bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025 huggingface dataset:
Cancer activation pathways of thymic epithelial tumors (TETs) by targeted gene expression analysis.
Authors: Benitez Jose Carlos , Job Bastien , Thomas de Montpreville Vincent , Lacroix Ludovic , Saulnier Patrick , Arana Riad , Lambotte Olivier ,   Cancer and Autoimmune/inflammatory Diseases Relationships Foundation, Mussot Sacha , Mercier Olaf , Fadel Elie , Scoazec Jean-Yves , Besse Benjamin
Published: June 2021

8575

Background: TETs are rare malignancies of the anterior mediastinum. Clinical behavior varies from mild thymoma (T) A to aggressive thymic carcinoma (TC). The biology of TETs is poorly understood and knowledge of the transcriptomic fingerprint of T and TC is limited. Additionally, up to 30% of patients (pts) will develop associated autoimmune disorders (AIDs). We aimed to characterize the main cancer activation pathways of the TET subgroups. Methods: We selected a representative balanced set of Ts and TCs to analyze 24 main cancer activation pathways using HTG Oncology biomarkers panel (2562 genes) by RNA sequencing. Tumor representative paraffin-embedded blocks were macrodissected for gene expression analysis. We analyzed epidemiologic, clinical and pathological characteristics of pts with TET’s and correlated with genes expression based on cancer Hallmarks. Results: From January 2010 to December 2019, 219 pts were included in the cohort. Molecular results of 194 pts were available. Median age at diagnosis was 56 (9-83) years. 54.1% were women. 65/194 (33.5%) reported AIDs. T B2 was the most frequent (n=41, 21.1%), followed by B1, AB, B3, TC and A. RNA expression analysis identified 2 main clusters, corresponding mainly to T (cluster 2) and TC (cluster 1) respectively (p<0.0001) (Table). Tumors of cluster 1 (TCs predominant) shown activated pathways (MYC [gene ratio= 0.5]; p<0.0001). In cluster 2 (T predominant), activated pathways differed among subgroups: B1 (E2F[0.5], G2M checkpoint [0.45]; p<0.001), B2 (E2F [>0.4]; p<0.0001). Routes were mostly suppressed: A (MYC [>0.5], E2F[>0.4], G2M checkpoint[>0.45], mitotic spindle[>0.35], MTOR [<0.35]; p<0.001), AB (INFα [>0.5], inflammatory response [>0.45], INTɣ [0.45], NFkb [>0.4], MTOR[>0.4]; p<0.001), B1 (EMT [0.6], angiogenesis [>0.5], INFα [0.5], homeostasis [0.5], NFkb [0.5], INTɣ [>0.45], myogenesis [<0.4]; p<0.0001), B2 (INFα [>0.65], INTɣ [>0.5], NFkb [0.5], EMT [0.45], inflammatory response [<0.4]; p< 0.0001), B3 (EMT [0.6], MYC [0.45]; p<0.001). Among pts reporting AIDs 61 and 4 were associated to cluster 2 and 1, respectively (p=0.017). Conclusions: We describe differential molecular characteristics among histological subgroups in 2 clusters. The analysis suggests new therapeutic venues. Additional analysis will be presented on outliers and response to treatment.[Table: see text]
Cell-free circulating tumor DNA (cfDNA) analysis of advanced thymic epithelial tumors (TETs).
Authors: Dada Hiba I. , Drusbosky Leylah , Giaccone Giuseppe
Published: June 2021

8577

Background: Thymic epithelial tumors (TETs) are rare tumors originating from the epithelial cells of the thymus. Thymomas tend to be slowly growing, whereas thymic carcinomas are more aggressive and often metastasize wildly. TETs have a very low tumor mutational burden (TMB). cfDNA has been used in several tumor types to describe the molecular characteristics and select treatment options, especially in absence of tissue availability. There is no information on the cfDNA detected in TETs. The purpose of this study was to identify common genomic alterations occurring in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patients with advanced TETs, detected using a cfDNA assay. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 157 TET samples from the Guardant Health database between November 2017 – November 2020. The cfDNA analysis interrogated single nucleotide variants (SNV), fusions, indels and copy number variations (CNV) of up to 83 genes using a commercially available liquid biopsy assay (Guardant360; Guardant Health, Redwood City, CA) . We evaluated the frequency of genomic alterations based on diagnosis, age, and sex. Results: In this cohort, 66% of the patients had thymic carcinoma and 34% had thymoma. The median age was 60 years, and 59% of patients were male. 126 patients (80%) of this cohort had ≥1 somatic alteration detected. The most prevalent mutations detected are TP53 (55%), KIT (13%), EGFR (12%), BRCA2 (11%), PIK3CA (10%), ARID1A (10%), ATM (10%), KRAS (9%), APC (9%), and BRAF (9%). Mutations were more commonly observed in thymic carcinomas than thymomas, but statistical significance was not reached due to the small sample size. Frequencies of the observed genomic alterations are shown in the table below. Conclusions: This study confirms that advanced stage TETs shed tumor DNA into the circulation that can be picked up in the majority of patients, using a solid tumor platform, despite the low TMB typically observed in these tumors. This assay can potentially be used to monitor response to therapy. A more targeted gene panel, enriched for genes commonly mutated in TETs (e.g. GTF2I, BAP1, CYLD) might provide further insights in the future in the management of TETs.[Table: see text]
Biomarker tissue journey among patients (pts) with untreated metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) in the U.S. Oncology Network community practices.
Authors: Robert Nicholas J. , Nwokeji Esmond D. , Espirito Janet L. , Chen Liwei , Karhade Mandar , Evangelist Makenzi Colleen , Spira Alexander I. , Neubauer Marcus A. , Bullock Susie A. , Coleman Robert L. ,   on behalf of MYLUNG Consortium Collaborators: The U.S. Oncology Network and sponsors
Published: June 2021

