Outcomes from salvage chemotherapy or pembrolizumab beyond progression with or without local ablative therapies for advanced non-small cell lung cancers with PD-L1 ≥50% who progress on first-line immunotherapy: real-world data from a European cohort

Immune checkpoint inhibitors rechallenge in non-small cell lung cancer: Current evidence and future directions

Immunotherapy, remarkably immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has significantly altered the treatment landscape for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Despite their success, the discontinuation of ICIs therapy may occur due to factors such as prior treatment completion, disease progression during ICIs treatment, or immune-related adverse events (irAEs). As numerous studies highlight the dynamic nature of immune responses and the sustained benefits of ICIs, ICIs rechallenge has become an attractive and feasible option. However, the decision-making process for ICIs rechallenge in clinical settings is complicated by numerous uncertainties. This review systematically analyses existing clinical research evidence, classifying ICIs rechallenge into distinct clinical scenarios, exploring methods to overcome ICIs resistance in rechallenge instances, and identifying biomarkers to select patients likely to benefit from rechallenge. By integrating recent studies and new technologies, we offer crucial recommendations for future clinical trial design and provide a practical guideline to maximize the therapeutic benefits of immunotherapy for NSCLC patients.

Experience with pembrolizumab in a renal transplant patient with advanced lung cancer: a case report and review

The treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has undergone a change because of the advancement of new therapies, like immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), including pembrolizumab. A 64-year-old woman received a kidney transplant in 2012 because of chronic kidney disease secondary to glomerulosclerosis, diagnosed in 2020 with stage IV NSCLC because of metastasis in the contralateral lung, with programmed death ligand 1programmed death ligand 1 expression of 98%, starting treatment with ICIs, despite presenting a graft rejection risk around 40%. After three ICIs cycles, the patient presented a partial response, with good tolerance to treatment and no signs of graft failure. ICIs were maintained for 19 cycles, until disease progression was observed on a reassessment computed tomography, with a progression-free interval of 18 months, with no evidence of treatment rejection. In transplant patients diagnosed with some type of tumor, antineoplastic therapies may be less effective than in the general population. The current evidence derives from observational studies and case series, since this patient population was excluded from clinical trials, suggesting that the use of ICIs in patients with kidney transplants can lead to acute graft rejection. This is still a controversial issue, it is necessary to improve the quality of the data, with the implementation of clinical trials or prospective studies.

Continuation of immunotherapy beyond progression is beneficial to the survival of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

To investigate the potential clinical importance of continuing immunotherapy beyond progression in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC).

METHODS

The data of patients with aNSCLC who experienced progressive disease after receiving first-line immunotherapy plus chemotherapy were collected from multiple centers for the period from January 1, 2018 to May 31, 2022. According to the second-line treatment, the patients were classified into two groups: the continuation of immunotherapy beyond progression (CIBP) group and the discontinuation of immunotherapy beyond progression (DIBP) group. The efficacy and safety of the treatment were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Overall, data from 169 patients were analyzed; 93 patients were enrolled in the CIBP group and 76 patients were in the DIBP group. The median second-line progression-free survival was 5.5 months in the CIBP group, which for the DIBP group was 3.4 (p = 0.011). The median overall survival of the CIBP group was 13.3 months, whereas that of the DIBP group was 8.8 months (p = 0.031). The disease control rate of the CIBP group (79.57%) was observably higher than that of the DIBP group (64.47%; p = 0.028). Among patients who responded better (complete or partial response) to prior therapy, the median progression-free survival was 5.5 months and 3.3 months in the CIBP and DIBP groups respectively (p = 0.022), and the median overall survival was 14.8 months and 8.8 months in the CIBP and DIBP groups respectively (p = 0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

Continuing immunotherapy as a second-line treatment could be beneficial to the survival of patients with aNSCLC with disease progression beyond initial chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy.

Continuous immunotherapy beyond progression in clinical practice for small cell lung cancer

In non-small-cell lung cancer, continuous immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) beyond progression are often used in clinical practice. On the other hand, there is almost no data on whether the concept of continuous ICIs beyond progression can be adopted in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). We describe the effectiveness of continuous ICIs beyond progression in SCLC. Medical courses of SCLC patients treated with chemo-immunotherapy were retrospectively reviewed at our hospital. The study included 36 patients with a median age of 73 years (range 46-83 years) who introduced chemo-immunotherapy between September 2019 and December 2022. Atezolizumab and durvalumab in combination with platinum plus etoposide were administered in 24 and 12 patients, respectively. The overall response rate was 67% and the disease control rate was 86%. The median progression-free survival and time to treatment failure (TTF) were 5.1 and 10.3 months, respectively. The median cycle of ICIs was 5 (range 1-42). The median overall survival was 13.6 months. ICIs were administered beyond progression in 14 (39%) patients: five were treated again with chemo-immunotherapy and local ablative radiotherapy, four with local ablative radiotherapy and continuous ICIs, three with chemo-immunotherapy, and two with continuous ICIs alone. TTF exceeded 12 months in 12 (86%) of the 14 cases, six of which were still on ICIs. Adverse events ≥grade 3 were observed in 21 (58%) patients. A notable TTF suggested a benefit of continuous ICIs beyond progression. The concept could be suitably adopted and provide a favorable prognosis in selected cases of SCLC that were previously regarded as an aggressive malignancy.

