A retrospective analysis of VeriStrat status on outcome of a randomized phase II trial of first-line therapy with gemcitabine, erlotinib, or the combination in elderly patients (age 70 years or older) with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer

The association of blood biomarkers with treatment response and adverse health outcomes in older patients with solid tumors: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Blood biomarkers are potentially useful prognostic markers and may support treatment decisions, but it is unknown if and which biomarkers are most useful in older patients with solid tumors. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence on the association of blood biomarkers with treatment response and adverse health outcomes in older patients with solid tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted in five databases in December 2022 to identify studies on blood biomarkers measured before treatment initiation, not tumor specific, and outcomes in patients with solid tumors aged ≥60 years. Studies on any type or line of oncologic treatment could be included. Titles and abstracts were screened by three authors. Data extraction and quality assessment, using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) checklist, were performed by two authors.

RESULTS

Sixty-three studies were included, with a median sample size of 138 patients (Interquartile range [IQR] 99-244) aged 76 years (IQR 72-78). Most studies were retrospective cohort studies (63%). The risk of bias was moderate in 52% and high in 43%. Less than one-third reported geriatric parameters. Eighty-six percent examined mortality outcomes, 37% therapeutic response, and 37% adverse events. In total, 77 unique markers were studied in patients with a large variety of tumor types and treatment modalities. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (20 studies), albumin (19), C-reactive protein (16), hemoglobin (14) and (modified) Glasgow Prognostic Score ((m)GPS) (12) were studied most often. The vast majority showed no significant association of these biomarkers with outcomes, except for associations between low albumin and adverse events and high (m)GPS with mortality.

DISCUSSION

Most studies did not find a significant association between blood biomarkers and clinical outcomes. The interpretation of current evidence on prognostic blood biomarkers is hampered by small sample sizes and inconsistent results across heterogeneous studies. The choice for blood biomarkers in the majority of included studies seemed driven by availability in clinical practice in retrospective cohort studies. Ageing biomarkers are rarely studied in older patients with solid tumors. Further research is needed in larger and more homogenous cohorts that combine clinical parameters and biomarkers before these can be used in clinical practice.

Prospective on Imaging Mass Spectrometry in Clinical Diagnostics

Imaging mass spectrometry (IMS) is a molecular technology utilized for spatially driven research, providing molecular maps from tissue sections. This article reviews matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization (MALDI) IMS and its progress as a primary tool in the clinical laboratory. MALDI mass spectrometry has been used to classify bacteria and perform other bulk analyses for plate-based assays for many years. However, the clinical application of spatial data within a tissue biopsy for diagnoses and prognoses is still an emerging opportunity in molecular diagnostics. This work considers spatially driven mass spectrometry approaches for clinical diagnostics and addresses aspects of new imaging-based assays that include analyte selection, quality control/assurance metrics, data reproducibility, data classification, and data scoring. It is necessary to implement these tasks for the rigorous translation of IMS to the clinical laboratory; however, this requires detailed standardized protocols for introducing IMS into the clinical laboratory to deliver reliable and reproducible results that inform and guide patient care.

Targeted Therapy for Older Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Guidelines from the French Society of Geriatric Oncology (SoFOG) and the French-Language Society of Pulmonology (SPLF)/French-Language Oncology Group (GOLF)

Simple Summary

Targeted therapy has become essential in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). There are currently no guidelines for older patients who are frailer with regard to this type of treatment. Two learned societies, the French Society of Geriatric Oncology (SoFOG) and the French-language Society of Pulmonology (SPLF)/French-language Oncology Group (GOLF), joined forces to conduct a systematic review of the literature from May 2010 to May 2021 regarding the efficacy, toxicity, and feasibility of targeted therapy in older patients with NSCLC. Guidelines were then drawn up to enable clinicians to adapt the type of targeted therapy proposed according to the oncological and geriatric profile of the older patient with NSCLC.

Abstract

Systematic molecular profiling and targeted therapy (TKI) have changed the face of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) treatment. However, there are no specific recommendations to address the prescription of TKI for older patients. A multidisciplinary task force from the French Society of Geriatric Oncology (SoFOG) and the French Society of Pulmonology/Oncology Group (SPLF/GOLF) conducted a systematic review from May 2010 to May 2021. Protocol registered in Prospero under number CRD42021224103. Three key questions were selected for older patients with NSCLC: (1) to whom TKI can be proposed, (2) for whom monotherapy should be favored, and (3) to whom a combination of TKI can be proposed. Among the 534 references isolated, 52 were included for the guidelines. The expert panel analysis concluded: (1) osimertinib 80 mg/day is recommended as a first-line treatment for older patients with the EGFR mutation; (2) full-dose first generation TKI, such as erlotinib or gefitinib, is feasible; (3) ALK and ROS1 rearrangement studies including older patients were too scarce to conclude on any definitive recommendations; and (4) given the actual data, TKI should be prescribed as monotherapy. Malnutrition, functional decline, and the number of comorbidities should be assessed primarily before TKI initiation.

Semi-Quantitative MALDI Measurements of Blood-Based Samples for Molecular Diagnostics

Accurate and precise measurement of the relative protein content of blood-based samples using mass spectrometry is challenging due to the large number of circulating proteins and the dynamic range of their abundances. Traditional spectral processing methods often struggle with accurately detecting overlapping peaks that are observed in these samples. In this work, we develop a novel spectral processing algorithm that effectively detects over 1650 peaks with over 3.5 orders of magnitude in intensity in the 3 to 30 kD m/z range. The algorithm utilizes a convolution of the peak shape to enhance peak detection, and accurate peak fitting to provide highly reproducible relative abundance estimates for both isolated peaks and overlapping peaks. We demonstrate a substantial increase in the reproducibility of the measurements of relative protein abundance when comparing this processing method to a traditional processing method for sample sets run on multiple matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight (MALDI-TOF) instruments. By utilizing protein set enrichment analysis, we find a sizable increase in the number of features associated with biological processes compared to previously reported results. The new processing method could be very beneficial when developing high-performance molecular diagnostic tests in disease indications.

Prediction of the VeriStrat test in first-line therapy of pemetrexed-based regimens for advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients

BACKGROUND

Although advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients have significantly better survival outcomes after pemetrexed based treatment, a subset of patients still show intrinsic resistance and progress rapidly. Therefore we aimed to use a blood-based protein signature (VeriStrat, VS) to analyze whether VS could identify the subset of patients who had poor efficacy on pemetrexed therapy.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analysed 72 advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients who received first-line pemetrexed/platinum or combined with bevacizumab treatment.

