Reliability of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) on cytological smears in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a prospective validation study

Introduction: Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) assessment is mandatory for the single agent pembrolizumab treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PD-L1 testing has been validated and is currently certified only on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded materials but not on cytological smears. Unfortunately, a significant proportion of patients, having only cytological material available, cannot be tested for PD-L1 and treated with pembrolizumab. In this study, we aimed to validate PD-L1 IHC on cytological smears prospectively by comparing clone SP263 staining in 150 paired histological samples and cytological smears of NSCLC patients. Methods: We prospectively enrolled 150 consecutive advanced NSCLC patients. The clone SP263 was selected as, in a previous study of our group, it showed higher accuracy compared with clones 28-8 and 22-C3, with good cyto-histological agreement using a cut-off of 50%. For cyto-histological concordance, we calculated the kappa coefficient using two different cut-offs according to the percentage of PD-L1 positive neoplastic cells (<1%, 1–49% and ⩾50%; <50%, ⩾50%). Results: The overall agreement between histological samples and cytological smears was moderate (kappa = 0.537). However, when the cyto-histological concordance was calculated using the cut-off of 50%, the agreement was good (kappa = 0.740). With the same cut-off, and assuming as gold-standard the results on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded materials, PD-L1 evaluation on smears showed specificity and negative predictive values of 98.1% and 93.9%, respectively. Conclusion: Cytological smears can be used in routine clinical practice for PD-L1 assessment with a cut-off of 50%, expanding the potential pool of NSCLC patients as candidates for first-line single agent pembrolizumab therapy

PD-L1 SNPs as biomarkers to define benefit in patients with advanced NSCLC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

Objective: To investigate the role of CTLA-4, PD-1 (programmed death-1), and PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in predicting clinical outcome of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Methods: A total of 166 consecutive patients were included. We correlated SNPs with clinical benefit, progression-free survival, time to treatment failure, and overall survival and evaluated the incidence of SNPs in nonresponder and long clinical benefit groups. Results: Considering the entire cohort, no correlation was found between SNPs and clinical outcome; however, PD-L1 rs4143815 SNP and the long clinical benefit group showed a statistically significant association (p = 0.02). The nonresponder cohort displayed distinctive PD-L1 haplotype (p = 0.05). Conclusion: PD-L1 SNPs seem to be marginally involved in predicting clinical outcome of NSCLC treated with ICI, but further investigations are required

The treatment paradigm of right-sided metastatic colon cancer: harboring BRAF mutation makes the difference

Purpose: BRAF mutations represent the main negative prognostic factor for metastatic colorectal cancer and a supposed negative predictive factor of response to standard chemotherapy. We have explored survival difference in right-sided colon cancer (RCC) patients according to BRAF mutations, with the aim to identify any predictive factors of response to targeted-based therapy. Methods: A retrospective study of RCC patients, with BRAF known mutation status, treated with chemotherapy (CT) from October 2008 to June 2019 in 5 Italian centers, was conducted. Results: We identified 207 advanced RCC patients: 20.3% BRAF mutant and 79.7% BRAF wild type (wt). BRAF-mutant cancers were more likely to be pT4 (50.0% v 25.7%, p = 0.016), undifferentiated (71.4% v 44.0%, p = 0.004), KRAS wt (90.5% v 38.2%, p < 0.001), and MSI-H (41.7% v 16.2%, p = 0.019) tumors, with synchronous (52.4% v 31.5%, p = 0.018) and peritoneal metastases (38.1% v 22.4%, p = 0.003). Median overall survival (OS) was 16 v 27 months in BRAF mutant and BRAF wt (P = 0.020). In first-line setting, BRAF-mutant showed a 2ys OS of 80% in clinical trials, 32% in anti-VEGF, 14% in epidermial growth factor receptor (EGFR), and 0% in chemotherapy alone regimens (P = 0.009). BRAF-mutant patients demonstrated worse survival, regardless of targeted therapy administered. However, survival difference was statistically significant in the anti-EGFR-treated subgroup (16 v 28 months, P = 0.005 in BRAF mutant v BRAF wt, respectively). Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that BRAF status makes the difference in treatment’s outcome. Therefore, the anti-EGFR should not be excluded in all advanced RCC but considered on a case-by-case basis

Efficacy of nivolumab in pre-treated non-small-cell lung cancer patients harbouring KRAS mutations