Experience with pembrolizumab in a renal transplant patient with advanced lung cancer: a case report and review

The treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has undergone a change due to the advancement of new therapies, like immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), including pembrolizumab. A 64-year-old woman received a kidney transplant in 2012 due to chronic kidney disease secondary to glomerulosclerosis, diagnosed in 2020 with stage IV NSCLC due to metastasis in the contralateral lung, with PD-L1 expression of 98%, starting treatment with ICIs, despite presenting a graft rejection risk around 40%. After 3 ICI cycles, the patient presented a partial response, with good tolerance to treatment and no signs of graft failure. ICIs were maintained for 19 cycles, until disease progression was observed on a reassessment computed tomography, with a progression-free interval of 18 months, with no evidence of treatment rejection. In transplant patients diagnosed with some type of tumor, antineoplastic therapies may be less effective than in the general population. The current evidence derives from observational studies and case series, since this patient population was excluded from clinical trials, suggesting that the use of ICIs in patients with kidney transplants can lead to acute graft rejection. This is still a controversial issue, it is necessary to improve the quality of the data, with the implementation of clinical trials or prospective studies.

[Interest of focal radiotherapy in case of oligoprogression under immunotherapy in the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer]

INTRODUCTION

The prognosis of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been improved by the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Unfortunately, in some cases, cancer cells will develop resistance mechanisms. In case of progression in a limited number of lesions (oligoprogression), focal treatment with radiotherapy is proposed while continuing the ICI therapy.

METHODS

A cohort of 37 patients with metastatic NSCLC treated with nivolumab (anti-PD-1) in second or subsequent line and who received focal radiotherapy for oligoprogression with continuation of nivolumab was compared with a control cohort of 87 patients no oligoprogressor treated par immunotherapy.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 37 months [18; 62], the median progression free survival (PFS) in the radiotherapy-treated cohort was 15.04 versus 5.04 months in the control cohort, with a statistically significant difference (P=0.048). The median PFS following focal radiotherapy in the oligoprogressor group was 7.5 months. In univariate analysis, the presence of lung metastasis was associated with increased PFS, in contrast to the presence of brain metastases, which were associated with decreased PFS in the radiotherapy group. The median overall survival was not reached in both groups, with no significant difference between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSION

The combination of focal radiotherapy in case of oligoprogression and continued treatment with nivolumab in the treatment of metastatic NSCLC in the second or subsequent line of treatment seems to be with an increase in PFS.

First-line cemiplimab monotherapy and continued cemiplimab beyond progression plus chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 50% or more (EMPOWER-Lung 1): 35-month follow-up from a mutlicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Cemiplimab provided significant survival benefit to patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of at least 50% and no actionable biomarkers at 1-year follow-up. In this exploratory analysis, we provide outcomes after 35 months' follow-up and the effect of adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at the time of disease progression.

METHODS

EMPOWER-Lung 1 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. We enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed squamous or non-squamous advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of 50% or more. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to intravenous cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks for up to 108 weeks, or until disease progression, or investigator's choice of chemotherapy. Central randomisation scheme generated by an interactive web response system governed the randomisation process that was stratified by histology and geographical region. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression free survival, as assessed by a blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Patients with disease progression on cemiplimab could continue cemiplimab with the addition of up to four cycles of chemotherapy. We assessed response in these patients by BICR against a new baseline, defined as the last scan before chemotherapy initiation. The primary endpoints were assessed in all randomly assigned participants (ie, intention-to-treat population) and in those with a PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. We assessed adverse events in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540.

FINDINGS

Between May 29, 2017, and March 4, 2020, we recruited 712 patients (607 [85%] were male and 105 [15%] were female). We randomly assigned 357 (50%) to cemiplimab and 355 (50%) to chemotherapy. 284 (50%) patients assigned to cemiplimab and 281 (50%) assigned to chemotherapy had verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. At 35 months' follow-up, among those with a verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50% median overall survival in the cemiplimab group was 26·1 months (95% CI 22·1-31·8; 149 [52%] of 284 died) versus 13·3 months (10·5-16·2; 188 [67%] of 281 died) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·46-0·71; p<0·0001), median progression-free survival was 8·1 months (95% CI 6·2-8·8; 214 events occurred) in the cemiplimab group versus 5·3 months (4·3-6·1; 236 events occurred) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·51, 95% CI 0·42-0·62; p<0·0001). Continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy as second-line therapy (n=64) resulted in a median progression-free survival of 6·6 months (6·1-9·3) and overall survival of 15·1 months (11·3-18·7). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (15 [4%] of 356 patients in the cemiplimab group vs 60 [17%] of 343 in the control group), neutropenia (three [1%] vs 35 [10%]), and pneumonia (18 [5%] vs 13 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in ten (3%) of 356 patients treated with cemiplimab (due to autoimmune myocarditis, cardiac failure, cardio-respiratory arrest, cardiopulmonary failure, septic shock, tumour hyperprogression, nephritis, respiratory failure, [n=1 each] and general disorders or unknown [n=2]) and in seven (2%) of 343 patients treated with chemotherapy (due to pneumonia and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each], and cardiac arrest, lung abscess, and myocardial infarction [n=1 each]). The safety profile of cemiplimab at 35 months, and of continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy, was generally consistent with that previously observed for these treatments, with no new safety signals INTERPRETATION: At 35 months' follow-up, the survival benefit of cemiplimab for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer was at least as pronounced as at 1 year, affirming its use as first-line monotherapy for this population. Adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at progression might provide a new second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

FUNDING

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi.

