Maintenance and consolidation therapy in patients with unresectable stage III/IV non-small cell lung cancer

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors as Switch or Continuation Maintenance Therapy in Solid Tumors: Rationale and Current State

First-line chemotherapy for many solid tumors is limited by toxicity. There is a growing interest in maintenance therapy as a strategy for prolonging the benefits of first-line therapy while minimizing toxicity. Maintenance therapy can comprise either continuation of an agent given as part of the first-line regimen (continuation maintenance) or treatment with a new agent (switch maintenance). Maintenance therapy is already established in several solid tumors, including lung, breast, gastric, colorectal, and ovarian cancer. Immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment has been shown to prolong duration of response and overall survival, but efficacy is generally restricted to a limited proportion of patients with selected tumors. Thus, efforts are ongoing to determine whether the clinical benefits of immune checkpoint inhibitors can be extended using novel treatment schedules and settings, including maintenance therapy. Early- and late-phase clinical trials have investigated the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors as switch and continuation maintenance in different tumors, and a range of phase III trials are ongoing. Interpretation of results requires consideration of trial designs, eligibility criteria, and primary endpoints, in addition to biomarker exploration, and assessment of quality of life and cost effectiveness. Findings from ongoing trials will help further define the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors as maintenance therapy across a spectrum of solid tumors.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for the Treatment of Unresectable Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Emerging Mechanisms and Perspectives

There has been no improvement in outcome for patients with unresectable locally advanced (stage III) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for more than 10 years. The standard treatment for these patients is definitive concurrent chemotherapy and radiation (CCRT). Although the goal of treatment in this setting is to achieve a cure, most patients progress and their prognosis is poor, with a 5-year survival rate of 15-30%. There is thus an urgent need for the development of novel anticancer treatments in this patient population. Recent advances in cancer immunotherapy have led to a marked improvement in clinical outcome for advanced NSCLC. Such immunotherapy mainly consists of the administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) such as antibodies to cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein-4 (CTLA-4) or to either programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) or its ligand PD-L1. Durvalumab (MEDI4736) is a high-affinity human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that blocks the binding of PD-L1 on tumor cells or antigen-presenting cells to PD-1 on T cells. The PACIFIC study recently evaluated consolidation immunotherapy with durvalumab versus placebo administered after concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC. It revealed a significant improvement in both progression-free and overall survival with durvalumab, and this improvement was associated with a favorable safety profile. This achievement has made durvalumab a standard of care for consolidation after CCRT in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC, and it has now been approved in this setting by regulatory agencies in the United States, Canada, Japan, Australia, Switzerland, Malaysia, Singapore, India, and the United Arab Emirates. In this review, we briefly summarize the results of the PACIFIC trial, including those of post hoc analysis, and we address possible molecular mechanisms, perspectives, and remaining questions related to combined treatment with CCRT and ICIs in this patient population.

Perspectives on treatment advances for stage III locally advanced unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer

For more than a decade, there has been no improvement in outcomes for patients with unresectable locally advanced (la) non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc). The standard treatment in that setting is definitive concurrent chemotherapy and radiation (ccrt). Although the intent of treatment is curative, most patients rapidly progress, and their prognosis is poor, with a 5-year overall survival (os) rate in the 15%-25% range. Those patients therefore represent a critical unmet need, warranting expedited approval of, and access to, new treatments that can improve outcomes. The pacific trial, which evaluated durvalumab consolidation therapy after ccrt in unresectable la nsclc, demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival (pfs) and a significant improvement in os. Durvalumab thus fills a critical unmet need in the setting of unresectable la nsclc and provides a new option for patients treated with curative intent. Here, we review the treatment of unresectable la nsclc, with a focus on the effect of the clinical data for durvalumab.