RESULTS

Plasma samples from these patients were analysed using VS and classified into the Good (VS-G) or Poor (VS-P) group. The relationship between efficacy and VS status was further investigated. Of the 72 patients included in this study, 35 (48.6%) were treated with pemetrexed plus platinum and 37 (51.4%) were treated with pemetrexed/platinum combined with bevacizumab. Among all patients, 60 (83.3%) and 12 (16.7%) patients were classified as VS-G and VS-P, respectively. VS-G patients had significantly better median progression-free survival (PFS) (Unreached vs. 4.2 months; P < 0.001) than VS-P patients. In addition, the partial response (PR) rate was higher in the VS-G group than that in the VS-P group (46.7% vs. 25.0%, P = 0.212). Subgroup analysis showed that PFS was also significantly longer in the VS-G group than that in the VS-P group regardless of whether patients received chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy plus bevacizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicated that VS might be considered as a novel and valid method to predict the efficacy of pemetrexed-based therapy and identify a subset of advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients who had intrinsic resistance to pemetrexed based regimens. However, larger sample studies are still needed to further confirm this result.

Prognostic performance of proteomic testing in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Timely assessment of patient-specific prognosis is critical to oncology care involving a shared decision-making approach, but clinical prognostic factors traditionally used in NSCLC have limitations. We examine a proteomic test to address these limitations.

METHODS

This study examines the prognostic performance of the VeriStrat blood-based proteomic test that measures the inflammatory disease state of patients with advanced NSCLC. A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed, yielding cohorts in which the hazard ratio (HR) was reported for overall survival (OS) of patients with VeriStrat Poor (VSPoor) test results versus VeriStrat Good (VSGood). A study-level meta-analysis of OS HRs was performed in subgroups defined by lines of therapy and treatment regimens.

RESULTS

Twenty-four cohorts met SLR criteria. Meta-analyses in five subgroups (first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, second-line single-agent chemotherapy, first-line EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy, and second- and higher-line TKI therapy, and best supportive care) resulted in statistically significant (p ≤ .001) summary effect sizes for OS HRs of 0.42, 0.54, 0.41, 0.52, and 0.50, respectively, indicating increased OS by about two-fold for patients who test VSGood. No significant heterogeneity was seen in any subgroup (p > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced NSCLC patients classified VSGood have significantly longer OS than those classified VSPoor. The summary effect size for OS HRs around 0.4-0.5 indicates that the expected median survival of those with a VSGood classification is approximately 2-2.5 times as long as those with VSPoor. The robust prognostic performance of the VeriStrat test across various lines of therapy and treatment regimens has clinical implications for treatment shared decision-making and potential for novel treatment strategies.

The clinical role of VeriStrat testing in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer considered unfit for first-line platinum-based chemotherapy

Purpose

We previously demonstrated that the median survival of patients with poor prognosis non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) considered unfit for first-line platinum chemotherapy was <4 months. We evaluated whether VeriStrat could be used as a prognostic or predictive biomarker in this population.

Experimental design

We conducted a randomised double-blind trial among patients with untreated advanced NSCLC considered unfit for platinum chemotherapy because of poor performance status (PS) or multiple comorbidities. All patients received active supportive care (ASC) and were treated with either oral erlotinib or placebo daily. Five hundred twenty-seven patients had plasma samples for VeriStrat classification: good (VeriStrat Good [VSG]) or poor (VeriStrat Poor [VSP]). Main end-point was overall survival.

Results

Fifty-five percent patients had VSG, and 83% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 2–3 at baseline. VeriStrat was strongly associated with survival. Among patients managed with ASC only, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 0.54 (p < 0.001) for VSG versus VSP. The association was consistent across patient factors: HR = 0.25 (p = 0.004) and HR = 0.56 (p < 0.001) for ECOG 0–1 and 2–3, respectively, HR = 0.49 (0070 < 0.001) for age≥75 years and HR = 0.59 (p = 0.007) for stage IV. Several ECOG 2–3 patients had long survival: 2-year survival was 8% for VSG patients who had ASC, compared with 0% for VSP. VeriStrat status did not predict benefit from erlotinib treatment because the HRs for erlotinib versus placebo were similar between VSG and VSP patients.

Conclusions

VeriStrat was not a predictive marker for survival when considering first-line erlotinib for patients with NSCLC who had poor PS and were not recommended for platinum doublet therapies. However, VeriStrat was an independent prognostic marker of survival. It represents an objective measurement that could be considered alongside other patient factors to provide a more refined assessment of prognosis for this particular patient group. VSG patients could be selected for treatment trials because of better survival, while VSP patients can continue to be treated conservatively or offered trials of less toxic agents.

Trial registration ISRCTN Number

ISRCTN02370070.

•

83% advanced NSCLC patients unfit for chemotherapy have poor performance status.

•

VeriStrat (proteomic blood test) is an independent prognostic marker for survival.

•

Patients classified as VeriStrat Good were less likely to die than those classified as VeriStrat Poor.

•

VeriStrat can refine patient prognosis in order to alter treatment management.

Retrospective Assessment of a Serum Proteomic Test in a Phase III Study Comparing Erlotinib plus Placebo with Erlotinib plus Tivantinib (MARQUEE) in Previously Treated Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

The VeriStrat test provides accurate predictions of outcomes in all lines of therapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated the predictive and prognostic role of VeriStrat in patients enrolled on the MARQUEE phase III trial of tivantinib plus erlotinib (T+E) versus placebo plus erlotinib (P+E) in previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

Pretreatment plasma samples were available for 996 patients and were analyzed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry to generate VeriStrat labels (good, VS-G, or poor, VS-P).

RESULTS

Overall, no significant benefit in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were observed for the addition of tivantinib to erlotinib. Regardless of treatment arm, patients who were classified as VS-G had significantly longer PFS (3.8 mo for T+E arm, 2.0 mo for P+E arm) and OS (11.6 mo for T+E, 10.2 mo for P+E arm) than patients classified as VS-P (PFS: 1.9 mo for both arms, hazard ratio [HR], 0.584; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.468-0.733; p < .0001 for T+E, HR, 0.686; 95% CI, 0.546-0.870; p = .0015 for P+E; OS: 4.0 mo for both arms, HR, 0.333; 95% CI, 0.264-0.422; p < .0001 for T+E; HR, 0.449; 95% CI, 0.353-0.576; p < .0001 for P+E). The VS-G population had higher OS than the VS-P population within Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score (PS) categories. VS-G patients on the T+E arm had longer PFS, but not OS, than VS-G patients on the P+E arm (p = .0108). Among EGFR mutation-positive patients, those with VS-G status had a median OS more than twice that of any other group (OS: 31.6 mo for T+E and 22.8 mo for P+E), whereas VS-P patients had similar survival rates as VS-G, EGFR-wild type patients (OS: 13.7 mo for T+E and 6.5 mo for P+E).