9004

Background: Given the importance of molecular testing and targeted therapy for mNSCLC, the MYLUNG (Molecularly Informed Lung Cancer Treatment in a Community Cancer Network) consortium pragmatic study assessed real-world biomarker testing rates and turnaround times (TAT) within The US Oncology Network of over 1,000 providers across the United States. Methods: This was a retrospective observational chart review study of pts with mNSCLC initiating first-line (1L) systemic therapy between 04/01/2018 and 03/31/2020. iKnowMed electronic health records were used to examine timing of biomarker testing: before 1L therapy (cohort 1), after 1L therapy (cohort 2) or no testing (cohort 3). We assessed testing rates for ALK, BRAF, EGFR, ROS1, and PD-L1; use of full next-generation sequencing panel (NGS); time from mNSCLC diagnosis (dx) to 1L therapy; TAT from biomarker orders to results; and time from mNSCLC dx to test results. Results: We identified 3474 adults. Median age was 69 years (range 23-90), 51% female, 74% with adenocarcinoma and 76% with a documented ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Testing rates are shown in table: 90% of pts had at least one biomarker test and 46% received all 5 biomarker tests. Changes in testing rates from 2018 to 2020 were 51% to 59% for BRAF, 71% to 71% for EGFR, 71% to 70% for ALK, 69% to 67% for ROS1, 82% to 84% for PD-L1, and 42% to 49% for pts tested for all 5 biomarkers. NGS testing increased from 33% to 44% (p<0.0001). The median (interquartile range [IQR]) time from mNSCLC dx to 1L therapy for all pts was 35 (22, 55) days. Median (IQR) TAT from biomarker testing orders to results ranged from 10 (6, 17) to 15 (10, 22) days for the individual biomarkers; and time from mNSCLC dx to biomarker results ranged from 14 (7, 26) to 21 (12, 36) days by biomarker. Conclusions: This real-world study showed that most pts received at least one biomarker test prior to 1L, but <50% received all 5 tests. NGS testing occurred in <50% of pts but increased over the periods examined. Median time from dx to 1L therapy was about 5 weeks and TAT from orders to results about 2 weeks. Analyses by histology and other trends will be reported. These data will be compared to the next phase of the MYLUNG study, which will evaluate contemporary ordering practices and TATs prospectively[Table: see text]
Concordance of tissue- and plasma-derived genomic profiling in CheckMate 9LA, using the FoundationOne CDx and GuardantOMNI assays.
Authors: Baden Jonathan F. , Sausen Mark , Kalinava Natallia , Geese William J. , Balli David , Neely Jaclyn , Green George
Published: June 2021

9010

Background: Blood-based profiling of genomic features including tumor mutational burden (TMB) has generally demonstrated positive correlations with tissue-derived assessments from paired tumor samples. However, both technical and biological factors contributing to discordance between these measurements and underlying sequence alterations need further investigation for the successful adoption of noninvasive tumor profiling. We explored the genomic landscape, including the association between tissue TMB (tTMB) and blood TMB (bTMB), in samples from patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) enrolled in CheckMate 9LA (NCT03215706), a phase 3, randomized clinical trial of nivolumab + ipilimumab in combination with 2 cycles of chemotherapy (chemo) vs 4 cycles of chemo as first-line treatment for NSCLC. Methods: Tissue- (FoundationOne CDx [F1CDx]) and blood-based (GuardantOMNI [OMNI]) genomic data obtained from both treatment arms were utilized for our retrospective analysis of genomic variants and complex biomarkers, including tTMB and bTMB. In total, 692 tissue and 646 plasma samples were analyzed. Results: Following the established criteria for the validated F1CDx and OMNI platforms, 464 tissue and 537 plasma samples passed quality control, resulting in ascertainment levels of 67% for tTMB and 83% for bTMB. Across 344 paired tissue and plasma samples, tTMB and bTMB scores were found to be moderately correlated (Spearman’s r = 0.56; P < 0.001); median tTMB score was 7.7 mutations per megabase (mut/Mb) and median bTMB score was 13.5 mut/Mb. For the prespecified cutoffs of 10 mut/Mb for tTMB and 16 mut/Mb for bTMB, the positive, negative, and overall percentage agreements between assays were 65%, 79%, and 73%, respectively. Interestingly, 2 discordant sample pairs had considerably higher bTMB than tTMB (76.1 vs 3.8 and 172.6 vs 5.0 mut/Mb for bTMB and tTMB, respectively) and both had high microsatellite instability from blood-based assessments. OMNI and F1CDx data from 477 patients were evaluable for the analysis of short sequence variants (single nucleotide variations and indels). OMNI detected 4557 variants, F1CDx detected 4620, and 2903 (46% of total reported variants) were detected by both assays. Conclusions: In CheckMate 9LA, data from paired samples revealed the complementary nature of TMB assessments from tissue and blood and suggest that both approaches may have the potential to identify genomic alterations that may be useful in the management of patients with NSCLC. Further interrogation of the biological and analytical factors affecting tumor- and blood-derived genomic profiling is warranted to support their implementation in clinical settings. Clinical trial information: NCT03215706.
Capmatinib in MET exon 14-mutated, advanced NSCLC: Updated results from the GEOMETRY mono-1 study.
Authors: Wolf Juergen , Garon Edward B. , Groen Harry J.M. , Tan Daniel Shao-Weng , Robeva Anna , Le Mouhaer Sylvie , Carbini Mariana , Chassot-Agostinho Andrea , Heist Rebecca Suk
Published: June 2021

