The impact of pre-treatment smoking status on survival after chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

Smoking is a risk factor for the development of lung cancer and reduces life expectancy within the general population. Retrospective studies suggest that non-smokers have better outcomes after treatment for lung cancer. We used a prospective database to investigate relationships between pre-treatment smoking status and survival for a cohort of patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with curative-intent concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

METHODS

All patients treated with CRT for stage III NSCLC at a major metropolitan cancer centre were prospectively registered to a database. A detailed smoking history was routinely obtained at baseline. Kaplan-Meier statistics were used to assess overall survival and progression-free survival in never versus former versus current smokers.

RESULTS

Median overall survival for 265 eligible patients was 2.21 years (95 % Confidence Interval 1.78, 2.84). It was 5.5 years (95 % CI 2.1, not reached) for 25 never-smokers versus 1.9 years (95 % CI 1.5, 2.7) for 182 former smokers and 2.2 years (95 % CI 1.3, 2.7) for 58 current smokers. Hazard ratio for death was 2.43 (95 % CI 1.32-4.50) for former smokers and 2.75 (95 % CI 1.40, 5.40) for current smokers, p = 0.006. Actionable tumour mutations (EGFR, ALK, ROS1) were present in more never smokers (14/25) than former (9/182) or current (3/58) smokers. TKI use was also higher in never smokers but this was not significantly associated with superior survival (Hazard ratio 0.71, 95 % CI 0.41, 1.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Never smokers have substantially better overall survival than former or current smokers after undergoing CRT for NSCLC.

Real world outcomes in KRAS G12C mutation positive non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

KRAS mutations are found in 20-30 % of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) and were traditionally considered undruggable. KRAS^G12C mutation confers sensitivity to KRAS^G12C covalent inhibitors, however its prognostic impact remains unclear. This study assesses the frequency, clinical features, prevalence of brain metastases and outcomes in KRAS^G12C NSCLC in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the prospective Thoracic Malignancies Cohort (TMC) between July 2012 to October 2019 with recurrent/metastatic non-squamous NSCLC, available KRAS results, and without EGFR/ALK/ROS1 gene aberrations, were selected. Data was extracted from TMC and patient records. Clinicopathologic features, treatment and overall survival (OS) was compared for KRAS wildtype (KRAS^WT) and KRAS mutated (KRAS^mut); and KRAS^G12C and other (KRAS^other) mutations.

RESULTS

Of 1386 NSCLC patients, 1040 were excluded: non-metastatic/recurrent (526); unknown KRAS status (356); ALK/EGFR/ROS1 positive (154); duplicate (4). Of 346 patients analysed, 144 (42 %) were KRAS^mut, of whom 65 (45 %) were KRAS^G12C. All patients with KRAS^G12C were active or ex-smokers, compared to 92 % of KRAS^other and 83 % of KRAS^WT. The prevalence of brain metastases during follow-up was similar between KRAS^mut and KRAS^WT (33 % vs 40 %, p = 0.17), and KRAS^G12C and KRAS^other (40 % vs 41 %, p = 0.74). The proportion of patients receiving one or multiple lines of systemic therapy was comparable. OS was similar between KRAS^mut and KRAS^WT (p = 0.54), and KRAS^G12C and KRAS^other (p = 0.39).

CONCLUSION

Patients with KRAS^mut and KRAS^WT, and KRAS^G12C and KRAS^other NSCLC have comparable clinical features, treatment and survival. While not prognostic, KRAS^G12C may be an important predictive biomarker as promising KRAS^G12C covalent inhibitors continue to be developed.

