Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy with or without immunotherapy for early-stage or isolated lung parenchymal recurrent node-negative non-small-cell lung cancer: an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is the standard treatment for medically inoperable early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but regional or distant relapses, or both, are common. Immunotherapy reduces recurrence and improves survival in people with stage III NSCLC after chemoradiotherapy, but its utility in stage I and II cases is unclear. We therefore conducted a randomised phase 2 trial of SABR alone compared with SABR with immunotherapy (I-SABR) for people with early-stage NSCLC.

METHODS

We did an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial comparing SABR to I-SABR, conducted at three different hospitals in TX, USA. People aged 18 years or older with histologically proven treatment-naive stage IA-IB (tumour size ≤4 cm, N0M0), stage IIA (tumour size ≤5 cm, N0M0), or stage IIB (tumour size >5 cm and ≤7 cm, N0M0) as per the American Joint Committee on Cancer version 8 staging system or isolated parenchymal recurrences (tumour size ≤7 cm) NSCLC (TanyNanyM0 before definitive surgery or chemoradiotherapy) were included in this trial. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1; using the Pocock & Simon method) to receive SABR with or without four cycles of nivolumab (480 mg, once every 4 weeks, with the first dose on the same day as, or within 36 h after, the first SABR fraction). This trial was unmasked. The primary endpoint was 4-year event-free survival (local, regional, or distant recurrence; second primary lung cancer; or death). Analyses were both intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03110978) and is closed to enrolment.

FINDINGS

From June 30, 2017, to March 22, 2022, 156 participants were randomly assigned, and 141 participants received assigned therapy. At a median 33 months' follow-up, I-SABR significantly improved 4-year event-free survival from 53% (95% CI 42-67%) with SABR to 77% (66-91%; per-protocol population, hazard ratio [HR] 0·38; 95% CI 0·19-0·75; p=0·0056; ITT population, HR 0·42; 95% CI 0·22-0·80; p=0·0080). There were no grade 3 or higher adverse events associated with SABR. In the I-SABR group, ten participants (15%) had grade 3 immunologial adverse events related to nivolumab; none had grade 3 pneumonitis or grade 4 or higher toxicity.

INTERPRETATION

Compared with SABR alone, I-SABR significantly improved event-free survival at 4 years in people with early-stage treatment-naive or lung parenchymal recurrent node-negative NSCLC, with tolerable toxicity. I-SABR could be a treatment option in these participants, but further confirmation from a number of currently accruing phase 3 trials is required.

FUNDING

Bristol-Myers Squibb and MD Anderson Cancer Center Alliance, National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health through Cancer Center Core Support Grant and Clinical and Translational Science Award to The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Safety, tolerability, and clinical activity of selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab in treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

In lung cancer, overexpression of nuclear export proteins can result in inactivation of critical tumor suppressor proteins and cell-cycle regulators. Selective suppression of nuclear export proteins has immunomodulatory activities. Here, clinical safety and early efficacy data are presented on the combination of pembrolizumab and an oral selective nuclear export inhibitor, selinexor, for the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC).

METHODS

The primary objective of this prospective investigator-initiated study was to determine the safety and tolerability of selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with mNSCLC. Secondary objectives included determination of objective tumor response rate, disease control rate, and progression-free survival duration.

RESULTS

A total of 17 patients were included in the final analysis. Fifteen (88%) received more than two lines of prior systemic therapy and 10 (59%) had prior exposure to anti-PD-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapy. The median age was 67.5 years. Ten patients had grade ≥3 adverse events related to selinexor treatment. Responses to treatment occurred in patients who did and did not undergo previous anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy and in patients with activating driver mutations. The median overall survival and progression-free survival were 11.4 months (95% CI, 3.4-19.8 months) and 3.0 months (95% CI, 1.7-5.7 months), respectively. The overall response rate was 18% and the 6-month disease control rate was 24%.

CONCLUSIONS

Selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab demonstrated promising antitumor activity in patients with mNSCLC, including those who had previously received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. The therapy-related toxic effects were consistent with the prior safety data for both drugs, and no overlapping toxic effects were observed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02419495.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

New strategies to prevent or reverse resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors are under investigation. Selective inhibitors of nuclear export proteins, such as selinexor, can induce restoration of tumor-suppressing pathways and induce potent immunomodulatory activities. This article contains the clinical safety and early efficacy data on the combination of pembrolizumab and selinexor in treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Brief Report: Clinical Response, Toxicity, and Resistance Mechanisms to Osimertinib Plus MET Inhibitors in Patients With EGFR-Mutant MET-Amplified NSCLC

Introduction

MET amplification is a known resistance mechanism to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment in EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Dual EGFR-MET inhibition has been reported with success in overcoming such resistance and inducing clinical benefit. Resistance mechanisms to dual EGFR-MET inhibition require further investigation and characterization.

Methods

Patients with NSCLC with both MET amplification and EGFR mutation who have received crizotinib, capmatinib, savolitinib, or tepotinib plus osimertinib (OSI) after progression on OSI at MD Anderson Cancer Center were included in this study. Molecular profiling was completed by means of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and next-generation sequencing (NGS). Radiological response was assessed on the basis of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1.

Results

From March 2016 to March 2022, 23 treatments with dual MET inhibitor and osi were identified with a total of 20 patients included. Three patients received capmatinib plus OSI after progression on crizotinib plus OSI. Median age was 64 (38-89) years old and 75% were female. MET amplification was detected by FISH in 14 patients in the tissue, NGS in 10 patients, and circulating tumor DNA in three patients. Median MET gene copy number was 13.6 (6.4-20). Overall response rate was 34.8% (eight of 23). In assessable patients, tumor shrinkage was observed in 82.4% (14 of 17). Median time on treatment was 27 months. Two of three patients responded to capmatinib plus OSI after progression on crizotinib plus OSI. Dual EGFR-MET inhibition was overall well tolerated. Two patients on crizotinib plus OSI and one pt on capmatinib plus OSI discontinued therapy due to pneumonitis. One pt discontinued crizotinib plus OSI due to gastrointestinal toxicity. Six patients were still on double TKI treatment. At disease progression to dual EGFR-MET inhibition, FISH and NGS on tumor and plasma were completed in six patients. Notable resistance mechanisms observed include acquired MET D1246H (n = 1), acquired EGFR C797S (n = 2), FGFR2 fusion (n = 1, concurrent with C797S), and EGFR G796S (n = 1, concurrent with C797S). Four patients lost MET amplification.

Conclusions

Dual EGFR and MET inhibition yielded high clinical response rate after progression on OSI. Resistance mechanisms to EGFR-MET double TKI inhibition include MET secondary mutation, EGFR secondary mutation, or loss of MET amplification.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Pemetrexed Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Previously Treated With Chemotherapy

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and toxicity of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients had a performance status 0 to 2, previous treatment with one prior chemotherapy regimen for advanced NSCLC, and adequate organ function. Patients received pemetrexed 500 mg/m² intravenously (IV) day 1 with vitamin B₁₂, folic acid, and dexamethasone or docetaxel 75 mg/m² IV day 1 with dexamethasone every 21 days. The primary end point was overall survival.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventy-one patients were randomly assigned. Overall response rates were 9.1% and 8.8% (analysis of variance P = .105) for pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 2.9 months for each arm, and median survival time was 8.3 versus 7.9 months (P = not significant) for pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. The 1-year survival rate for each arm was 29.7%. Patients receiving docetaxel were more likely to have grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (40.2% v 5.3%; P < .001), febrile neutropenia (12.7% v 1.9%; P < .001), neutropenia with infections (3.3% v 0.0%; P = .004), hospitalizations for neutropenic fever (13.4% v 1.5%; P < .001), hospitalizations due to other drug related adverse events (10.5% v 6.4%; P = .092), use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support (19.2% v 2.6%, P < .001) and all grade alopecia (37.7% v 6.4%; P < .001) compared with patients receiving pemetrexed.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with pemetrexed resulted in clinically equivalent efficacy outcomes, but with significantly fewer side effects compared with docetaxel in the second-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC and should be considered a standard treatment option for second-line NSCLC when available.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in operable non-small cell lung cancer: the phase 2 platform NEOSTAR trial

Neoadjuvant ipilimumab + nivolumab (Ipi+Nivo) and nivolumab + chemotherapy (Nivo+CT) induce greater pathologic response rates than CT alone in patients with operable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The impact of adding ipilimumab to neoadjuvant Nivo+CT is unknown. Here we report the results and correlates of two arms of the phase 2 platform NEOSTAR trial testing neoadjuvant Nivo+CT and Ipi+Nivo+CT with major pathologic response (MPR) as the primary endpoint. MPR rates were 32.1% (7/22, 80% confidence interval (CI) 18.7-43.1%) in the Nivo+CT arm and 50% (11/22, 80% CI 34.6-61.1%) in the Ipi+Nivo+CT arm; the primary endpoint was met in both arms. In patients without known tumor EGFR/ALK alterations, MPR rates were 41.2% (7/17) and 62.5% (10/16) in the Nivo+CT and Ipi+Nivo+CT groups, respectively. No new safety signals were observed in either arm. Single-cell sequencing and multi-platform immune profiling (exploratory endpoints) underscored immune cell populations and phenotypes, including effector memory CD8+ T, B and myeloid cells and markers of tertiary lymphoid structures, that were preferentially increased in the Ipi+Nivo+CT cohort. Baseline fecal microbiota in patients with MPR were enriched with beneficial taxa, such as Akkermansia, and displayed reduced abundance of pro-inflammatory and pathogenic microbes. Neoadjuvant Ipi+Nivo+CT enhances pathologic responses and warrants further study in operable NSCLC. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03158129 .).

