Paclitaxel for malignant pleural mesothelioma: a phase II study of the EORTC Lung Cancer Cooperative Group.

The EORTC Lung Cancer Cooperative Group undertook a phase II study of paclitaxel in 25 chemotherapy-naive patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Paclitaxel was given intravenously at a dose of 200 mg m-2 as a 3 h infusion every 3 weeks, after standard premedication with corticosteroids and antihistamines. This regimen was well tolerated, with < 4% of cycles resulting in severe toxicity. No major objective responses were observed and ten patients had stable disease. Median survival time was 39 weeks and the 1 year survival rate was 30%. In conclusion, paclitaxel at the dose and schedule investigated in this trial had no major activity in the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Continuous professional development: elevating thoracic oncology education in Europe

The @EuroRespSoc launches a new thoracic oncology continuous professional development programme http://bit.ly/31ShuTp

Multicentre phase II study of gemcitabine and cisplatin in malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a notoriously chemoresistant tumour. However, a recent single institution study showed an impressive activity of gemcitabine and cisplatin. Our aim is to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of a gemcitabine and cisplatin combination in selected and chemo-naive patients with histologically proven malignant pleural mesothelioma. Method: Gemcitabine 1250 mg m−2 was administered on day 1 and day 8 and cisplatin 80 mg m−2 was administered on day 1 in a 3-week cycle with a maximum of six cycles. Response and toxicity evaluations were performed according to WHO and NCIC-CTC criteria. Pathology and radiology were centrally reviewed. Results show that in 25 evaluable patients, four PR were observed (ORR 16%, 95% CI 1–31%). Responses of seven patients were unevaluable. No unexpected toxicity occurred. Time to progression was 6 months (5–7 months) with a median survival from registration of 9.6 months (95% CI 8–12 months). In conclusion this trial excludes with 90% power a response rate of greater than 30% in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma using a combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin at the proposed dose and schedule

Supporting Clinical Decision-Making during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic through a Global Research Commitment: The TERAVOLT Experience.

To understand the real impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients, an entirely new data collection effort was initiated within the Thoracic Cancers International COVID-19 Collaboration (TERAVOLT). TERAVOLT reported high mortality related to COVID-19 infection in thoracic cancer patients and identified several negative prognostic factors. In this commentary, we discuss the importance and limits of patient registries to support decision-making in thoracic cancer during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Multicenter phase II trial of accelerated cisplatin and high-dose epirubicin followed by surgery or radiotherapy in patients with stage IIIa non-small-cell lung cancer with mediastinal lymph node involvement (N2-disease)

To assess the therapeutic activity of accelerated cisplatin and high-dose epirubicin with erythropoietin and G-CSF support as induction therapy for patients with stage IIIa-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with stage IIIa-N2 NSCLC were enrolled in a phase II trial. They received cisplatin 60 mg m−2 and epirubicin 135 mg m−2 every 2 weeks for three courses combined with erythropoietin and G-CSF. Depending on results of clinical response to induction therapy and restaging, patients were treated with surgery or radiotherapy. In total, 61 patients entered from March 2001 to April 2004. During 169 courses of induction chemotherapy, National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCI-C) grade III/IV leucocytopenia was reported in 35 courses (20.7%), NCI-C grade III/IV thrombocytopenia in 26 courses (15.4%) and NCI-C grade III/IV anaemia in six courses (3.6%). Main cause of cisplatin dose reduction was nephrotoxicity (12 courses). Most patients received three courses. There were no chemotherapy-related deaths. Three patients were not evaluable for clinical response. Twenty-eight patients had a partial response (48.3%, 95% CI: 36–61.1%), 24 stable disease and six progressive disease. After induction therapy, 30 patients underwent surgery; complete resection was achieved in 19 procedures (31.1%). Radical radiotherapy was delivered to 25 patients (41%). Six patients were considered unfit for further treatment. Median survival for all patients was 18 months. Response rate of accelerated cisplatin and high-dose epirubicin as induction chemotherapy for stage IIIa-N2 NSCLC patients is not different from more commonly used cisplatin-based 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.)

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

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

International audienceRapid 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

Endosonography With or Without Confirmatory Mediastinoscopy for Resectable Lung Cancer:A Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE:Resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a high probability of mediastinal nodal involvement requires mediastinal staging by endosonography and, in the absence of nodal metastases, confirmatory mediastinoscopy according to current guidelines. However, randomized data regarding immediate lung tumor resection after systematic endosonography versus additional confirmatory mediastinoscopy before resection are lacking.METHODS:Patients with (suspected) resectable NSCLC and an indication for mediastinal staging after negative systematic endosonography were randomly assigned to immediate lung tumor resection or confirmatory mediastinoscopy followed by tumor resection. The primary outcome in this noninferiority trial (noninferiority margin of 8% that previously showed to not compromise survival, Pnoninferior &lt;.0250) was the presence of unforeseen N2 disease after tumor resection with lymph node dissection. Secondary outcomes were 30-day major morbidity and mortality.RESULTS:Between July 17, 2017, and October 5, 2020, 360 patients were randomly assigned, 178 to immediate lung tumor resection (seven dropouts) and 182 to confirmatory mediastinoscopy first (seven dropouts before and six after mediastinoscopy). Mediastinoscopy detected metastases in 8.0% (14/175; 95% CI, 4.8 to 13.0) of patients. Unforeseen N2 rate after immediate resection (8.8%) was noninferior compared with mediastinoscopy first (7.7%) in both intention-to-treat (Δ, 1.03%; UL 95% CIΔ, 7.2%; Pnoninferior =.0144) and per-protocol analyses (Δ, 0.83%; UL 95% CIΔ, 7.3%; Pnoninferior =.0157). Major morbidity and 30-day mortality was 12.9% after immediate resection versus 15.4% after mediastinoscopy first (P =.4940).CONCLUSION:On the basis of our chosen noninferiority margin in the rate of unforeseen N2, confirmatory mediastinoscopy after negative systematic endosonography can be omitted in patients with resectable NSCLC and an indication for mediastinal staging.</p

Chemotherapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma: past results and recent developments

PubMedWo