CONCLUSION

In these analyses, VeriStrat showed a prognostic role within EGOC PS categories and regardless of treatment arm and EGFR status, suggesting that VeriStrat could be used to identify EGFR mutation-positive patients who will have a poor response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study suggests that VeriStrat testing could enhance the prognostic role of performance status and smoking status and replicates findings from other trials that showed that the VeriStrat test identifies EGFR mutation-positive patients likely to have a poor response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Although these findings should be confirmed in other populations, VeriStrat use could be considered in EGFR mutation-positive patients as an additional prognostic tool, and these results suggest that EGFR mutation-positive patients with VeriStrat "poor" classification could benefit from other therapeutic agents given in conjunction with TKI monotherapy.

Next-Generation Novel Noninvasive Cancer Molecular Diagnostics Platforms Beyond Tissues

In recent years, there has been a revolutionary expansion in technologic advances and therapeutic innovations in cancer medicine. Cancer diagnostics has begun to move away from a sole dependence on direct tumor tissue biopsy for cancer detection, diagnosis, and treatment monitoring. The need for improvement in molecular cancer diagnostics has never been more important, with not only the advent of cancer genomics and genomics-guided precision medicine but also the recent arrival of cancer immunotherapies. Owing to the practical limitations and risks associated with tissue-based biopsy diagnostics, novel noninvasive cancer diagnostics platforms have continued to evolve and expand in recent years. Examples of these platforms include the liquid biopsy, which is used to interrogate ctDNA or circulating tumor cells, proteomics, metabolomics, and exosomes; the urine biopsy, which is used to assay ctDNAs; saliva and stool biopsies, which are used for molecular genomics assays; and the breath biopsy, which measures volatile organic compounds. These next-generation noninvasive molecular diagnostics assays beyond tissues fundamentally transform the potential utilities of cancer diagnostics to enable repeat, prospective, and serial longitudinal "biopsies" to monitor disease response resistance and progression on therapies. Moreover, they allow continual interrogation and molecular in-depth analysis of the evolving tumor's pan-canceromics under therapeutic stress. These technological and diagnostic advances have already brought about paradigm-changing next-generation cancer therapeutic strategies to enhance overall treatment efficacies. This article reviews the key noninvasive next-generation molecular diagnostics platforms beyond tissues, with emphasis on clinical utilities and applications.

Underutilization and disparities in access to EGFR testing among Medicare patients with lung cancer from 2010 - 2013

Background

Tumor testing for mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene is indicated for all newly diagnosed, metastatic lung cancer patients, who may be candidates for first-line treatment with an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Few studies have analyzed population-level testing.

Methods

We identified clinical, demographic, and regional predictors of EGFR & KRAS testing among Medicare beneficiaries with a new diagnosis of lung cancer in 2011–2013 claims. The outcome variable was whether the patient underwent molecular, EGFR and KRAS testing. Independent variables included: patient demographics, Medicaid status, clinical characteristics, and region where the patient lived. We performed multivariate logistic regression to identify factors that predicted testing.

Results

From 2011 to 2013, there was a 19.7% increase in the rate of EGFR testing. Patient zip code had the greatest impact on odds to undergo testing; for example, patients who lived in the Boston, Massachusetts hospital referral region were the most likely to be tested (odds ratio (OR) of 4.94, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.67–14.62). Patient demographics also impacted odds to be tested. Asian/Pacific Islanders were most likely to be tested (OR 1.63, CI 1.53–1.79). Minorities and Medicaid patients were less likely to be tested. Medicaid recipients had an OR of 0.74 (CI 0.72–0.77). Hispanics and Blacks were also less likely to be tested (OR 0.97, CI 0.78–0.99 and 0.95, CI 0.92–0.99), respectively. Clinical procedures were also correlated with testing. Patients who underwent transcatheter biopsies were 2.54 times more likely to be tested (CI 2.49–2.60) than those who did not undergo this type of biopsy.

Conclusions

Despite an overall increase in EGFR testing, there is widespread underutilization of guideline-recommended testing. We observed racial, income, and regional disparities in testing. Precision medicine has increased the complexity of cancer diagnosis and treatment. Targeted interventions and clinical decision support tools are needed to ensure that all patients are benefitting from advances in precision medicine. Without such interventions, precision medicine may exacerbate racial disparities in cancer care and health outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4190-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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.

Combination of chemotherapy and gefitinib as first-line treatment for patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma and sensitive EGFR mutations: A randomized controlled trial

To explore the optimal treatment strategy for patients who harbor sensitive EGFR mutations, a head-to-head study was performed to compare chemotherapy and gefitinib in combination or with either agent alone as first-line therapy, in terms of efficacy and safety. A total of 121 untreated patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma who harbored sensitive EGFR mutations were randomly assigned to receive gefitinib combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin, pemetrexed plus carboplatin or gefitinib alone. The progression-free survival (PFS) of patients in the combination group (17.5 months, 95% CI, 15.3-19.7) was longer than that of patients in the chemotherapy group (5.7 months, 95% CI, 5.2-6.3) or gefitinib (11.9 months, 95% CI, 9.1-14.6) group. The (hazard ratios) HRs of PFS for the combination group vs. chemotherapy and gefitinib groups were 0.16 (95% CI, 0.09-0.29, p < 0.001) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.29-0.78, p = 0.003), respectively. The overall response rate (ORR) in the combination therapy group, chemotherapy group and the gefitinib group was 82.5%, 32.5% and 65.9%, respectively. The combinational strategy resulted in longer overall survival (OS) than chemotherapy (HR = 0.46, p = 0.016) or gefitinib (HR = 0.36, p = 0.001) alone. Our finding suggested that treatment with pemetrexed plus carboplatin combined with gefitinib could provide better survival benefits for patients with lung adenocarcinoma harboring sensitive EGFR mutations.

Evaluation of the VeriStrat® serum protein test in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the lung treated with second-line afatinib or erlotinib in the phase III LUX-Lung 8 study

OBJECTIVES

Identification of biomarkers associated with clinical benefit may be crucial in establishing optimal treatment choice for patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung after first-line chemotherapy. In this study, the ability of the VeriStrat serum protein test to predict differential clinical benefit with afatinib versus erlotinib, and the association of VeriStrat status with clinical outcomes irrespective of EGFR-TKI used, was assessed in a retrospective analysis of the phase III LUX-Lung 8 trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pretreatment plasma samples were analyzed using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Spectra were evaluated to assign a VeriStrat 'Good' (VS-G) or VeriStrat 'Poor' (VS-P) classification. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, and other endpoints were assessed with respect to pretreatment VeriStrat status; OS was the primary efficacy variable. Outcomes with other efficacy endpoints were similar.