9020

Background: Capmatinib, a selective MET inhibitor, is approved in the USA and Japan for the treatment of patients (pts) with MET exon 14 skipping mutation ( METex14) advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on the multi-cohort phase II GEOMETRY mono-1 study. This is the first report on expansion Cohort 7 in first line (1L) METex14 NSCLC pts, with updates to previously reported results (Wolf et al, NEJM 2020) for METex14 pts. Methods: In GEOMETRY mono-1, pts were assigned to cohorts based on previous lines of therapy and MET status ( METex14 or MET amplification). This efficacy analysis includes patients with METex14 NSCLC who were treatment-naive (Cohort 5b and 7) and those who had previously received 1L or 2L of therapy (expansion Cohort 6 and Cohort 4) for their advanced disease (data cutoff: Sep 18, 2020). Evaluated outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and progression-free survival (PFS), all by BIRC; and overall survival (OS). The safety analysis includes all patients enrolled. Results: In total, 160 pts with METex14 who received capmatinib 400 mg BID were analyzed. ORR of 65.6% (95% CI 46.8-81.4) for the treatment-naive expansion Cohort 7 was in line with that previously reported for Cohort 5b (Table). Though Cohort 7 data are still immature, median PFS was 10.8 mo (95% CI 6.87-not estimable [NE]). Mature median OS was 20.8 mo (95% CI 12.4-NE) in Cohort 5b and 13.6 mo (95% CI 8.6-22.2) in Cohort 4. Median OS for Cohorts 6 and 7 and DOR for Cohort 7 are not yet reached. The safety profile remained unchanged across all study cohorts (N = 373): 98.4% of pts reported AEs (68.6% Grade [G] 3/4) regardless of causality and 16.1% reported AEs leading to discontinuation (10.5% G3/4). The most common AEs (≥20% all G) were peripheral edema (54.2%), nausea (45.0%), vomiting (28.2%), increased blood creatinine (26.5%), dyspnea (23.3%), fatigue (22.3%), and decreased appetite (21.2%). Conclusions: Results of Cohort 7 confirm those previously reported for Cohort 5b showing higher efficacy of capmatinib when used as 1L in METex14 NSCLC pts. A clinically meaningful median OS of 20.8 mo in 1L (Cohort 5b) and of 13.6 mo in relapse (Cohort 4) was also observed and, together with the continued manageable toxicity profile, the data support capmatinib as a valuable targeted treatment option for METex14 NSCLC pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02414139. [Table: see text]
Tepotinib in patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with MET amplification (METamp).
Authors: Le Xiuning , Paz-Ares Luis G. , Van Meerbeeck Jan , Viteri Santiago , Cabrera Galvez Carlos , Vicente Baz David , Kim Young-Chul , Kang Jin-Hyoung , Schumacher Karl-Maria , Karachaliou Niki , Adrian Svenja , Bruns Rolf , Paik Paul K.
Published: June 2021

9021

Background: METamp is an oncogenic driver occurring in 1–5% of NSCLCs that confers a poor prognosis and lacks approved targeted therapies. Tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, provided durable response in NSCLC with MET exon 14 ( METex14) skipping in Cohort A of the Phase II VISION trial (NCT02864992). VISION Cohort B evaluated tepotinib in pts with advanced NSCLC and METamp, as detected by a convenient and minimally invasive liquid biopsy assay, in the absence of METex14 skipping. Methods: Pts with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0–1, 0–2 prior lines of therapy, EGFR/ ALK wild-type status, no METex14 skipping, and METamp by liquid biopsy (Guardant360®; MET gene copy number ≥2.5) received oral tepotinib 500 mg QD (450 mg active moiety). The primary endpoint was objective response (RECIST v1.1) by independent review committee (IRC). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. The data cut-off was July 1, 2020. Results: Among 24 enrolled pts, median age was 63.4 years (range: 38–73), 21 pts (88%) were male, 21 (88%) had ECOG PS 1 and 21 (88%) were smokers. Tepotinib was given to 7 pts (29%) in first line (1L), 10 pts (42%) in second line (2L) and 7 pts (29%) in third line (3L). As of November 2020, treatment was ongoing for > 1 year in 5 pts (1L, n = 2; 2L, n = 2; 3L, n = 1). Objective response rate (ORR) by IRC was 42% (10/24 pts) overall, 71% (5/7 pts) in 1L, 30% (3/10 pts) in 2L and 29% (2/7 pts) in 3L (Table). Median DOR by IRC was not estimable (NE; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.8 months–NE). Investigator-assessed outcomes were similar. Five pts (20.8%) discontinued due to adverse events (AEs), which were considered unrelated to tepotinib. Treatment-related AEs were reported in 16 pts (67%; Grade 3/4, 7 pts [29%]) and included peripheral edema (9 pts [38%]; Grade 3/4, 2 pts [8%]), generalized edema (4 pts [17%]; Grade 3/4, 2 pts [8%]) and constipation (4 pts [17%]; Grade 3/4, 0 pts). Conclusions: In the first study of a MET inhibitor in NSCLC with METamp prospectively detected by liquid biopsy, tepotinib showed high and clinically meaningful activity, especially in 1L, and was generally well tolerated. Tepotinib warrants further evaluation in NSCLC with METamp. Clinical trial information: NCT02864992. [Table: see text]
A randomized phase II study comparing nivolumab (NIVO) with carboplatin-pemetrexed (CbPEM) for patients (pts) with EGFR mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who acquire resistance to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) not due to a secondary T790M mutation (WJOG8515L).
Authors: Hayashi Hidetoshi , Sugawara Shunichi , Fukuda Yasushi , Sato Yuki , Miura Satoru , Ota Keiichi , Ozawa Yuichi , Hara Satoshi , Tanizaki Junko , Azuma Koichi , Omori Shota , Tachihara Motoko , Nishino Kazumi , Hosokawa Shinobu , Chiba Yasutaka , Haratani Koji , Sakai Kazuko , Nishio Kazuto , Yamamoto Nobuyuki , Nakagawa Kazuhiko
Published: June 2021