What to do after immune-checkpoint inhibitors failure in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: an expert opinion and review

INTRODUCTION

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (IO) have significantly improved outcomes of patients with non-oncogene-addicted non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), becoming the first-line agents for advanced disease. However, resistance remains a significant clinical challenge, limiting their effectiveness.

AREAS COVERED

Hereby, we addressed standard and innovative therapeutic approaches for NSCLC patients experiencing progression after IO treatment, discussing the emerging resistance mechanisms and the ongoing efforts to overcome them. In order to provide a complete overview of the matter, we performed a comprehensive literature search across prominent databases, including PubMed, EMBASE (Excerpta Medica dataBASE), and the Cochrane Library, and a research of the main ongoing studies on clinicaltrials.gov.

EXPERT OPINION

The dynamics of progression to IO, especially in terms of time to treatment failure and burden of progressive disease, should guide the best subsequent management, together with patient clinical conditions. Long-responders to IO might benefit from continuation of IO beyond-progression, in combination with other treatments. Patients who experience early progression should be treated with salvage CT in case of preserved clinical conditions. Finally, patients who respond to IO for a considerable timeframe and who later present oligo-progression could be treated with a multimodal approach in order to maximize the benefit of immunotherapy.

Immunotherapy resistance in non-small-cell lung cancer: From mechanism to clinical strategies

The high primary resistance incidence and unavoidable secondary resistance are the major clinical obstacle to lasting long-term benefits in Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with immunotherapy. The mechanisms of immunotherapy resistance in NSCLC are complex, mainly involving tumor cells and tumor microenvironment (TME) infiltrating immune cells, including TAMs, B cells, NK cells, and T cells. The selection of clinical strategies for NSCLC progression after immunotherapy resistance should depend on the progressive mode. The progression pattern of NSCLC patients after immunotherapy resistance can be divided into oligo-progression and systemic/multiple progression, which should be considered for further treatment selection. In the future, it needs to explore how to optimize the combined therapy and explore strategies to reprogram infiltrating immune cells under various genetic backgrounds of tumor cells and timely reshape TME during antitumor treatments.

Treatment strategies based on different oligoprogressive patterns after immunotherapy failure in metastatic NSCLC

Background

Oligoprogressive disease is recognized as the overall umbrella term; however, a small number of progressions on imaging can represent different clinical scenarios. This study aims to explore the optimal treatment strategy after immunotherapy (IO) resistance in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), especially in personalized therapies for patients with different oligoprogressive patterns.

Methods

Based on European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer consensus, metastatic NSCLC patients with cancer progression after IO resistance were divided into four patterns, repeat oligoprogression (REO, oligoprogression with a history of oligometastatic disease), induced oligoprogression (INO, oligoprogression with a history of polymetastatic disease), de-novo polyprogression (DNP, polyprogression with a history of oligometastatic disease), and repeat polyprogression (REP, polyprogression with a history of polymetastatic disease). Patients with advanced NSCLC who received programmed cell death-1/programmed cell death ligand-1 inhibitors between January 2016 and July 2021 at Shanghai Chest Hospital were identified. The progression patterns and next-line progression-free survival (nPFS), overall survival (OS) were investigated stratified by treatment strategies. nPFS and OS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

A total of 500 metastatic NSCLC patients were included. Among 401 patients developed progression, 36.2% (145/401) developed oligoprogression and 63.8% (256/401) developed polyprogression. Specifically, 26.9% (108/401) patients had REO, 9.2% (37/401) patients had INO, 27.4% (110/401) patients had DNP, and 36.4% (146/401) patients had REP, respectively. The patients with REO who received local ablative therapy (LAT) had significant longer median nPFS and OS compared with no LAT group (6.8 versus 3.3 months; p = 0.0135; OS, not reached versus 24.5 months; p = 0.0337). By contrast, there were no nPFS and OS differences in INO patients who received LAT compared with no LAT group (nPFS, 3.6 versus 5.3 months; p = 0.3540; OS, 36.6 versus 45.4 months; p = 0.8659). But in INO patients, there were significant longer median nPFS and OS using IO maintenance by contrast with IO halt treatment (nPFS, 6.1 versus 4.1 months; p = 0.0264; OS, 45.4 versus 32.3 months; p = 0.0348).

Conclusions

LAT (radiation or surgery) is more important for patients with REO while IO maintenance plays a more dominant role in patients with INO.

Virtual clinical trials: A tool for predicting patients who may benefit from treatment beyond progression with pembrolizumab in non-small cell lung cancer

Enrolling patients in immunotherapy clinical trials is becoming increasingly competitive. Virtual clinical trials can help investigators answer key questions despite this. For example, pembrolizumab is the recommended first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with no driver alterations and a programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) Tumor Proportion Score ≥50%. Salvage therapies for relapsed/refractory patients are limited. Retrospective studies suggest that a subset of patients may benefit from pembrolizumab beyond progression; these results have not been validated in a prospective study. We constructed digital twins of patients and simulated clinical trials to predict the best salvage therapy after progressive disease (PD) on pembrolizumab. Response dynamics were evaluated at the lesion level to represent patients who experience systemic PD while individual lesions continue shrinking. With >25,000 radiographic lesion measurements from >500 patients, we simulated responses to pembrolizumab, chemotherapy, and PD on pembrolizumab followed by either pembrolizumab beyond progression or salvage chemotherapy. Switching all progressors to salvage chemotherapy was suboptimal. Virtual trials predicted progression-free survival (PFS) from pembrolizumab beyond progression to be comparable with salvage chemotherapy in patients whose PD was due to nontarget progression. A PFS-optimized regimen may improve disease control rates ≥15%. Pembrolizumab beyond progression may benefit a subset of patients with PD-L1-high, driver alteration-free NSCLC, but prospective studies are warranted.