RESULTS

Of 795 patients randomized in LUX-Lung 8, 675 were classified (VS-G: 412; VS-P: 263). In the VS-G group, OS was significantly longer with afatinib versus erlotinib (HR 0.79 [95% CI: 0.63-0.98]). In the VS-P group, there was no significant difference in OS between afatinib and erlotinib (HR 0.90 [0.70-1.16]). However, there was no interaction between VeriStrat classification and treatment group for OS (p_interaction=0.5303). OS was significantly longer in VS-G versus VS-P patients, both in the overall VeriStrat-classified population (HR 0.41 [0.35-0.49]) and afatinib-treated patients (HR 0.40 [0.31-0.51]). Multivariate analysis showed that VeriStrat was an independent predictor of OS in afatinib-treated patients, regardless of ECOG PS or best response to first-line chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

VS-G classification is strongly associated with favorable survival outcomes with either afatinib or erlotinib compared with VS-P classification. In VS-G patients, survival outcomes with afatinib are superior to those with erlotinib. VeriStrat classification may guide treatment decisions in patients with SCC of the lung. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT01523587.

Integrating Pharmacoproteomics into Early-Phase Clinical Development: State-of-the-Art, Challenges, and Recommendations

Pharmacoproteomics is the study of disease-modifying and toxicity parameters associated with therapeutic drug administration, using analysis of quantitative and temporal changes to specific, predetermined, and select proteins, or to the proteome as a whole. Pharmacoproteomics is a rapidly evolving field, with progress in analytic technologies enabling processing of complex interactions of large number of unique proteins and effective use in clinical trials. Nevertheless, our analysis of clinicaltrials.gov and PubMed shows that the application of proteomics in early-phase clinical development is minimal and limited to few therapeutic areas, with oncology predominating. We review the history, technologies, current usage, challenges, and potential for future use, and conclude with recommendations for integration of pharmacoproteomic in early-phase drug development.

Biology and patterns of response to EGFR-inhibition in squamous cell cancers of the lung and head & neck

The identification of common molecular aberrations that drive cancer progression has led to targeted therapies that improve treatment efficacy in many tumor types. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors have been used to treat both lung and head and neck cancers with squamous cell histology. These tumors often show high EGFR expression and/or increased gene copy number, but low incidence of the activating kinase domain mutations common to adenocarcinomas of the lung. In this manuscript, we review clinical trial data on EGFR-inhibitors in the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) of the lung and head and neck (SCCHN), including both efficacy and biomarker analyses. Although some efficacy with use of EGFR inhibitors is observed, the level of benefit varies within and across tumor types, and the predictive capacity of high EGFR protein expression and/or gene amplification, if any, is limited. Due to the lack of candidate biomarkers that consistently predict response to EGFR-inhibitor therapy across treatment setting and class of agent in SqCC of the lung and SCCHN, we explore the biology, genomics and patterns of response to EGFR-inhibitors to inform identification of potential biomarkers, highlighting several key molecules that have shown promise in preclinical studies and clinical trials across multiple cancer sites.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Erlotinib versus Docetaxel in Patients with Advanced Squamous Cell Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Failing First-Line Platinum-Based Doublet Chemotherapy Stratified by VeriStrat Good versus VeriStrat Poor. The European Thoracic Oncology Platform (ETOP) EMPHASIS-lung Trial

INTRODUCTION

Docetaxel and erlotinib are registered second-line treatments for wild-type EGFR NSCLC. Previous studies suggested a predictive value of the VeriStrat test in second-line therapy of NSCLC, classifying patients as either VeriStrat good or VeriStrat poor. EMPHASIS-lung aimed at exploring this predictive effect in patients with squamous cell NSCLC. The trial closed prematurely because of low accrual and results from other trials. Our analysis includes an exploratory combined analysis with results from the PROSE trial.

METHODS

EMPHASIS-lung was a randomized phase III multicenter trial exploring the differential effect of second-line erlotinib versus docetaxel on progression-free survival (PFS) in VeriStrat good versus VeriStrat poor patients with squamous cell NSCLC.

RESULTS

A total of 80 patients were randomized, with 72.5% categorized as VeriStrat good. Patient characteristics were balanced between VeriStrat status and treatment groups. The median PFS times with docetaxel and erlotinib treatment in the VeriStrat good cohort were 4.1 and 1.6 months, respectively, versus 1.9 and 2.1 months, respectively, in the VeriStrat poor cohort. The median overall survival (OS) times with docetaxel and erlotinib treatment in the VeriStrat good cohort were 7.8 and 8.4 months, respectively, and 4.4 and 5.2 months, respectively, in the VeriStrat poor cohort. An additional exploratory analysis was performed; in it, 47 patients from the squamous cell subgroup of PROSE were included in a combined analysis, contributing with 45 PFS and 41 OS events.

CONCLUSIONS

The final analysis of EMPHASIS-lung did not show a differential effect on PFS for erlotinib versus docetaxel stratified by VeriStrat status. Similarly, in the combined analysis, no significant treatment by VeriStrat status interaction was observed (interaction p = 0.24 for PFS and 0.45 for OS, stratified by study).

Serum proteomic test in advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer treated in first line with standard chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

VeriStrat is a blood-based proteomic test with predictive and prognostic significance in second-line treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This trial was designed to investigate the role of VeriStrat in first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC with standard chemotherapy. Here we present the results for 76 non-squamous patients treated with a combination of carboplatin or cisplatin with pemetrexed.

METHODS

The test-assigned classifications of VeriStrat Good or VeriStrat Poor to samples collected at baseline. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and objective response. Exploratory analyses of end points separately in carboplatin/pemetrexed and cisplatin/pemetrexed subgroups were also conducted.

RESULTS

Patients classified as VeriStrat Good had longer PFS and OS than VeriStrat Poor: 6.5 vs 1.6 months and 10.8 vs 3.4 months, respectively; the corresponding hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.36 (P<0.0001) and 0.26 (P<0.0001); they were also more likely to achieve objective response. Prognostic significance of VeriStrat was confirmed in multivariate analysis. Significant differences in OS and PFS between Veristrat classifications were also found when treatment subgroups were analysed separately.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial demonstrated clinical utility of VeriStrat as a prognostic test for standard first-line chemotherapy of non-squamous advanced NSCLC.

A Randomized Phase 2 Study Comparing the Combination of Ficlatuzumab and Gefitinib with Gefitinib Alone in Asian Patients with Advanced Stage Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

A randomized phase 2 study was designed to compare the combination of ficlatuzumab (AV-299), a humanized hepatocyte growth factor-neutralizing monoclonal antibody, plus gefitinib versus gefitinib monotherapy in a pulmonary adenocarcinoma population clinically enriched for EFGR tyrosine kinase inhibitor-sensitizing mutations.