9037

Background: Although the efficacy of antibodies to programmed cell death–1 (PD-1) appears to be less pronounced in patients with NSCLC harboring epidermal growth factor receptor gene ( EGFR) mutations, patients who develop disease progression (PD) to TKIs due to mechanisms other than secondary T790M mutation of EGFR might be more likely to benefit from NIVO. Here, we report the results of first randomized phase II trial to compare NIVO with the CbPEM in those population. Methods: Pts with advanced EGFR mt NSCLC who experienced PD after EGFR-TKIs were randomized 1:1 to NIVO or CbPEM. Eligibility criteria included the treatment history with TKIs as follow; no evidence of T790M after PD on 1st/2nd generation (gen) TKIs (A) after PD on 3rd gen TKIs as a 2nd line for T790M positive tumor (B) or 3rd gen TKIs as a front-line (C). The primary end point is progression-free survival (PFS) and biomarker analysis were included for exploratory analysis. Results: A total of 102 patients was randomized. Median PFS and overall survival (OS) were 1.7 and 20.7 months (mo), respectively, for NIVO arm (n = 52) versus 5.6 and 19.9 months for CbPEM (n = 50) (Hazard ratio [HR] = 1.92 and 0.88, respectively). Overall response rate and duration of response were 9.6% and 5.3 months for NIVO and 36.0% and 5.5 months for CbPEM. PD-L1 expression on tumor cells and tumor mutation burden (TMB) were evaluated in 77 (TPS 0%. 1-49%, > 50%, n = 46, 20, and 11) and 50 (Median TMB 6.2mt/mb). Immune-related gene expression profiling was under evaluation and the results will be demonstrated in the meeting. The efficacy of NIVO in PD-L1 strong positive (>50%, n = 8) and no evidence of T790M after PD on 1st/2nd gen TKIs (n = 29) was tended to be better than their counterparts. There was no significant correlation between TMB and the efficacy of NIVO. Pneumonitis was observed in one patient (1.0%) for NIVO arm and no new safety signals were noted. Conclusions: NIVO was not associated with longer PFS than CbPEM in selected pts with advanced EGFR mt NSCLC. OS was similar between groups. Baseline PD-L1 status and genetic alteration features may be relevant predictive markers to select pts who would benefit from NIVO. Clinical trial information: jRCTs051180133. [Table: see text]
Differential immune-related microenvironment determines PD-1/PD-L1 blockade efficacy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients.
Authors: Shirasawa Masayuki , Yoshida Tatsuya , Shimoda Yukiko , Takayanagi Daisuke , Shiraishi Kouya , Kubo Takashi , Mitani Sachiyo , Matsumoto Yuji , Masuda Ken , Shinno Yuki , Okuma Yusuke , Goto Yasushi , Horinouchi Hidehito , Ichikawa Hitoshi , Kohno Takashi , Yamamoto Noboru , Watanabe Shun-ichi , Motoi Noriko , Ohe Yuichiro
Published: June 2021

9044

Background: Programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression is not a completely reliable predictive marker of the efficacy of anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1)/anti-PD-L1 therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients (NSCLC). Immune-related tumor microenvironment (TME) is classified into four different types based on the status of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and PD-L1 expression. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed advanced NSCLC patients treated with anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 therapy between 2015 and 2019, and investigated the association between the efficacy of anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 therapy, the types of TME based on PD-L1 (clone: 22C3) expression, and the density of CD8-positive TILs by immunohistochemistry (/mm2), and mutational profiles assessed by next-generation sequencing. Results: Overall, 228 patients without driver mutation ( EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and RET) were included in the analysis. The patients were classified into four following groups: Type I: PD-L1High (tumor proportion score [TPS]≥50%)/TILHigh (≥85/mm2; n = 73), Type II: PD-L1Low (TPS < 50%)/TILLow ( < 85/mm2; n = 70), Type III: PD-L1High/TILLow (n = 37), and Type IV: PD-L1Low/TILHigh (n = 48). The progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) of anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 therapy clearly differed according to the different tumor microenvironment (TME) types (ORR and median PFS; Type I: 64%, 14.5 months, Type II: 12%, 2.1 months, Type III: 24%, 3.6 months, Type IV: 41%, 10.8 months). In patients with PD-L1High tumors, Type I tumors had significantly better ORR and PFS than Type III(ORR: p < 0.001, and PFS: p < 0.001) tumors. Regarding the association between mutational profiles, histology and the TME types, the presence of TP53 mutation and KRAS mutation significantly related to TILHigh (Type I and IV) and PD-L1High tumors (Type I and III), respectively. Pleomorphic and NSCLC- not otherwise specified histology were associated with Type I tumors, while LCNEC was associated with PD-L1 low tumors (Type II and IV). Conclusions: Various factors (mutational profile and histology) are related to TME classification based on the status of TILs and PD-L1 expression. Differential types of TME, including PD-L1 expression and TILs status, can accurately predict the efficacy of anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 therapy.[Table: see text]
Physician concern about delaying lung cancer treatment while awaiting biomarker testing: Results of a survey of U.S. oncologists.
Authors: Mileham Kathryn Finch , Basu Roy Upal Kunal , Bruinooge Suanna Steeby , Freeman-Daily Janet , Garon Edward B. , Garrett-Mayer Liz , Jalal Shadia Ibrahim , Johnson Bruce E. , Moore Amy , Osarogiagbon Raymond U. , Rosenthal Lauren , Schenkel Caroline , Smith Robert A. , Virani Shamsuddin , Redman Mary Weber , Silvestri Gerard A.
Published: June 2021