Integration of Remote Symptom and Biometric Monitoring Into the Care of Adult Patients With Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy-A Decentralized Feasibility Pilot Study

PURPOSE

Although electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are efficacious in symptom management, much is unknown about the utility of vital signs surveillance. We examined the feasibility of a remote patient monitoring platform that integrates ePROs and biometrics into the ambulatory management of symptom burden.

METHODS

Using a decentralized workflow, patients with gastrointestinal or thoracic cancer were approached for a 1-month study. Patients reported symptom burden via ePROs and biometrics (blood pressure, oxygen saturation, pulse, weight, and temperature) using bluetooth-enabled devices daily. Alerts on the basis of prespecified thresholds were managed via nurse-led triage. Adherence was defined as the completion of > 70% of daily symptom and biometric reporting requirements. Pilot acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility were measured using validated instruments. Net promoter score, system usability scale, and emergency department (ED) admission rates were collected.

RESULTS

Over 8 months, 36 patients were enrolled and 25 (60% gastrointestinal) completed the study. Participants had a mean age of 58.0 years, mean Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0.88, were 52% female, and predominantly had stage IV or recurrent disease (72%). Program adherence was 73% and associated with high acceptability (4.63), feasibility (4.56), and appropriateness (4.46). System usability scale and net promoter score scores were 88 and 55, respectively. Seventy percent of alerts were generated by biometrics, 28% for symptoms, and 2% were patient-initiated communication. Finally, the ED visitation rate over the pilot period was 8%.

CONCLUSION

Our remote patient monitoring pilot program was highly acceptable, feasible, and appropriate. It had high rates of patient adherence and satisfaction and was associated with low ED visitation rates.

Poziotinib for EGFR exon 20-mutant NSCLC: Clinical efficacy, resistance mechanisms, and impact of insertion location on drug sensitivity

We report a phase II study of 50 advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with point mutations or insertions in EGFR exon 20 treated with poziotinib (NCT03066206). The study achieved its primary endpoint, with confirmed objective response rates (ORRs) of 32% and 31% by investigator and blinded independent review, respectively, with a median progression-free survival of 5.5 months. Using preclinical studies, in silico modeling, and molecular dynamics simulations, we found that poziotinib sensitivity was highly dependent on the insertion location, with near-loop insertions (amino acids A767 to P772) being more sensitive than far-loop insertions, an observation confirmed clinically with ORRs of 46% and 0% observed in near versus far-loop, respectively (p = 0.0015). Putative mechanisms of acquired resistance included EGFR T790M, MET amplifications, and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Our data demonstrate that poziotinib is active in EGFR exon 20-mutant NSCLC, although this activity is influenced by insertion location.

Alleviating breathlessness in patients with cancer with dexamethasone (ABCD): A parallel-group, double-blind, randomized clinical trial (RCT)

12112

Background: Systemic corticosteroids are commonly prescribed for palliation of dyspnea in patients with cancer; however, evidence to support their use is limited. A small RCT suggested that dexamethasone may be efficacious. In this confirmatory RCT, we compared the effect of high dose dexamethasone and placebo on dyspnea in patients with cancer. Methods: This NCI-funded, multi-site, double-blind, parallel group RCT enrolled ambulatory patients with cancer, age ≥18, dyspnea ≥4/10 and randomly assigned them to receive dexamethasone 8 mg orally every 12 hours for 7 days followed by 4 mg orally every 12 hours for 7 days or matching placebo capsules. Permuted block randomization (block size = 6, 2:1) was conducted, stratified by baseline dyspnea and study site. Patients, research staff and clinicians were blinded. The primary outcome was change in average dyspnea intensity assessed with a 0-10 numeric rating scale (0 = none, 10 = worst) between baseline and day 7. Secondary outcomes included the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and adverse effects (CTCAE v4.02). Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted with linear models to compare between groups. The planned sample size of 201 patients provided 80% power to detect a mean difference of 1.0 between treatment groups with a two-sided α of 5%, assuming a standard deviation of 2.0 and 15% attrition. (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03367156). Results: Between 1/11/2017 and 4/23/2021, we enrolled 149 patients and 128 received the blinded study interventions (dexamethasone n = 85, placebo n = 43). Enrollment was terminated early by the Data Safety Monitoring Board when futility criterion was met in pre-planned interim analysis. The mean change in dyspnea NRS intensity between baseline and day 7 was -1.6 (95% CI -2, -1.2) in the dexamethasone group and -1.6 (95% CI -2.3, -0.9) in the placebo group, with no significant between-group difference (mean 0, 95% CI -0.8, 0.7; P = 0.91). Secondary analyses showed that the dexamethasone group had a significantly better ESAS appetite (mean difference -1.2, 95% CI -2.2, -0.1; P = 0.03) and well being (mean -1, 95% CI -1.8, -0.2; P = 0.02), and worse ESAS anxiety (mean 1.1, 95% CI 0.3, 1.9; P = 0.01) and depression (mean 0.9, 95% CI 0.1, 1.7; P = 0.02) compared to placebo. Similar magnitude of changes in dyspnea and ESAS symptoms were observed by day 14. Adverse effects were reported more frequently in the dexamethasone group (any grade): insomnia (38% v. 12%), neuropsychiatric symptoms (31% vs. 7%), infections (21% v. 12%), dyspepsia (26% v. 12%), edema (18% v. 9%), hiccups (12% v. 7%), flushing (9% v. 5%) and respiratory distress (6% v. 0%). More patients in the dexamethasone group required hospitalization within 30 d of last study medication (25% vs. 7%, P = 0.02). Conclusions: High dose dexamethasone did not improve dyspnea in patients with cancer more than placebo and was associated with more adverse events. Clinical trial information: NCT03367156.

Results of a phase 1b study of osimertinib plus sapanisertib or alisertib for osimertinib-resistant, EGFR-mutant non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

9105

Background: The aurora kinase and mTOR pathways are implicated in resistance to EGFR inhibitor osimertinib. Here, we investigated the safety and efficacy of the aurora kinase inhibitor alisertib and the mTOR inhibitor sapanisertib in combination with osimertinib. Methods: This is a phase 1b study with dose finding and expansion portions (NCT04479306). The dose finding portion used a Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) design to assess two arms: osimertinib 80 mg daily in combination with alisertib 20 mg, 30 mg, and 40 mg daily day 1-21 of 28-day cycle (osi-ali arm) and osimertinib 80 mg daily in combination with sapanisertib 2 mg and 3 mg daily (osi-sapa arm). Dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were predefined in the protocol. Patients with EGFR (L858R/exon 19 deletion) mutant NSCLC whose disease have progressed on osi and up to one additional line of systemic therapy were assigned, at investigator discretion, to either study arm. Tumor biopsy was mandatory at study entry and optional upon progression. Results: As of February 1, 2022, 40 patients are enrolled (20 in each arm). One DLT was observed in each arm: grade 3 nausea in ali-osi arm and grade 3 AST elevation in osi-sapa arm. Grade 3 treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 10% of each arm, and no grade 4 TEAEs were observed. The most common TEAEs in osi-ali arm was leucopenia (45%) and anemia (35%) while in osi-sapa arm, hyperglycemia (45%) and stomatitis (40%). In osi-ali arm (n = 20), median progression free survival (mPFS) was 1.9 months while objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 5% (95% CI: 0.1 ̃ 24.9%) and 40% (95% CI: 19.1 ̃ 63.9%), respectively. In osi-sapa arm (n = 16, evaluated for response to date), mPFS was 4.6 months while ORR and DCR were 12.5% (95% CI: 1.6 ̃ 38.3%) and 68.7% (95% CI: 35.7 ̃ 82.7%), respectively. Conclusions: Osimertinib with alisertib or sapanisertib is well tolerated in osimertinib-resistant, EGFR mutant NSCLC. The sapanisertib combination, but not the alisertib combination, demonstrates antitumor activity suggesting that mTOR inhibition warrants further exploration in this population. Biomarker analysis is ongoing to identify the molecular determinants of response and resistance to sapasertib. Clinical trial information: NCT04479306.

Poziotinib for Patients With HER2 Exon 20 Mutant Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From a Phase II Trial

PURPOSE

Targeted therapies against non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring HER2 mutations remain an unmet need. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of poziotinib in patients with HER2 exon 20 mutant advanced NSCLC in a single-arm, open-label, phase II study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with advanced HER2 exon 20 mutant NSCLC were enrolled to receive poziotinib at a dose of 16 mg/d for 28-day cycles. The primary end point was objective response rate per RECIST version 1.1. Confirmatory scans were performed at least 28 days from initial radiologic response.

RESULTS

Thirty patients received poziotinib treatment. At baseline, 90% of patients received prior platinum-based chemotherapy and 53% had two lines or more prior systemic therapies. As of data cutoff on March 1, 2021, the confirmed objective response rate was 27% (95% CI, 12 to 46). Responses were observed across HER2 exon 20 mutation subtypes. The median duration of response was 5.0 months (95% CI, 4.0 to not estimable). The median progression-free survival was 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 7.0). The median overall survival was 15 months (95% CI, 9.0 to not estimable). The most common grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were skin rash (47%) and diarrhea (20%). There was one possible treatment-related death because of pneumonitis.