Immunotherapy in Advanced NSCLC Without Driver Mutations: Available Therapeutic Alternatives After Progression and Future Treatment Options

The treatment paradigm of non-small-cell lung cancer without oncogenic drivers has varied dramatically in recent years and is constantly evolving. Immune- checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated unprecedented durable efficacy in a subset of these patients, so these drugs have become the standard of care in most cases. There are different ways to deliver these agents, such as monotherapy and combinations of immunotherapy or chemotherapy plus immunotherapy. Treatment selection is complicated by an absence of head-to-head comparisons in randomized trials because these agents have gained approval by demonstrating superiority to platinum-doublet chemotherapy alone. Unfortunately, most patients will progress and die from their disease despite advances. Furthermore, after progression on these agents, there is a lack of randomized controlled data to support further management, constituting an unmet need. This review discusses the therapeutic alternatives after progression, summarizes mechanisms of resistance and progression patterns, and describes the main approaches under clinical investigation in the field.

Investigating the Quality of Life for Cancer Patients and Estimating the Cost of Immunotherapy in Selected Cases

The aim of this study is to assess the quality of life of patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) by evaluating their physical and psychological well-being as well as their social and spiritual functioning. The 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and quality of life core 30 (QLQ-C30) questionnaires were used to measure the quality of life of people receiving checkpoint inhibitors. An attempt was also made to make a rough estimate of the cost of checkpoint inhibitors in selected cases. The present study was conducted at the Oncology Day Hospital of the General University Hospital of Patras and the sample consisted of 100 subjects. The results of the two questionnaires show that the subjective evaluation of the patient's quality of life is satisfactory and functional since most of the respondents evaluate their quality of life as good to very good. Regarding the duration of immunotherapy, their health status seems to have improved, as 49% of respondents report having no pain, while the QLQ-C30 shows that 93% of patients have no problems with personal hygiene. Important determinants related to the limitation of work and daily activities were influenced by patients' age and marital status. Finally, age, monthly income, and education level seem to exert a general influence on a person's physical condition.

Treatment beyond progression in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Treatment beyond progression (TBP) is defined as treatment continuing in spite of disease progression, according to the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide evidence for the effects of TBP on lung cancer survival.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study has been conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic review of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Collaboration Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials from the inception of each database to December 2021 was conducted. Two authors independently reviewed articles for inclusion and extract data from all the retrieved articles. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software, version 3 (Biostat, Englewood, NJ, USA). Hazard ratios (HRs) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used for survival outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified five (15.6%) prospective randomized trials and twenty-seven (84.4%) retrospective observational studies of a total of 9,631 patients for the meta-analysis. 3,941 patients (40.9%) were in a TBP group and 5,690 patients (59.1%) were in a non-TBP group. There is a statistically significant advantage for patients who received TBP compared with those who did not in post progression progression-free survival (ppPFS), post progression overall survival (ppOS), and overall survival (OS) from initiation of drugs (ppPFS: HR, 0.746; 95% CI, 0.644-0.865; P<0.001; ppOS: HR, 0.689; 95% CI, 0.596-0.797; P<0.001; OS from initiation of drugs: HR, 0.515; 95% CI, 0.387-0.685; P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study provides further evidence in support of TBP for NSCLC, however, these results require cautious interpretation. Large, randomized, controlled trials investigating the efficacy of TBP in lung cancer treatment are warranted.

SYSTEMIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ identifier CRD42021285147.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge in advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

After progression to immunotherapy, the standard of care for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was limited. Administration of the same or different immune checkpoint inhibitors (i.e., ICI rechallenge) may serve as a novel option. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ICI rechallenge for NSCLC and explore prognostic factors.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, data of advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients rechallenged with ICI at the Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, and Peking Union Medical College between December 2018 and June 2021 were retrieved. Progression-free, overall survivals (PFS; OS), etc. were calculated. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to baseline characteristics, prior treatment results, etc. for prognostic factor exploration using the Cox model.

RESULTS

Forty patients were included. Median age was 59 years. Thirty-one (78%) were male. Twenty-seven (68%) were smokers. Adenocarcinoma (28 [70%]) was the major histological subtype. Median PFS of patients receiving initial ICI was 5.7 months. The most common rechallenge regimens were ICI plus chemotherapy and/or angiogenesis inhibitor (93%). Seventeen (43%) were rechallenged with another ICI. Median PFS for ICI rechallenge was 6.8 months (95% CI 5.8-7.8). OS was immature. Tendencies for longer PFS were observed in nonsmoker or patients with adenocarcinoma, response of stable/progressive disease in initial immunotherapy, or whose treatment lines prior to ICI rechallenge were one/two. However, all results of prognostic factors were nonsignificant.

CONCLUSION

ICI rechallenge may be an option for NSCLC after progress to immunotherapy. Further studies to confirm the efficacy and investigate prognostic factors are warranted.

Rechallenge of immunotherapy beyond progression in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer

Background: Rechallenge of immunotherapy beyond progression (RIBP) has been demonstrably effective in a variety of cancers. Our study aims to investigate the efficacy of RIBP in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients under real-world conditions.

Methods: SCLC patients who experienced progressive disease after receiving programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy from January 2017 to October 2021 were enrolled. The study population was divided into two groups: the RIBP group and the discontinuation of immunotherapy beyond progression (DIBP) group. Inverse propensity score weighting (IPSW) method was used to balance the clinical baseline characteristics. The short-term and long-term efficacy of the two groups was compared.