9067

Background: With rapid advancements in biomarker testing informing lung cancer treatment decisions, clinicians are challenged to maintain knowledge of who, what and when to test and how to treat based on test results. An ASCO taskforce including representatives from the American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable and patient advocates conducted a study to assess biomarker testing and treatment practices for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) among U.S. oncologists. Methods: A survey was sent to 2374 ASCO members – lung cancer specialists and general oncologists. Eligibility required treating ≥1 lung cancer patient/month. Proportions were estimated across groups and compared using chi-square tests. Results: 170 responses were analyzed. 59% of respondents work at an academic center (i.e., have a fellowship program), while 41% work at a community (non-academic hospital/health system/private practice). Nearly all (98%) believe biomarker results should be received within 1 or 2 weeks of ordering, yet 37% wait an average of 3 or 4 weeks for results. Of respondents who usually wait 3 or 4 weeks, 37% initiate a non-targeted systemic treatment while waiting. Respondents from community practices were more likely to initiate non-targeted systemic treatment if results were not available after 2 weeks (59% compared to 40% of academic respondents; p = 0.013). ). When asked about reasons for not testing, respondents <5 years since training were more likely to report that delaying treatment while waiting for results was always/often a concern compared to those >6 years from training (41% vs 19%). Respondents reported high testing rates in both non-squamous and squamous aNSCLC. Roughly equal representation of generalists/specialists and academic/community respondents helps mitigate potential concerns about external validity. Conclusions: Respondents indicated that treatment decisions are impacted by delays in biomarker test results. Clinicians should be informed about when it is safe and appropriate to defer treatment while biomarker testing is pending. Respondents suggest that diagnostic biomarker testing companies should strive to expedite results.[Table: see text]
Phase I study of the aurora kinase A inhibitor alisertib in combination with osimertinib in EGFR-mutant lung cancer.
Authors: Blakely Collin M. , Gubens Matthew A. , Allen Gregory M. , Shah Shrusti , Jereza Matthew , Bacaltos Bianca , Bandyopadhyay Sourav
Published: June 2021

9074

Background: The 3rd generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) osimertinib is effective for the treatment of advanced EGFR-mutant (mt) lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). However, tumor resistance to osimertinib monotherapy invariably occurs. Activation of Aurora Kinase A (AURKA) drives resistance to osimertinib treatment in preclinical models of EGFR-mutant LUAD and is associated with TKI resistance in patients. Alisertib is a selective AURKA inhibitor with an acceptable safety profile established in early phase clinical trials. Methods: We performed a single institution phase Ia clinical trial of alisertib in combination with the 3rd generation EGFR inhibitor osimertinib in patients with metastatic EGFR-mutant LUAD who had experienced disease progression on osimertinib monotherapy (NCT04085315). The primary objective of the study was to determine the safety and tolerability of alisertib in combination with osimertinib in order to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and to identify a recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Secondary efficacy endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Utilizing a 3+3 trial design, patients receiving osimertinib 80 mg daily were treated with alisertib using an intermittent dosing strategy of 20-50 mg twice daily (BID) oral alisertib on days (d) 1-3, 8-11, and 15-17 of a 28-day cycle. Results: A total of 10 patients were treated with osimertinib 80 mg and received at least one dose of alisertib. 6 patients were treated at the 30 mg BID and 4 patients at the 40 mg BID intermittent dosing schedule of alisertib. The most commonly reported adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (70%), fatigue (60%), alopecia (50%) and neutropenia (50%). All AEs, except neutropenia, were grade 1 or 2. Two patients (20%) experienced grade 3 or grade 4 neutropenia; both patients were treated at the 40 mg BID intermittent dose of alisertib. Intermittent alisertib 30 mg BID was identified as the MTD and RP2D in combination with osimertinib 80 mg daily. The ORR was 10% (1/10) and DCR 70% (7/10), with the majority of patients, 60% (6/10), achieving stable disease (SD). 30% (3/10) experienced progressive disease (PD) as their best response. The median PFS was 9.4 months (2.0 months - N.R.). Conclusions: Intermittent dosing of alisertib 30 mg BID on d1-3, 8-11, and 15-17 of a 28-day cycle in combination with osimertinib 80 mg daily demonstrates an acceptable toxicity profile. Preliminary efficacy analysis suggests that alisertib + osimertinib may result in clinically meaningful disease control in EGFR-mt LUAD patients whose disease is resistant to osimertinib monotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT04085315.
Update analysis of NEJ009: Gefitinib alone (G) versus gefitinib plus chemotherapy (GCP) for non-small cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR.
Authors: Miyauchi Eisaku , Morita Satoshi , Nakamura Atsushi , Hosomi Yukio , Watanabe Kana , Ikeda Satoshi , Seike Masahiro , Fujita Yuka , Minato Koichi , Ko Ryo , Harada Toshiyuki , Hagiwara Koichi , Kobayashi Kunihiko , Nukiwa Toshihiro , Inoue Akira ,   North East Japan Study Group (NEJSG)
Published: June 2021

