On target: Rational approaches to KRAS inhibition for treatment of non-small cell lung carcinoma

Non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) is a leading cause of cancer death. Approximately one-third of patients with NSCLC have a KRAS mutation. KRASG12C, the most common mutation, is found in ~13% of patients. While KRAS was long considered 'undruggable', several novel direct KRASG12C inhibitors have shown encouraging signs of efficacy in phase I/II trials and one of these (sotorasib) has recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. This review examines the role of KRAS mutations in NSCLC and the challenges in targeting KRAS. Based on specific KRAS biology, it reports exciting progress, exploring the use of novel direct KRAS inhibitors as monotherapy or in combination with other targeted therapies, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy

Prevalence of programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) by demographic, disease and sample characteristics in unresectable, stage III NSCLC (PACIFIC)

n/

Associations of Tissue Tumor Mutational Burden and Mutational Status With Clinical Outcomes With Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy For Metastatic NSCLC

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated tissue tumor mutational burden (tTMB) and mutations in STK11, KEAP1, and KRAS as biomarkers for outcomes with pembrolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (pembrolizumab-combination) for NSCLC among patients in the phase 3 KEYNOTE-189 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02578680; nonsquamous) and KEYNOTE-407 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02775435; squamous) trials. METHODS: This retrospective exploratory analysis evaluated prevalence of high tTMB and STK11, KEAP1, and KRAS mutations in patients enrolled in KEYNOTE-189 and KEYNOTE-407 and the relationship between these potential biomarkers and clinical outcomes. tTMB and STK11, KEAP1, and KRAS mutation status was assessed using whole-exome sequencing in patients with available tumor and matched normal DNA. The clinical utility of tTMB was assessed using a prespecified cutpoint of 175 mutations/exome. RESULTS: Among patients with evaluable data from whole-exome sequencing for evaluation of tTMB (KEYNOTE-189, n = 293; KEYNOTE-407, n = 312) and matched normal DNA, no association was found between continuous tTMB score and overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival for pembrolizumab-combination (Wald test, one-sided p \u3e 0.05) or placebo-combination (Wald test, two-sided p \u3e 0.05) in patients with squamous or nonsquamous histology. Pembrolizumab-combination improved outcomes for patients with tTMB greater than or equal to 175 compared with tTMB less than 175 mutations/exome in KEYNOTE-189 (OS, hazard ratio = 0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38‒1.07] and 0.64 [95% CI: 0.42‒0.97], respectively) and KEYNOTE-407 (OS, hazard ratio = 0.74 [95% CI: 0.50‒1.08 and 0.86 [95% CI: 0.57‒1.28], respectively) versus placebo-combination. Treatment outcomes were similar regardless of KEAP1, STK11, or KRAS mutation status. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support pembrolizumab-combination as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic NSCLC and do not suggest the utility of tTMB, STK11, KEAP1, or KRAS mutation status as a biomarker for this regimen

Tepotinib in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer with MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations

BACKGROUND: A splice-site mutation that results in a loss of transcription of exon 14 in the oncogenic driver MET occurs in 3 to 4% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, in this patient population. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 study, we administered tepotinib (at a dose of 500 mg) once daily in patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC with a confirmed MET exon 14 skipping mutation. The primary end point was the objective response by independent review among patients who had undergone at least 9 months of follow-up. The response was also analyzed according to whether the presence of a MET exon 14 skipping mutation was detected on liquid biopsy or tissue biopsy. RESULTS: As of January 1, 2020, a total of 152 patients had received tepotinib, and 99 patients had been followed for at least 9 months. The response rate by independent review was 46% (95% confidence interval [CI], 36 to 57), with a median duration of response of 11.1 months (95% CI, 7.2 to could not be estimated) in the combined-biopsy group. The response rate was 48% (95% CI, 36 to 61) among 66 patients in the liquid-biopsy group and 50% (95% CI, 37 to 63) among 60 patients in the tissue-biopsy group; 27 patients had positive results according to both methods. The investigator-assessed response rate was 56% (95% CI, 45 to 66) and was similar regardless of the previous therapy received for advanced or metastatic disease. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher that were considered by investigators to be related to tepotinib therapy were reported in 28% of the patients, including peripheral edema in 7%. Adverse events led to permanent discontinuation of tepotinib in 11% of the patients. A molecular response, as measured in circulating free DNA, was observed in 67% of the patients with matched liquid-biopsy samples at baseline and during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced NSCLC with a confirmed MET exon 14 skipping mutation, the use of tepotinib was associated with a partial response in approximately half the patients. Peripheral edema was the main toxic effect of grade 3 or higher. (Funded by Merck [Darmstadt, Germany]; VISION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02864992.)

