Systematic review and meta-analysis of immune checkpoint inhibitors as single agent or in combination with chemotherapy in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: Impact of clinicopathological factors and indirect comparison between treatment strategies

BACKGROUND

In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) revolution is rapidly moving from metastatic to early-stage, however, the impact of clinicopathological variables and optimal treatment sequencing remain unclear.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with early-stage NSCLC treated with ICI as single agent or in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy (PCT) were included. Primary outcomes were pathological complete response (pCR), event free survival (EFS) (neoadjuvant/perioperative), and disease-free survival (DFS) (adjuvant). Secondary outcomes were major pathological response (MPR), overall survival (OS), toxicity, surgical outcomes (neoadjuvant/perioperative); OS and toxicity (adjuvant). An additional secondary endpoint was to compare EFS and OS between neoadjuvant and perioperative strategies.

RESULTS

8 RCTs (2 neoadjuvant, 4 perioperative, 2 adjuvant) (4661 participants) were included. Neoadjuvant/perioperative ICI+PCT significantly improved pCR, EFS, OS, MPR and R0 resection compared to PCT. Adjuvant ICI significantly improved DFS compared to placebo. There was a significant subgroup interaction by PD-L1 status (χ2 = 10.72, P = 0.005), pCR (χ2 = 17.80, P < 0.0001), and stage (χ2 = 4.46, P = 0.003) for EFS. No difference according to PD-L1 status was found for pCR, with 14% of patients having PD-L1 negative tumors still experiencing a pCR. No interaction by PD-L1 status was found for DFS upon adjuvant ICI. Indirect comparison showed no difference in EFS and OS between neoadjuvant and perioperative ICI+PCT.

CONCLUSIONS

PD-L1 status, pCR and stage impact on survival upon neoadjuvant/perioperative ICI. The restriction of neoadjuvant/perioperative ICI to PD-L1 + patients could preclude pCR and long-term benefit in the PD-L1- subgroup. Neoadjuvant and perioperative could be equivalent strategies.

Integrating supportive care into the multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: we can't wait any longer

INTRODUCTION

Due to important achievements in terms of diagnostic and therapeutic tools and the complexity of the disease itself, lung cancer management needs a multidisciplinary approach. To date, the classical multidisciplinary team involves different healthcare providers mainly dedicated to lung cancer diagnosis and treatments. Nevertheless, the underlying disease and related treatments significantly impact on patient function and psychological well-being. In this sense, supportive care may offer the best approach to relieve and manage patient symptoms and treatment-related adverse events.

AREAS COVERED

Evidence report that exercise, nutrition, smoking cessation and psychological well-being bring many benefits in patients with lung cancer, from both a physical and socio-psychological points of view, and potentially improving their survival. Nevertheless, supportive care is rarely offered to patients, and even less frequently these needs are discussed within the multidisciplinary meeting.

EXPERT OPINION

Integrating supportive care as part of the standard multidisciplinary approach for lung cancer involves a series of challenges, the first one represented by the daily necessity of specialists, such as kinesiologists, dietitians, psycho-oncologists, able to deliver a personalized approach. In the era of precision medicine this is an essential step forward to guarantee comprehensive and patient-centered care for all patients with lung cancer.

Anticipating EGFR Targeting in Early Stages of Lung Cancer: Leave No Stone Unturned

Background: The current treatment landscape of early stage lung cancer is rapidly evolving, particularly in EGFR mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), where target therapy is moving to early stages. In the current review, we collected the available data exploring the impact of EGFR targeting in both neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, underlying lights and shadows and discussing the existing open issues. Methods: We performed a comprehensive search using PubMed and the proceedings of major international meetings to identify neoadjuvant/adjuvant trials with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in NSCLC. Results: Limited data are available so far about the activity/efficacy of neoadjuvant TKIs in EGFR mutant NSCLC, with only modest downstaging and pathological complete response rates reported. Differently, the ADAURA trial already proposed osimertinib as a potential new standard of care in resected NSCLC harboring an activating EGFR mutation. Conclusion: Anticipating targeted therapy to early stage EGFR mutant NSCLC presents great opportunities but also meaningful challenges in the current therapeutic/diagnostic pathway of lung cancer care. Appropriate endpoint(s) selection for clinical trials, disease progression management, patients' and treatment selection, as well as need to address the feasibility of molecular profiling anticipation, represent crucial issues to face before innovation can move to early stages.

Study Design and Rationale for Espera Trial: A Multicentre, Randomized, Phase II Clinical Trial Evaluating the Potential Efficacy of Adding SBRT to Pembrolizumab-Pemetrexed Maintenance in Responsive or Stable Advanced Non-Squamous NSCLC After Chemo-Immunotherapy Induction

BACKGROUND

Improvement in radiotherapy techniques and expected outcomes, as well as in understanding the underlying biological mechanisms contributing to its action (immunomodulation in primis), led to the integration of this therapeutical approach in the current management of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), not only in oncogene-driven tumors, but also in non-oncogene addicted NSCLC where the combination of platinum-based chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab represents nowadays the pivotal strategy. In this light, we have designed a randomized phase II (ESPERa) trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) to pembrolizumab-pemetrexed maintenance in advanced NSCLC patients experiencing disease response or stability after chemo-immunotherapy induction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Advanced non-oncogene addicted NSCLC patients with ECOG performance status of 0 or 1, who obtained disease response or stability after 4 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab will be randomized 2:1 to receive pembrolizumab-pemetrexed maintenance plus SBRT vs pembrolizumab-pemetrexed alone. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS). Concomitant translational researches will be performed to identify potential prognostic and/or predictive biomarkers, as well as to analyze and monitor tumour microenvironment and tumor-host interactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Although available data suggest the safety and efficacy of combining immunotherapy and radiotherapy, their systematic integration in the current first-line landscape still remains to be explored. If the pre-planned endpoints of the ESPERa trial will be achieved, the addition of SBRT to pembrolizumab-pemetrexed maintenance as a strategy to consolidate and ideally improve the awaited benefit could be considered as a promising strategy in NSCLC undergoing first-line therapy, as well as an interesting approach to be evaluated in other disease setting, as well as in other oncological malignancies where immunotherapy represents nowadays the standard-of-care.