COAST: An Open-Label, Phase II, Multidrug Platform Study of Durvalumab Alone or in Combination With Oleclumab or Monalizumab in Patients With Unresectable, Stage III Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Durvalumab; Non-Small-Cell Lung CancerDurvalumab; Cáncer de pulmón de células no pequeñasDurvalumab; Càncer de pulmó de cèl·lules no petitesPURPOSE Durvalumab significantly improves overall survival for patients with unresectable stage III non–small-cell lung cancer and no progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT). Building upon that standard of care, COAST is a phase II study of durvalumab alone or combined with the anti-CD73 monoclonal antibody oleclumab or anti-NKG2A monoclonal antibody monalizumab as consolidation therapy in this setting. METHODS Patients with unresectable stage III non–small-cell lung cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1, and no progression after cCRT were randomly assigned 1:1:1, ≤ 42 days post-cCRT, to durvalumab alone or combined with oleclumab or monalizumab for up to 12 months, stratified by histology. The primary end point was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v1.1). RESULTS Between January 2019 and July 2020, 189 patients were randomly assigned. At this interim analysis (data cutoff, May 17, 2021), median follow-up was 11.5 months (range, 0.4-23.4 months; all patients). Confirmed ORR was numerically higher with durvalumab plus oleclumab (30.0%; 95% CI, 18.8 to 43.2) and durvalumab plus monalizumab (35.5%; 95% CI, 23.7 to 48.7) versus durvalumab (17.9%; 95% CI, 9.6 to 29.2). Progression-free survival (PFS) was prolonged with both combinations versus durvalumab (plus oleclumab: hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.75; and plus monalizumab: hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.72), with higher 12-month PFS rates (plus oleclumab: 62.6% [95% CI, 48.1 to 74.2] and plus monalizumab: 72.7% [95% CI, 58.8 to 82.6] v durvalumab alone: 33.9% [95% CI, 21.2 to 47.1]). All-cause grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 40.7%, 27.9%, and 39.4% with durvalumab plus oleclumab, durvalumab plus monalizumab, and durvalumab, respectively. CONCLUSION Both combinations increased ORR and prolonged PFS versus durvalumab alone. Safety was similar across arms with no new or significant safety signals identified with either combination. These data support their further evaluation in a phase III trial

COAST : An Open-Label, Phase II, Multidrug Platform Study of Durvalumab Alone or in Combination with Oleclumab or Monalizumab in Patients with Unresectable, Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSEDurvalumab significantly improves overall survival for patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer and no progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT). Building upon that standard of care, COAST is a phase II study of durvalumab alone or combined with the anti-CD73 monoclonal antibody oleclumab or anti-NKG2A monoclonal antibody monalizumab as consolidation therapy in this setting.METHODSPatients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1, and no progression after cCRT were randomly assigned 1:1:1, ≤ 42 days post-cCRT, to durvalumab alone or combined with oleclumab or monalizumab for up to 12 months, stratified by histology. The primary end point was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v1.1).RESULTSBetween January 2019 and July 2020, 189 patients were randomly assigned. At this interim analysis (data cutoff, May 17, 2021), median follow-up was 11.5 months (range, 0.4-23.4 months; all patients). Confirmed ORR was numerically higher with durvalumab plus oleclumab (30.0%; 95% CI, 18.8 to 43.2) and durvalumab plus monalizumab (35.5%; 95% CI, 23.7 to 48.7) versus durvalumab (17.9%; 95% CI, 9.6 to 29.2). Progression-free survival (PFS) was prolonged with both combinations versus durvalumab (plus oleclumab: hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.75; and plus monalizumab: hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.72), with higher 12-month PFS rates (plus oleclumab: 62.6% [95% CI, 48.1 to 74.2] and plus monalizumab: 72.7% [95% CI, 58.8 to 82.6] v durvalumab alone: 33.9% [95% CI, 21.2 to 47.1]). All-cause grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 40.7%, 27.9%, and 39.4% with durvalumab plus oleclumab, durvalumab plus monalizumab, and durvalumab, respectively.CONCLUSIONBoth combinations increased ORR and prolonged PFS versus durvalumab alone. Safety was similar across arms with no new or significant safety signals identified with either combination. These data support their further evaluation in a phase III trial