Treatment with 20(S)-ginsenoside Rg3 reverses multidrug resistance in A549/DDP xenograft tumors

Multidrug resistance (MDR) is an obstacle for cancer chemotherapy. It was reported that 20(S)-ginsenoside Rg3 (hereafter Rg3) was able to regulate MDR in mouse leukemia cells. The present study investigated the effect of Rg3 on the MDR of A549 lung cancer cells. A cell viability assay revealed that Rg3 treatment increased cisplatin (DDP) cytotoxicity in DDP resistant A549 cells (A549/DDP). Furthermore, Rg3 increases the antitumor effect of DDP on A549/DDP xenograft mice. The expression of MDR-mediated proteins, including P-glycoprotein (P-gp), multidrug resistance-associated protein (MPR1) and lung resistance protein 1 (LPR1), was detected in tumor tissue of A549/DDP xenograft mice. The results revealed that Rg3 treatment inhibited the expression of these MDR-associated proteins. Additionally, technetium-99m labeled hexakis-2-methoxyisobutylisonitrile (^99mTc-MIBI) single-photon emission computed tomography was used to monitor the effect of Rg3 on cisplatin sensitivity of A549/DDP xenograft tumors. It was observed that uptake of ^99mTc-MIBI was increased by Rg3 treatment, which indicated that Rg3 is able to effectively enhance chemotherapy sensitivity of A549/DDP xenograft tumors. Taken together, these results revealed that Rg3 may be able to reverse MDR of lung cancer via the downregulation of P-gp, MPR1 and LPR1.

Quantification of cell-free mSHOX2 Plasma DNA for therapy monitoring in advanced stage non-small cell (NSCLC) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients

Purpose

Most patients suffering from advanced lung cancer die within a few months. To exploit new therapy regimens we need better methods for the assessment of a therapy response.

Material and Methods

In a pilot study we prospectively enrolled 36 patients with advanced NSCLC and SCLC (34 stage IV, 2 stage IIIB) of whom 34 received standard platinum-based chemo/radiotherapy and two were treated with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor. We measured the levels of extracellular methylated SHOX2 DNA (mSHOX2) in plasma before and during therapy until re-staging. The mSHOX2 analysis was blinded with respect to the clinical data making it an observational study.

Results

According to the re-staging of 31 first-line patients, 19 patients were classified as non-responders while 12 patients were in the responder group. We observed a tight correlation between radiological data and the change of plasma mSHOX2 level as the equivalent for a therapy response. A ROC analysis showed a high discriminatory power for both patient groups already one week after therapy start (AUC 0.844). Additionally, a Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazards analyses revealed a strong relationship between survival and plasma mSHOX2 value p≤0.001 (hazard ratio 11.08) providing some evidence for mSHOX2 also being a predictive marker.

Conclusion

The longitudinal measurement of extracellular plasma mSHOX2 DNA yields information about the response to cytotoxic treatment and allows an early assessment of treatment response for lung cancer patients. If confirmed in a larger study this would be a valuable tool for selecting and guiding a cytotoxic treatment.

Nimotuzumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicenter, randomized, open-label Phase II study

Background

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of nimotuzumab in combination with chemotherapy (docetaxel and carboplatin) versus chemotherapy alone in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer.

Methods

This multicenter, open-label, Phase II study randomized 110 patients to receive nimotuzumab plus chemotherapy (nimotuzumab group) or chemotherapy alone (control group), and comprised concomitant, maintenance, and follow-up phases. Nimotuzumab 200 mg was administered once weekly for 13 weeks during the first two phases with four cycles of chemotherapy and docetaxel 75 mg/m² and carboplatin (area under the curve 5 mg/mL*min) every 3 weeks for a maximum of four cycles during the concomitant phase. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (sum of complete response and partial response). Secondary endpoints, ie, overall survival and progression-free survival, were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Efficacy was evaluated on the intent-to-treat and efficacy-evaluable sets. Safety was assessed from adverse event and serious adverse event data.

Results

The objective response rate was significantly higher in the nimotuzumab group than in the control group in the intent-to-treat population (54% versus 34.5%; P=0.04). A complete response and partial response were achieved in 3.6% and 50% of patients, respectively, in the nimotuzumab group, and in 4% and 30.9% of patients, respectively, in the control group. No significant differences in median progression-free survival and overall survival were observed. Safety profiles were comparable between the two groups.

Conclusion

Nimotuzumab plus chemotherapy significantly improved the objective response rate as compared with chemotherapy alone. The combination was safe and well tolerated in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer.