Results: 100 SCLC patients were included in this study. There were 45 patients in the RIBP group and 55 patients in the DIBP group. The disease control rate (DCR) and the proportion of durable clinical benefit (DCB) were significantly higher in the RIBP group (DCR: 79.7% vs. 55.7%, p = 0.027; DCB: 40.7 vs. 20.7%, p = 0.025) after weighting. The median progressive-free survival (PFS) in the RIBP group was significantly longer than the DIBP group in the total population (mPFS: 4.8 vs. 2.4 months, p = 0.002), while there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) of the two groups (mOS: 17.4 vs. 8.0 months, p = 0.098). In the weighted first-line initial immunotherapy subgroup, PFS and OS were significantly improved in the RIBP group (mPFS: 4.5 vs. 2.8 months, p = 0.017; mOS: 11.6 vs. 5.4 months, p = 0.028). After weighting, the RIBP group had a significantly longer PFS than the DIBP group in the SD/PD response to the initial immunotherapy subgroup (mPFS: 6.8 vs. 1.8 months, p = 0.026).

Conclusion: Rechallenge of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors could bring benefits to SCLC patients, especially in the first-line initial immunotherapy subgroup or SD/PD response to the initial immunotherapy subgroup.

Platinum-Based Chemotherapy 'Rechallenge' in Advanced Non-ovarian Solid Malignancies

Platinum-based chemotherapy forms the backbone of treatment for many solid cancers. However, resistance inevitably develops in those with advanced disease. Platinum rechallenge is a well-established concept in the management of ovarian cancer, small cell lung cancer and germ cell tumours. In other solid malignancies there is a lack of quality evidence to support platinum rechallenge, yet it is a widely adopted strategy. Often, patients are within the last year of life, making questions of efficacy, treatment-related toxicity and quality of life critical factors for treatment recommendations. In this overview we appraise the available evidence for platinum rechallenge and strategies being developed to attempt resensitisation of tumours to platinum-based chemotherapy.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based treatment beyond progression with prior immunotherapy in patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective study

Background

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) provide unprecedented survival improvement for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), disease progression inevitably occurs. After ICIs failure, limited data exist on whether ICI-based treatment beyond progression (TBP) may be beneficial to advanced NSCLC. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of this treatment approach in advanced NSCLC and identify potential beneficial factors.

Methods

Patients with stage IV NSCLC who received ICI-based treatment after the failure of prior PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor treatments (monotherapy or combination therapy) between January 2016 and July 2020 were enrolled. Their clinical characteristics and treatment procedures were collected, and the follow-up would be performed.

Results

A total of 204 patients were included. All patients had disease progression after prior immunotherapy, with 49.5% (101/204) of patients presenting with new metastasis lesions and the rest 50.5% (103/204) of patients' progression on originate lesions. Within the entire cohort, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) of ICI-based TBP with prior immunotherapy were 5.0 months (95% CI: 4.5-5.5 months) and 15.7 months (95% CI: 14.7-16.8 months), respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 9.3% and 74.0%, respectively. According to the multivariate analysis, ICI-based combination therapy [PFS: hazard ratio (HR), 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28-0.84, P=0.011] (OS: HR, 0.44, 95% CI: 0.23-0.85, P=0.014), not having targetable gene alterations (PFS: HR, 0.56, 95% CI: 0.40-0.79, P=0.001) (OS: HR, 0.57, 95% CI: 0.37-0.87, P=0.009), and good response to prior immunotherapy (PFS: HR, 0.36, 95% CI: 0.24-0.53, P<0.0001) (OS: HR, 0.31, 95% CI: 0.19-0.52, P<0.0001) were independently associated with improved PFS and OS. Moreover, disease progression due to appearances of new metastasis (OS: HR, 0.56, 95% CI: 0.37-0.84, P=0.005) was only associated with better OS.

Conclusions

While the ORR in patients with advanced NSCLC receiving ICI-based TBP with prior immunotherapy was limited, the DCR was relatively high in our study which is encouraging. ICI-based treatment strategy may be a reasonable option for patients who progressed from prior immunotherapy. Further prospective studies on larger sample size are warranted.

Pericardial effusion with pembrolizumab

INTRODUCTION

The treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has profoundly changed on account of the arrival of new therapies, like immunotherapy. Within this group of drugs, those aimed at the programmed cell death-1 or programmed cell death ligand-1(PD1/PDL-1) are very relevant, for example, Pembrolizumab. Although its adverse reactions are generally mild and well tolerated, it has been associated with certain immune-related adverse events (IrAEs) than can be serious and affect any organ.

CASE REPORT

A 62-year-old woman diagnosed with stage IV NSCLC with a single bone metastasis and PD-L1 expression of 60% started treatment with cisplatin-pemetrexed-pembrolizumab, and maintenance with pembrolizumab.

MANAGEMENT AND OUTCOME

The patient attended the ER with pericardial effusion that was assumed to be a Pembrolizumab IrAE and was managed with corticosteroids. The patient fully recovered but immunotherapy was not reintroduced due to the severity of the AE.

DISCUSSION

The cardiovascular system is among the least affected organs by immunotoxicity, with an incidence between 0.09-0.6%. However, some authors suspect the incidence is underestimated. Median time to onset is highly variable, ranging from 6 weeks since the first dose to 2 years after discontinuation of the treatment. There are not guidelines on the most effective management of the IrAEs, but according to the pharmaceutical reference, corticosteroids should be initiated followed by a progressive reduction. If no response is obtained, another immunosuppressive agent should be added. The determination to restart immunotherapy depends on the severity of the adverse reaction, the availability of other alternative treatments, and the cancer response.