Treatment Guidance for Patients With Lung Cancer During the Coronavirus 2019 Pandemic

The global coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic continues to escalate at a rapid pace inundating medical facilities and creating substantial challenges globally. The risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in patients with cancer seems to be higher, especially as they are more likely to present with an immunocompromised condition, either from cancer itself or from the treatments they receive. A major consideration in the delivery of cancer care during the pandemic is to balance the risk of patient exposure and infection with the need to provide effective cancer treatment. Many aspects of the SARS-CoV-2 infection currently remain poorly characterized and even less is known about the course of infection in the context of a patient with cancer. As SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious, the risk of infection directly affects the cancer patient being treated, other cancer patients in close proximity, and health care providers. Infection at any level for patients or providers can cause considerable disruption to even the most effective treatment plans. Lung cancer patients, especially those with reduced lung function and cardiopulmonary comorbidities are more likely to have increased risk and mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 as one of its common manifestations is as an acute respiratory illness. The purpose of this manuscript is to present a practical multidisciplinary and international overview to assist in treatment for lung cancer patients during this pandemic, with the caveat that evidence is lacking in many areas. It is expected that firmer recommendations can be developed as more evidence becomes available

Maintenance therapy in NSCLC: why? To whom? Which agent?

Maintenance therapy is emerging as a treatment strategy in the management of advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Initial trials addressing the question of duration of combination chemotherapy failed to show any overall survival benefit for the prolonged administration over a fixed number of cycles with an increased risk for cumulative toxicity. Nowadays several agents with different ways of administration and a different pattern of toxicity have been formally investigated in the maintenance setting. Maintenance strategies include continuing with an agent already present in the induction regimen or switching to a different one. Taking into consideration that no comparative trials of maintenance with different chemotherapy drugs or targeted agents have been conducted, the choice and the duration of maintenance agents is largely empirical. Furthermore, it is still unknown and it remains an open question if this approach needs to be proposed to every patient in the case of partial/complete response or stable disease after the induction therapy. Here, we critically review available data on maintenance treatment, discussing the possibility to tailor the right treatment to the right patient, in an attempt to optimize costs and benefits of an ever-growing panel of different treatment options

Treatment Characteristics and Real-World Progression-Free Survival in Patients With Unresectable Stage III NSCLC Who Received Durvalumab After Chemoradiotherapy: Findings From the PACIFIC-R Study.

IntroductionThe phase 3 PACIFIC trial established consolidation therapy with durvalumab as standard of care for patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC and no disease progression after definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT). The observational PACIFIC-R study assesses the real-world effectiveness of durvalumab in patients from an early access program. Here, we report treatment characteristics and a preplanned analysis of real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS).MethodsPACIFIC-R (NCT03798535) is an ongoing, international, retrospective study of patients who started durvalumab (intravenously; 10 mg/kg every 2 wk) within an early access program between September 2017 and December 2018. The primary end points are investigator-assessed rwPFS and overall survival (analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method).ResultsAs of November 30, 2020, the full analysis set comprised 1399 patients from 11 countries (median follow-up duration, 23.5 mo). Patients received durvalumab for a median of 11.0 months. Median rwPFS was 21.7 months (95% confidence interval: 19.1-24.5). RwPFS was numerically longer among patients who received concurrent versus sequential CRT (median, 23.7 versus 19.3 mo) and among patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression greater than or equal to 1% versus less than 1% (22.4 versus 15.6 mo). Overall, 16.5% of the patients had adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation; 9.5% of all patients discontinued because of pneumonitis or interstitial lung disease.ConclusionsConsolidation durvalumab after definitive CRT was well tolerated and effective in this large, real-world cohort study of patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC. As expected, rwPFS was longer among patients who received concurrent versus sequential CRT and patients with higher programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression. Nevertheless, favorable rwPFS outcomes were observed regardless of these factors

Bringing onco‐innovation to Europe’s healthcare systems: The potential of biomarker testing, real world evidence, tumour agnostic therapies to empower personalised medicine

Rapid and continuing advances in biomarker testing are not being matched by uptake in health systems, and this is hampering both patient care and innovation. It also risks costing health systems the opportunity to make their services more efficient and, over time, more economical. The potential that genomics has brought to biomarker testing in diagnosis, prediction and research is being realised, pre‐eminently in many cancers, but also in an ever‐wider range of conditions— notably BRCA1/2 testing in ovarian, breast, pancreatic and prostate cancers. Nevertheless, the implementation of genetic testing in clinical routine setting is still challenging. Development is impeded by country‐related heterogeneity, data deficiencies, and lack of policy alignment on standards, approval—and the role of real‐world evidence in the process—and reimbursement. The acute nature of the problem is compellingly illustrated by the particular challenges facing the development and use of tumour agnostic therapies, where the gaps in preparedness for taking advantage of this innovative approach to cancer therapy are sharply exposed. Europe should already have in place a guarantee of universal access to a minimum suite of biomarker tests and should be planning for an optimum testing scenario with a wider range of biomarker tests integrated into a more sophisticated health system articulated around personalised medicine. Improving healthcare and winning advantages for Europe’s industrial competitiveness and innovation require an appropriate policy framework—starting with an update to outdated recommendations. We show herein the main issues and proposals that emerged during the previous advisory boards organised by the European Alliance for Personalized Medicine which mainly focus on possible scenarios of harmonisation of both oncogenetic testing and management of cancer patients