The CCR4-NOT Complex Is Implicated in the Viability of Aneuploid Yeasts

To identify the genes required to sustain aneuploid viability, we screened a deletion library of non-essential genes in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe, in which most types of aneuploidy are eventually lethal to the cell. Aneuploids remain viable for a period of time and can form colonies by reducing the extent of the aneuploidy. We hypothesized that a reduction in colony formation efficiency could be used to screen for gene deletions that compromise aneuploid viability. Deletion mutants were used to measure the effects on the viability of spores derived from triploid meiosis and from a chromosome instability mutant. We found that the CCR4-NOT complex, an evolutionarily conserved general regulator of mRNA turnover, and other related factors, including poly(A)-specific nuclease for mRNA decay, are involved in aneuploid viability. Defective mutations in CCR4-NOT complex components in the distantly related yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae also affected the viability of spores produced from triploid cells, suggesting that this complex has a conserved role in aneuploids. In addition, our findings suggest that the genes required for homologous recombination repair are important for aneuploid viability

Distinct Progression and Efficacy of First-Line Osimertinib Treatment According to Mutation Subtypes in Metastatic NSCLC Harboring EGFR Mutations

Introduction: Osimertinib (OSI), a third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is the standard treatment for patients with naive EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Nevertheless, information on how the mutation subtype affects disease progression after the failure of OSI treatment is scarce. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC who received OSI as a first-line treatment between April 2015 and December 2021. Results: This study included 229 patients. The objective response rate was 71%, with intracranial and extracranial response rates of 71% and 90%, respectively. The median progression-free survival was 23.3 mo (95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.6–26.7), and the median overall survival was 33.7 mo (95% CI: 31.3–58.6). Multivariate analysis revealed that the EGFR exon 21 L858R point mutation (L858R) (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.04–2.34, p = 0.0328) and liver metastasis (HR = 2.63, 95% CI: 1.53–4.49, p = 0.0004) were significant predictors of progression-free survival in OSI treatment. The concomitant disease progression involving the central nervous system metastasis was significantly more common in patients with L858R (p = 0.048), whereas concomitant disease progression involving primary lesions was significantly more common in patients with exon 19 deletion mutation (p = 0.01). In addition, the probability of disease progression over time was higher for L858R compared with that for exon 19 deletion mutation, in patients with central nervous system metastasis (log-rank test, p = 0.027). Conclusions: The mutation subtype had an impact not only on the clinical outcome of the first-line OSI treatment but also on progression patterns after OSI treatment in patients with NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations

First-Line Lorlatinib Versus Crizotinib in ALK-Positive NSCLC: Japanese Subgroup Analysis of CROWN

Introduction: Lorlatinib, a third-generation ALK inhibitor, was found to have improved efficacy versus crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC in the ongoing, global, randomized, phase 3 CROWN study. Methods: The study’s primary end point was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included objective and intracranial response. Here, we report efficacy and safety data of the Japanese subgroup of the CROWN study (lorlatinib 100 mg once daily, n = 25; crizotinib 250 mg twice daily, n = 23). Results: Progression-free survival was not reached (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.3 mo–not reached) for lorlatinib and 11.1 months (95% CI: 5.4–14.8) for crizotinib (hazard ratio = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.19–1.01). Objective response (lorlatinib versus crizotinib) was 68.0% (95% CI: 46.5–85.1) versus 52.2% (95% CI: 30.6–73.2) in all patients, and intracranial response was 100.0% (three of three, 95% CI: 29.2–100.0) versus 28.6% (two of seven; 95% CI: 3.7–71.0) in patients with brain metastases at baseline. The most common adverse events with lorlatinib were hypertriglyceridemia, hypercholesterolemia, and weight increase; 28.0% and 8.0% of patients had cognitive and mood effects (all grades 1 or 2), respectively. Lorlatinib was associated with more grade 3 or 4 events than crizotinib (80.0% versus 72.7%). Treatment was discontinued owing to adverse events in 16.0% and 27.3% of patients in the lorlatinib and crizotinib groups, respectively. Conclusions: The efficacy and safety of lorlatinib in the Japanese subgroup were similar to those in the CROWN global population, revealing improved outcomes versus crizotinib in Japanese patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Lorlatinib in Japanese Patients With ALK-Positive Advanced NSCLC—A Brief Report From the CROWN Study

Introduction: Lorlatinib was found to have improved efficacy versus crizotinib in the global phase 3 CROWN study (NCT03052608). Similar results were revealed for the Japanese population as for the overall population. We present results from the unplanned 3-year follow-up from the CROWN study in Japanese patients. Methods: Patients were randomized to either lorlatinib 100 mg once daily (n = 25) or crizotinib 250 mg twice daily (n = 23). The primary end point was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included objective and intracranial responses assessed by blinded independent central review and safety. Results: At the data cutoff of September 20, 2021, median progression-free survival was not reached with lorlatinib and 11.1 months with crizotinib (hazard ratio = 0.36). Objective response rate was 72.0% with lorlatinib and 52.2% with crizotinib. For patients with baseline brain metastases, intracranial response rate was 100.0% versus 28.6% with lorlatinib versus crizotinib. Nine patients in the lorlatinib group received more than or equal to 1 subsequent anticancer systemic therapy, with ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor as the most common first subsequent therapy. The safety profile was consistent with that reported previously, with no new safety signals. Conclusions: This updated analysis in the Japanese population revealed prolonged benefits of lorlatinib over crizotinib in patients with treatment-naive advanced ALK-positive NSCLC with and those without brain metastases