Background: The present study investigated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab in pre-treated patients with advanced NSCLC harbouring KRAS mutations. Methods: Clinical data and KRAS mutational status were analysed in patients treated with nivolumab within the Italian Expanded Access Program. Objective response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival were evaluated. Patients were monitored for adverse events using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Results: Among 530 patients evaluated for KRAS mutations, 206 (39%) were positive while 324 (61%) were KRAS wild-type mutations. KRAS status did not influence nivolumab efficacy in terms of ORR (20% vs 17%, P = 0.39) and DCR (47% vs 41%, P = 0.23). The median PFS and OS were 4 vs 3 months (P = 0.5) and 11.2 vs 10 months (P = 0.8) in the KRAS-positive vs the KRAS-negative group. The 3-months PFS rate was significantly higher in the KRAS-positive group as compared to the KRAS-negative group (53% vs 42%, P = 0.01). The percentage of any grade and grade 3–4 AEs were 45% vs 33% (P = 0.003) and 11% vs 6% (P = 0.03) in KRAS-positive and KRAS-negative groups, respectively. Conclusions: Nivolumab is an effective and safe treatment option for patients with previously treated, advanced non-squamous NSCLC regardless of KRAS mutations

Trabectedin for patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma: A non-interventional, retrospective, multicenter study of the italian sarcoma group

The Italian Sarcoma Group performed this retrospective analysis of patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma, pretreated with ≥1 anthracycline-based treatment, and treated with trabectedin every three weeks. Primary endpoint was to describe real-life use of trabectedin across Italy. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and safety. Overall, 512 patients from 20 Italian centers were evaluated. Leiomyosarcoma (37.7%)/liposarcoma (30.3%) were the most prevalent histological types (abbreviated as L-sarcoma). Patients received a median of four trabectedin cycles (range: 1–40), mostly as a second-line treatment (~60% of patients). The ORR was 13.7% superior (p < 0.0001) in patients with L-sarcoma compared with patients with non-L-sarcoma (16.6% vs. 9.0%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.1 months, whereas median overall survival (OS) was 21.6 months. Significantly better PFS and OS were observed in patients with L-sarcoma, those with objective responses and/or disease stabilization, treated in an early line and treated with reduced dose. Bone marrow toxicity (61.4%) and transaminase increases (21.9%) were the most common grade 3/4 adverse events. The results of this real-life study suggest that trabectedin is an active treatment, which is mostly given as a second-line treatment to patients with a good performance status and high-grade, metastatic L-sarcoma (clinical trial information: NCT02793050)

Development and Multicenter Validation of a Novel Immune-Inflammation-Based Nomogram to Predict Survival in Western Resectable Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma (GEA): The NOMOGAST

Background. More than 50% of operable GEA relapse after curative-intent resection. We aimed at externally validating a nomogram to enable a more accurate estimate of individualized risk in resected GEA. Methods. Medical records of a training cohort (TC) and a validation cohort (VC) of patients undergoing radical surgery for c/uT2-T4 and/or node-positive GEA were retrieved, and potentially interesting variables were collected. Cox proportional hazards in univariate and multivariate regressions were used to assess the effects of the prognostic factors on OS. A graphical nomogram was constructed using R software’s package Regression Modeling Strategies (ver. 5.0-1). The performance of the prognostic model was evaluated and validated. Results. The TC and VC consisted of 185 and 151 patients. ECOG:PS > 0 (p < 0.001), angioinvasion (p < 0.001), log (Neutrophil/Lymphocyte ratio) (p < 0.001), and nodal status (p = 0.016) were independent prognostic values in the TC. They were used for the construction of a nomogram estimating 3- and 5-year OS. The discriminatory ability of the model was evaluated with the c-Harrell index. A 3-tier scoring system was developed through a linear predictor grouped by 25 and 75 percentiles, strengthening the model’s good discrimination (p < 0.001). A calibration plot demonstrated a concordance between the predicted and actual survival in the TC and VC. A decision curve analysis was plotted that depicted the nomogram’s clinical utility. Conclusions. We externally validated a prognostic nomogram to predict OS in a joint independent cohort of resectable GEA; the NOMOGAST could represent a valuable tool in assisting decision-making. This tool incorporates readily available and inexpensive patient and disease characteristics as well as immune-inflammatory determinants. It is accurate, generalizable, and clinically effectivex

p 53 abnormal expression might influence global outcome through egfr modulation in ras braf wild type metastatic colorectal cancer patients receiving later line irinotecan cetuximab

n/