CONCLUSION

Poziotinib showed promising antitumor activity in patients with HER2 exon 20 mutant NSCLC including patients who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy.

Phase I Trial of Definitive Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy and Trametinib for KRAS-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

OBJECTIVE

This phase I trial (NCT01912625) evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetics of definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) and the radiosensitizer trametinib (MEK1/2 inhibitor) for KRAS-mutated nonmetastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Patients received cCRT (carboplatin/paclitaxel and 60 Gy/30 fractions radiotherapy); oral trametinib (7 days/week) commenced on day 1 and completed on the final day of radiotherapy. Dose-finding of trametinib was done using the time-to-event continual reassessment method (TiTE-CRM); dose levels were 0.5mg (level -1), 1mg (initial, level 1), 1.5mg (level 2), and 2mg (level 3). Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times were also recorded.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (stage III, variety of KRAS mutations) were treated, with 1/5/4/5 at dose levels -1/1/2/3, respectively. Five patients received dose reductions (n=2, levels 2 and 3; n=1, level 1). Twelve patients completed the full cCRT course. One patient (following 12d trametinib) was taken off protocol for an unrelated/unresolved grade 1 event and later experienced grade 5 sepsis/respiratory failure. There was one grade 4 retinal detachment; grade 3 events included skin rash (n=2) and ventricular dysfunction, pneumonitis, pain, fatigue, and diarrhea (n=1 each). The final dose selected by the TiTE-CRM of trametinib was 1.5 mg. Pharmacokinetic profiles were elucidated and extensively described. At median follow-up of 70 months, median PFS was 11 months and median OS was 38 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The MTD for trametinib when combined with cCRT is 1.5 mg, with encouraging preliminary outcomes. This combination merits further study to combine with consolidation durvalumab in non-metastatic KRAS mutant NSCLC.

High-dose irradiation in combination with non-ablative low-dose radiation to treat metastatic disease after progression on immunotherapy: Results of a phase II trial

AIM

To report early findings from a phase II trial of high-dose radiotherapy (HD-RT) with or without low-dose RT (LD-RT) for metastatic cancer.

METHODS

Eligible patients had metastatic disease that progressed on immunotherapy within 6 months. Patients were given either HD-RT (20-70 Gy total; 3-12.5 Gy/f), or HD-RT + LD-RT (0.5-2 Gy/f up to 1-10 Gy total) to separate lesions, with continued immunotherapy. Radiographic response was assessed per RECIST 1.1 and Immune-Related Response Criteria (irRC). Primary endpoints: (1) 4-month disease control (DCR, complete/partial response [CR/PR] or stable disease [SD]) or an overall response (ORR, CR/PR) at any point in ≥10% of patients, per RECIST 1.1; (2) dose-limiting toxicity within 3 months not exceeding 30%. Secondary endpoint was lesion-specific response.

RESULTS

Seventy-four patients (NSCLC, n = 38; melanoma n = 21) were analyzed (39 HD-RT and 35 HD-RT + LD-RT). The median follow-up time was 13.6 months. The primary endpoint was met for 72 evaluable patients, with a 4-month DCR of 42% (47% [16/34] vs. 37% [14/38] in HD-RT + LD-RT vs. HD-RT, P = 0.38), and 19% ORR at any time (26% [9/34] vs. 13% [5/38] in HD-RT + LD-RT vs. HD-RT, P = 0.27). Three patients had toxicity ≥grade 3. LD-RT lesion response (53%) was improved compared to nonirradiated lesions in HD-RT + LD-RT (23%, P = 0.002) and HD-RT (11%, P < 0.001). T- and NK cell infiltration was enhanced in lesions treated with LD-RT.

CONCLUSIONS

HD-RT plus LD-RT safely improved lesion-specific response in patients with immune resistant solid tumors by promoting infiltration of effector immune cells into the tumor microenvironment.

Prognostic factors in RET dependent cancers treateded with RET inhibitors in early phase clinical trials

3117

Background: Activation of the RET proto-oncogene has been identified in multiple cancer types, for example, gene rearrangements in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and papillary thyroid cancer (PTC) and activating mutations in medullary thyroid cancer (MTC), amongst others. The recent FDA approval of two highly selective RET inhibitors, selpercatinib and pralsetinib has changed the treatment paradigm of RET-driven cancers, but the significance of historical prognostic factors is unknown. Herein, we analyzed the outcomes of patients with RET-altered cancers enrolled in phase I trials and assess the utility of prognostic scores. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of patients treated with selective RET inhibitors at the MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC). Baseline clinical factors and survival data were assessed. Overall and progression free survival (OS and PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox models were constructed. For all a p-value of < 0.05 was consider significant. Results: Among 126 patients, median age was 58 years (range, 15-82), most with ECOG 0-1 (n = 124). RET-mutant MTC was most frequent (n = 81), followed by RET fusion-positive NSCLC (n = 30) and RET fusion positive thyroid cancer (n = 9). RET fusion partners were KIF5B (n = 17), CCD6 (n = 12) and NCOA4 (n = 7). RET M918T mutation was the most frequent (n = 50, 63%). Most patients were treated in the relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting (n = 85) and received a median of 1 prior line of therapy (range, 0-11). Median follow up was 20 months (range, 1-43). The estimated median PFS and OS were 24 and 35 months, respectively. Overall objective response rate was 64% (81/126), 2 complete response, 79 partial response, 32 had stable disease (25%) and 13 had progressive disease (PD). The following were associated with shorter PFS and OS: age ≥50 years (p < 0.05), albumin < 4 g/dL (p < 0.01), brain metastases (p < 0.0001), hemoglobin < 12 g/dL ( < 0.05), LDH > normal (p < 0.05), WBC ≥8 (p < 0.01), PD (p < 0.0001) and NSCLC (p < 0.01). The M918T mutation and ECOG > 0 were associated with shorter OS but not PFS (p < 0.05). > 3 metastatic sites and R/R disease were associated with inferior PFS (p = 0.04 and p = 0.01, respectively) but not OS. The Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) and MDACC prognostic scores were significantly associated with PFS and OS (p < 0.01). In multivariable models including all variables significantly associated with PFS and OS (excluding LDH as this was only tested in 58 patients) albumin < 4 (HR 6.10, p = 0.013), brain metastases (HR 4.90, p = 0.027) and WBC ≥8 (HR 4.67, p = 0.031) were associated with inferior OS. NSCLC was significantly associated with inferior PFS (HR 5.45, p = 0.02). Conclusions: The RMH and MDACC prognostic scores predict OS in RET-aberrant cancers treated on early phase trials. Low albumin, WBC > 8 and brain metastases are significantly associated with inferior survival.

Impact of genomic aberrations and additional therapies on survival outcomes of patients with operable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the NEOSTAR study

8542

Background: The NEOSTAR study compared nivolumab (N) vs. nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NI) with major pathological response (MPR; ≤10% viable tumor) as primary outcome. We report updated rates of treatment failure (TF), including in patients whose tumors harbored genomic aberrations, and outcomes of additional treatments. Methods: Patients (pts) with stage I-IIIA resectable NSCLC (AJCC 7th) were randomized to either neoadjuvant N or NI followed by surgery (n = 44). TF was defined as radiographic and/or biopsy-proven recurrence from primary lung cancer and/or death (treatment or cancer-related). Additional systemic therapy at recurrence included immuno-oncology (IO)-based therapy (IO or chemo-IO), targeted therapy (TT), or chemotherapy. Disease control rate (DCR) was defined as the proportion of pts with radiographic objective responses and stable disease at first restaging. Cox proportional hazards model was used to associate baseline characteristics and time to TF. Results: A total of 44 randomized pts were evaluated, the median follow-up was 35 months (mts) as of February 4, 2021. Among the 12 TF pts (12/44, 27%), 42% (5/12) did not undergo surgery on trial, 9 (9/44, 20%) experienced recurrence and 6 (6/44, 14%) died (1 non-cancer-related, 5 cancer-related). TF was less likely in smokers vs. never smokers (hazard ratio = 0.20, 95% confidence interval = 0.06-0.65, p = 0.007). Among pts with pathological specimen resected on trial, MPR was achieved in 40% (12/30) of non-TF pts. Only 1 (1/7, 14%) TF pt achieved MPR, but died of a non-cancer related cause. TF-free survival rate at 2 years was 92% in MPR and 78% in non-MPR pts. Eight (8/9, 89%) pts had tumors with canonical oncodriver aberrations (5 EGFR mutations, 1 with STK11+ KRAS Q61H mutations, 1 ALK translocation and 1 RET fusions). Of the 9 recurrences, 44% (4/9) were treated with IO therapy, and all 7 pts with targetable aberrations were treated with TT (3 after retreatment with IO therapies). Of the 4 pts retreated with IO therapy, duration between end of neoadjuvant and retreatment were 20, 17, 23, and 19 mts. Duration from retreatment until progression (PD) were 1, 1, and 2 mts, respectively. Last pt was treated without PD for 2 mts but switched to TT due to discovery of genomic aberration. IO retreatment achieved 25% DCR (1/4). In comparison, the DCR for TT treated pts was 71% (5/7, p = 0.242). Median time to treatment was 21 mts, and median time to PD was not reached. Among 32 non-TF pts, 12 had genomic analysis and 7 aberrations were found in 6 pts (2 STK11, 2 ERBB2, 1 STK11 + 1 KRAS G12C, and 1 KRAS G12C mutation). Conclusions: A 27% TF rate was observed after neoadjuvant IO. TF was less likely to occur in smokers and MPR pts, and 42% of TF pts did not undergo curative-intent surgery on trial. Genomic aberrations were common in pts with recurrence (89%), and treatment with TT achieved 71% DCR vs. 25% DCR with IO-based retreatment. Clinical trial information: NCT: 03158129.