METHODS

A total of 188 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either gefitinib or ficlatuzumab plus gefitinib treatment. Patients who demonstrated disease control in the single-agent gefitinib arm were allowed to cross over to ficlatuzumab plus gefitinib treatment upon disease progression. Molecular analyses included tumor EGFR mutation status and retrospective proteomic testing using VeriStrat, a multivariate test based on mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

The addition of ficlatuzumab to gefitinib did not provide significant improvement over gefitinib monotherapy for the primary end point of overall response rate or the secondary end points of progression-free survival and overall survival. In the subgroup classified as VeriStrat poor, the addition of ficlatuzumab to gefitinib showed significant improvement in both progression-free survival and overall survival in both the intent-to-treat population and the subgroup with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor-sensitizing mutations. For all patients, the most frequent adverse events were diarrhea, dermatitis acneiform, and paronychia.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the trial showed no significant benefit from the addition of ficlatuzumab to gefitinib in the overall population of Asian patients with advanced-stage pulmonary adenocarcinoma, the biomarker data suggest that patients classified as VeriStrat poor may benefit from ficlatuzumab combination therapy.

Clinical Utility of Liquid Diagnostic Platforms in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

: A firmer understanding of the genomic landscape of lung cancer has recently led to targeted, therapeutic advances in non-small cell lung cancer. Historically, the reference standard for the diagnosis and genetic interrogation for advanced-stage patients has been tissue acquisition via computed tomography-guided core or fine needle aspiration biopsy. However, this process can frequently put the patient at risk and remains complicated by sample availability and tumor heterogeneity. In addition, the time required to complete the diagnostic assays can negatively affect clinical care. Technological advances in recent years have led to the development of blood-based diagnostics or "liquid biopsies" with great potential to quickly diagnose and genotype lung cancer using a minimally invasive technique. Recent studies have suggested that molecular alterations identified in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) or circulating tumor DNA can serve as an accurate molecular proxy of tumor biology and reliably predict the response to tyrosine kinase therapy. In addition, several trials have demonstrated the high accuracy of microRNA (miRNA) platforms in discerning cancerous versus benign nodules in high-risk, screened patients. Despite the promise of these platforms, issues remain, including varying sensitivities and specificities between competing platforms and a lack of standardization of techniques and downstream processing. In the present report, the clinical applications of liquid biopsy technologies, including circulating tumor cells, proteomics, miRNA, and cfDNA for NSCLC, are reviewed and insight is provided into the diagnostic and therapeutic implications and challenges of these platforms.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Although tumor biopsies remain the reference standard for the diagnosis and genotyping of non-small cell lung cancer, they remain fraught with logistical complexities that can delay treatment decisions and affect clinical care. Liquid diagnostic platforms, including cell-free DNA, proteomic signatures, RNA (mRNA and microRNA), and circulating tumor cells, have the potential to overcome many of these barriers, including rapid and accurate identification of de novo and resistant genetic alterations, real-time monitoring of treatment responses, prognosis of outcomes, and identification of minimal residual disease. The present report provides insights into new liquid diagnostic platforms in non-small cell lung cancer and discusses the promise and challenges of their current and future clinical use.

SWOG S0709: Randomized Phase II Trial of Erlotinib versus Erlotinib Plus Carboplatin/Paclitaxel in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Impaired Performance Status as Selected by a Serum Proteomics Assay

INTRODUCTION

Patients with advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and borderline performance status (performance status 2 [PS2]) are often excluded from clinical trials and platinum-based therapy. In light of the potential role for serum proteomics in predicting the benefit of erlotinib beyond that of epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutational status, we conducted a trial in which the Veristrat proteomics assay was used for data enrichment when selecting a cohort of patients with NSCLC and PS2 to receive erlotinib with and without chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with metastatic NSCLC, PS2, acceptable end-organ function, and Veristrat-good status were randomly assigned to receive either 150 mg of erlotinib orally daily (arm 1) or 150 mg of erlotinib orally daily on days 2 through16 plus four cycles of carboplatin (area under the curve = 5 on day 1) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1) followed by 150 mg of erlotinib orally (arm 2). The arm 2 agents were pharmacodynamically separated to mitigate potential antagonism. The arm with superior observed median progression-free survival (PFS) would be selected for further evaluation, but only if PFS lasted for at least 3 months.

RESULTS

The trial terminated before the planned accrual of 98 patients for regulatory reasons. A total of 156 patients were screened. Of the 83 (59%) who were classified as Veristrat good, 59 met the trial eligibility criteria and were randomly assigned to one of two arms (33 patients in arm 1 and 26 in arm 2). The patients in arm 2 patients had a higher response rate (23% versus 6%, p = 0.06), disease control rate (77% versus 41%, p = 0.0046), median PFS (4.6 versus 1.6 months, p = 0.06), and median overall survival (11 versus 6 months, p = 0.27). Treatment-related grade 4 adverse events were seen in two patients in arm 1 (thrombosis and hypomagnesemia) and in five patients in arm 2 (neutropenia in five, febrile neutropenia in one, and leukopenia in one).

CONCLUSIONS

In a proteomics-enriched cohort of patients with NSCLC and PS2, pharmacodynamically separated erlotinib plus chemotherapy had better efficacy than did erlotinib alone and surpassed the protocol-specified benchmark of PFS of at least 3 months required for further study.

Lung Cancer Staging and Prognosis

The seventh edition of the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) TNM staging system was developed by the International Association for the Staging of Lung Cancer (IASLC) Lung Cancer Staging Project by a coordinated international effort to develop data-derived TNM classifications with significant survival differences. Based on these TNM groupings, current 5-year survival estimates in NSLCC range from 73 % in stage IA disease to 13 % in stage IV disease. TNM stage remains the most important prognostic factor in predicting recurrence rates and survival times, followed by tumor histologic grade, and patient sex, age, and performance status. Molecular prognostication in lung cancer is an exploding area of research where interest has moved beyond TNM stage and into individualized genetic tumor analysis with immunohistochemistry, microarray, and mutation profiles. However, despite intense research efforts and countless publications, no molecular prognostic marker has been adopted into clinical use since most fail in subsequent cross-validation with few exceptions. The recent interest in immunotherapy for NSCLC has identified new biomarkers with early evidence that suggests that PD-L1 is a predictive marker of a good response to new immunotherapy drugs but a poor prognostic indicator of overall survival. Future prognostication of outcomes in NSCLC will likely be based on a combination of TNM stage and molecular tumor profiling and yield more precise, individualized survival estimates and treatment algorithms.

Personalized Medicine in Respiratory Disease: Role of Proteomics

Respiratory diseases affect humanity globally, with chronic lung diseases (e.g., asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, among others) and lung cancer causing extensive morbidity and mortality. These conditions are highly heterogeneous and require an early diagnosis. However, initial symptoms are nonspecific, and the clinical diagnosis is made late frequently. Over the last few years, personalized medicine has emerged as a medical care approach that uses novel technology aiming to personalize treatments according to the particular patient's medical needs. This review highlights the contributions of proteomics toward the understanding of personalized medicine in respiratory disease and its potential applications in the clinic.