Modulation of MDR1 and MRP3 gene expression in lung cancer cells after paclitaxel and carboplatin exposure

Carboplatin-paclitaxel is a reference regimen in the treatment of locally advanced or disseminated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This paper discusses the multidrug resistance developed with this drug combination, which is one of the major obstacles to successful treatment. In order to understand and overcome the drug resistance pattern of NSCLC after carboplatin plus paclitaxel exposure, levels of mRNA expression of multidrug resistance 1 (MDR1) and multidrug resistance-associated protein 3 (MRP3) were investigated in primary NSCLC cell lines (A-549 and A-427) and a metastasis-derived NSCLC cell line (NODO). Our results showed that exposure of the three NSCLC lines to plasma concentrations of paclitaxel (5 μM) produced an increase in MDR1 expression, while MRP3 showed no alteration in expression. By contrast, the same cells exposed to carboplatin plasma concentrations (30 μM) showed overexpression of MRP3. In these cells, MDR1 showed no expression changes. Interestingly, the combination of both paclitaxel and carboplatin caused increased expression of the MDR1 drug resistance gene rather than the individual treatments. These results suggest that carboplatin and paclitaxel may induce drug resistance mediated by MDR1 and MRP3, which may be enhanced by the simultaneous use of both drugs.

Maintenance treatment with chemotherapy and immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: a case report

A 53-years-old woman was diagnosed with lung adenocarcinoma state IV (synchronous pleural involvement) in April 2009. First-line systemic treatment included six cycles of Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, and Bevacizumab. Partial response was achieved. Maintenance therapy with Bevacizumab and Pemetrexed was given from September 2009 to February 2010. No response changes were observed. Immunotherapy was initiated, and then Pemetrexed was given with the same disease status. Both treatments were well tolerated. Immunotherapy toxicity included reaction at the site of injection grade 2. At present, the patient is still on this treatment. Given the poor prognosis of patients with advanced lung cancer, the combination of both treatments during the stable phase of the disease may improve progression-free survival.

In vivo synergistic cytogenetic effects of aminophylline on lymphocyte cultures from patients with lung cancer undergoing chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The anti-cancer and cytogenetic effects of aminophylline (AM) have been demonstrated in several clinical trials. The aim of the present study was to investigate the in vivo cytogenetic effects of AM in newly diagnosed patients with small cell (SCLC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), receiving chemotherapy for the first time.

METHODS

Sister chromatid exchanges (SCEs) and proliferation rate index (PRI) were evaluated in peripheral blood lymphocyte cultures from six patients with SCLC and six patients with NSCLC after the in vitro addition of AM and after the in vivo administration of AM in patients receiving chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The in vitro addition of AM significantly increased SCEs only in SCLC patients (p<0.001). The in vivo administration of AM after chemotherapy increased SCEs in both cancer types (SCLC: p<0.001, NSCLC: p=0.003) and this increase was synergistic, the rates of SCEs in the presence of AM were higher than the expected SCE values if the increases above background for chemotherapy and AM were independent and additive (SCLC: p<0.001, NSCLC: p=0.008). Although in both groups of patients cell division delays were observed after the combined chemotherapy plus in vivo AM treatment, the correlation between the magnitude of the SCE response and the PRI depression was not statistically significant (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These observations suggest that AM enhances the results of concurrently administered chemotherapy by synergistically increasing its cytogenetic effects in patients with lung cancer.

Is there still a role for mitomycin-based combination chemotherapy in treating patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer? A single institution experience

Background:

Mitomycin and irinotecan are widely used in the treatment of colorectal cancer, furthermore both of these drugs are active agents against nonsmall cell lung cancer and their combination has shown synergism in preclinical studies. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mitomycin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapy combination in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer progressing after previous antineoplastic therapies.

Methods:

Thirty-one consecutive patients suffering from nonsmall cell lung cancer, who underwent mitomycin- plus irinotecan-based chemotherapy as salvage treatment after failure of at least two previous systemic treatments, were retrospectively identified in our database. Between September 2003 and March 2011, 31 patients with histologically proven stage IIIB or IV nonsmall cell lung cancer, received mitomycin 5 mg/m2 on day 1 followed by irinotecan 150 mg/m2 on day 2. Cycles were repeated at 2-week interval.

Results:

A total of 164 cycles of treatment were given with a median of five per patient (range 1–10). The objective responses included partial response in 6 patients (19.3%), stable disease in 4 (13%), and progressive disease in 21 (67.7%). Median time to disease progression was 4 months, and median survival was 9+ months. Twelve patients (38%) reached 1-year survival. Grade 3–4 toxicities occurred in seven patients (22.5%), mainly myelosuppression (neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia), mucositis, and diarrhea. No treatment-related death was recorded.

Conclusion:

The mitomycin- and irinotecan-based combination chemotherapy seems to be tolerated and active in this subset of heavily pretreated patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer. However, evaluation or recruitment of a larger number of patients would be needed to provide more adequate data on safety and activity of the described combination.