Toxicity and Survival After Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy Versus Passive Scattering Proton Therapy for NSCLC

OBJECTIVE

Although intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMPT) is dosimetrically superior to passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) for locally advanced NSCLC (LA-NSCLC), direct comparisons of clinical outcomes are lacking. Here, we compare toxicity profiles and clinical outcomes after IMPT versus PSPT for LA-NSCLC.

METHODS

This is a nonrandomized, comparative study of two independent cohorts with LA-NSCLC (stage II-IIIB, stage IV with solitary brain metastasis) treated with concurrent chemotherapy and proton beam therapy. Toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0) and outcomes were prospectively collected as part of a clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00915005) or prospective registry (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00991094).

RESULTS

Of 139 patients, 86 (62%) received PSPT and 53 (38%) IMPT; median follow-up times were 23.9 and 29.0 months, respectively. IMPT delivered lower mean radiation doses to the lungs (PSPT 16.0 Gy versus IMPT 13.0 Gy, p < 0.001), heart (10.7 Gy versus 6.6 Gy, p = 0.004), and esophagus (27.4 Gy versus 21.8 Gy, p = 0.005). Consequently, the IMPT cohort had lower rates of grade 3 or higher pulmonary (17% versus 2%, p = 0.005) and cardiac (11% versus 0%, p = 0.01) toxicities. Six patients (7%) with PSPT and zero patients (0%) with IMPT experienced grade 4 or 5 toxicity. Lower rates of pulmonary (28% versus 3%, p = 0.006) and cardiac (14% versus 0%, p = 0.05) toxicities were observed in the IMPT cohort even after propensity score matching for baseline imbalances. There was also a trend toward longer median overall survival in the IMPT group (23.9 mo versus 36.2 mo, p = 0.09). No difference was found in the 3-year rates of local (25% versus 20%, p = 0.44), local-regional (29% versus 36%, p = 0.56) and distant (52% versus 51%, p = 0.71) recurrences.

CONCLUSIONS

IMPT is associated with lower radiation doses to the lung, heart, and esophagus, and lower rates of grade 3 or higher cardiopulmonary toxicity; additional clinical studies will be needed to assess the potential differences in survival between the two techniques.

Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Heterogeneity and Its Impact on Benefit From Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in NSCLC

INTRODUCTION

Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression may vary in different disease sites and at different time points of the disease course. We aimed to investigate PD-L1 heterogeneity and its usefulness as a predictive value for immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in patients with NSCLC.

METHODS

PD-L1 expression was analyzed in 1398 patients with NSCLC. The predictive value of PD-L1 for ICIs in 398 patients with metastatic NSCLC was assessed.

RESULTS

PD-L1 was significantly associated with biopsy sites (p = 0.004). Adrenal, liver, and lymph node (LN) metastases had the highest PD-L1 expression as a continuous variable and at 1% or 50% cutoff. PD-L1 expression was lower in bone and brain metastases. Among 112 patients with two specimens tested, 55 (49%) had major changes in PD-L1 falling into different clinically relevant categories (<1%, 1%-49%, ≥50%) at different time points. Previous ICI therapy was associated with significant decrease in PD-L1 compared with treatment-naive counterparts (p = 0.015). Patients with metastatic NSCLC treated with ICI (n = 398) were divided into three cohorts on the basis of biopsy sites: lung (n = 252), LN (n = 85), and distant metastasis (n = 61). Higher PD-L1 in lung or distant metastasis specimens was associated with higher response rate, longer progression-free survival, and overall survival. However, PD-L1 in LN biopsies was not associated with either response or survival.

CONCLUSIONS

PD-L1 varies substantially across different anatomical sites and changes during the clinical course. PD-L1 from different biopsy sites may have different predictive values for benefit from ICIs in NSCLC.

Advanced cancer patients' (CP) attitudes and perceptions regarding reasons for outpatient supportive care (SC) referral at a comprehensive cancer center: A randomized controlled study

e24135

Background: Current ASCO guidelines propose early access to SC in all CP to improve quality of care, quality of life, and symptoms. Very few studies have evaluated patients’ perceived criteria for referral to outpatient SC and perceptions of patients who are referred early in their disease trajectory. Methods: In this study we evaluated CP attitudes and perceptions regarding the role of and access to outpatient Supportive Care clinic (SCC) at a comprehensive cancer center. CP with life expectancy of greater than 6 months (as determined by the oncologist) and who are newly registered at MD Anderson Cancer Center were randomized to either obtain an educational brochure that explained the role of the SCC or no brochure. Both groups then completed a survey regarding the role and access to of outpatient SCC. After completion of the survey, patients were asked if they would like to be seen by the SC team. If so, they were scheduled by their oncologist for a SC consult. Results: 288 patients were evaluable: median age was 63, 43% were female, 84% were Caucasian, and the most common cancer type was lung cancer (39%). Median survival was 15 months. Patients who received a brochure reported more understanding of the role of SC vs those who did not receive a brochure (63% vs 37%, p = 0.04). Both groups felt that SC could help to address physical (47% vs 54%) and psychosocial (50% vs 50%) symptoms. Both groups felt SC could help to address questions regarding prognosis (50% vs 50%) and future care (53% vs 47%). Both groups did not feel that time (50% vs 50%) nor financial concerns (49% vs 51%) would be barriers to access SC. Both groups did not feel that receiving SC would impede their cancer care (60% vs 40%) nor change their oncologists’ perspective of them (25% vs 75%). Both groups felt they could receive SC and cancer care simultaneously (50% vs 50%). Approximately half of the patients in both groups perceived it was not too early for a referral to SC. There were no statistical differences in these groups for these findings. Conclusions: Patients who received a brochure had a better understanding of the role of SC. A very significant proportion in both groups had limited awareness of the value of SC. Oncologist driven referral and education of SC may facilitate better understanding of the value of SC. Further studies are needed.

Use of pulse steroids to treat renal IRAE to maintain patients with metastatic non-small cell carcinoma cancer on pembrolizumab

e21589

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) has a major clinical success in many cancers including non-small cell lung cancer. Renal Immune related adverse events is one of the rare IRAE’s with a reported incidence of 3-5%. In this abstract we present two cases of patients with metastatic NSCL cancer with biopsy proven acute interstitial nephritis and maintained on pembrolizumab with co-treatment of steroids. Methods: We reviewed all patients diagnosed with NSCL cancer and treated with ICI who have been diagnosed with biopsy proven AIN. We selected only the patients who were re-challenged with ICI and co-treated with steroids. Results: Two patients were identified. First patient a 40 y.o. female who was diagnosed with metastatic NSCLC. Patient was started on carboplatin, alimta, and pembrolizumab. After cycle 4 she acute kidney injury where creatinine increased to 3.26mg/dl from baseline 0.69mg/dl she was initially pulsed with steroids due to suspected renal IRAE. A kidney biopsy that indicated acute tubular necrosis which is likely related to pemetrexed and/or carboplatin. In addition, she did have acute tubular interstitial nephritis related to pembrolizumab. Creatinine stabilized at 2.0mg/dl and was continue only on pembrolizumab for the last 5 months with prednisone 40mg daily tapered off over 4 days. She has maintained her creatinine at 2.0mg/dl with continued excellent disease control. Second patient diagnosed with poorly differentiated non-small cell carcinoma with metastatic disease and PD-L1 expression is 80-90%. She was initially started on carboplatin, alimta, and pembrolizumab with complete response after 4 cycles. Her creatinine peaked to 1.84mg/dl from baseline of 0.67mg/dl. A kidney biopsy revealed chronic active interstitial nephritis. She was treated with a prednisone taper and creatinine improved to 1.1mg/dl. Patient was continued on pembrolizumab and maintained for 14 months on prednisone (as above) and sustained complete tumor response. Conclusions: Steroids in patients with persistent AIN after re-challenge may provide an excellent option to continuation of treatment. As demonstrated above, use of steroids is controversial since concern of impact on tumor response; however, smaller doses for short duration maybe efficacious in treatment of renal IRAE without impact on tumor response. Further studies need to be initiated to evaluate this intervention and its long term effects.

A Phase I/II Study of Neoadjuvant Cisplatin, Docetaxel, and Nintedanib for Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

Nintedanib enhances the activity of chemotherapy in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this phase I/II study, we assessed safety and efficacy of nintedanib plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy, using major pathologic response (MPR) as primary endpoint.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients had stage IB (≥4 cm)-IIIA resectable NSCLC. A safety run-in phase was followed by an expansion phase with nintedanib 200 mg orally twice a day (28 days), followed by three cycles of cisplatin (75 mg/m²), docetaxel (75 mg/m²) every 21 days plus nintedanib, followed by surgery. With 33 planned patients, the study had 90% power to detect an MPR increase from 15% to 35%.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients (stages I/II/III, N = 1/8/12) were treated. One of 15 patients treated with nintedanib 200 mg achieved MPR [7%, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.2%-32%]. Best ORR in 20 evaluable patients was 30% (6/20, 95% CI, 12%-54%). Twelve-month recurrence-free survival and overall survival were 66% (95% CI, 47%-93%) and 91% (95% CI, 79%-100%), respectively. Most frequent treatment-related grade 3-4 toxicities were transaminitis and electrolyte abnormalities. On the basis of an interim analysis the study was discontinued for futility. Higher levels of CD3⁺ and cytotoxic CD3⁺CD8⁺ T cells were found in treated tumors of patients who were alive than in those who died (652.8 vs. 213.4 cells/mm², P = 0.048; 142.3 vs. 35.6 cells/mm², P = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Although tolerated, neoadjuvant nintedanib plus chemotherapy did not increase MPR rate compared with chemotherapy historical controls. Additional studies of the combination in this setting are not recommended. Posttreatment levels of tumor-infiltrating T cells were associated with patient survival. Use of MPR facilitates the rapid evaluation of neoadjuvant therapies.See related commentary by Blakely and McCoach, p. 3499.