Assessing the significance of KRAS G12C mutation: Clinicopathologic features, treatments, and survival outcomes in a real-world KRAS mutant non-small cell lung cancer cohort

e19324

Background: KRASG12C mutations are present in 15% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and have recently been shown to confer sensitivity to KRAS(G12C) inhibitors. This study aims to assess the clinical features and outcomes with KRASG12C mutant NSCLC in a real-world setting. Methods: Patients enrolled in an Australian prospective cohort study, Thoracic Malignancies Cohort (TMC), between July 2012 to October 2019 with metastatic or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC, with available KRAS test results, and without EGFR, ALK, or ROS1 gene aberrations, were selected. Data was extracted from TMC and patient records. Clinicopathologic features, treatment and overall survival was compared for KRAS wildtype ( KRASWT) and KRAS mutated ( KRASmut) patients, and between KRAS G12C ( KRASG12C) and other ( KRASother) mutations. Results: Of 1386 patients with non squamous NSCLC, 1040 were excluded for: non metastatic or recurrent (526); KRAS not tested (356); ALK, EGFR or ROS1 positive (154); duplicate (4). Of 346 patients analysed, 202 (58%) were KRASWT and 144 (42%) were KRASmut, of whom 65 (45%) were KRASG12C. 100% of pts with KRASG12C were smokers, compared to 92% of KRASother and 83% of KRASWT. The prevalence of brain metastases over entire follow-up period was similar between KRASmut and KRASWT (33% vs 40%, p = 0.17), and KRASG12C and KRASother (40% vs 41%, p = 0.74). Likewise, there was no difference in the proportion of patients receiving one or multiple lines of systemic therapy. Overall survival (OS) was also similar between KRASmut and KRASWT (p = 0.54), and KRASG12C and KRASother (p = 0.39). Conclusions: In this real-world prospective cohort, patients had comparable clinical features regardless of having a KRASmut, KRASG12C or KRASother mutation, or being KRASWT . Treatment and survival were also similar between groups. While not prognostic, KRASG12C may be an important predictive biomarker as promising KRAS G12C covalent inhibitors continue to be developed.

Survival difference according to mutation status in a prospective cohort study of Australian patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneous disease comprising not only different histological subtypes but also different molecular subtypes.

AIM

To describe the frequency of oncogenic drivers in patients with metastatic NSCLC, the proportion of patients tested and survival difference according to mutation status in a single-institution study.

METHODS

Metastatic NSCLC patients enrolled in a prospective Thoracic Malignancies Cohort Study between July 2012 and August 2016 were selected. Patients underwent molecular testing for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements, Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS), B-Raf proto-oncogene (BRAF) mutations and ROS1 gene rearrangements. Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method for groups of interest, and comparisons were made using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

A total of 392 patients were included, 43% of whom were female with median age of 64 years (28-92). Of 296 patients tested, 172 patients (58%) were positive for an oncogenic driver: 81 patients (27%) were EGFR positive, 25 patients (9%) were ALK positive, 57 patients (19%) had KRAS mutation and 9 patients (3%) were ROS1 or BRAF positive. Patients with an actionable mutation (EGFR/ALK) had a survival advantage when compared with patients who were mutation negative (hazard ratio (HR) 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-0.71; P < 0.01). Survival difference between mutation negative and mutation status unknown was not statistically significant when adjusted for confounding factors in a multivariate analysis (HR 1.29; 95% CI 0.97-1.78, P = 0.08).

CONCLUSION

In this prospective cohort, the presence of an actionable mutation was the strongest predictor of overall survival. These results confirm the importance of molecular testing and suggest likely survival benefit of identification and treatment of actionable oncogenes.

Lung cancer prognostic index: a risk score to predict overall survival after the diagnosis of non-small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

Non-small-cell lung cancer outcomes are poor but heterogeneous, even within stage groups. To improve prognostic precision we aimed to develop and validate a simple prognostic model using patient and disease variables.

METHODS

Prospective registry and study data were analysed using Cox proportional hazards regression to derive a prognostic model (hospital 1, n=695), which was subsequently tested (Harrell's c-statistic for discrimination and Cox-Snell residuals for calibration) in two independent validation cohorts (hospital 2, n=479 and hospital 3, n=284).

RESULTS

The derived Lung Cancer Prognostic Index (LCPI) included stage, histology, mutation status, performance status, weight loss, smoking history, respiratory comorbidity, sex, and age. Two-year overall survival rates according to LCPI in the derivation and two validation cohorts, respectively, were 84, 77, and 68% (LCPI 1: score⩽9); 61, 61, and 42% (LCPI 2: score 10-13); 33, 32, and 14% (LCPI 3: score 14-16); 7, 16, and 5% (LCPI 4: score ⩾15). Discrimination (c-statistic) was 0.74 for the derivation cohort, 0.72 and 0.71 for the two validation cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

The LCPI contributes additional prognostic information, which may be used to counsel patients, guide trial eligibility or design, or standardise mortality risk for epidemiological analyses.