Enhanced anti-tumor and anti-angiogenic effects of metronomic cyclophosphamide combined with Endostar in a xenograft model of human lung cancer

Standard chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC has reached a therapeutic plateau. More effective strategies must be explored. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of metronomic chemotherapy combined with an angiogenesis inhibitor in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A total of 114 BALB/c nude mice were inoculated subcutaneously with human NSCLC cells (A549), and when xenograft tumors were palpable, mice were randomly injected with saline as controls (Ctrl), or treated with metronomic cyclophosphamide (MET CPA), recombinant human endostatin, Endostar (Endo), MET CPA combined with Endostar (MET CPA + Endo) or maximum tolerance dose of CPA (MTD CPA), respectively. The growth of xenograft tumors and mouse survival were monitored. The frequency of peripheral blood circulating endothelial cells (CECs), microvessel density (MVD) and pericyte coverage was determined using flow cytometry and immunofluorescence staining. In comparison with the controls, treatment with either drug significantly inhibited the growth of xenograft tumors in mice. Treatment with MET CPA or Endostar, but not with MTD CPA, significantly reduced the frequency of peripheral blood total and viable CECs and the value of MVD. Endostar also considerably reduced pericyte coverage in xenograft tumors. Moreover, MET CPA combined with Endostar further reduced the frequency of peripheral blood CECs, the value of MVD, and pericyte coverage, with concomitant delay in tumor growth and extension of mouse survival. Our results indicate that MET CPA combined with Endostar results in enhanced anti-tumor and anti-angiogenic effects in a xenograft model of human lung cancer. Combined therapy with metronomic chemotherapy and an angiogenesis inhibitor may serve as a promising treatment strategy for patients with advanced NSCLC.

LICC: L-BLP25 in patients with colorectal carcinoma after curative resection of hepatic metastases: a randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter, multinational, double-blinded phase II trial

Background

15-20% of all patients initially diagnosed with colorectal cancer develop metastatic disease and surgical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment available. Current 5-year survival following R0-resection of liver metastases is 28-39%, but recurrence eventually occurs in up to 70%. To date, adjuvant chemotherapy has not improved clinical outcomes significantly. The primary objective of the ongoing LICC trial (L-BLP25 In Colorectal Cancer) is to determine whether L-BLP25, an active cancer immunotherapy, extends recurrence-free survival (RFS) time over placebo in colorectal cancer patients following R0/R1 resection of hepatic metastases. L-BLP25 targets MUC1 glycoprotein, which is highly expressed in hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. In a phase IIB trial, L-BLP25 has shown acceptable tolerability and a trend towards longer survival in patients with stage IIIB locoregional NSCLC.

Methods/Design

This is a multinational, phase II, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a sample size of 159 patients from 20 centers in 3 countries. Patients with stage IV colorectal adenocarcinoma limited to liver metastases are included. Following curative-intent complete resection of the primary tumor and of all synchronous/metachronous metastases, eligible patients are randomized 2:1 to receive either L-BLP25 or placebo. Those allocated to L-BLP25 receive a single dose of 300 mg/m² cyclophosphamide (CP) 3 days before first L-BLP25 dose, then primary treatment with s.c. L-BLP25 930 μg once weekly for 8 weeks, followed by s.c. L-BLP25 930 μg maintenance doses at 6-week (years 1&2) and 12-week (year 3) intervals unless recurrence occurs. In the control arm, CP is replaced by saline solution and L-BLP25 by placebo. Primary endpoint is the comparison of recurrence-free survival (RFS) time between groups. Secondary endpoints are overall survival (OS) time, safety, tolerability, RFS/OS in MUC-1 positive cancers. Exploratory immune response analyses are planned. The primary endpoint will be assessed in Q3 2016. Follow-up will end Q3 2017. Interim analyses are not planned.

Discussion

The design and implementation of such a vaccination study in colorectal cancer is feasible. The study will provide recurrence-free and overall survival rates of groups in an unbiased fashion.

Trial Registration

EudraCT Number 2011-000218-20

Strengths and weaknesses of immunotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of 12 randomized controlled trials

Background

Lung cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for approximately 85% of all lung cancers. Immunotherapy has yielded no consistent benefit to date for those patients. Assessing the objective efficacy and safety of immunotherapy for advanced NSCLC patients will help to instruct the future development of immunotherapeutic drugs.