Phase II Trial of Cediranib in Combination With Cisplatin and Pemetrexed in Chemotherapy-Naïve Patients With Unresectable Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (SWOG S0905)

PURPOSE

Antiangiogenic agents combined with chemotherapy have efficacy in the treatment of unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Cediranib (AstraZeneca, Cheshire, United Kingdom), a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and platelet-derived growth factor receptor inhibitor, demonstrated therapeutic potential in a prior phase I trial. We evaluated a phase II trial for efficacy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

SWOG S0905 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01064648) randomly assigned cediranib or placebo with platinum-pemetrexed for six cycles followed by maintenance cediranib or placebo in unresectable chemotherapy-naïve patients with MPM of any histologic subtype. Primary end point was Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival, PFS by modified RECIST v1.1, response (modified RECIST and RECIST v1.1), disease control, and safety/toxicity. The trial was designed to detect a difference in RECIST v1.1 PFS at the one-sided 0.1 level using a stratified log-rank test.

RESULTS

Ninety-two eligible patients were enrolled (75% epithelioid and 25% biphasic or sarcomatoid). The cediranib arm had more grade 3 and 4 diarrhea, dehydration, hypertension, and weight loss. Cediranib improved PFS by RECIST v1.1 (hazard ratio, 0.71; 80% CI, 0.54 to 0.95; P = .062; 7.2 months v 5.6 months) and increased modified RECIST v1.1 response (50% v 20%; P = .006). By modified RECIST v1.1, cediranib numerically increased PFS (hazard ratio, 0.77; 80% CI, 0.59 to 1.02; P = .12; median, 6.9 months v 5.6 months). No significant difference in overall survival was observed.

CONCLUSION

The addition of cediranib to platinum-pemetrexed improved PFS by RECIST v1.1 and response rate by modified RECIST in patients with unresectable MPM. Whereas adding antiangiogenics to chemotherapy has been a successful strategy for some patients, the cediranib toxicity profile and small incremental survival benefit precludes additional development in MPM.

Neoadjuvant nivolumab (N) or nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NI) for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Clinical and correlative results from the NEOSTAR study

8504

Background: Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) induce major pathologic response (MPR) rates of 20 to 45% in resected NSCLCs. We report the results of NEOSTAR - a phase 2 trial of neoadjuvant N or NI for NSCLCs. Methods: Pts with stage I-IIIA (single N2) resectable NSCLC (AJCC 7th), PS 0-1, were randomized to N (3 mg/kg IV, D1, 15, 29) or N plus I (1 mg/kg IV, D1) followed by surgery (n = 44). Primary endpoint: MPR (≤10% viable tumor), hypothesized to be higher than MPR to induction chemotherapy historical controls. Tumor immune infiltrates and pre- & post-ICI tumor PD-L1 % were assessed by flow cytometry & IHC. Wilcoxon ranked sum test & Fisher’s exact test were used for comparisons. Results: 44 pts were randomized, 23 N, 21 NI: mean age 66, 64% males, 18% never smokers, 59% adenocarcinomas, stages: IA 8 (18%), IB 15 (34%), IIA 7 (16%) IIB 5 (11%); IIIA 9 (20%). Only 3 pts received < 3 doses due to TRAEs (7%). 34 pts had surgery post ICIs (7 not resected [7/41], 17%, [2 N, 5 NI], 3 pending). There were 10 MPRs in 41 pts overall (24%, 4 N, 6 NI), of which 6 were path CRs (15%, 2 N [9%], 4 NI [21%]). Among 34 resected pts, MPR rate was 29% (N 20%, NI 43%). Median % of viable tumor was lower post NI vs N (20% vs 65%, p = .097). ORR (RECIST v1.1) was 22% (8 PRs [5 N, 3 NI], 1 CR [NI]); 15% of pts had PD (3 N, 3 NI). The proportion of CR+PR in MPR+ was higher than in MPR- (6 [60%] vs 2 [7%], p < .001). Surgical complications included 2 bronchopleural fistulas (BPFs) in N & 8 air leaks (5 N, 3 NI). G3-G5 TRAEs included a death due to BPF post steroid-treated pneumonitis (G5, N); G3 pneumonia, hypoxia, hypermagnesemia (1 each, all N), G3 diarrhea (1 NI). CD3+ & CD103+ tissue resident memory CD8+ TILs were higher in NI- vs N-treated tumors (CD3+ 81.2% vs 54.4%, p = .028; CD8+ 56.2% vs 38.3%, p = .069). Median pre-treatment tumor PD-L1 was higher in responders (MPR+, CR+PR) vs non-responders (80% vs 1%, p = .024), and the % of viable tumor was lower in tumors with PD-L1 > 1% vs PD-L1 ≤1% (median 20% vs 80%, p = .046). Conclusions: Overall a 24% MPR rate to neoadjuvant ICIs was observed. NI induced a higher % of non-viable tumor and of tissue resident memory TILs vs N. Antitumor activity was associated with higher pre-treatment PD-L1 levels. Clinical trial information: NCT03158129.

Induction Cisplatin Docetaxel Followed by Surgery and Erlotinib in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Data from meta-analyses support the use of induction or adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). This phase 2 study assessed the role of induction cisplatin and docetaxel followed by surgery in patients with resectable stage I to III NSCLCs, followed by 12 months of adjuvant erlotinib.

METHODS

Patients with resectable stage I to III NSCLCs received cisplatin 80 mg/m2, docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 21 days for 3 cycles, followed by surgery, followed by adjuvant erlotinib for 12 months. The primary endpoint included safety. Long-term efficacy outcomes and exploratory analysis of intermediary endpoints are also reported (NCT00254384).

RESULTS

Forty-seven eligible patients received a median of 3 cycles of induction treatment, 37 underwent surgical resection, and only 21 received adjuvant erlotinib. Two patients died in the perioperative period (1 sepsis during chemotherapy, 1 acute respiratory distress syndrome postoperatively). Most common grade 3 to 5 toxicities during chemotherapy included hypokalemia (8%), infection (7%), and granulocytopenia (25%). During adjuvant erlotinib, 14% of patients experienced grade 2 rash. Median overall survival was 3.4 years. Major pathologic responses in the primary tumor were observed in 19% (7 of 37) of patients and correlated with improved long-term overall survival. Complete pathologic response in mediastinal/hilar nodes also correlated with superior survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Induction cisplatin and docetaxel was well tolerated. Adjuvant erlotinib did not improve outcomes compared with historical controls. Major pathologic response predicted for improved long-term survival and is a suitable intermediary endpoint for future phase 2 studies.

Bayesian Adaptive Randomization Trial of Passive Scattering Proton Therapy and Intensity-Modulated Photon Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose This randomized trial compared outcomes of passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) versus intensity-modulated (photon) radiotherapy (IMRT), both with concurrent chemotherapy, for inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We hypothesized that PSPT exposes less lung tissue to radiation than IMRT and thereby reduces toxicity without compromising tumor control. The primary end points were grade ≥ 3 radiation pneumonitis (RP) and local failure (LF). Patients and Methods Eligible patients had stage IIB to IIIB NSCLC (or stage IV NSCLC with a single brain metastasis or recurrent lung or mediastinal disease after surgery) who were candidates for concurrent chemoradiation therapy. Pairs of treatment plans for IMRT and PSPT were created for each patient. Patients were eligible for random assignment only if both plans satisfied the same prespecified dose-volume constraints for at-risk organs at the same tumor dose. Results Compared with IMRT (n = 92), PSPT (n = 57) exposed less lung tissue to doses of 5 to 10 Gy(RBE), which is the absorbed Gy dose multiplied by the relative biologic effectiveness (RBE) factor for protons; exposed more lung tissue to ≥ 20 Gy(RBE), but exposed less heart tissue at all dose levels between 5 and 80 Gy(RBE). The grade ≥ 3 RP rate for all patients was 8.1% (IMRT, 6.5%; PSPT, 10.5%); corresponding LF rates were 10.7% (all), 10.9% (IMRT), and 10.5% (PSPT). The posterior probability of IMRT being better than PSPT was 0.54. Exploratory analysis showed that the RP and LF rates at 12 months for patients enrolled before versus after the trial midpoint were 21.1% (before) versus 18.2% (after) for the IMRT group (P = .047) and 31.0% (before) versus 13.1% (after) for the PSPT group (P = .027). Conclusion PSPT did not improve dose-volume indices for lung but did for heart. No benefit was noted in RP or LF after PSPT. Improvements in both end points were observed over the course of the trial.

Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Radiation Dose Escalation to the Gross Tumor Volume With Intensity Modulated (Photon) Radiation Therapy or Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy and Concurrent Chemotherapy for Stage II to III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase 1 Study

PURPOSE

To establish, in the phase 1 portion of a prospective phase 1/2 study, the maximum tolerated dose of image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or proton therapy (IMPT), both with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), for patients with stage II to IIIB non-small cell lung cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiation therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients had pathologically proven non-small cell lung cancer, either unresectable stage II to IIIB disease or recurrent disease after surgical resection, and could tolerate concurrent chemoradiation. Radiation doses were selectively escalated to the SIB volume (internal gross tumor volume + 5-mm margin), and the dose to the planning target volume (internal gross tumor volume + 8-mm margin for clinical target volume + 5 mm) was kept at 60 Gy [cobalt gray equivalent (CGE)] over 30 fractions. Patients were randomized between the IMRT and IMPT groups if slots were available on the treatment machines for both groups. Otherwise, patients were allocated to IMRT or IMPT, whichever had an open treatment slot on the machine without randomization.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (6 IMRT, 9 IMPT) were enrolled. The highest doses to the SIB were 72 Gy in the IMRT group and 78 Gy(CGE) in the IMPT group. Nine patients (6 IMRT, 3 IMPT) received an SIB dose of 72 Gy(CGE) [biologically effective dose = 89.3 Gy(CGE)], and 6 patients (IMPT) received an SIB dose of 78 Gy(CGE) [biologically effective dose = 98.3 Gy(CGE)]. Dose-limiting (grade ≥3) toxicity (esophagitis) developed in 1 of the 9 patients given 72 Gy(CGE) SIB. Grade ≥3 pneumonitis developed in 2 of the 6 patients treated to 78 Gy(CGE) IMPT SIB: 1 (grade 3) at 3 months after treatment and the other (grade 5, possibly related to treatment) at 2 months after treatment. Only 1 patient developed a marginal tumor recurrence with a median follow-up of 25 months (range, 4.3-47.4 months).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend that an SIB dose of 72 Gy(CGE) be used as the highest SIB dose for the planned randomized phase 2 study.

Interplay between immune infiltration and tumor progression and survival in non-small cell lung cancer: An analysis of institutional and public data

8538

Background: In many types of cancer, infiltration of tumor by immune cells, as a reflection of the immune response against the tumor, is thought to play a critical role in clinical outcome. Tumors, however, tend to evade the immune response as they progress. In this study, we characterize the interplay between immune infiltration and tumor progression and survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: We performed histologic immune profiling and microarray expression analysis on primary tumor specimens from 275 NSCLC patients (PR: PROSPECT trial) as well as RNA-Seq expression analysis on biopsy specimens from 50 patients with advanced NSCLC (B2: BATTLE-2 trial). RNA-Seq data from the TCGA lung cancer project was also analyzed. Immune Infiltration Score (IIS) was computed from the expression data using the Estimate package in R. Immune Suppression Score (ISS) was defined as the difference between the mean of CD3, CD4, CD8, FOXP3, and PD1 counts in the periphery and core of the tumor. Results: Tumor IIS is correlated (all p < 0.0005) with tumor immune infiltration as measured by inflammatory cell count on frozen tumor or several immune marker counts in tumor core. IIS is positively associated with survival (p = 0.04) independently of age (p = 0.008) and stage (p = 8e-10). IIS in the top half is associated with higher median survival vs. bottom half (10.2 vs 2.2 months, p < 0.0001) in B2. In TCGA lung adenocarcinoma samples, IIS is higher in stage I/II disease vs stage III/IV (p = 0.003). For all immune markers in PR samples, periphery of the tumor on average has higher counts vs tumor core (p < 0.0011), and this difference (suppression score) is higher in stage III/IV samples vs stage I/II for CD3, CD4, and CD8 (all p < 0.04) and for FOXP3 and PD1 (p < 0.1). ISS is negatively associated with survival (p = 0.02) independently of age (p = 0.06) and stage (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: As NSCLC tumors progress, immune infiltration in the periphery of the tumor increases while infiltration in the core decreases, reflecting increasing immune suppression. Tumor immune infiltration and suppression, as measured by IIS and ISS, are significant predictors of survival, independently of age and stage.

Response to single-agent (SA) chemotherapy (CTx) after immunotherapy exposure in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

9083

Background: Overall response rates (ORR) to 2nd-line SACTx in NSCLC have consistently not exceeded 15%. Exploratory analysis of clinical trials in various tumor types have demonstrated potential improvements in ORR to CTx after exposure to vaccine-based immunotherapy. The objective of this retrospective study was to determine if SACTx (3rd-line or beyond) would yield improved ORR when given after exposure to programmed-death-(ligand)1 inhibitors (PD1i) in metastatic NSCLC. Methods: Eligibility criteria - patients registered in the Thoracic GEMINI database of MD Anderson treated between 06/12 and 11/16 who received at least one SACTx as 3rd-line or beyond, following progression after platinum-based CTx and PD1i. We computed efficacy outcomes to each therapy, including ORR by RECIST v1.1, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Of 306 PD1i-treated patients registered in the database, 28 met eligibility criteria - 54% were male, median age 66 years, 82% adenocarcinoma, 29% never smokers. The PD1i and SACTx most commonly used were nivolumab (82%) and docetaxel (54%). ORR to SACTx after exposure to PD1i was 39% (11/28 patients, 8 confirmed). In contrast, ORR to 1st-line CTx in this cohort was 30% (Table). Liver metastasis and pembrolizumab as the PD1i of choice were the only factors associated with response to SACTx on univariate analysis (p < 0.05). Conclusions: In NSCLC patients, ORR to SACTx after immunotherapy exposure was higher compared to historical data from the pre-PD1i era, and approached ORR to 1st-line platinum-based CTx. Further investigation of a possible chemosensitization effect by immunotherapy is warranted. [Table: see text]

The BATTLE-2 Study: A Biomarker-Integrated Targeted Therapy Study in Previously Treated Patients With Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

By applying the principles of real-time biopsy, biomarker-based, adaptively randomized studies in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) established by the Biomarker-Integrated Approaches of Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Elimination (BATTLE) trial, we conducted BATTLE-2 (BATTLE-2 Program: A Biomarker-Integrated Targeted Therapy Study in Previously Treated Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer), an umbrella study to evaluate the effects of targeted therapies focusing on KRAS-mutated cancers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with advanced NSCLC (excluding sensitizing EGFR mutations and ALK gene fusions) refractory to more than one prior therapy were randomly assigned, stratified by KRAS status, to four arms: (1) erlotinib, (2) erlotinib plus MK-2206, (3) MK-2206 plus AZD6244, or (4) sorafenib. Tumor gene expression profiling-targeted next-generation sequencing was performed to evaluate predictive and prognostic biomarkers.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients, 27% with KRAS-mutated (KRAS mut+) tumors, were adaptively randomly assigned to erlotinib (n = 22), erlotinib plus MK-2206 (n = 42), MK-2206 plus AZD6244 (n = 75), or sorafenib (n = 61). In all, 186 patients were evaluable, and the primary end point of an 8-week disease control rate (DCR) was 48% (arm 1, 32%; arm 2, 50%; arm 3, 53%; and arm 4, 46%). For KRAS mut+ patients, DCR was 20%, 25%, 62%, and 44% whereas for KRAS wild-type patients, DCR was 36%, 57%, 49%, and 47% for arms 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 2.0 months, not different by KRAS status, 1.8 months for arm 1, and 2.5 months for arms 2 versus arms 3 and 4 in KRAS mut+ patients (P = .04). Median overall survival was 6.5 months, 9.0 and 5.1 months for arms 1 and 2 versus arms 3 and 4 in KRAS wild-type patients (P = .03). Median overall survival was 7.5 months in mesenchymal versus 5 months in epithelial tumors (P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Despite improved progression-free survival on therapy that did not contain erlotinib for KRAS mut+ patients and improved prognosis for mesenchymal tumors, better biomarker-driven treatment strategies are still needed.

Effects of high-dose Asian ginseng (Panax ginseng) to improve cancer-related fatigue: Results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial

209

Background: Cancer related fatigue (CRF) is the most common and disabling symptom in cancer.Panax ginseng extract (PG) is frequently used as a nutraceutical treatment for fatigue. There are no well-powered placebo-controlled trials that used validated CRF outcome measures to investigate of PG effects in cancer patients. The primary objective of this trial was to evaluate the effects oral PG versus Placebo (PL) for CRF. Methods: Patients with cancer fatigue ≥ 4/10 on Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) were eligible. Patients were randomized to either 400mg of standardized PG or matching PL orally twice a day for 28 days. The primary endpoint was change in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness-Fatigue (FACIT-F) fatigue subscale from baseline to Day 28. Secondary outcomes were Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and ESAS. Results: Total evaluable patients were 112 (56 for PG and PL groups). No significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups except cancer type (p = 0.002). There was significant improvement in FACIT fatigue and ESAS fatigue scores in PG and PL groups at Day 15 and Day 29. The mean (SD) of FACIT-F fatigue scores at baseline, Day 15, and Day 29 were 22.6 (10.4), 29.8(10.7), 30.1 (11.6) and 23.8 (9.1), 30.0 (10.1), 30.4 (11.6) for PG and PL respectively. Mean (SD) improvement in the FACIT-F subscale at Day 29 was not significantly different in PG than in the PL group [7.5 (12.7) vs 6.5 (9.9), P = 0.67]. Mean (SD) improvement in the ESAS fatigue, FACT-G, and HADS at Day 29 were also not significantly different in PG than in the PL group. In a multiple linear model analysis, the change in FACIT-F fatigue from Day 0 to Day 29 was negatively correlated with baseline FACIT-F fatigue (p = 0.0005), baseline HADS score (p = 0.032), and male gender (p = 0.023). There were a significantly higher number of any grade of toxicities in PL group than in PG group (33/62 vs. 28/64, p = 0.024). Conclusions: Both PG and Placebo result in a significant improvement in CRF at Day 15 and Day 29. PG was not significantly superior to placebo after 4 weeks of treatment. Further studies are needed. Clinical trial information: NCT01375114.