Effect of smoking status on progression-free and overall survival in non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving erlotinib or gefitinib: a meta-analysis

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) such as erlotinib or gefitinib are indicated for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). EGFR tyrosine kinase domain mutations have been reported to be associated with EGFR-TKI response in patients with NSCLC. Certain patient subgroups in which EGFR somatic mutations are more frequently observed are thought to derive more clinical benefit from EGFR-TKI therapy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the evidence regarding the association of smoking status with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with NSCLC receiving EGFR-TKI therapy with erlotinib or gefitinib.

METHODS

Eligible studies were selected by two independent reviewers using the inclusion and exclusion criteria predefined in the protocol. Eligible studies included those evaluating the association of smoking status with OS and PFS in patients with NSCLC receiving erlotinib or gefitinib. Non-clinical studies, case reports, non-peer-reviewed abstracts and non-relevant studies were excluded.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Data on OS and PFS in patients with NSCLC treated with EGFR-TKIs were available in nine and ten trials, respectively. The OS and PFS from both the treatment and control groups were not significantly different between never smokers and former or current smokers (OS: odds ratio [OR], 0·80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0·63-1·09; PFS: OR, 0·75; 95% CI, 0·49-1·14), respectively. However, in comparison within each smoking group, EGFR-TKI treatment led to more favourable OS and PFS in never smokers (OS: OR, 0·55; 95% CI, 0·42-0·73; PFS: OR, 0·43; 95% CI, 0·33-0·54), compared with former or current smokers (OS: OR, 0·89; 95% CI, 0·80-0·97; PFS: OR, 0·73; 95% CI, 0·62-0·85).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Among patients with NSCLC receiving EGFR-TKI therapy with erlotinib or gefitinib, never smokers appear to show longer OS and PFS as compared to former or current smokers. However, this is based on indirect comparisons and more robust larger head-to-head trials are required for more robust inferences.

Non-invasive approaches to monitor EGFR-TKI treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR-TKIs) are standard treatments for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. Nowadays, tumor tissues acquired by surgery or biopsy are the routine materials for EGFR mutation analysis. However, the accessibility of tumor tissues is not always satisfactory in advanced NSCLC. Moreover, a high proportion of NSCLC patients will eventually develop resistance to EGFR-TKIs. Invasive procedures, such as surgery or biopsy, are impractical to be performed repeatedly to assess the evolution of EGFR-TKI resistance. Thus, exploring some convenient and less invasive techniques to monitor EGFR-TKI treatment is urgently needed. Circulating cell-free tumor DNA (ctDNA) has a high degree of specificity to detect EGFR mutations in NSCLC. Besides, ctDNA is capable of monitoring the disease progression during EGFR-TKI treatment. Certain serum microRNAs that correlate with EGFR signaling pathway, such as miR-21 and miR-10b, have been demonstrated to be helpful in evaluating the efficiency of EGFR-TKI therapeutics. A commercialized serum-based proteomic test, named VeriStrat test, has shown an outstanding ability to predict the clinical outcome of NSCLC patients receiving EGFR-TKIs. Analysis of EGFR mutations in circulating tumor cells (CTCs) is feasible, and CTCs represent a promising material to predict EGFR-TKI-treatment efficacy and resistance. These evidences suggested that non-invasive techniques based on serum or plasma samples had a great potential for monitoring EGFR-TKI treatment in NSCLC. In this review, we summarized these non-invasive approaches and considered their possible applications in EGFR-TKI-treatment monitoring.

Use of ChemoFx® for Identification of Effective Treatments in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

Selection of appropriate chemotherapy, including identification of platinum resistance, is critical to effective management of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). ChemoFx®, a multiple treatment marker (chemoresponse assay), has been developed to address this challenge and to improve outcomes in patients with advanced EOC. While much work has been done that has demonstrated the analytical validity of this assay, more recent studies have highlighted the unique clinical benefits offered by the assay. A prospective, multicenter trial has shown an increase in overall survival (OS) of 14 months and an increase in progression-free survival (PFS) by 3 months in patients with recurrent EOS treated by a "sensitive" therapy based on ChemoFx results. Along with other studies showing similar gains in OS and PFS, ChemoFx has been shown to be both a prognostic and predictive marker in patients with recurrent EOC where current treatment options are sorely lacking. In addition to these clinical benefits, economic analyses have shown that ChemoFx is a cost-effective intervention. Current guidelines and technology assessments relating to ChemoFx are largely outdated and refer primarily to metrics of analytical validity. Thus, in addition to analytical validity, the clinical validity, clinical utility and economic impact of ChemoFx are reviewed herein, including published literature, technology assessments by independent parties, and regulatory approvals of this marker.

Chemotherapy plus Erlotinib versus Chemotherapy Alone for Treating Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether a combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib is beneficial for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. This study aimed to summarize the currently available evidence and compare the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy alone for treating advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant studies. Our protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42014015015).

RESULTS

Nine randomized controlled trials with a total of 3599 patients were included. Compared to chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy plus erlotinib was superior in PFS (HR = 0.76 [95% CI 0.62, 0.92], P = 0.006), and no statistically significant difference was observed in OS (HR = 0.94 [95% CI 0.86, 1.03], P = 0.16). Intercalated erlotinib plus chemotherapy demonstrated improvements in PFS (HR = 0.67 [95% CI 0.50, 0.91], P = 0.009) and OS (HR = 0.82 [95% CI 0.69, 0.98], P = 0.03). Continuous erlotinib plus chemotherapy treatment failed to demonstrate improvements in PFS (HR = 0.91 [95% CI 0.80, 1.04], P = 0.16) and OS (HR = 0.98 [95% CI 0.89, 1.09], P = 0.75). The association of chemotherapy plus erlotinib with improvement in PFS was significant in never smoking patients (HR = 0.46 [95% CI 0.37, 0.56], P<0.00001) but not in smoking patients (HR = 0.70 [95% CI 0.49, 1.00], P = 0.05). Among patients with EGFR mutant tumors, chemotherapy plus erlotinib demonstrated significant improvements in PFS (HR = 0.31 [95% CI 0.17, 0.58], P = 0.0002) and OS (HR = 0.52 [95% CI 0.30, 0.88], P = 0.01). Among patients with EGFR wild-type tumors, no statistically significant difference was observed with respect to PFS (HR = 0.87 [95% CI 0.70, 1.08], P = 0.21) and OS (HR = 0.78 [95% CI 0.59, 1.01], P = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

Combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable treatment option for patients with NSCLC, especially for patients who never smoked and patients with EGFR mutation-positive disease. In addition, intercalated administration is an effective combinatorial strategy.