Clinical Characteristics and Pharmacokinetics Change of Long-Term Responders to Antiprogrammed Cell Death Protein 1 Inhibitor Among Patients With Advanced NSCLC

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) induce long-term, durable responses in patients with advanced NSCLC. Nevertheless, these responses are limited to a few patients, and most responders have disease progression. The purpose of this study was to determine the differences in clinical factors and blood drug concentrations between long-term responders (LTRs) and non-LTRs. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with advanced NSCLC who received antiprogrammed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitor monotherapy (nivolumab) from December 22, 2015, to May 31, 2017. Patients who obtained a clinical benefit for more than 6 months were referred to as “responders”; among these, individuals who had a durable response for more than 2 years were defined as “LTRs.” Those with a clinical benefit for less than 2 years were defined as “non-LTRs.” Results: A total of 212 patients received anti–PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy. The responders accounted for 35% (75 of 212) of the patients. Of these, 29 (39%) were LTRs and 46 (61%) were non-LTRs. The overall response rate and median tumor shrinkage in the LTR group were significantly higher than those in the non-LTR group (76% versus 35%, p < 0.0001, and 66% versus 16%, p < 0.001, respectively). The groups had no significant difference in PD-L1 expression and serum drug concentration at 3- and 6-month post-treatment initiation. Conclusions: Significant tumor shrinkage was associated with a long-term response to an anti–PD-1 inhibitor. Nevertheless, the PD-L1 expression level and pharmacokinetic profile of the inhibitor could not be used to predict the durable response among the responders

Health Care Resource Use Among Patients with Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer in Japan, 2017–2019

ABSTRACT: Background: First-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapy for advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was introduced in Japan in February 2017. Limited information is available since that time regarding health care resource use for NSCLC in Japan, where the hospitalization burden is high. Objective: We evaluated health care resource use from first- through third-line systemic anticancer therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC included in a multicenter, retrospective chart review study. Methods: Eligible patients were aged 20 years or older with unresectable locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC with no known actionable genomic alteration who initiated first-line systemic anticancer therapy from July 1, 2017, to December 20, 2018, at 23 Japanese hospitals. We calculated the percentage of patients with a record of each resource used, the total number of each resource, and the resource use per 100 patient-weeks of follow-up from initiation of first-, second-, and third-line therapy, overall and by the 3 most common regimen categories, namely, ICI monotherapy, platinum-doublet chemotherapy (without concomitant ICI), and nonplatinum cytotoxic regimens (nonplatinum). Study follow-up ended September 30, 2019. Results: Among 1208 patients (median age = 70 years; 975 [81%] men), 463 patients (38%) received ICI monotherapy, 647 (54%) received platinum-doublet chemotherapy, and 98 (8%) received nonplatinum regimens as first-line therapy. During the study, 621 (51%) patients initiated second-line, and 281 (23%) initiated third-line therapy. The majority of patients experienced ≥1 hospitalization (76%–94%) and ≥1 outpatient visit (85%–90%) during each therapy line. The number of hospitalizations increased from 6.5 per 100 patient-weeks in first-line to 8.0 per 100 patient-weeks in third-line. During first-line therapy, the number of hospitalizations per 100 patient-weeks were 4.8, 8.4, and 6.5 for patients receiving ICI monotherapy, platinum-doublet chemotherapy, and nonplatinum regimens, respectively, and the percentages of hospitalizations categorized as attributable to NSCLC treatment administration (no surgery, procedure, treatment of metastasis, or palliative lung radiation) were 64%, 77%, and 73%, respectively. The number of outpatient visits increased from 43.0 per 100 patient-weeks in first-line to 51.4 per 100 patient-weeks in third-line therapy. During first-line therapy, outpatient visits per 100 patient-weeks were 41.0, 46.7, and 33.0 for patients receiving ICI monotherapy, platinum-doublet chemotherapy, and nonplatinum regimens, respectively, and the percentages of outpatient visits for infusion therapy were 48%, 34%, and 36%, respectively. Conclusions: The results of this study, although solely descriptive, showed differing patterns of health care resource use during first-line therapy among the 3 common systemic anticancer therapy regimens for advanced NSCLC in Japan and suggest that further research is needed to investigate these apparent differences by treatment regimen

A Retrospective, Multicenter, Observational Study to Evaluate Clinical Outcomes of Lorlatinib After Alectinib in Patients With ALK-Positive NSCLC in Japan