9081

Background: NEJ009 study is the first randomized phase III trial that compared gefitinib plus chemotherapy with gefitinib in patients with untreated NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations. We report an updated OS and long-term tolerability analysis, including subgroup analyses focusing on a type of EGFR mutation and metastatic sites. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to gefitinib (gefitinib 250 mg PO, QD) and GCP regimen (gefitinib 250 mg PO, QD combined with carboplatin AUC 5 and pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 in a 3-week cycle for up to six cycles, followed by concurrent gefitinib and pemetrexed maintenance). This study tested multiple primary endpoints, PFS, PFS2, and OS, which were analyzed using a preplanned hierarchical sequential testing method. Results: Three hundred forty-five patients were randomly assigned (gefitinib, n = 172; GCP, n =170). At latest data cut-off (May 22, 2020), although there was no significant difference in OS between the groups (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.06; P=0.13), GCP still demonstrated significantly better PFS and PFS2 compared to G. The updated median PFS, PFS2, and OS was 11.2 months, 18.0 months, and 38.5 months in the gefitinib group and 20.9 months, 20.9 months, and 49.0 months in the GCP group, respectively. No severe adverse events occurred in the period since the first report. Conclusions: This updated analysis confirmed that the GCP regimen achieved significantly better PFS and PFS2 with an acceptable safety profile compared with gefitinib alone. The efficacy outcome of GCP is more favorable than gefitinib monotherapy as first-line treatment of NSCLC with EGFR mutation. Clinical trial information: UMIN000006340. Clinical trial information: UMIN000006340. [Table: see text]
Chemo-immunotherapy outcomes of KRAS-G12C mutant lung cancer compared to other molecular subtypes of KRAS-mutant lung cancer.
Authors: Arbour Kathryn Cecilia , Ricciuti Biagio , Rizvi Hira , Hellmann Matthew D. , Yu Helena Alexandra , Ladanyi Marc , Kris Mark G. , Arcila Maria E. , Rudin Charles M. , Lito Piro , Awad Mark M. , Riely Gregory J.
Published: June 2021

9088

Background: KRAS mutations are identified in approximately 30% of NSCLC, with G12C mutations being the most common subtype and representing 12% of all non-small cell lung cancer cases. Novel direct inhibitors are in clinical development and have shown promising activity, although the efficacy of these agents compared to other standard therapies for lung cancer is not yet known. We hypothesized that patients with KRAS-G12C mutations may have distinct responses to chemo-immunotherapy regimens both with respect to STK11 and KEAP1 co-mutation status and compared to patients with non-G12C subtypes. Methods: Patients with KRAS-mutant lung cancers at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Dana Farber Cancer Institute treated with chemo-immunotherapy regimens as first line therapy for advanced/metastatic disease were identified. Subset with KRAS G12C mutations non-G12C subtypes were compared and response to therapy was assessed by investigator. Baseline characteristics were compared with the Chi-square and Fisher’s exact test for categorical data and Wilcoxon rank-rum test for continuous data. Response evaluations where performed by investigators and compared between groups with the Fisher’s exact test. Progression free survival and overall survival was calculated from start of therapy to date of progression or death/last follow up, respectively and compared between groups using the Cox proportional-hazards model. Results: We identified 137 patients with KRAS -mutant NSCLC treated with chemo-immunotherapy: 45% (62/137) had mutations in KRAS-G12C and 55% harbored non-G12C mutations (17% G12V, 15% G12D, 4% G12A, 4% G12S, 3% G13D). The median OS was 21 and 14 months for G12C and non-G12C patients, respectively (p = 0.24). ORR to chemo-immunotherapy for patients harboring a KRAS-G12C mutation was 40% (25/62) compared to 31% (23/75) in non-G12C subtypes (p = 0.3). Median PFS was similar for both G12C and non-G12C subtypes (7.3 vs 6.1 months, respectively, p = 0.12). Concurrent STK11 mutation was identified in 40% of patients with KRAS-G12C and KEAP1 alterations were observed in 32% of patients. In patients with KRAS-G12C, co-mutation in STK11 and/or KEAP1 was associated with shorter PFS (15.8 vs 5.1 months, p = 0.01). Conclusions: KRAS-G12C mutations are present in 12% of patients with NSCLC and represent a relevant subtype of NSCLC given KRAS G12C inhibitors now in clinical development. Treatment outcomes to chemo-immunotherapy are similar in patients with G12C and non-G12C subtypes. Outcomes are poor for patients with concurrent STK11 and/or KEAP1 mutations representing a significant unmet need.
Impact of STK11 mutation on first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) outcomes in a real-world KRAS G12C mutant lung adenocarcinoma cohort.
Authors: Heist Rebecca Suk , Yu Junhua , Donderici Elifnur Yay , Zhang Nicole , Espenschied Carin R. , Lang Kathryn , Korytowsky Beata , Chi Andrew S. , Christensen James G
Published: June 2021