An exploratory comparative analysis of tyrosine kinase inhibitors or docetaxel in second-line treatment of EGFR wild-type non-small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective real-world practice review at a single tertiary care centre

BACKGROUND

Treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc), especially in patients with wild-type EGFR, remains limited. Recently, erlotinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (tki) targeting EGFR mutation, was approved as second-line treatment in EGFR wild-type nsclc. Despite evidence of better overall survival (os) with chemotherapy than with tki in second-line treatment, data on the use of tki in the real-life clinical setting remain limited. The present practice review of tki use for second- and third-line treatment in EGFR wild-type nsclc also compares clinical outcomes for tki and single-agent docetaxel as second-line treatment.

METHODS

Our retrospective cohort study included patients with EGFR wild-type nsclc treated at the Jewish General Hospital (Montreal, QC) between 2003 and 2013. Patients received a tki (erlotinib or gefitinib) in the second and third line or docetaxel in the second line. For each group, we determined os, disease control rate, progression-free survival (pfs), and event-free survival (efs).

RESULTS

The tki group included 145 patients, with 92 receiving second-line treatment. In the control group, 53 patients received docetaxel as second-line therapy. In the tki group, os was 6.0 months; pfs, 2.7 months; and efs, 3.0 months. Comparing second-line treatments, os was 5.3 and 5.0 months respectively (p = 0.88), pfs was 2.5 and 1.8 months respectively (p = 0.041), and efs was 3.0 and 1.7 months respectively (p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study cohort, second-line therapy for EGFR wild-type nsclc with tki (compared with docetaxel) was associated with statistically better pfs and efs and noninferior os. Those findings raise the question of whether efs should also be considered when choosing second-line treatment in this patient population.

The value of proteomics in lung cancer

Many studies have identified the prognostic and predictive value of proteins or peptides in lung cancer but most failed to provide strong evidence for their clinical applicability. The strongest predictive proteins seem to be fatty acid-binding protein heart (H-FABP), and the 8-peak mass spectrography signature of VeriStrat. When focusing on VeriStrat, a 'VeriStrat good' profile did not discriminate between chemotherapy and erlotinib. The 'VeriStrat poor' profile showed a better outcome to chemotherapy than to erlotinib. VeriStrat is a prognostic test and only the "poor profile" discriminates for the type of therapy that should be chosen. Whether it adds useful information in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and wild type EGFR mutations is still doubtful. The position of the VeriStrat test in clinical practice is still not clear and we are waiting for prospective studies where biomarker test are involved in clinical decision.

Prognostic markers in lung cancer: is it ready for prime time?

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneity disease and to date, specific clinical factors and tumor stage are established as prognostic markers. Nevertheless, prognosis within stage may vary significantly. During the last 3 decades, genes/proteins that drive tumor initiation and progression, such as oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes have been studied as additional potential prognostic markers. The protein markers as evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC) have previously dominated these studies. However, with the development of high-throughput techniques to interrogate genome wide genetic or gene expression changes, DNA (copy number and mutation) and RNA (mRNA and microRNA) based markers have more recently been studied as prognostic markers. Largely due to the heterogeneity and complexity of NSCLC, single gene markers including KRAS mutation has not been validated as strong prognostic markers. In contrast, several gene expression signatures representing mRNA levels of multiple genes have been developed and validated in multiple microarray datasets of independent patient cohorts. The salient features of these gene signatures and their potential value to predict benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy is discussed.

Respiratory proteomics: from descriptive studies to personalized medicine

Respiratory diseases are highly prevalent and affect humankind worldwide, causing extensive morbidity and mortality with the environment playing an important role. Given the complex structure of the airways, sophisticated tools are required for early diagnosis; initial symptoms are nonspecific, and the clinical diagnosis is made frequently late. Over the past few years, proteomics has made high technological progress in mass-spectrometry-based protein identification and has allowed us to gain new insights into disease mechanisms and identify potential novel therapeutic targets. This review will highlight the contributions of proteomics toward the understanding of the respiratory proteome listing potential biomarkers and its potential application to the clinic. We also outline the contributions of proteomics to creating a personalized approach in respiratory medicine.

Predictive value of a serum-based proteomic test in non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Several studies have demonstrated that a serum-based proteomic test (VeriStrat * ) is able to predict the clinical outcome of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs). However, these studies have limited power to draw a precise conclusion because of their small sample sizes and inconsistent results. Therefore, a meta-analysis was carried out in an attempt to provide more persuasive evidence.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Electronic searches for relevant articles in PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Web of Science published up to May 2013 were conducted. Stata Statistical Software version 12.0 was applied for statistical analysis. The combined hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated using fixed-effects models.

RESULTS

Eleven cohorts involving 706 patients collected from seven studies were subjected to final analysis. This serum-based proteomic test's 'good' status predicted a better clinical outcome with a pooled HR of 0.40 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.49; p < 0.001) for overall survival (OS), and 0.49 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.60; p < 0.001) for progression-free survival (PFS). There was no significant heterogeneity, but a slight publication bias in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrated that this serum-based proteomic test has a predictive value for NSCLC patients treated with EGFR-TKIs. Future data are needed to validate and update our results.

Tumor heterogeneity and resistance to EGFR-targeted therapy in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer: challenges and perspectives

Lung cancer, mostly nonsmall cell lung cancer, continues to be the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. With the development of tyrosine kinase inhibitors that selectively target lung cancer-related epidermal growth factor receptor mutations, management of advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer has been greatly transformed. Improvements in progression-free survival and life quality of the patients were observed in numerous clinical studies. However, overall survival is not prolonged because of later-acquired drug resistance. Recent studies reveal a heterogeneous subclonal architecture of lung cancer, so it is speculated that the tumor may rapidly adapt to environmental changes via a Darwinian selection mechanism. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of both spatial and temporal tumor heterogeneity as potential mechanisms underlying epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance in nonsmall cell lung cancer and summarize the possible origins of tumor heterogeneity covering theories of cancer stem cells and clonal evolution, as well as genomic instability and epigenetic aberrations in lung cancer. Moreover, investigational measures that overcome heterogeneity-associated drug resistance and new assays to improve tumor assessment are also discussed.

