic model for MLUAD. We identified 44,878 patients with MLUAD. The patients were randomized into the training and validation cohorts. Cox regression models were performed to identify independent prognostic factors. Then, R software was employed to construct a new nomogram for predicting overall survival (OS) of patients with MLUAD. Accuracy was assessed by the concordance index (C-index), receiver operating characteristic curves and calibration plots. Finally, clinical practicability was examined via decision curve analysis. The OS time range for the included populations was 0 to 107 months, and the median OS was 7.00 months. Nineteen variables were significantly associated with the prognosis, and the top 5 prognostic factors were chemotherapy, grade, age, race and surgery. The nomogram has excellent predictive accuracy and clinical applicability compared to the TNM system (C-index: 0.723 vs 0.534). The C-index values were 0.723 (95% confidence interval: 0.719-0.726) and 0.723 (95% confidence interval: 0.718-0.729) in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. The area under the curve for 6-, 12-, and 18-month OS was 0.799, 0.764, and 0.750, respectively, in the training cohort and 0.799, 0.762, and 0.746, respectively, in the validation cohort. The calibration plots show good accuracy, and the decision curve analysis values indicate good clinical applicability and effectiveness. The nomogram model constructed with the above 19 prognostic factors is suitable for predicting the OS of MLUAD and has good predictive accuracy and clinical applicability.

Construction and validation of a nomogram for non small cell lung cancer patients with liver metastases based on a population analysis

Lung cancer is one of the most common malignancies in the United States, and the common metastatic sites in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are bone, brain, adrenal gland, and liver, respectively, among which patients with liver metastases have the worst prognosis. We retrospectively analyzed 1963 patients diagnosed with NSCLC combined with liver metastases between 2010 and 2015. Independent prognostic factors for patients with liver metastases from NSCLC were identified by univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis. Based on this, we developed a nomogram model via R software and evaluated the performance and clinical utility of the model by calibration curve, receiver operating characteristic curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The independent prognostic factors for NSCLC patients with liver metastases included age, race, gender, grade, T stage, N stage, brain metastases, bone metastases, surgery, chemotherapy, and tumor size. The area under the curve predicting OS at 6, 9, and 12 months was 0.793, 0.787, and 0.784 in the training cohort, and 0.767, 0.771, and 0.773 in the validation cohort, respectively. Calibration curves of the nomogram showed high agreement between the outcomes predicted by the nomogram and the actual observed outcomes, and the DCA further demonstrated the value of the clinical application of the nomogram. By analyzing the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, we established and verified a prognostic nomogram for NSCLC patients with liver metastases, to personalize the prognosis of patients. At the same time, the prognostic nomogram has a satisfactory accuracy and the results are a guide for the development of patient treatment plans.

Current status of immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is a kind of digestive tract malignant tumor with a poor prognosis. Radical surgery is the preferred alternative choice for patients with pancreatic cancer, but most patients have no chance of radical surgery when they are diagnosed. At present, a number of studies have been carried out on immunotherapies for pancreatic cancer, mainly including immune checkpoint inhibitors, tumor vaccines, and adoptive cell therapy, which are expected to become a new strategy for the treatment of pancreatic cancer, and ultimately achieve the purpose of improving the overall prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer. In this paper, we summarize the current status of pancreatic cancer immunotherapy and analyze the future trend of immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer.

Combination of the EP and Anti-PD-1 Pathway or Anti-CTLA-4 for the Phase III Trial of Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

The morbidity and mortality of lung cancer remain one of the highest among multiple cancers, respectively. Small-Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) accounts for around 10%-15% of all lung cancers. Approximately two-thirds of the diagnosed SCLCs are in extensive stage (ES). Decades later, we still rely on the same traditional regimen with etoposide and platinum (EP) as the mainstay of treatment with poor prognosis. This meta-analysis aims to assess the effect of adding Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (CPIs) such as (ipilimumab, atezolizumab, pembrolizumab, and durvalumab) to the traditional EP regimen for small-cell lung cancer extensive stage (ES-SCLC). We searched through PubMed looking for studies that compare between EP and CPIs, with EP alone, and only Phase III randomized controlled trials were considered eligible for this study. A total of 3645 papers were the results of the initial search, and only 4 studies met our criteria. Each investigator extracted the data independently using the PRISMA MODEL (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guideline. Each author used a prespecified sheet. The primary endpoint was to calculate OS (overall survival) and PFS (progression-free survival) hazard ratios for both arms. We found that adding EP plus CPIs increased both OS (HR, 95% CI 0.80 [0.70, 0.93], P = 0.0001, I ² = 49%) and PFS (HR95% CI 0.81 [0.74, 0.88], P < 0.00001, I ² = 0%). On the other hand, ORR (overall response rate) was not affected by the addition of CPIs to EP compared to EP alone, and the same was true for adverse events. To conclude, CTLA-4 alone is not encouraging, but PD-1/PD-L1 adds survival benefits. A combined treatment regimen shows to be more effective, improving overall survival rate Durvalumab and atezolizumab showed improvement for OS, but pembrolizumab and ipilimumab did not show a significant increase of OS over EP; however, pembrolizumab showed significant prolongation of the disease-free period.

Crosstalk of long non-coding RNAs and EMT: Searching the missing pieces of an incomplete puzzle for lung cancer therapy

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is considered to be the first place among the cancer-related deaths worldwide and demands novel strategies in the treatment of this life-threatening disorder. The aim of this review is to explore regulation of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) by long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) in lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION

LncRNAs can be considered as potential factors for targeting in cancer therapy, since they regulate a bunch of biological processes, e.g. cell proliferation, differentiation and apoptosis. The abnormal expression of lncRNAs occurs in different cancer cells. On the other hand, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) is a critical mechanism participating in migration and metastasis of cancer cells.

METHOD

Different databases including Googlescholar, Pubmed and Sciencedirect were used for collecting articles using keywords such as "LncRNA", "EMT", and "Lung cancer".

RESULT

There are tumor-suppressing lncRNAs that can suppress EMT and metastasis of lung cancer cells. Expression of such lncRNAs undergoes down-regulation in lung cancer progression and restoring their expression is of importance in suppressing lung cancer migration. There are tumor-promoting lncRNAs triggering EMT in lung cancer and enhancing their migration.

CONCLUSION

LncRNAs are potential regulators of EMT in lung cancer, and targeting them, both pharmacologically and genetically, can be of importance in controlling migration of lung cancer cells.