Assessment of the current and emerging criteria for the histopathological classification of lung neuroendocrine tumours in the lungNENomics project

Background: Six thoracic pathologists reviewed 259 lung neuroendocrine tumours (LNETs) from the lungNENomics project, with 171 of them having associated survival data. This cohort presents a unique opportunity to assess the strengths and limitations of current World Health Organization (WHO) classification criteria and to evaluate the utility of emerging markers. Patients and methods: Patients were diagnosed based on the 2021 WHO criteria, with atypical carcinoids (ACs) defined by the presence of focal necrosis and/or 2-10 mitoses per 2 mm2. We investigated two markers of tumour proliferation: the Ki-67 index and phospho-histone H3 (PHH3) protein expression, quantified by pathologists and automatically via deep learning. Additionally, an unsupervised deep learning algorithm was trained to uncover previously unnoticed morphological features with diagnostic value. Results: The accuracy in distinguishing typical from ACs is hampered by interobserver variability in mitotic counting and the limitations of morphological criteria in identifying aggressive cases. Our study reveals that different Ki-67 cut-offs can categorise LNETs similarly to current WHO criteria. Counting mitoses in PHH3+ areas does not improve diagnosis, while providing a similar prognostic value to the current criteria. With the advantage of being time efficient, automated assessment of these markers leads to similar conclusions. Lastly, state-of-the-art deep learning modelling does not uncover undisclosed morphological features with diagnostic value. Conclusions: This study suggests that the mitotic criteria can be complemented by manual or automated assessment of Ki-67 or PHH3 protein expression, but these markers do not significantly improve the prognostic value of the current classification, as the AC group remains highly unspecific for aggressive cases. Therefore, we may have exhausted the potential of morphological features in classifying and prognosticating LNETs. Our study suggests that it might be time to shift the research focus towards investigating molecular markers that could contribute to a more clinically relevant morpho-molecular classification.</p

Lancet

BACKGROUND: In 2015, the second cycle of the CONCORD programme established global surveillance of cancer survival as a metric of the effectiveness of health systems and to inform global policy on cancer control. CONCORD-3 updates the worldwide surveillance of cancer survival to 2014. METHODS: CONCORD-3 includes individual records for 37.5 million patients diagnosed with cancer during the 15-year period 2000-14. Data were provided by 322 population-based cancer registries in 71 countries and territories, 47 of which provided data with 100% population coverage. The study includes 18 cancers or groups of cancers: oesophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, liver, pancreas, lung, breast (women), cervix, ovary, prostate, and melanoma of the skin in adults, and brain tumours, leukaemias, and lymphomas in both adults and children. Standardised quality control procedures were applied; errors were rectified by the registry concerned. We estimated 5-year net survival. Estimates were age-standardised with the International Cancer Survival Standard weights. FINDINGS: For most cancers, 5-year net survival remains among the highest in the world in the USA and Canada, in Australia and New Zealand, and in Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. For many cancers, Denmark is closing the survival gap with the other Nordic countries. Survival trends are generally increasing, even for some of the more lethal cancers: in some countries, survival has increased by up to 5% for cancers of the liver, pancreas, and lung. For women diagnosed during 2010-14, 5-year survival for breast cancer is now 89.5% in Australia and 90.2% in the USA, but international differences remain very wide, with levels as low as 66.1% in India. For gastrointestinal cancers, the highest levels of 5-year survival are seen in southeast Asia: in South Korea for cancers of the stomach (68.9%), colon (71.8%), and rectum (71.1%); in Japan for oesophageal cancer (36.0%); and in Taiwan for liver cancer (27.9%). By contrast, in the same world region, survival is generally lower than elsewhere for melanoma of the skin (59.9% in South Korea, 52.1% in Taiwan, and 49.6% in China), and for both lymphoid malignancies (52.5%, 50.5%, and 38.3%) and myeloid malignancies (45.9%, 33.4%, and 24.8%). For children diagnosed during 2010-14, 5-year survival for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia ranged from 49.8% in Ecuador to 95.2% in Finland. 5-year survival from brain tumours in children is higher than for adults but the global range is very wide (from 28.9% in Brazil to nearly 80% in Sweden and Denmark). INTERPRETATION: The CONCORD programme enables timely comparisons of the overall effectiveness of health systems in providing care for 18 cancers that collectively represent 75% of all cancers diagnosed worldwide every year. It contributes to the evidence base for global policy on cancer control. Since 2017, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has used findings from the CONCORD programme as the official benchmark of cancer survival, among their indicators of the quality of health care in 48 countries worldwide. Governments must recognise population-based cancer registries as key policy tools that can be used to evaluate both the impact of cancer prevention strategies and the effectiveness of health systems for all patients diagnosed with cancer. FUNDING: American Cancer Society; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Swiss Re; Swiss Cancer Research foundation; Swiss Cancer League; Institut National du Cancer; La Ligue Contre le Cancer; Rossy Family Foundation; US National Cancer Institute; and the Susan G Komen Foundation

