Neoadjuvant treatment does not influence PD-L1 expression in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective analysis of tumor samples from the trials SAKK 16/96, 16/00, 16/01, and 16/14

BACKGROUND

The inclusion of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the treatment of operable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer is becoming a new standard. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) protein expression on tumor cells has emerged as the most important biomarker for sensitivity to ICIs targeting the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)-PD-L1 axis. Little is known about the impact of neoadjuvant treatment on PD-L1 expression.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We assessed PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemistry (Ventana SP263 assay) on tumor cells in treatment-naive diagnostic tumor samples and matched lung resections from patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer included in the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) trials 16/96, 16/00, 16/01, and 16/14. All patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) with cisplatin/docetaxel, either as single modality (CT), with sequential radiotherapy [chemoradiation therapy (CRT)] or with the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab (CT + ICI).

RESULTS

Overall, 132 paired tumor samples were analyzed from patients with neoadjuvant CT (n = 69), CRT (n = 33) and CT + ICI (n = 30). For CT and CRT, PD-L1 expression before and after neoadjuvant treatment did not differ significantly (Wilcoxon test, P = 0.94). Likewise, no statistically significant difference was observed between CT and CRT for PD-L1 expression after neoadjuvant treatment (P = 0.97). For CT + ICI, PD-L1 expression before and after neoadjuvant treatment also did not differ significantly (Wilcoxon test, P > 0.99). Event-free survival and overall survival for patients with downregulation or upregulation of PD-L1 expression after neoadjuvant treatment were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort of patients neoadjuvant treatment did not influence PD-L1 expression, irrespective of the specific neoadjuvant treatment protocol. Dynamic change of PD-L1 expression did not correlate with event-free survival or overall survival.

Long-term benefit of lurbinectedin as palliative chemotherapy in progressive malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM): final efficacy and translational data of the SAKK 17/16 study

Background

The SAKK 17/16 study showed promising efficacy data with lurbinectedin as second- or third-line palliative therapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma. Here, we evaluated long-term outcome and analyzed the impact of lurbinectedin monotherapy on the tumor microenvironment at the cellular and molecular level to predict outcomes.

Material and methods

Forty-two patients were treated with lurbinectedin in this single-arm study. Twenty-nine samples were available at baseline, and seven additional matched samples at day one of cycle two of treatment. Survival curves and rates between groups were compared using the log-rank test and Kaplan–Meier method. Statistical significance was set at P value <0.05.

Results

Updated median overall survival (OS) was slightly increased to 11.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.8-13.8 months]. Thirty-six patients (85%) had died. The OS rate at 12 and 18 months was 47% (95% CI 32.1% to 61.6%) and 31% (95% CI 17.8% to 45.0%), respectively. Median progression-free survival was 4.1 months (95% CI 2.6-5.5 months). No new safety signals were observed. Patients with lower frequencies of regulatory T cells, as well as lower tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) at baseline, had a better OS. Comparing matched biopsies, a decrease of M2 macrophages was observed in five out of seven patients after exposure to lurbinectedin, and two out of four patients showed increased CD8+ T-cell infiltrates in tumor.

Discussion

Lurbinectedin continues to be active in patients with progressing malignant pleural mesothelioma. According to our very small sample size, we hypothesize that baseline TAMs and regulatory T cells are associated with survival. Lurbinectedin seems to inhibit conversion of TAMs to M2 phenotype in humans.

•

Lurbinectedin continues to be active in patients with progressing MPM with a median OS of 11.5 months (95% CI 8.8-13.8 months).

•

TAMs and regulatory T cells are associated with survival.

•

Lurbinectedin seems to inhibit conversion of TAMs to M2 phenotype in humans.

Long-term outcomes of operable stage III NSCLC in the pre-immunotherapy era: results from a pooled analysis of the SAKK 16/96, SAKK 16/00, SAKK 16/01, and SAKK 16/08 trials

Background

Chemoradiotherapy with durvalumab consolidation has yielded excellent results in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Therefore, it is essential to identify patients who might benefit from a surgical approach.