9106

Background: The introduction of KRAS G12C inhibitors into clinical trials has demonstrated promise and may provide a new therapeutic option for patients (pts) harboring KRAS G12C mutations. Recent data has also indicated that immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have shown benefit in KRAS G12C mutant lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD); however, data on the impact of co-occurring STK11 mutations on outcomes are conflicting. We utilized the Guardant INFORM real-world clinical-genomic database to assess the impact of co-occurring STK11 mutations on outcomes in pts with KRAS G12C mutant LUAD treated with a first-line ICI containing regimen. Methods: This retrospective matched cohort observational study was conducted in a nationally representative clinical-genomic database covering over 137,000 pts with comprehensive ctDNA results and associated clinical information. Adult pts with metastatic LUAD who received ≥ 1 dose of first-line anti-PD1/PD-L1 ± chemotherapy and had at least 90 days follow-up after first KRAS G12C detection were included. A cohort of pts without KRAS G12C, including KRAS wildtype pts and pts with other KRAS mutations, were matched 3:1 for age, gender, year of index and baseline comorbidity. Time to next treatment (TTNT), time to discontinuation (TTD), real-world overall survival (rwOS) were compared with vs. without STK11 mutations for both cohorts using cox proportional-hazards model. Results: Among 330 pts in the KRAS G12C cohort, 21% (n = 70) had an STK11 mutation. Among the matched cohort (n = 938), 754 pts were KRAS wildtype, of whom 6% (n = 49) had STK11 mutations. Within the KRAS G12C cohort, pts with STK11 mutations had statistically significant shorter TTNT (hazard ratio [HR] 2.7, 95% confidence internal [CI] 1.8-4.0, p < 0.0001), TTD (HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-2.0, p < 0.04) and rwOS (HR 3.2, 95% CI 2.0-5.1, p < 0.0001) than pts without STK11 mutations. Within the matched KRAS wildtype cohort, the differences in TTD (HR 1.4, 95% CI = 1.0-2.0, p = 0.08) and rwOS (HR 1.4, 95% CI = 0.8-2.4, p = 0.3) in patients with vs. without STK11 mutation did not reach statistical significance (Table). Conclusions: This study provides real-world evidence that STK11 co-mutations are associated with worse outcomes among pts with KRAS G12C mutant LUAD treated with first-line ICI. These inferior outcomes indicate a high unmet medical need among LUAD pts harboring co-occurring KRAS G12C and STK11 mutations and demonstrate the need for effective targeted and/or combination therapies in this patient population.[Table: see text]
Long-term efficacy and safety of larotrectinib in patients with TRK fusion-positive lung cancer.
Authors: Lin Jessica Jiyeong , Kummar Shivaani , Tan Daniel Shao-Weng , Lassen Ulrik Niels , Leyvraz Serge , Liu Yongmei , Moreno Victor , Patel Jyoti D. , Rosen Lee S. , Solomon Benjamin Maurice , Norenberg Ricarda , Dima Laura , Brega Nicoletta , Shen Lin , Drilon Alexander E.
Published: June 2021

9109

Background: Neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase ( NTRK) gene fusions have been identified as oncogenic drivers in a diverse array of tumor types including lung cancer. Larotrectinib is a first-in-class, highly selective, central nervous system (CNS)-active tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitor approved for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients (pts) with TRK fusion cancer, with an objective response rate (ORR) of 78% across multiple non-CNS cancers (McDermott et al, ESMO 2020). Here, we report the updated data on pts with lung cancer treated with larotrectinib. Methods: Pts with lung cancer harboring a NTRK gene fusion enrolled in two clinical trials (NCT02576431 and NCT02122913) were identified for this analysis. Larotrectinib 100 mg PO BID was administered on a continuous 28-day schedule until disease progression, withdrawal, or unacceptable toxicity. Response was assessed by the investigator per RECIST v1.1. Results: As of July 20, 2020, a total of 20 pts with TRK fusion-positive lung cancer (19 with non-small cell lung cancer and 1 with small cell lung cancer) were enrolled. Median age was 48.5 years (range 25.0–76.0). The gene fusions involved NTRK1 (n = 16; 80%) or NTRK3 (n = 4; 20%). Pts were heavily pre-treated with a median of 3 systemic therapies (range 0–6). Among 15 evaluable pts, the confirmed ORR was 73% (95% CI 45–92): 1 complete response, 10 partial responses (PR), 3 stable disease (SD) and 1 progressive disease (PD). The median time to response was 1.8 months. Among 8 evaluable pts with baseline measurable and non-measurable CNS metastases, the ORR was 63% (95% CI 25–91): 5 PR, 2 SD, and 1 PD. In all evaluable pts, the 12-month rates for duration of response and progression-free survival were 81% and 65%, respectively. Median overall survival was 40.7 months (95% CI 17.2 to not estimable) at a median follow-up of 16.2 months. Duration of treatment ranged from 0.03+ to 51.55+ months. Adverse events (AEs) were predominantly Grade 1–2. Treatment-related AEs were reported in 16 pts, of which 2 experienced Grade 3 events (myalgia, hypersensitivity, weight increase). There were no treatment discontinuations due to AEs. Conclusions: These data confirm that larotrectinib is highly active with rapid and durable responses, extended survival benefit, and a favorable long-term safety profile in pts with advanced lung cancer harboring NTRK gene fusions, including in pts with CNS metastases. These results underscore the importance of screening for NTRK gene fusions in pts with lung cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT02576431 and NCT02122913.
Effect of continuing osimertinib with chemotherapy in the post-progression setting on progression-free survival among patients with metastatic epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) positive non-small cell lung cancer.
Authors: Patil Tejas , Tsui David Chun Cheong , Nicklawsky Andrew , Schenk Erin Lynn , Purcell William T. , Bunn Paul A. , Pacheco Jose Maria , Camidge D. Ross
Published: June 2021