Mass spectrometry-based serum and plasma peptidome profiling for prediction of treatment outcome in patients with solid malignancies

INTRODUCTION

Treatment selection tools are needed to enhance the efficacy of targeted treatment in patients with solid malignancies. Providing a readout of aberrant signaling pathways and proteolytic events, mass spectrometry-based (MS-based) peptidomics enables identification of predictive biomarkers, whereas the serum or plasma peptidome may provide easily accessible signatures associated with response to treatment. In this systematic review, we evaluate MS-based peptide profiling in blood for prompt clinical implementation.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched for studies using a syntax based on the following hierarchy: (a) blood-based matrix-assisted or surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight MS peptide profiling (b) in patients with solid malignancies (c) prior to initiation of any treatment modality, (d) with availability of outcome data.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies were eligible for review; the majority were performed in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Median classification prediction accuracy was 80% (range: 66%-93%) in 11 models from 14 studies reporting an MS-based classification model. A pooled analysis of 9 NSCLC studies revealed clinically significant median progression-free survival in patients classified as "poor outcome" and "good outcome" of 2.0 ± 1.06 months and 4.6 ± 1.60 months, respectively; median overall survival was also clinically significant at 4.01 ± 1.60 months and 10.52 ± 3.49 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Pretreatment MS-based serum and plasma peptidomics have shown promising results for prediction of treatment outcome in patients with solid tumors. Limited sample sizes and absence of signature validation in many studies have prohibited clinical implementation thus far. Our pooled analysis and recent results from the PROSE study indicate that this profiling approach enables treatment selection, but additional prospective studies are warranted.

Management of elderly patients with NSCLC; updated expert's opinion paper: EORTC Elderly Task Force, Lung Cancer Group and International Society for Geriatric Oncology

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a very common disease in the elderly population and its incidence in this particular population is expected to increase further, because of the ageing of the Western population. Despite this, limited data are available for the treatment of these patients and, therefore, the development of evidence-based treatment recommendations is challenging. In 2010, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) took an initiative in collaboration with International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) and created an experts panel that provided an experts' opinion consensus paper for the management of elderly NSCLC patients. Since this publication, important new data are available and EORTC and SIOG recommended to update the 2010 recommendations. Besides recommendations for surgery, adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy, treatment of locally advanced and metastatic disease, recommendations were expanded, to include data on patient preferences and geriatric assessment.

Predictive value of a proteomic signature in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with second-line erlotinib or chemotherapy (PROSE): a biomarker-stratified, randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

An established multivariate serum protein test can be used to classify patients according to whether they are likely to have a good or poor outcome after treatment with EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. We assessed the predictive power of this test in the comparison of erlotinib and chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.

METHODS

From Feb 26, 2008, to April 11, 2012, patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically or cytologically confirmed, second-line, stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer were enrolled in 14 centres in Italy. Patients were stratified according to a minimisation algorithm by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, smoking history, centre, and masked pretreatment serum protein test classification, and randomly assigned centrally in a 1:1 ratio to receive erlotinib (150 mg/day, orally) or chemotherapy (pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2), intravenously, every 21 days, or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2), intravenously, every 21 days). The proteomic test classification was masked for patients and investigators who gave treatments, and treatment allocation was masked for investigators who generated the proteomic classification. The primary endpoint was overall survival and the primary hypothesis was the existence of a significant interaction between the serum protein test classification and treatment. Analyses were done on the per-protocol population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00989690.

FINDINGS

142 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy and 143 to erlotinib, and 129 (91%) and 134 (94%), respectively, were included in the per-protocol analysis. 88 (68%) patients in the chemotherapy group and 96 (72%) in the erlotinib group had a proteomic test classification of good. Median overall survival was 9·0 months (95% CI 6·8-10·9) in the chemotherapy group and 7·7 months (5·9-10·4) in the erlotinib group. We noted a significant interaction between treatment and proteomic classification (pinteraction=0·017 when adjusted for stratification factors; pinteraction=0·031 when unadjusted for stratification factors). Patients with a proteomic test classification of poor had worse survival on erlotinib than on chemotherapy (hazard ratio 1·72 [95% CI 1·08-2·74], p=0·022). There was no significant difference in overall survival between treatments for patients with a proteomic test classification of good (adjusted HR 1·06 [0·77-1·46], p=0·714). In the group of patients who received chemotherapy, the most common grade 3 or 4 toxic effect was neutropenia (19 [15%] vs one [<1%] in the erlotinib group), whereas skin toxicity (one [<1%] vs 22 [16%]) was the most frequent in the erlotinib group.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings indicate that serum protein test status is predictive of differential benefit in overall survival for erlotinib versus chemotherapy in the second-line setting. Patients classified as likely to have a poor outcome have better outcomes on chemotherapy than on erlotinib.

FUNDING

Italian Ministry of Health, Italian Association of Cancer Research, and Biodesix.

Phase II trial of sorafenib and erlotinib in advanced pancreatic cancer

This trial was designed to assess efficacy and safety of erlotinib with sorafenib in the treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. An exploratory correlative study analyzing pretreatment serum samples using a multivariate protein mass spectrometry-based test (VeriStrat®), previously shown to correlate with outcomes in lung cancer patients treated with erlotinib, was performed. Patients received sorafenib 400 mg daily along with erlotinib 150 mg daily with a primary endpoint of 8-week progression free survival (PFS) rate. Pretreatment serum sample analysis by VeriStrat was done blinded to clinical and outcome data; the endpoints were PFS and overall survival (OS). Difference between groups (by VeriStrat classification) was assessed using log-rank P values; hazard ratios (HR) were obtained from Cox proportional hazards model. Thirty-six patients received study drug and were included in the survival analysis. Eight-week PFS rate of 46% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.32–0.67) did not meet the primary endpoint of a rate ≥70%. Thirty-two patients were included in the correlative analysis, and VeriStrat “Good” patients had superior PFS (HR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.06–0.57; P = 0.001) and OS (HR = 0.31 95% CI: 0.13–0.77, P = 0.008) compared to VeriStrat “Poor” patients. Grade 3 toxicities of this regimen included fever, anemia, diarrhea, dehydration, rash, and altered liver function. This study did not meet the primary endpoint, and this combination will not be further pursued. In this small retrospective analysis, the proteomic classification was significantly associated with clinical outcomes and is being further evaluated in ongoing studies.

VeriStrat: a prognostic and/or predictive biomarker for advanced lung cancer patients?

The role of EGF receptor (EGFR) inhibitors in the treatment of lung cancer without activating EGFR mutations has been a controversial issue, particularly their relative efficacy over the available chemotherapy in the second- and third-line setting. VeriStrat is a serum/plasma proteomic test developed using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization methodology, aiming at predicting benefit from EGFR treatment. The VeriStrat algorithm has been interrogated retrospectively and prospectively in samples from randomised trials, such as the PROSE study, confirming the prognostic information associated with the signature. In addition, the test appeared to be predictive of erlotinib impact on survival, as only VeriStrat Good patients benefited from such a treatment. Additional studies should confirm and further define its role in predicting EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor benefit, and to establish its better use in terms of clinical efficiency identifying which patients are candidates for the test, at which time on the history of the disease, and lastly at what extra cost.