Changing the culture for psychosocial care: Does it need changing?

70

Background: National organizations recommend routine screening for psychosocial distress in cancer patients. American College of Surgeons (ACoS) Commission on Cancer mandates screening for accreditation with requirements for timing/method/tool for screening; assessment/referral; and documentation. Methods: MD Anderson routinely screens patients for distress with policies and algorithms for the process. We sought to enhance this standard process by incorporating a dedicated psychosocial liaison in the clinic to ensure screening based on NCCN guidelines, follow-up with patients at the medical visit, and clear documentation and referral per ACoS standards. This study compared the standard process to the enhanced process (which occurred in parallel) through a 6-month retrospective chart review of Thoracic Center patients identified as distressed by either process. Results: The enhanced process utilized the Distress Thermometer (DT) cut-off > 4 resulting in optimal specificity (.77) and sensitivity (.64) compared to the standard process using > 6 (specificity = .87; sensitivity = .34). In the enhanced process (N = 71), 99% were seen during the clinic visit, compared to 13% in the standard process (N = 92) (Fishers Exact; P < .0001). In the standard process, 18% were contacted by phone, 10% were seen later while in-patient, and 33% received a phone message; for 26%, no note was dictated. In the enhanced process, there were high rates of documentation of assessments of suicide (100%), depressive symptoms (100%) and anxiety symptoms (96%) compared to the standard process where documentation occurred less often (suicide 5%; depressive symptoms 11%; anxiety symptoms 11%) (Fishers Exact; all P’s < .0001). Conclusions: Results support the institution’s recent practice change to > 4 on the DT. The enhanced process utilizing a psychosocial liaison facilitates screening at the clinic visit and can support existing mental health providers who may have competing responsibilities. Findings also suggest having standards for distress documentation. Overall, the enhanced process fully meets ACoS standards in all required areas.

Biomarkers/Molecular Targets, Immunotherapy, and Treatments for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

For decades, the prognosis for patients with advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was bleak, with chemotherapy offering limited benefit and much toxicity. Now, with mutational testing, new generations of targeted therapies, and emerging immunotherapies, the treatment horizon for these patients has greatly expanded. In this article, the authors review molecular targets, biomarkers, as well as immune checkpoint inhibitors, which are having a major impact on the management of this patient population.

Phase I study of IMGN901, a CD56-targeting antibody-drug conjugate, in patients with CD56-positive solid tumors

Background IMGN901 is a CD56-targeting antibody-drug conjugate designed for tumor-selective delivery of the cytotoxic maytansinoid DM1. This phase 1 study investigated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary activity of IMGN901 in patients with CD56-expressing solid tumors. Methods Patients were enrolled in cohorts of escalating IMGN901 doses, administered intravenously, on 3 consecutive days every 21 days. A dose-expansion phase accrued patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC), Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC), or ovarian cancer. Results Fifty-two patients were treated at doses escalating from 4 to 94 mg/m(2)/day. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined to be 75 mg/m(2). Dose-limiting toxicities included fatigue, neuropathy, headache or meningitis-like symptoms, chest pain, dyspnea, and myalgias. In the dose-expansion phase (n = 45), seven patients received 75 mg/m(2) and 38 received 60 mg/m(2) for up to 21 cycles. The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was established at 60 mg/m(2) during dose expansion. Overall, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were experienced by 96.9 % of all patients, the majority of which were Grade 1 or 2. The most commonly reported Grade 3 or 4 TEAEs were hyponatremia and dyspnea (each 8.2 %). Responses included 1 complete response (CR), 1 clinical CR, and 1 unconfirmed partial response (PR) in MCC; and 1 unconfirmed PR in SCLC. Stable disease was seen for 25 % of all evaluable patients who received doses ≥60 mg/m(2). Conclusions The RP2D for IMGN901 of 60 mg/m(2) administered for 3 consecutive days every 3 weeks was associated with an acceptable tolerability profile. Objective responses were observed in patients with advanced CD56+ cancers.

Comprehensive biomarker analysis and final efficacy results of sorafenib in the BATTLE trial

PURPOSE

To report the clinical efficacy of sorafenib and to evaluate biomarkers associated with sorafenib clinical benefit in the BATTLE (Biomarker-Integrated Approaches of Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Elimination) program.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with previously treated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received sorafenib until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Eight-week disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Prespecified biomarkers included K-RAS, EGFR, and B-RAF mutations, and EGFR gene copy number. Gene expression profiles from NSCLC cell lines and patient tumor biopsies with wild-type EGFR were used to develop a sorafenib sensitivity signature (SSS).

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients were eligible and randomized to receive sorafenib. Among 98 patients evaluable for eight-week DCR, the observed DCR was 58.2%. The median PFS and OS were 2.83 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.04-3.58] and 8.48 months (95% CI, 5.78-10.97), respectively. Eight-week DCR was higher in patients with wild-type EGFR than patients with EGFR mutation (P = 0.012), and in patients with EGFR gene copy number gain (FISH-positive) versus patients FISH-negative (P = 0.048). In wild-type EGFR tumors, the SSS was associated with improved PFS (median PFS 3.61 months in high SSS vs. 1.84 months in low SSS; P = 0.026) but not with eight-week DCR. Increased expression of fibroblast growth factor-1, NF-κB, and hypoxia pathways were identified potential drivers of sorafenib resistance.

CONCLUSION

Sorafenib demonstrates clinical activity in NSCLC, especially with wild-type EGFR. SSS was associated with improved PFS. These data identify subgroups that may derive clinical benefit from sorafenib and merit investigation in future trials.

Abstract C29: Characterization and identification of specific EGFR mutations in circulating tumor cells (CTCs) isolated from non-small cell lung cancer patients using an antibody independent method, ApoStream™: An update report

Background: A variety of methods for capture of rare CTCs of epithelial origin are available; most employ antibodies to epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) and cytokeratin (CK). Using a classic phenotypic definition, a CTC is nucleated, CK(+), CD45(-) cell. However, some CTCs may elude capture as they originate from primary tumor cells which have undergone epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). We report here the use of ApoStream™, a novel dielectrophoresis field-flow-assisted, antibody-free method to isolate CTCs from blood.

Methods: Blood was collected from consented NSCLC patients and processed using ApoStream™. For CTC enumeration comparison, the CellSearch® FDA-approved kit was used. Isolated cells were evaluated with a multiplexed immunofluorescent assay and laser scanning cytometry was applied to identify multiple combinations of positive and/or negative staining for CK/CD45/DAPI and EpCAM. To determine specific EGFR mutations from captured CTCs, samples were analyzed using Improved and Complete Enrichment with CO-amplification at Lower Denaturation temperature (ICE COLD-PCR).

Results: Blood samples from 37 NSCLC patients and 8 healthy volunteers were processed and the results of the cell populations isolated using ApoStream™ are summarized in table. EGFR mutations [exon 19 deletion and exon 21 L858R] were determined and found to be concordant when compared to tumor tissue analysis by Sanger sequencing.

Conclusions: The ApoStream™ platform enriched EpCAM(+) and EpCAM(-) CTCs from the blood of NSCLC patients demonstrating utility in recovering cancer cells with multiple phenotypes. From recovered CTCs, detection of EGFR mutations was possible indicating the clinical relevance and potential utility of CTCs as an alternative to tissue biopsy. Additional sensitivity and complete mutation analysis will be presented. (a portion of this data was presented at 2013 ASCO Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, USA)

Characterization and identification of specific EGFR mutations in circulating tumor cells (CTCs) isolated from non-small cell lung cancer patients using antibody independent method, ApoStream

11044

Background: A variety of methods for isolation of CTCs of epithelial origin are available; most employ antibodies to epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM). Using classic phenotypic definition, a CTC is nucleated, cytokeratin CK(+), CD45(-) cell. However, some CTCs may elude capture as they originate from primary tumor cells which have undergone epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). We report here the use of ApoStream, a novel dielectrophoresis field-flow-assisted, antibody-free method to isolate CTCs from blood. Methods: Blood was collected from consented NSCLC patients and processed using ApoStrea. For CTC enumeration comparison, CellSearch FDA-approved kit was used. Isolated cells were evaluated with multiplexed immunofluorescent assay and laser scanning cytometry analysis were applied to identify multiple combinations of positive and/or negative staining for CK/CD45/DAPI and EpCam. To determine specific EGFR mutations from captured CTCs, samples were analyzed using Improved and Complete Enrichment with CO-amplification at Lower Denaturation temperature (ICE COLD-PCR). Results: Blood samples from 32 NSCLC patients and 3 healthy volunteers were processed. ApoStream isolated 0 to 65 CK(+)/CD45(-) CTCs(n=32) and CellSearch isolated 0 to 13 EpCAM(+)/CK(+)/CD45(-) CTCs(n=7). Additionally, ApoStream™ recovered 37-3536 CK(-)/CD45(-) and 4-10702 CK(+)/CD45(+) cells. EpCAM expression was detected in 7-100% of CK(+)/CD45(-) and 0-5% of CK(-)/CD45(-) cells, and 18-100% of CK(+)/CD45(+) cells. EGFR mutations [exon 19 deletion and exon 21 L858R] were determined and found to be concordant when compared to tumor tissue analysis by Sanger sequencing. Conclusions: The ApoStream platform enriched EpCAM(+) and EpCAM(-) CTCs from the blood of NSCLC patients demonstrating utility in recovering cancer cells with multiple phenotypes. From recovered CTCs, detection of EGFR mutations was possible indicating the clinical relevance and potential utility of CTCs as an alternative to tissue biopsy. Complete mutation analysis will be presented.