Efficacy of Pembrolizumab Monotherapy in Patients With or Without Brain Metastases From Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With a PD-L1 Expression ≥50%

The authors conducted a multicenter retrospective study on the outcome of programmed death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score≥50% advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with first-line pembrolizumab according to the presence/absence of brain metastases. A total of 282 patients were included, of whom 56 had brain metastases that were treated with upfront local radiation therapy in 80.3% of cases. The overall response rate was 39.2% and 44.4% in patients with and without brain metastases (P=0.48), respectively, while intracranial response rate and intracranial disease control rate were 67.5% and 85.0%, respectively. The median time-to-treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were 4.2 and 9.9 months versus 10.8 and 26.5 months for patients with and without brain metastases (P=0.06 and 0.05, respectively). Drug discontinuation rate due to treatment-related adverse events was 10.7% and 10.2% in patients with and without brain metastases, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that baseline steroids was an independent predictor for a worse OS (P<0.001), while performance status (PS)≥2 was an independent predictor for a poorer TTF (P<0.001) and OS (P<0.001). In patients with brain metastases, only PS ≥2 was predicted for a worse TTF (P=0.02) and OS (P=0.03). Pembrolizumab has activity against brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancers with programmed death-ligand 1≥50%. Presence of brain metastases per se does not appear to be prognostic, and PS ≥2 seems to be the only factor associated with a worse outcome in patients with brain metastases.

How to optimize the incorporation of immunotherapy in trials for oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a narrative review

Patients with oligometastatic disease (OMD) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are considered as a subgroup of metastatic NSCLC that can obtain long-term survival or even cure. Oligometastatic refers to a state of a limited number of metastases in a limited number of organs. In clinical guidelines it is stated that patients with oligometastatic NSCLC can benefit from the addition of local radical therapy (LRT) to systemic therapy. With the introduction of minimally invasive surgery, advances in interventional radiology and stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT), LRT is becoming feasible for more and more patients. Furthermore, the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in the treatment landscape of advanced NSCLC has improved the survival of these patients. Importantly, the use of ICI in combination with LRT is also of interest in the subgroup of NSCLC patients with OMD. For example, it has been suggested that SRT may synergize with ICI as several preclinical studies reported an increased tumor antigen release, improved antigen presentation, and T-cell infiltration in irradiated tumors. In this narrative review, we describe the current evidence of immunotherapy treatment in OMD NSCLC, with a focus on future trial design and problems that need to be addressed.

Decreased survival in patients treated by chemotherapy after targeted therapy compared to immunotherapy in metastatic melanoma

Background

Cytotoxic chemotherapy (CC) is currently used in metastatic melanoma after patients have developed resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and/or Mitogen‐Activated Protein Kinase inhibitors (MAPKi). We sought to evaluate if a previous treatment by ICI or MAPKi influences clinical outcomes in patients treated by CC in metastatic melanoma.

Methods

Eighty‐eight patients with a metastatic melanoma, treated by CC after a previous treatment by ICI or MAPKi between January 2009 and October 2019, were retrospectively analyzed. Progression‐Free‐Survival (PFS), Overall Survival (OS), Overall Response Rate (ORR), and Disease Control Rate (DCR) were evaluated in patients treated by CC according to their prior treatment by ICI or MAPKi.

Results

Patients treated by CC after ICI tended to have a better median PFS (2.81 months (2.39–5.30) versus 2.40 months (0.91–2.75), p = 0.023), median OS (6.03 months (3.54–11.54) versus 4.44 months (1.54–8.59), p = 0.27), DCR (26.0% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.121) and ORR (22.0% vs. 7.9% p = 0.134) than those previously treated by MAPKi.

Conclusions

A prior treatment by an MAPKi may be associated with a worse response to CC than ICI, and further investigations should be performed to confirm if there is a clinical benefit to propose CC in this setting.

Beyond First-Line Immunotherapy: Potential Therapeutic Strategies Based on Different Pattern Progressions: Oligo and Systemic Progression

First-line immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy has deeply changed the treatment landscape and prognosis in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) patients with no targetable alterations. Nonetheless, a percentage of patients progressed on ICI as monotherapy or combinations. Open questions remain on patients' selection, the identification of biomarkers of primary resistance to immunotherapy and the treatment strategies to overcome secondary resistance to first-line immunotherapy. Local ablative approaches are the main therapeutic strategies in oligoprogressive disease, and their role is emerging in patients treated with immunotherapy. Many therapeutic strategies can be adapted in aNSCLC patients with systemic progression to personalize the treatment approach according to re-characterization of the tumors, previous ICI response, and type of progression. This review's aim is to highlight and discuss the current and potential therapeutic approaches beyond first-line ICI-based therapy in aNSCLC patients based on the pattern of disease progression (oligoprogression versus systemic progression).

Post-progression outcomes of NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50% receiving first-line single-agent pembrolizumab in a large multicentre real-world study

BACKGROUND

Treatment sequencing with first-line immunotherapy, followed by second-line chemotherapy, is still a viable option for NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%.

METHODS

We evaluated post-progression treatment pathways in a large real-world cohort of metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50% treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy.