Material and methods

Data from 437 patients with operable stage III NSCLC enrolled in four consecutive Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) trials (16/96, 16/00, 16/01, 16/08) were pooled and outcomes were analyzed in 431 eligible patients. All patients were treated with three cycles of induction chemotherapy (cisplatin/docetaxel), followed in some patients by neoadjuvant radiotherapy (44 Gy, 22 fractions) (16/00, 16/01, 16/08) and cetuximab (16/08).

Results

With a median follow-up time of 9.3 years (range 8.5-10.3 years), 5- and 10-year overall survival (OS) rates were 37% and 25%, respectively. Overall, 342 patients (79%) underwent tumor resection, with a complete resection (R0) rate of 80%. Patients (n = 272, 63%) with R0 had significantly longer OS compared to patients who had surgery but incomplete resection (64.8 versus 19.2 months, P < 0.001). OS for patients who achieved pathological complete remission (pCR) (n = 66, 15%) was significantly better compared to resected patients without pCR (86.5 versus 37.0 months, P = 0.003). For patients with pCR, the 5- and 10-year event-free survival and OS rates were 45.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 32.8% to 57.7%] and 28.1% (95% CI 15.2% to 42.6%), and 58.2% (95% CI 45.2% to 69.2%) and 45.0% (95% CI 31.5% to 57.6%), respectively.

Conclusion

We report favorable long-term outcomes in patients with operable stage III NSCLC treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and docetaxel ± neoadjuvant sequential radiotherapy from four prospective SAKK trials. Almost two-third of the patients underwent complete resection after neoadjuvant therapy. We confirm R0 resection and pCR as important predictors of outcome.

•

Combined modality treatment in operable stage III NSCLC results in 5- and 10-year survival rates of 37% and 25%.

•

Long-term survival for patients with incomplete resection is poor.

•

Complete resection and pCR are important predictors for outcome.

A randomised phase II study of osimertinib and bevacizumab versus osimertinib alone as second-line targeted treatment in advanced NSCLC with confirmed EGFR and acquired T790M mutations: the European Thoracic Oncology Platform (ETOP 10-16) BOOSTER trial

BACKGROUND

While osimertinib, a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) is the standard treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with sensitising EGFR and acquired T790M mutations, progression inevitably occurs. The angiogenic pathway is implicated in EGFR TKI resistance.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

BOOSTER is an open-label randomised phase II trial investigating the efficacy and safety of combined osimertinib 80 mg daily and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks, versus osimertinib alone, in patients with EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC and acquired T790M mutations after failure on previous EGFR TKI therapy. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Between May 2017 and February 2019, 155 patients were randomised (combination: 78; osimertinib: 77). At data cut-off of 22 February 2021, median follow-up was 33.8 months [interquartile range (IQR): 26.5-37.6 months] and 129 (83.2%) PFS events were reported in the intention-to-treat population. There was no difference in median PFS between the combination [15.4 months; 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.2-18.0 months] and osimertinib arm (12.3 months; 95% CI 6.2-17.2 months; stratified log-rank P = 0.83), [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.96; 95% CI 0.68-1.37]. Median OS was 24.0 months (95% CI 17.8-32.1 months) in the combination arm and 24.3 months (95% CI 16.9-37.0 months) in the osimertinib arm (stratified log-rank P = 0.91), (HR = 1.03; 95% CI 0.67-1.56). Exploratory analysis revealed a significant interaction of smoking history with treatment for PFS (adjusted P = 0.0052) with a HR of 0.52 (95% CI 0.30-0.90) for smokers, and 1.47 (95% CI 0.92-2.33) for never smokers. ORR was 55% in both arms and the median time to treatment failure was significantly shorter in the combination than in the osimertinib arm, 8.2 months versus 10.8 months, respectively (P = 0.0074). Safety of osimertinib and bevacizumab was consistent with previous reports with grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) reported in 47% and 18% of patients on combination and osimertinib alone, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

No difference in PFS was observed between osimertinib plus bevacizumab and osimertinib alone. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were more common in patients on combination.

Second-line therapy improves overall survival in primary refractory non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients

Background

The effect of palliative chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is well established. Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown promising efficacy in NSCLC patients. However, little is known about the efficacy of cytotoxic chemotherapy in patients whose tumors are refractory to first-line chemotherapy. We investigated the outcome of all consecutive and unselected patients receiving palliative chemotherapy in a single institution to assess the efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in primary refractory NSCLC.