The Influence of Comorbidity and the Simplified Comorbidity Score on Overall Survival in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer-A Prospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

We addressed the uncertainty of comorbidity as a prognosticator by evaluating comorbidity and the Simplified Comorbidity Score (SCS) as predictors of overall survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

A prospective study included patients in whom NSCLC was diagnosed at an Australian cancer hospital between 2012 and 2014. Patients were assessed for SCS at recruitment and followed up every 3 months until death.

RESULTS

The cohort included 633 patients; their median age was 67 years (range 28-93), 63% were male, and 86% were ever-smokers. The median SCS at enrolment was 8 (range 0-19); 20% had an SCS higher than 9, and 11% had an SCS of 0. An SCS higher than 9 was associated with male sex, age older than 75 years, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher, and fewer cancer treatments. The 1-year overall survival rate was 62% (95% confidence interval: 58-66). In multivariate analysis, the strongest associations with mortality were metastatic disease (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.8, p < 0.01), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (HR = 2.0, p < 0.01), male sex (HR = 1.6, p < 0.01), more than 10% weight loss at diagnosis (HR = 1.5, p < 0.01), and age older than 75 years (HR = 1.5, p = 0.01). An SCS higher than 9 was not associated with overall survival (HR = 1.0, p = 0.8), and the effect of continuous SCS (HR = 1.1, p < 0.01) was explained by smoking status.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of patients with NSCLC the SCS was not a clinically significant predictor of overall survival over and above basic patient and disease factors.

Setting global research priorities for developmental disabilities, including intellectual disabilities and autism

OBJECTIVES

The prevalence of intellectual disabilities (ID) has been estimated at 10.4/1000 worldwide with higher rates among children and adolescents in lower income countries. The objective of this paper is to address research priorities for development disabilities, notably ID and autism, at the global level and to propose the more rational use of scarce funds in addressing this under-investigated area.

METHODS

An expert group was identified and invited to systematically list and score research questions. They applied the priority setting methodology of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) to generate research questions and to evaluate them using a set of five criteria: answerability, feasibility, applicability and impact, support within the context and equity.

FINDINGS

The results of this process clearly indicated that the important priorities for future research related to the need for effective and efficient approaches to early intervention, empowerment of families supporting a person with developmental disability and to address preventable causes of poor health in people with ID and autism.

CONCLUSIONS

For the public health and other systems to become more effective in delivering appropriate support to persons with developmental disabilities, greater (and more targeted) investment in research is required to produce evidence of what works consistent with international human rights standards.

ISCoS-WHO collaboration. International Perspectives of Spinal Cord Injury (IPSCI) report

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to describe the projects, the International Spinal Cord Society (ISCoS) has in cooperation with the World Health Organization (WHO) for the benefit of individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) worldwide.

SETTING

International

METHODS

Collaboration between ISCoS and WHO can be divided into (A) building capacity for better SCI education and prevention programs; (B) improving classification systems for use of data in SCI research, the International Classification of External Cause of Injury (ICECI), the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF); and (C) improving the evidence base for SCI through the report, International Perspectives on Spinal Cord Injury (IPSCI). The objectives of the IPSCI report are first to summarize information on SCI, in particular the science and epidemiology, the services, interventions and policies that are relevant and 'the lived experience' of persons with SCI across the full spectrum of life and throughout the world; second, to document all aspects of the science and experience of SCI to identify gaps between what exists and what is required; and third to make recommendations based on this evidence, with a clear perception of feasible goals and targets, that are consistent with the aspirations and goals of inclusion and full participation as expressed in the UN Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. FUTURE COOPERATION: ISCoS and WHO will continue to join forces in areas where they can make the greatest difference, especially in prevention and educational issues worldwide.