Search

Background: Mesenchymal epithelial transition factor (MET) is a rare oncologic driver gene, and information on immunotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with this driver gene is limited. Here we evaluate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) under different therapeutic regimen for NSCLC patients with MET alterations. Methods: From June 2019 to December 2023, we assessed the efficacy and toxicity of ICIs in 42 NSCLC patients with MET alterations. Survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan–Meier method and the Cox proportional hazards model applied for univariate and multivariate analyses. We assessed the size of target lesion according to RECIST v1.1, and objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the sum of complete response (CR) and partial response (PR), disease control rate (DCR) as the sum of CR, PR, and disease stable. Results: A total of 42 NSCLC patients with MET alterations were included in this retrospective study, 10 was MET 14 skipping mutation and 32 was MET amplification. The ORR for ICI treatment was 30.95% and the DCR was 71.43%. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 4.40 and 13.97 months, respectively. There exists statistical differences between the mPFS of ICI monotherapy and combine ICI therapy (2.8 vs 7.8 months, p = 0.022). The incidence of drug-related adverse reactions was 47.62%, mainly bone marrow suppression (14.28%), immune-related pneumonia (7.14%), and liver function impairment (7.14%), and six patients (14.28%) experiencing grade 3 or above adverse events. Conclusion: NSCLC patients with MET alterations can benefit from immunotherapy, especially the patients treated by combined ICI therapy. However, special attention should be paid to the occurrence of grade 3/4 adverse reactions while using the combined ICI therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The efficacy of afatinib or pyrotinib has been demonstrated in HER2-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients; however, the efficacy of pyrotinib after afatinib progression has yet to be determined. Method: Patients with HER2 mutated advanced lung adenocarcinoma administered afatinib or pyrotinib monotherapy were enrolled. Those who received pyrotinib after afatinib were further analyzed to determine the efficacy and safety of pyrotinib after progression on afatinib. Survival curves were plotted with the Kaplan–Meier method. A swimming plot was used to describe the specific treatments. Additionally, patient-derived tumor organoids (PDTOs) were established from HER2-amplified NSCLC patient samples to investigate the antitumor activity of pyrotinib in HER2-amplified tumor cells in vitro. Results: A total of 99 patients were enrolled, 13 of whom were administered pyrotinib after progression on afatinib. No statistical difference in PFS of pyrotinib was observed between patients whether be treated after afatinib progression or not (6.7 months vs. 4.4 months, P = 0.817), thus indicating that progression on afatinib did not affect the efficacy of pyrotinib. Further analysis was conducted on the former patients, which comprising eight patients administered interval chemotherapy after progression on afatinib. Two patients achieved PR after pyrotinib treatment. No independent factors were found to influence the PFS of pyrotinib. PDTOs confirmed the anti-tumor activity of pyrotinib in NSCLC tumor cells with HER2 amplification. Conclusions: Progression after prior afatinib treatment does not influence the efficacy of pyrotinib treatment. Pyrotinib may be a salvage option for patients with HER2 mutation who have experienced progression on afatinib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anlotinib, as a salvage treatment for patients after failure of third-line or later-line treatments for small cell lung cancer (SCLC), has shown efficacy in patients with brain metastases (BMs). However, the efficacy and safety of anlotinib alone or in combination with immunotherapy for SCLC with BMs remain unclear. Method: Patients treated with anlotinib alone or in combination with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) at the Zhejiang Cancer Hospital between April 2019 and February 2023 were identified. Kaplan–Meier curves were used to describe the progression-free survival (PFS) and intracranial PFS (iPFS). A waterfall diagram was used to indicate changes in intracranial lesions. Results: A total of 48 patients were included; 29 received anlotinib alone, and 19 were administered anlotinib plus ICI. Combination therapy, compared with anlotinib, was associated with significantly longer PFS and iPFS (PFS: 8.1 months vs. 2.5 months, P < 0.001; iPFS: 8.1 months vs. 2.5 months, P = 0.004). Similar results were observed in patients with multiple BMs (PFS: 8.1 months vs. 1.9 months, P = 0.001; iPFS: 8.1 months vs. 1.9 months, P = 0.002). After third-line or later-line treatments, patients treated with ICI plus anlotinib also achieved significant PFS and iPFS benefits (PFS: 8.4 months vs. 2.1 months, P < 0.001; iPFS: 9.2 months vs. 2.1 months, P = 0.002). No new or severe adverse events were observed with combination therapy. Conclusion: The combination of anlotinib and ICI has promising intracranial and extracranial efficacy with tolerable toxicity, and may be a therapeutic option for SCLC patients with BMs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]