Treatment (Tx) patterns and overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with NSCLC in Sweden : A SCAN-LEAF study analysis from the I-O Optimise initiative

Background: As part of I-O Optimise, a multinational research platform providing real-world insights into the management of lung cancers, the SCAN-LEAF study aims to describe the epidemiology, clinical care and outcomes for pts with NSCLC in Scandinavia. We report initial Tx and OS for pts with NSCLC prior to the availability of immunotherapies in Sweden. Methods: The analysis includes all adult pts diagnosed with NSCLC at Uppsala and Karolinska (Stockholm) University Hospitals from 2012 to 2015 (follow-up to Dec 2016). Electronic medical record data were extracted using Pygargus CXP software and linked with national registries. Bespoke rule-based algorithms were applied to describe Tx patterns; Kaplan–Meier methods were used to estimate OS. Results: 2779 pts were diagnosed with incident NSCLC (median age, 70 yrs [range: 22–96; 14.2% ≥80]; male, 48.5%; histology: non-squamous (NSQ), 70.9%, squamous (SQ), 17.7%, other, 11.4%; stage distribution: I, 19.3%; II, 7.7%; IIIA, 12.3%; IIIB, 7.2%; IV, 51.2%). Initial Tx (≤6 months from diagnosis) by stage and yr of diagnosis is shown in the table. Median OS (months) for NSQ and SQ pts: not reached and 52.8 in stage I, 43.2 and 23.6 in stage II, 26.7 and 20.4 in stage IIIA, 12.5 and 12.9 in stage IIIB, and 7.6 and 6.1 in stage IV, respectively. Among stage IIIB–IV pts, 60.7% (NSQ) and 53.5% (SQ) had ≥1 line of systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT); median OS was 12.2 (NSQ) and 10.4 (SQ) months in pts on SACT, and 3.1 (NSQ) and 3.7 (SQ) months in pts not on SACT. Ongoing analyses will assess factors associated with SACT receipt in stage IIIB–IV pts. Conclusions: Swedish pts with NSCLC had a high burden of disease, with most diagnosed at stage IV and a median OS of 1 yr in late-stage pts receiving SACT. There is also scope for improved prognosis in pts diagnosed at early stages, particularly in SQ pts. Future analyses will assess the potential impact of recent improvements in diagnostics and therapeutics on Tx patterns and OS in Swedish NSCLC pts

Evolution of overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with incident NSCLC in Denmark and Sweden : A SCAN-LEAF study analysis from the I-O Optimise initiative

Background: As part of I-O Optimise, a multinational research platform providing real-world insights into the management of lung cancers, the SCAN-LEAF study aims to describe the epidemiology, clinical care, and outcomes for pts with NSCLC in Scandinavia. Here, we report temporal OS trends among pts diagnosed with incident NSCLC from 2005 to 2015 in Denmark and Sweden. Methods: The SCAN-LEAF Danish and Swedish cohorts were established by linking respective national registries and include all adult pts diagnosed with incident NSCLC from Jan 2005 to Dec 2015 (follow-up to Dec 2016). The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate OS at 1, 3, and 5 yrs by histology (non-squamous cell [NSQ] or squamous cell [SQ]), TNM stage, and yr of diagnosis; changes in OS over time were assessed using the Cochrane–Armitage test. Results: 31,939 pts in Denmark and 30,067 pts in Sweden were diagnosed with NSCLC from 2005 to 2015. Most were diagnosed at stage IV (51.6% and 48.4%, respectively) and had NSQ histology (54.4% and 60.4%). Statistically significant trends (P 5% over the analysis period were seen for NSQ pts at 1 yr for all stages in both countries (Table); at 3 yrs for stages I–IIIB in Denmark (P ≤ 0.027), and stages I–II (P ≤ 0.0013) in Sweden; and at 5 yrs for stages I–II (P ≤ 0.026) in both countries. For SQ pts, this was seen only at 1 yr for stage IIIA in Denmark and stage I in Sweden (Table), and at 5 yrs for stage IIIA in Denmark (p = 0.02). Conclusions: Despite some improvements between 2005 and 2015, mainly in the short-term survival of pts with early-stage NSCLC, long-term OS rates for pts with late-stage disease did not change significantly and remained low. Even in pts with early-stage disease, OS outcomes were suboptimal, with a particular unmet need in the SQ population. Future analyses including data after 2015 will evaluate the potential impact on OS of increased use of new TKIs and immune checkpoint inhibitors