Introduction: Lorlatinib is an ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved in Japan for the treatment of advanced ALK+ NSCLC. There has been little evidence about lorlatinib efficacy after first-line (1L) alectinib in clinical practice in Japan. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC previously treated with 1L alectinib at multiple sites in Japan. Primary objectives were to collect patient demographics at baseline and estimate time to treatment failure (TTF) with second-line (2L) or third-line (3L) or later line (≥3L) lorlatinib treatment. Secondary objectives included objective response rate (ORR) with lorlatinib, reason for discontinuation and time to last treatment failure with lorlatinib, TTF and ORR of alectinib, and combined TTF. Results: Among the 51 patients included in the study, 29 (56.9%) received 2L and 22 (43.1%) received ≥3L lorlatinib treatment. At lorlatinib initiation, brain metastases were reported in 25 patients (49.0%), and 32 (62.7%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Median TTF with lorlatinib was 11.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.6–13.8) in any line, 10.8 months (95% CI: 3.9–13.8) in 2L, and 11.5 months (95% CI: 2.9–not reached) in ≥3L. Median TTF was 11.5 months (95% CI: 3.9–not reached) in patients with brain metastases at lorlatinib initiation and 9.9 months (95% CI: 4.3–13.8) in patients without brain metastases. ORR was 35.7% with any-line lorlatinib treatment. Conclusions: Patient characteristics and efficacy were comparable with previous reports when lorlatinib was given after 1L alectinib in patients with ALK+ NSCLC

Effectiveness and Safety of Atezolizumab Monotherapy in Previously Treated Japanese Patients With Unresectable Advanced or Recurrent NSCLC: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study (J-TAIL)

Introduction: The efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in previously treated patients with NSCLC have been established in the registrational phase 3 OAK trial. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of atezolizumab monotherapy in a large real-world cohort to confirm the reproducibility of the results of the registrational trial. Methods: This was a multicenter, prospective, single-arm observational study. Consecutive patients with previously treated NSCLC scheduled to receive atezolizumab monotherapy were enrolled. The primary end point was the 18-month overall survival (OS) rate. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) and immune-related AEs was evaluated. Results: Overall, 1002 patients were included in the safety analysis set and 1000 in the full analysis set. Median follow-up was 11.5 months. Of the full analysis set, 62% were ineligible for the OAK trial (OAK-unlike subpopulation). The 18-month OS rate was 41.1%, with a median OS of 13.0 months (95% confidence interval: 12.2–15.1). The 18-month OS rate was 49.4% and 36.1% in OAK-like and OAK-unlike subpopulations, respectively; that in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status greater than or equal to 2 was 14.3%. The incidence of AEs overall, in the OAK-like, and OAK-unlike subpopulations was 43.9%, 46.2%, and 42.5%; that of immune-related AEs was 19.0%, 20.1%, and 18.3%, respectively. Conclusions: The findings suggest that atezolizumab may be effective and safe for previously treated patients with NSCLC in real-world settings; however, atezolizumab administration should be considered carefully regarding the benefit–risk balance for the OAK-unlike subpopulation, especially in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status greater than or equal to 2

Asian Subgroup Analysis of the Randomized Phase 3 CROWN Study of First-Line Lorlatinib Versus Crizotinib in Advanced ALK-Positive NSCLC

Introduction: Lorlatinib is a potent, third-generation inhibitor of ALK. In the planned interim analysis of the ongoing, phase 3, randomized, global CROWN trial (NCT03052608), lorlatinib resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced, ALK-positive NSCLC. Here, we present a subgroup analysis of Asian patients in the CROWN study. Methods: Patients received lorlatinib 100 mg once daily or crizotinib 250 mg twice daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review. Objective response rate (ORR), intracranial ORR, safety, and select biomarkers were secondary end points. Results: At data cutoff (September 20, 2021), 120 patients were included in the Asian intention-to-treat subgroup (lorlatinib n = 59; crizotinib n = 61). At 36 months, 61% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 47–72) and 25% (95% CI: 12–41) of patients in the lorlatinib and crizotinib groups, respectively, were alive without disease progression (hazard ratio for disease progression by blinded independent central review or death: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.23–0.71). ORR was 78% (95% CI: 65–88) versus 57% (95% CI: 44–70) for patients treated with lorlatinib and crizotinib, respectively. In patients with measurable, nonmeasurable, or both measurable and nonmeasurable brain metastases at baseline, intracranial ORR was 73% (95% CI: 39–94) versus 20% (95% CI: 4–48) for patients treated with lorlatinib and crizotinib, respectively. The definition of nonmeasurable brain metastases is: a brain lesion less than 10 mm in MRI scan is defined as nonmeasurable brain metastasi based on RECIST criteria (Clinical trial evaluation criteria). Hypercholesterolemia, hypertriglyceridemia, and edema were the most frequently reported adverse events with lorlatinib. Conclusions: Lorlatinib efficacy and safety in the Asian subgroup of CROWN were consistent with those in the overall population