Methodology and Principal Findings

We performed a meta-analysis of 12 randomized controlled trials including 3134 patients (1570 patients in the immunotherapy group and 1564 patients in the control group) with histologically confirmed stage IIIA, IIIB, or IV NSCLC. The analysis was executed with efficacy end points regarding overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and total effective rate. Overall unstratified OS, PFS, PR, and total effective rate were significantly improved in advanced NSCLC patients in the immunotherapy group (P = 0.0007, 0.0004, 0.002, 0.003, respectively), whereas CR was not improved (P = 0.97). Subgroup analysis showed that monoclonal antibody (mAb) immunotherapy significantly improved the PFS, PR, and total effective rate and showed a trend of improving OS of advanced NSCLC patients compared with the control group, with one kind of adverse event being significantly dominant. Compared with the control group, the vaccine subgroup showed no significant difference with regard to serious adverse events, whereas cytokine immunotherapy significantly induced three kinds of serious adverse events.

Conclusions

Immunotherapy works efficiently on advanced NSCLC patients. Of several immunotherapies, mAb therapy may be a potential immunotherapy for advanced NSCLC patients, and become a standard complementary therapeutic approach in the future if the issues concerning toxicity and allergenicity of mAbs have been overcome.

A review of clinical trials of cetuximab combined with radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer

Treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is challenging in many ways. One of the problems is disappointing local control rates in larger volume disease. Moreover, the likelihood of both nodal and distant spread increases with primary tumour (T-) stage. Many patients are elderly and have considerable comorbidity. Therefore, aggressive combined modality treatment might be contraindicated or poorly tolerated. In many cases with larger tumour volume, sufficiently high radiation doses can not be administered because the tolerance of surrounding normal tissues must be respected. Under such circumstances, simultaneous administration of radiosensitizing agents, which increase tumour cell kill, might improve the therapeutic ratio. If such agents have a favourable toxicity profile, even elderly patients might tolerate concomitant treatment. Based on sound preclinical evidence, several relatively small studies have examined radiotherapy (RT) with cetuximab in stage III NSCLC. Three different strategies were pursued: 1) RT plus cetuximab (2 studies), 2) induction chemotherapy followed by RT plus cetuximab (2 studies) and 3) concomitant RT and chemotherapy plus cetuximab (2 studies). Radiation doses were limited to 60-70 Gy. As a result of study design, in particular lack of randomised comparison between cetuximab and no cetuximab, the efficacy results are difficult to interpret. However, strategy 1) and 3) appear more promising than induction chemotherapy followed by RT and cetuximab. Toxicity and adverse events were more common when concomitant chemotherapy was given. Nevertheless, combined treatment appears feasible. The role of consolidation cetuximab after RT is uncertain. A large randomised phase III study of combined RT, chemotherapy and cetuximab has been initiated.

INSPIRE: A phase III study of the BLP25 liposome vaccine (L-BLP25) in Asian patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer

Background

Previous research suggests the therapeutic cancer vaccine L-BLP25 potentially provides a survival benefit in patients with locally advanced unresectable stage III non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). These promising findings prompted the phase III study, INSPIRE, in patients of East-Asian ethnicity. East-Asian ethnicity is an independent favourable prognostic factor for survival in NSCLC. The favourable prognosis is most likely due to a higher incidence of EGFR mutations among this patient population.

Methods/design

The primary objective of the INSPIRE study is to assess the treatment effect of L-BLP25 plus best supportive care (BSC), as compared to placebo plus BSC, on overall survival time in East-Asian patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC and either documented stable disease or an objective response according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria following primary chemoradiotherapy. Those in the L-BLP25 arm will receive a single intravenous infusion of cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m²) 3 days before the first L-BLP25 vaccination, with a corresponding intravenous infusion of saline to be given in the control arm. A primary treatment phase of 8 subcutaneous vaccinations of L-BLP25 930 μg or placebo at weekly intervals will be followed by a maintenance treatment phase of 6-weekly vaccinations continued until disease progression or discontinuation from the study.

Discussion

The ongoing INSPIRE study is the first large study of a therapeutic cancer vaccine specifically in an East-Asian population. It evaluates the potential of maintenance therapy with L-BLP25 to prolong survival in East-Asian patients with stage III NSCLC where there are limited treatment options currently available.

Study number

EMR 63325-012

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov reference: NCT01015443