Randomized phase II trial comparing twice daily hyperfractionated with once daily hypofractionated thoracic radiotherapy in limited disease small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: Concurrent chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) is recommended for limited disease small cell lung cancer (LD SCLC). Twice daily TRT is well documented, but not universally implemented - probably mainly due to inconvenience and concerns about toxicity. A schedule of three-week hypofractionated TRT is a commonly used alternative. This is the first randomized trial comparing twice daily and hypofractionated TRT in LD SCLC. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients received four courses of cisplatin/etoposide (PE) and were randomized to TRT of 42 Gy in 15 fractions (once daily, OD) or 45 Gy in 30 fractions (twice daily, BID) between the second and third PE course. Good responders received prophylactic cranial irradiation of 30 Gy in 15 fractions. RESULTS: 157 patients were enrolled between May 2005 and January 2011 (OD: n = 84, BID: n = 73). Median age was 63 years, 52% were men, 84% had performance status 0-1, 72% had stage III disease and 11% non-malignant pleural effusion. The treatment arms were well balanced. The response rates were similar (OD: 92%, BID: 88%; p = 0.41), but more BID patients achieved a complete response (OD: 13%, BID: 33%; p = 0.003). There was no difference in one-year progression-free survival (PFS) (OD: 45%, BID: 49%; p = 0.61) or median PFS (OD: 10.2 months, BID: 11.4 months; p = 0.93). The median overall survival in the BID arm was 6.3 months longer (OD: 18.8 months, BID: 25.1 months; p = 0.61). There were no differences in grade 3-4 esophagitis (OD: 31%, BID: 33%, p = 0.80) or pneumonitis (OD: 2%, BID: 3%, p = 1.0). Patients on the BID arm reported slightly more dysphagia at the end of the TRT. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in severe toxicity between the two TRT schedules. The twice daily schedule resulted in significantly more complete responses and a numerically longer median overall survival, but no firm conclusions about efficacy could be drawn from this phase II trial

Osimertinib in T790M-positive and -negative patients with EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (the TREM-study)

Abstract Objectives: In non-small cell lung cancer patients with acquired resistance to first- or second-generation EGFR-TKIs, osimertinib is approved in the presence of the T790 M resistance mutation. We assessed the efficacy of osimertinib in both T790M-positive and T790M-negative patients. Materials and methods: The TREM-study is an investigator-initiated, multi-centre, single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial conducted in five Northern European countries. Patients with progression on at least one previous EGFR-TKI were assigned to treatment with 80 mg of osimertinib daily until radiological progression or death. Patients were included regardless of the presence of T790 M. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Results: Of 199 included patients, 120 (60 %) were T790M-positive, 52 (26 %) were T790M-negative and 27 (14 %) had unknown T790M-status. 24 % had brain metastases and 15 % had an ECOG performance status of 2. Overall ORR was 48 % (95 % CI, 41 %–55 %), 60 % (51 %–69 %) for T790M-positive patients and 28 % (15 %–41 %) for T790M-negative patients, p &lt; 0.001. ORR for patients with co-occurring del19 vs L858R was 61 % vs 32 %, p = 0.001. Duration of response was similar between the T790M-positive and –negative groups (11.8 vs 10.7 months, p = 0.229). Overall median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.9 months (95 % CI, 7.4–10.5), and 10.8 vs 5.1 months for T790M-positive vs –negative patients (HR 0.62, p = 0.007). Median overall survival (OS) was 17.9 months (95 % CI, 14.4–21.3). For T790M-positive vs –negative median OS was 22.5 vs 13.4 months, (HR 0.55, p = 0.002). Conclusions: This study confirms the efficacy of osimertinib for T790M-positive patients. There was also clinically significant activity of osimertinib in a proportion of T790M-negative patients. Clinical trial registration: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02504346)