RESULTS

Overall, 974 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 22.7 months (95%CI: 21.6-38.2), the median overall survival (OS) of the entire population was 15.8 months (95%CI: 13.5-17.5; 548 events). At the data cutoff, among the 678 patients who experienced disease progression, 379 (55.9%) had not received any further treatment, and 359 patients (52.9%) had died. Patients who did not receive post-progression therapies were older (p = 0.0011), with a worse ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and were on corticosteroids prior to pembrolizumab (p = 0.0024). At disease progression, 198 patients (29.2%) received a switched approach and 101 (14.9%) received pembrolizumab ByPD either alone (64 [9.4%]) or in combination with local ablative treatments (37 [5.5%]) (LATs). After a random-case control matching according to ECOG-PS, CNS metastases, bone metastases, and (previous) best response to pembrolizumab, patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD plus LATs were confirmed to have a significantly longer post-progression OS compared to patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD alone 13.9 months versus 7.8 months (p = 0.0179) 241 patients (35.5%) among the 678 who had experienced PD, received a second-line systemic treatment (regardless of previous treatment beyond PD). As compared to first-line treatment commencement, patients' features at the moment of second-line initiation showed a significantly higher proportion of patients aged under 70 years (p = 0.0244), with a poorer ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and having CNS (p = 0.0001), bone (p = 0.0266) and liver metastases (p = 0.0148).

CONCLUSIONS

In the real-world scenario NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% treated with first-line single-agent pembrolizumab achieve worse outcomes as compared to the Keynote-024 trial. Poor post-progression outcomes are major determinants of the global results that should be considered when counselling patients for first-line treatment choices.

Immunotherapy beyond progression in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent a great breakthrough in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). However, whether immunotherapy beyond progression (IBP) is effective for aNSCLC has yet to be established. Therefore, a retrospective clinical study was conducted to investigate the efficacy of IBP in patients with aNSCLC under real-world conditions.

Methods

A total of 125 Chinese patients with aNSCLC who experienced progressive disease (PD) after receiving monotherapy or combination therapy (combined with chemotherapy or/and antiangiogenic therapy) with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors between January 2015 and March 2019 were enrolled. Patients who were treated with ICIs for more than 6 weeks after PD were defined as IBP (n=39), while those who received ICI treatment for less than 6 weeks or discontinued it due to PD were defined as non-IBP (n=86). Patient clinical characteristics were evaluated. An optimization-based method was applied to balance the clinical baseline characteristics between the two groups.

Results

In total population, the IBP group had longer overall survival (median OS, 26.6 vs. 9.5 months; HR, 0.40; 95% CI: 0.23–0.69; P<0.001) and progression-free survival (median PFS, 8.9 vs. 4.1 months; HR, 0.41; 95% CI: 0.26–0.65; P<0.001), compared with the non-IBP group. Despite no significant difference in objective response rate (ORR, 15.4% vs. 11.6%, P=0.560), disease control rate (DCR) was significantly higher in the IBP group (89.7% vs. 61.6%, P<0.001). After balancing baseline covariates, the IBP group also had longer OS (median: 26.6 vs. 10.7 months; HR, 0.40; 95% CI: 0.19–0.84; P=0.015) and PFS (median: 9.7 vs. 4.3 months; HR, 0.28; 95% CI: 0.15–0.51; P<0.001), with a benefit in either of patients previously treated with ICI monotherapy or in combination therapy and with non-response to the previously ICI.

Conclusions

IBP is associated with longer OS and PFS in patients with aNSCLC. Our findings may suggest new therapeutic options for patients with aNSCLC who experienced disease progression after initial immunotherapy.

Prospective Evaluation of All-lesion Versus Single-lesion Radiotherapy in Combination With PD-1/PD-L1 Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Background

Local ablative treatments improve survival in patients with oligometastatic disease in addition to chemotherapy. The application of immune checkpoint inhibitors prolonged patients’ survival in different tumor entities. This raises the question if patients still benefit from intensified local treatments in combination with a more efficient systemic treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Methods

The prospective non-interventional ST-ICI trial investigates treatment with PD-1/PD-L1 (Programmed cell death protein 1/Programmed cell death 1 ligand 1) immune checkpoint inhibitors and radiotherapy in different tumor entities. Patients who started radiotherapy and immunotherapy concomitantly were included in this interim analysis. In this cohort patients with all-lesion radiotherapy (all tumor lesions irradiated, al-RT) were compared to patients with radiotherapy to only a single of their tumor lesions (single-lesion radiotherapy, sl-RT). Endpoints of the interim analysis were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP).

Results

A total of 104 patients were registered between April 2017 and August 2019. Fifty patients started immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment and radiotherapy concomitantly and were included. Most frequent tumor entities were non-small cell lung cancer (62%) followed by head and neck squamous cell cancer (26%). Most frequent location of radiotherapy was lung (34%) and central nervous system (20%). Median duration of follow-up was 8.6 months beginning with first administration of the immune-checkpoint-inhibitor. Median PFS was 9.2 months (95% CI, 5.8 – 12.6) in the al-RT group and 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.5 – 3.5) in the sl-RT group (p<0.001). Median OS was 11.6 months (95% CI, 8.1 - 15.1) in the al-RT group and 4.2 months (95% CI, 3.0 - 5.4) in the sl-RT group (p=0.007). Median TTP was not reached in the al-RT group compared to 4.6 months (95% CI, 1.1–8.0) in the sl-RT group (p=0.028). Univariate Cox regression analyses computed tumor entity, histology, central nervous system metastases, immunotherapy drug and al-RT as predictors of OS (with an effect p-value of ≤ 0.1). In the multivariable analysis only tumor entity and al-RT remained prognostic factors for OS.