Patients and methods

Patients with metastatic NSCLC diagnosed between 1990 and 2016 were assessed. Outcome parameters were collected and patients were characterized as either having primary progressive disease or clinical benefit [CB; defined as complete/partial remission (CR, PR) or stable disease (SD)]. Probabilities of survival were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier estimator. The log-rank test was used for comparing groups. Cox models were used to explore the prognostic value of covariables.

Results

The analysis included 576 patients. Median overall survival (OS) was 9.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.47-10.47]; 62.7% of patients were treated with a platinum-based first-line therapy. Two hundred twenty-two patients (38.5%) were primary refractory to first-line therapy. Median OS was significantly shorter for those patients [7.4 versus 11.5 months, hazard ratio (HR) 1.61 (95% CI 1.34-1.93), P < 0.0001]. Poorer initial performance status was significantly associated with primary refractory disease (P = 0.015). Eighty-one (36.5%) primary refractory patients received a second-line therapy. Median OS was significantly longer for refractory patients receiving second-line therapy versus best supportive care [10.1 versus 5.0 months, HR 0.53 (95% CI 0.40-0.72), P < 0.0001].

Conclusions

Nearly 40% of patients are primary refractory to palliative first-line therapy and have a poor prognosis. Active second-line therapy can significantly improve the outcome. Therefore, patients with primary refractory NSCLC should be offered further active therapy. These real-life data for primary refractory patients form the basis for further research in sequencing of current palliative treatment options.

•

Unselected patients with metastatic NSCLC have a poor outcome despite recent therapeutic advances.

•

A substantial number of NSCLC patients in a real-world setting is refractory to primary treatment.

•

Primary refractory patients have a poor prognosis.

•

It is unclear whether patients with primary refractory NSCLC should receive further active systemic treatment.

•

Our work shows that further treatment of primary refractory patients can lead to an improvement of the prognosis.

Choice of first line systemic treatment in pancreatic cancer among national experts

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer depend on various factors, including performance status, tumor burden and patient preferences. Metastatic pancreatic cancer is incurable and many systemic treatment options have been investigated over the past decades. This analysis of patterns of practice was performed to identify decision criteria and their impact on the choice of first-line management of metastatic pancreatic cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Members of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) Gastrointestinal Cancer Group were contacted and agreed to participate in this analysis. Decision trees for the first line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer from 9 centers in Switzerland were collected and analyzed based on the objective consensus methodology to identify consensus and discrepancies in clinical decision-making.

RESULTS

The final treatment algorithms included 3 decision criteria (comorbidities, performance status and age) and 5 treatment options: FOLFIRINOX, FOLFOX, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine mono and best supportive care.

CONCLUSION

We identified multiple decision criteria relevant to all participating centers. We found consensus for the treatment of young (age below 65) patients with good performance status with FOLFIRINOX. For patients with increasing age and reducing performance status there was a decreasing trend to use gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel. Gemcitabine monotherapy was typically offered to patients in the presence of comorbidities. For patients with ECOG 3-4, most of the experts recommended BSC.

Lurbinectedin as second- or third-line palliative therapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma: an international, multi-centre, single-arm, phase II trial (SAKK 17/16)

BACKGROUND

Systemic second- and third-line therapies for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) result in a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of <2 months and median overall survival (mOS) of 6-9 months. Lurbinectedin binds to the DNA of the regulatory region while inhibiting tumour-associated macrophage transcription. In early trials, encouraging outcomes occurred in patients (pts) with MPM treated with lurbinectedin. We aimed to generate lurbinectedin efficacy and safety data among pts with progressive MPM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Pts with progressing MPM treated with first-line platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without immunotherapy received lurbinectedin monotherapy. Treatment was given intravenously at 3.2 mg/m² dose every 3 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Using Simon's two-stage design, the primary endpoint, progression-free survival (PFS) at 12 weeks (PFS_12wks), was met if achieved by ≥21 pts (p0 ≤35% versus p1 ≥55%).