9124

Background: Continuing a 1st generation EGFR TKI with chemotherapy upon TKI progression was not shown to be beneficial in the IMPRESS trial. However, the validity of this approach with osimertinib remains under explored. We attempted to characterize the efficacy of continuing osimertinib with chemotherapy in the post-progression setting. Methods: A single-center retrospective review of patients with metastatic EGFR mutant NSCLC who had progressed on osimertinib was performed. Clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes were noted. Progression free survival (PFS), duration of treatment (DOT), overall survival (OS) and rates of intracranial progression were captured. ANOVA or a Fisher exact test were used to identify associations between cohort characteristics and treatment outcomes. Differences in PFS, DOT and OS were assessed using a log-rank test. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to adjust for potential confounders. Results: 73 patients with EGFR mutant NSCLC with post-osimertinib treatment outcomes were identified. Cohort characteristics are summarized in Table. Median duration of follow up was 41 months. Upon progression, osimertinib was discontinued in 34 patients (Cohort A) and continued with next line of therapy in 39 patients (Cohort B). Survival analyses were adjusted for prior lines of therapy, use of platinum doublet chemotherapy, and use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the post-progression setting. After adjusting for covariates, continuing osimertinib post-progression was associated with an improved PFS (7 vs 4 months; HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.34 – 1.00; p = 0.003) and DOT (7 vs 4 months; HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.31 – 0.87; p = 0.006). There was no difference in OS between Group A and B (52 vs 41 months; HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.43 – 1.24; p = 0.234). Rates of intracranial progression were similar between Group A and B (28% vs 23%; p = 0.649). Conclusions: After adjusting for covariates, continuing osimertinib with chemotherapy in the post-progression setting was associated with a significant difference in PFS and DOT, but with no differences in OS. Continuing osimertinib does not appear to influence the rate of subsequent intracranial progression. Prospective studies are needed to identify the optimal practice pattern.[Table: see text]
Atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic mucosal melanoma: Interim analysis of an open-label phase II trial.
Authors: Si Lu , Fang Meiyu , Chen Yu , Mao Lili , Zhang Peng , Lin Jing , Bai Xue , Cao Xiao , Chen Yi , Guo Jun
Published: June 2021

9511

Background: Mucosal melanoma is a rare malignant melanoma in Caucasians but ranks the second most common subtype in the Asian population. It is more often diagnosed at an advanced stage and responds poorly to current PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Here we report the interim analysis results of ML41186, an open-label, multicenter, single-arm phase II study, aiming to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab in patients (pts) with advanced mucosal melanoma. Methods: Eligible pts aged 18 to 75 years with histologically confirmed unresectable locally advanced or metastatic mucosal melanoma had at least one measurable lesion per RECIST version 1.1 at baseline, with an ECOG PS 0 or 1 and adequate hematologic and organ function. ML41186 is a Simon two-stage design study, if 22 pts completed ORR evaluation and more than 3 pts respond in stage I, the study then continue to Stage II. Atezolizumab and bevacizumab were administered at a fixed dose of 1200 mg and 7.5 mg/kg Q3W respectively (on day 1 of each 21-day cycle) until unacceptable toxicity or loss of clinical benefit. The primary endpoint is the objective response rate (ORR). The secondary endpoints include progression-free survival (PFS), duration of objective response (DoR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety. Results: By the cut-off date of 9th September 2020, 35 pts has been enrolled, among whom 22 pts in the stage I analysis set has completed two efficacy evaluation, while 28 pts (full analysis set) has completed at least one efficacy evaluation. In ITT populations (n=35), mean age was 58.9 years with 10 (28%) pts had ECOG PS of 1. LDH level elevated in 9 (25.7%) pts. More than half pts (19, 54.3%) had metastatic mucosal melanoma, of whom 3 (15.8%) pts had more than 3 metastasis sites and 4 (21.1%) pts had liver metastasis. In stage I analysis set (n=22), the best confirmed ORR was 36.4% (95% CI, 17.0%-59.3%). Median progression-free survival was 5.32 months (95% CI, 1.58-not reached), and the best confirmed DCR was 59.1% (95%CI, 36.4%-79.3%). The median confirmed DoR was not reached (95% CI, 2.76-NR). In the full analysis set (n=28), the unconfirmed ORR was 42.9% (95%CI, 24.5%-62.8%). In ITT populations (n=35), 28 pts (80%) experienced at least one adverse event (AE) and 5 pts (14.3%) experienced at least one grade 3-4 AEs. Only one patient experienced AE leading to treatment discontinuation. One patient died of autoimmune lung disease. Conclusions: The combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed promising benefit and was tolerable in pts with advanced mucosal melanoma. At the time of this interim analysis, the primary endpoint did not cross the futility boundary, thus the study will run into Stage II. Clinical trial information: NCT04091217.
Adverse effects of adjuvant tamoxifen treatment on bone mineral density in premenopausal breast cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Authors: Cha Chihwan , Lee Soo Jin , Hong Hanpyo , Choi Yun Young , Chung Min Sung
Published: June 2021

e12500

Background: It is well known that adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for breast cancer in postmenopausal women decreases bone loss. However, the adverse effect of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy for bone mineral density (BMD) in premenopausal breast cancer patients remains uncertain. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy on BMD changes in premenopausal women with primary breast cancer. Methods: Through April 2020, studies reporting BMD changes of lumbar spine or hip in premenopausal women with primary breast cancer treated with adjuvant tamoxifen were collected from EMBASE and PubMed. The pooled analysis was performed using random effects model of the standardized mean difference (SMD) of BMD in patients. Results: A total of 1,432 premenopausal patients from eight studies were included in the pooled analysis. After 3 years of median follow up, adjuvant tamoxifen therapy decreased BMD by as much as SMD of -0.79 [95% confidence interval (CI); -1.25 to -0.33, P < 0.01] at lumbar spines and -0.38 at hip (95%CI; -0.88 to 0.12, P > 0.05). Compared with patients received tamoxifen alone, patients who received combination therapy with chemotherapy or ovarian function suppression (OFS) showed decreased bone loss at lumbar spine (SMD -1.17 with 95%CI -1.59 to -0.75, -0.43 with 95%CI -2.26 to 1.40, and -0.75 with 95%CI -1.38 to -0.13, respectively). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis revealed that premenopausal women who received adjuvant tamoxifen treatment showed significant bone loss over a period of time, especially at lumbar spine. However, tamoxifen attenuated bone loss in those who received tamoxifen after chemotherapy or along with OFS.[Table: see text]