Conclusion

Patients with PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy benefit from local radiotherapy to all known lesions compared to single-lesion radiotherapy regarding PFS and OS.

Steroid Use Independently Predicts for Poor Outcomes in Patients With Advanced NSCLC and High PD-L1 Expression Receiving First-Line Pembrolizumab Monotherapy

BACKGROUND

Real-world data have suggested a detrimental effect of steroid use in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving immunotherapy. However, previous studies included heterogeneous cohorts of patients receiving different lines of treatment with several immuno-oncology agents and various combinations of chemotherapy and immuno-oncology agents.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A comprehensive clinicopathologic database of patients with NSCLC and programmed cell death ligand 1 >50% treated with frontline pembrolizumab monotherapy was constructed in 14 centers in Italy, Spain, Greece, and Switzerland. A multivariate analysis adjusting for the established prognostic factors was performed using a Cox regression model.

RESULTS

For the 265 eligible patients, the median age at diagnosis was 67 years, 66% were male, 90% were current or former smokers, 18% had had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or 3. Of the NSCLC subtypes, 64% were adenocarcinoma and 25% were squamous cell. Of the patients, 18% had had brain metastases at diagnosis and 24% had received steroids before or during pembrolizumab treatment. The median time to progression was 4.4 months with and 13.7 months without steroid use (hazard ratio [HR], 2.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.69-3.85; log-rank P < .001). The median survival was 22.5 months for the whole cohort, 7.7 months for the steroid group, and not reached for the non-steroid group (HR, 3.64; 95% CI, 2.34-5.68; log-rank P < .001). On multivariate analysis accounting for all established prognostic variables, steroid use was still independently associated with a high risk of progression (HR, 1.864; 95% CI, 1.179-2.949; P = .008) and death (HR, 2.292; 95% CI, 1.441-3.644; P < .001) CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced NSCLC and programmed cell death ligand 1 expression > 50% receiving frontline pembrolizumab monotherapy, any use of steroids before or during treatment was associated with an 86% increase in the risk of progression and a 2.3-fold increase in the risk of death, even accounting for palliative indication-related bias, including the presence of central nervous system metastasis. The use of steroids for palliative indications should be restricted to absolutely necessary for patients receiving immuno-oncology monotherapy.

Interstitial nephritis with pembrolizumab: A case report and review

Introduction

Pembrolizumab is a monoclonal antibody approved for adult patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although immune related adverse events are considered to be well tolerated, complications may occur and discontinuation of the treatment could be required.

Case report

A 62-year old patient diagnosed with advanced non-small cell lung cancer experienced a decline in the renal function after seven cycles with pembrolizumab. Management & outcome: After ruling out other common causes of interstitial nephritis, pembrolizumab was attributed as a cause of interstitial nephritis. At first, toxicity was managed with corticosteroids and closely monitoring the patient, but finally pembrolizumab had to be discontinued due to the kidney function did not recover.

Discussion

Renal and urinary disorders were reported in <3% of patients treated with pembrolizumab, being interstitial nephritis the most reported toxicity. The kidney damage can be a complication to consider in patients receiving pembrolizumab. Early identification of an increase in serum creatinine levels may help with prevention by establishing an effective treatment, although it may not mean a total recovery of kidney function.

[Immunotherapy of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer from first line to resistance and its management]

Immunotherapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy is now an integral part of the treatment of metastatic NSCLC. This treatment is transforming the management of these cancers, with 20-30% of patients achieving long survival. However, disease progression under treatment is still the rule for the majority of patients, raising problems both in understanding its mechanisms and in subsequent appropriate management. This study examines current therapeutic options and proposes solutions to circumvent resistance to immunotherapy. The mechanisms of resistance to these treatments is also analysed.

The landscape of gene mutations and clinical significance of tumor mutation burden in patients with soft tissue sarcoma who underwent surgical resection and received conventional adjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the landscape of gene mutations and the clinical significance of tumor mutation burden (TMB) in patients with soft tissue sarcoma who underwent surgical resection and received conventional adjuvant therapy.

METHODS

A total of 68 patients with soft tissue sarcoma were included. Postoperative tumor tissue specimens from the patients were collected for DNA extraction. Targeted next-generation sequencing of cancer-relevant genes was performed for the detection of gene mutations and the analysis of TMB. Univariate analysis between TMB status and prognosis was carried out using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and multivariate analysis was adjusted by the Cox regression model.

RESULTS

No specific genetic mutations associated with soft tissue sarcoma were found. The mutation frequency of TP53, PIK3C2G, NCOR1, and KRAS of the 68 patients with soft tissue sarcoma were observed in 19 cases (27.94%), 15 cases (22.06%), 14 cases (20.59%), and 14 cases (20.59%), respectively. With regard to the analysis of TMB, the overall TMB of the 68 patients with soft tissue sarcoma was relatively low (median: 2.05 per Mb (range: 0∼15.5 per Mb)). Subsequently, TMB status was divided into TMB-Low and TMB-Middle according to the median TMB. Patients with TMB-Low and TMB-Middle were 37 cases (54.41%) and 31 cases (45.59%), respectively. Overall survival analysis indicated that the median overall survival of patients with TMB-Low and TMB-Middle was not reached, and 4.5 years, respectively (P=0.015).

CONCLUSION

This study characterizes the genetic background of patients with STS soft tissue sarcoma. The TMB was of clinical significance for patients with soft tissue sarcoma who underwent surgical resection and received conventional adjuvant therapy.