RESULTS

Forty-two pts from nine centres across Switzerland and Italy were recruited. Histology was epithelioid in 33 cases, sarcomatoid in 5, and biphasic in 4. Overall 10/42 (23.8%) underwent prior immunotherapy and 14/42 (33.3%) had progressed ≤6 months after first-line chemotherapy. At data cut-off PFS_12wks was met by 22/42 pts (52.4%; 90% confidence interval (CI): 38.7% to 63.5%; P = 0.015) with an mPFS of 4.1 months and mOS of 11.1 months. The best response was complete and partial remission observed in one patient each and stable disease in 20 pts. The duration of disease control was 6.6 months (95% CI: 5.2-7.4). No significant difference in PFS_12wks, mPFS, and mOS was recorded in epithelioid versus non-epithelioid cases and pts with prior immunotherapy versus those without. Similar mPFS but shorter mOS were observed among pts who progressed within ≤6 months after first-line chemotherapy. Lurbinectedin-related grade 3-4 toxicity was seen in 21 pts, mostly being neutropenia (23.8%) and fatigue (16.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The primary efficacy endpoint was reached with acceptable toxicity. Lurbinectedin showed promising activity regardless of histology, prior immunotherapy, or outcome on prior treatment. CLINICALTRIALS.

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03213301.

Safety evaluation of nivolumab added concurrently to radiotherapy in a standard first line chemo-radiotherapy regimen in stage III non-small cell lung cancer-The ETOP NICOLAS trial

OBJECTIVES

Chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) and concurrent PD-1 inhibition has shown promising results in pre-clinical models. So far, the feasibility of delivering concurrent CRT and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition has never been assessed in a clinical trial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

NICOLAS is a phase-II trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of nivolumab combined with CRT in stage III NSCLC. Patients received 3 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy and concurrent RT (66 Gy/33fractions). Nivolumab started concurrently with RT. The primary endpoint was 6-month post-RT rate of grade-≥3-pneumonitis. A formal interim safety analysis (IA) was scheduled when the first 21 patients reached 3 months follow-up post-RT. An early positive safety conclusion would be reached at IA if there were no grade ≥3-pneumonitis in those patients. Efficacy evaluation was planned provided the safety conclusion was reached.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

As of 13 December 2018, 82 patients were recruited with median follow-up of 13.4 months. The most frequent adverse events (AEs) were anaemia, fatigue and pneumonitis. No unexpected AEs or increased toxicities were observed. For the first 21 patients, no grade-≥3-pneumonitis was observed by the end of the 3-month post-RT follow-up period. The early safety IA provides evidence that the addition of nivolumab to concurrent CRT is safe and tolerable regarding the 6-month rate of pneumonitis grade ≥3 at the one-sided significance level of 5%. Following that, the 1-year progression-free survival will be evaluated in an expanded patient cohort. NICOLAS trial creates the opportunity for assessing the activity of the combination of checkpoint with concurrent CRT in larger prospective trials for locally advanced NSCLC.

Lung cancer patients with HER2 mutations treated with chemotherapy and HER2-targeted drugs: results from the European EUHER2 cohort

BACKGROUND

HER2 mutations have been identified as oncogenic drivers in lung cancers and are found in 1-2% of lung adenocarcinomas. There is, to date, no standard of care for these patients. We thus aim to study the therapeutic outcomes of patients harboring HER2 mutations and establish the efficacy of various drug regimens.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study in European centers assessed patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a known HER2 exon-20 insertion, treated with chemotherapy and/or HER2-targeted drugs.

RESULTS

We identified 101 eligible patients from 38 centers: median age 61 years (range: 30-87), 62.4% women, 60.4% never-smokers. All tumors were adenocarcinomas. Concomitant EGFR mutations, ALK translocations, and ROS translocations were observed in 5, 1, and 1 patients, respectively. The median number of treatment lines was 3 (range: 1-11). The median overall survival was 24 months. Overall response rate (ORR) and the median progression-free survival (PFS) with conventional chemotherapy (excluding targeted therapies) were 43.5% and 6 months in first-line (n = 93), and 10% and 4.3 months in second-line (n = 52) therapies. Sixty-five patients received HER2-targeted therapies: trastuzumab = 57, neratinib = 14, afatinib = 9, lapatinib = 5, T-DM1 = 1. ORR was 50.9% and PFS was 4.8 months with trastuzumab or T-DM1.

CONCLUSION

This series shows the chemosensitivity of HER2-driven NSCLC, and the potential interest of HER2-targeted agents. Our results should help to define the best therapeutic strategy for these patients and to orient future clinical trials.