Brief Report: A Phase II Study of Sunitinib in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma. The NCIC Clinical Trials Group

IntroductionMalignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive malignancy that most often presents at an advanced, incurable stage. After the failure of standard first-line cisplatin/antifolate chemotherapy, there is no accepted treatment. The vascular endothelial growth factor pathway may be a relevant therapeutic target in MPM.MethodsThis open-labeled phase II trial evaluated single-agent sunitinib, an inhibitor of multiple receptor tyrosine kinases including the vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, given at 50 mg daily orally for 4 weeks followed by a 2-week rest, in patients with advanced MPM. Two cohorts were studied: cohort 1, in which patients had previously received cisplatin-based chemotherapy, and cohort 2, consisting of previously untreated patients. A two-stage design was used for both cohorts; the primary outcome was objective response rate as determined by the RECIST criteria modified for MPM. Secondary outcomes included rates and duration of disease control, progression-free survival and overall survival, and safety and tolerability.ResultsA total of 35 eligible patients were enrolled (17 to cohort 1 and 18 to cohort 2). Neither cohort met the criteria for continuing to the second stage of accrual; only one objective response, confirmed by independent review, was observed in a previously untreated patient. Median progression-free and overall survivals were 2.8 and 8.3 months in cohort 1, and 2.7 and 6.7 months in cohort 2, respectively. Observed toxicity was within that expected for sunitinib.ConclusionsSunitinib, similar to other angiogenesis inhibitors, has limited activity in MPM. Future trials of angiogenesis inhibitors given as single agents in unselected patients with MPM are not warranted

Targeting Novel but Less Common Driver Mutations and Chromosomal Translocations in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Discovery of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutation and the anaplastic lymphoma kinase chromosomal translocation in non-small cell lung cancer has prompted efforts around the world to identify many less common targetable oncogenic drivers. Such concerted efforts have been variably successful in both non-squamous and squamous cell carcinomas of the lung. Some of the targeted therapies for these oncogenic drivers have received regulatory approval for clinical use, while others have modest clinical benefit. In this mini-review, several of these targets will be reviewed

Present and Emerging Biomarkers in Immunotherapy for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Review

Targeting the immune system, especially the PDL-1/PD-1 axis, has significantly improved the outcomes of metastatic lung cancer patients. However, only a portion of patients will benefit significantly from PD(L)1 therapeutics alone or in combination with either chemotherapy or anti-CTLA4 antibody. It is therefore important to study predictive biomarkers to help select the patients who will experience the most benefit from immunotherapy. In this paper, the current status of PDL-1 expression on tumour cells, the smoking status of patients, tumour mutational burden, gut microbiome and STK11 and KEAP1 mutations in the tumour as predictive biomarkers for PD(L)-1-based immunotherapy are summarized

Targeting metastatic upper gastrointestinal adenocarcinomas

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) tumors, including adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, stomach, pancreas, and biliary tree, have traditionally been difficult to treat with cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents. There has been little drug development success in treating these cancers over the last 20 years, perhaps a reflection of a combination of the aggressive biology of these tumors, the void in effective and specific drug development for these varied tumors, and the lack of properly designed, biologically-based clinical trials. Recently, so called “targeted agents” have risen to the forefront in the care of cancer patients and have made strong impacts in many areas of oncology, particularly gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), colon, breast, and lung cancers. Unfortunately, slow progress has been made using such agents in upper GI tumors. However, more recently, trials in some tumor types have demonstrated gains in progression free survival and overall survival. In this review, we discuss the drugs and pathways that have been most successful in the treatment of upper GI tumors and present the relevant data supporting their use for each tumor site. Additionally, we will explore a few novel pathways that may prove effective in the treatment of upper GI malignancies in the near future