BATTLE-2 program: A biomarker-integrated targeted therapy study in previously treated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

TPS8118

Background: New strategies incorporating a personalized medicine approach for NSCLC treatment are increasingly explored and were pioneered in the prospective, biomarker-driven clinical program titled Biomarker-integrated Approaches of Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Elimination (BATTLE-1) (Kim et al Cancer Discov 2011;1:44). Effective therapeutic strategies for mutant KRAS and other biomarkers of resistance in refractory NSCLC remain an unmet medical need. The BATTLE-2 clinical study is using EGFR, PI3K/AKT and MEK inhibitors and is designed to identify biomarkers for optimal patient selection for these therapies, with a long-term goal to significantly improve the survival of NCSLC patients (pts) (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01248247). Methods: This is a four-arm, open-label, multi-center, biopsy-driven, adaptive randomization, phase II clinical trial in refractory NSCLC pts (failed at least 1 prior line of therapy). After a study-entry tumor biopsy, pts are adaptively randomized, based on KRAS status, to 4 trial arms: erlotinib, erlotinib plus the AKT inhibitor MK-2206, MK-2206 plus the MEK inhibitor selumetinib, and sorafenib. The primary objective is 8-week disease control rate (DCR). Baseline tumor testing includes KRAS and EGFR mutations and EML4/ALK translocation, the latter two being exclusion criteria. The trial is conducted in 2 stages. In Stage 1, 200 evaluable pts are adaptively randomized (AR) based on observed 8-week DCR and KRAS status while predictive biomarkers are being developed. In Stage 2, the AR model is refined to include the most predictive biomarkers tested in Stage 1, with subsequent Stage 2 AR based on the new algorithm, to a total of 400 evaluable pts. Selection of Stage 2 single and/or composite markers (“signatures”) follows a rigorous, internally and externally reviewed statistical analysis. All Stage 1 and 2 randomization biomarker assays are CLIA-certified. 219 pts have been enrolled and 124 pts randomized. 100 pts are evaluable for the 8-week DCR endpoint. Accrual updates, demographics, and further details will be presented at the meeting. Supported by NCI R01CA155196-01A1. Clinical trial information: NCT01248247.

Positron emission tomography/computed tomography-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Omitting elective nodal irradiation from planning target volumes does not compromise outcomes in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, but whether the same is true for those with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) is unknown. Therefore, in the present study, we sought to determine the clinical outcomes and the frequency of elective nodal failure in patients with LS-SCLC staged using positron emission tomography/computed tomography and treated with involved-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 2005 and 2008, 60 patients with LS-SCLC at our institution underwent disease staging using positron emission tomography/computed tomography before treatment using an intensity-modulated radiotherapy plan in which elective nodal irradiation was intentionally omitted from the planning target volume (mode and median dose, 45 Gy in 30 fractions; range, 40.5 Gy in 27 fractions to 63.8 Gy in 35 fractions). In most cases, concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy was administered. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical outcomes to determine the overall survival, relapse-free survival, and failure patterns. Elective nodal failure was defined as recurrence in initially uninvolved hilar, mediastinal, or supraclavicular nodes. Survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

The median age of the study patients at diagnosis was 63 years (range, 39-86). The median follow-up duration was 21 months (range, 4-58) in all patients and 26 months (range, 4-58) in the survivors. The 2-year actuarial overall survival and relapse-free survival rate were 58% and 43%, respectively. Of the 30 patients with recurrence, 23 had metastatic disease and 7 had locoregional failure. We observed only one isolated elective nodal failure.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the outcomes in patients with LS-SCLC staged with positron emission tomography/computed tomography and treated with definitive intensity-modulated radiotherapy. In these patients, elective nodal irradiation can be safely omitted from the planning target volume for the purposes of dose escalation and toxicity reduction.

Weekly alternating therapy with irinotecan plus cisplatin and etoposide plus cisplatin in the treatment of patients with extensive small cell lung carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Irinotecan has significant activity in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). The authors' previous phase 1 study of alternating weekly therapy with irinotecan/cisplatin (IP), etoposide/cisplatin (EP), and granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support was well tolerated and active in patients with SCLC. A phase 2 trial was conducted to estimate the efficacy of this regimen in previously untreated patients with extensive SCLC.

METHODS

A total of 33 patients were treated between June 2002 and July 2007. Patients received 12 weeks of therapy with cisplatin (20 mg/m(2)) on Day 1 and irinotecan (100 mg/m(2)) on Day 1 and G-CSF on Days 2 to 5 (Weeks 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11) followed by cisplatin (20 mg/m(2)) on Day 1 and etoposide (60 mg/m(2)) on Days 1 to 3 with G-CSF on Days 4 to 7 (Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12). The primary endpoint was 1-year survival rate.

RESULTS

Grade 4 neutropenia (toxicities were determined using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria [version 2.0]) was noted in 5 (1.5%) of 343 courses with neutropenic fever in only 5 (1%) of 343 courses. One patient died of neutropenic sepsis. Nonhematologic toxicities grade >or=2 were observed in 15 (4%) of 343 courses and were limited to fatigue, hyponatremia, and diarrhea. The overall objective response rate was 89% in 28 assessable patients (no complete responses and 25 partial responses). The median progression-free and overall survivals were 6.0 months and 10.9 months, respectively. The 1-year survival rate was 33%.

CONCLUSIONS

Weekly therapy with IP alternating with EP and G-CSF support was well tolerated in patients with extensive SCLC, but did not demonstrate improved progression-free or overall survival when compared with historical controls at the study institution.

Phase 2 study of carboplatin, docetaxel, and bevacizumab as frontline treatment for advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Bevacizumab has recently been demonstrated to prolong overall survival when added to carboplatin and paclitaxel for chemotherapy-naïve patients with nonsquamous nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the effects of combining bevacizumab with other standard, front-line, platinum-based doublets have not been extensively explored. We designed this single treatment arm, phase 2 trial to determine whether the combination of carboplatin, docetaxel, and bevacizumab is tolerable and prolongs progression-free survival of chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced, nonsquamous NSCLC.

METHODS

Forty patients were treated with up to 6 cycles of carboplatin (AUC 6), docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)), and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) on Day 1 every 21 days. Patients with an objective response or stable disease received maintenance bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) every 21 days until disease progression. The primary endpoint was median progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints included safety, response rates, and overall survival.

RESULTS

The median number of chemotherapy and maintenance bevacizumab cycles/patient was 6 and 2, respectively. Grades 3-5 adverse events included febrile granulocytopenia (10%), infections (13%), bleeding (13%), thrombotic events (13%), hypertension (5%), bowel perforation (5%), and proteinuria (3%). Median progression-free survival was 7.9 months and median overall survival was 16.5 months. Partial responses were observed in 21 patients (53%), and stable disease >or=6 weeks occurred in another 17 patients (43%), for a disease control rate of 95%.

CONCLUSIONS

Carboplatin, docetaxel, and bevacizumab were feasible and effective for front-line treatment of advanced, nonsquamous NSCLC. These data provide further evidence that bevacizumab may be used in combination with multiple standard, platinum-based doublets in this setting.

Phase II study of vinorelbine and docetaxel in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer as frontline and second-line therapy

OBJECTIVES

Combination chemotherapy with third-generation, nonplatinum agents (ie, gemcitabine, vinorelbine, taxanes, or camptothecins) represents a well-tolerated frontline treatment option for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer and might play a role as salvage therapy as well. The aim of this phase 2 study was to investigate the use of docetaxel and vinorelbine in the frontline and second-line setting in patients with incurable non-small-cell lung cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy-eight patients (42 untreated, 36 previously treated) were administered vinorelbine (20 mg/m) on days 1 and 8 and docetaxel (75 mg/m for untreated patients; 60 mg/m for previously treated patients for cycle 1, increased to 75 mg/m for the subsequent cycles in the absence of grade 3 fever/neutropenia) on day 8, repeated every 21 days, with routine filgrastim support.

RESULTS

The most common grade 3 to 4 nonhematologic toxicities were diarrhea, dyspnea, fatigue, and nausea/vomiting (5% each). Grade 3 to 4 granulocytopenia occurred in 55% of the patients, however only 5% experienced febrile neutropenia. Response rates were 13% in the chemotherapy-naive cohort and 9% in previously treated patients. Median time to progression was 2.9 and 3.0 months and median overall survival was 15.0 and 6.2 months, for the frontline and second-line patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with historical controls, in the first-line setting, the combination of docetaxel and vinorelbine did not demonstrate increased efficacy advantages over platinum- or other nonplatinum-based doublets. In the second-line setting, single agent chemotherapy is as effective as, and less toxic than the docetaxel-vinorelbine combination, and the former remains the cytotoxic treatment of choice.