Search

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) represent first-line standard of care in unresectable EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, 10–20% of patients with EGFRm+ NSCLC have uncommon EGFR variants, defined as mutations other than L858R substitutions or exon 19 deletions. NSCLC harboring uncommon EGFR mutations may demonstrate lower sensitivity to targeted agents than NSCLC with L858R or exon 19 deletion mutations. Prospective clinical trial data in patients with NSCLC uncommon EGFR mutations are lacking. Afatinib is a second-generation TKI and the only Food and Drug Administration-approved drug for some of the more prevalent uncommon EGFR mutations. We present a series of seven case reports describing clinical outcomes in afatinib-treated patients with NSCLC harboring a diverse range of extremely rare mutations with or without co-mutations affecting other genes. EGFR alterations included compound mutations, P-loop αC-helix compressing mutations, and novel substitution mutations. We also present a case with NSCLC harboring a novel EGFR::CCDC6 gene fusion. Overall, the patients responded well to afatinib, including radiologic partial responses in six patients during treatment. Responses were durable for three patients. The cases presented are in line with a growing body of clinical and preclinical evidence that indicating that NSCLC with various uncommon EGFR mutations, with or without co-mutations, may be sensitive to afatinib.

Introduction: Patients with metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in clinical practice may often not meet the strict inclusion criteria of clinical trials. Our aim was to assess the trial eligibility of patients with mNSCLC treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy in real-world and to compare the outcome of “trial-ineligible” and “potentially trial-eligible” patients. Methods: Data from the prospective, clinical research platform CRISP were used to compare patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome of patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score greater than or equal to 50% tumors treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy who are deemed either “potentially trial-eligible” or “trial-ineligible” according to inclusion and exclusion criteria of the registrational studies (KEYNOTE-024 and -042). Results: Of 746 patients included, 343 patients (46.0%) were classified as “trial-ineligible” and had significantly worse outcomes compared with “potentially trial-eligible” patients (n = 403, 54.0%): median progression-free survival: 6.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.2–8.4) versus 10.3 (95% CI: 8.4–13.8) months, hazard ratio (trial-ineligible versus potentially trial-eligible) of 1.43 (95% CI: 1.19–1.72), p less than 0.001; median overall survival: 15.9 (95% CI: 11.4–20.3) versus 25.3 (95% CI: 19.8–30.4) months, hazard ratio of 1.36 (95% CI: 1.10–1.67), p equals 0.004. Conclusions: Our data reveal that a considerable proportion of patients with mNSCLC are not eligible to participate in a clinical trial and were found to have worse outcomes than potentially trial-eligible patients, whose outcomes were comparable with those obtained from pivotal clinical trials. This is of substantial clinical relevance for physicians discussing outcomes to be expected with their patients and stresses the need for real-world effectiveness analyses.

EGFR-mutant lung cancers develop a wide range of potential resistance alterations under therapy with the third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor osimertinib. MET amplification ranks among the most common acquired resistance alterations and is currently being investigated as a therapeutic target in several studies. Nevertheless, targeted therapy of MET might similarly result in acquired resistance by point mutations in MET, which further expands therapeutic and diagnostic challenges. Here, we report a 50-year-old male patient with EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma and stepwise acquired resistance by a focal amplification of MET followed by D1246N (D1228N), D1246H (D1228H), and L1213V (L1195V) point mutations in MET, all detected by NGS. The patient successfully responded to the combined and sequential treatment of osimertinib, osimertinib/crizotinib, and third-line osimertinib/cabozantinib. This case highlights the importance of well-designed, sequential molecular diagnostic analyses and the personalized treatment of patients with acquired resistance.

Breakdown of vascular barriers is a major complication of inflammatory diseases. However, the mechanisms underlying platelet recruitment to inflammatory micro-environments remains unclear. Here, the authors identify haptotaxis as a key effector function of immune-responsive platelets

Visualizing cell behavior and effector function on a single cell level has been crucial for understanding key aspects of mammalian biology. Due to their small size, large number and rapid recruitment into thrombi, there is a lack of data on fate and behavior of individual platelets in thrombosis and hemostasis. Here we report the use of platelet lineage restricted multi-color reporter mouse strains to delineate platelet function on a single cell level. We show that genetic labeling allows for single platelet and megakaryocyte (MK) tracking and morphological analysis in vivo and in vitro, while not affecting lineage functions. Using Cre-driven Confetti expression, we provide insights into temporal gene expression patterns as well as spatial clustering of MK in the bone marrow. In the vasculature, shape analysis of activated platelets recruited to thrombi identifies ubiquitous filopodia formation with no evidence of lamellipodia formation. Single cell tracking in complex thrombi reveals prominent myosin-dependent motility of platelets and highlights thrombus formation as a highly dynamic process amenable to modification and intervention of the acto-myosin cytoskeleton. Platelet function assays combining flow cytrometry, as well as in vivo, ex vivo and in vitro imaging show unaltered platelet functions of multicolor reporter mice compared to wild-type controls. In conclusion, platelet lineage multicolor reporter mice prove useful in furthering our understanding of platelet and MK biology on a single cell level.

Neutrophils provide a critical line of defense in immune responses to various pathogens, inflicting self-damage upon transition to a hyperactivated, procoagulant state. Recent work has highlighted proinflammatory neutrophil phenotypes contributing to lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Here, we use state-of-the art mass spectrometry–based proteomics and transcriptomic and correlative analyses as well as functional in vitro and in vivo studies to dissect how neutrophils contribute to the progression to severe COVID-19. We identify a reinforcing loop of both systemic and neutrophil intrinsic IL-8 (CXCL8/IL-8) dysregulation, which initiates and perpetuates neutrophil-driven immunopathology. This positive feedback loop of systemic and neutrophil autocrine IL-8 production leads to an activated, prothrombotic neutrophil phenotype characterized by degranulation and neutrophil extracellular trap (NET) formation. In severe COVID-19, neutrophils directly initiate the coagulation and complement cascade, highlighting a link to the immunothrombotic state observed in these patients. Targeting the IL-8–CXCR-1/-2 axis interferes with this vicious cycle and attenuates neutrophil activation, degranulation, NETosis, and IL-8 release. Finally, we show that blocking IL-8–like signaling reduces severe acute respiratory distress syndrome of coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein–induced, human ACE2–dependent pulmonary microthrombosis in mice. In summary, our data provide comprehensive insights into the activation mechanisms of neutrophils in COVID-19 and uncover a self-sustaining neutrophil–IL-8 axis as a promising therapeutic target in severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.

COVID-19 vaccines have become an integral element in the protection of cancer patients against SARS-CoV-2. To date, there are no direct comparisons of the course of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients between the pre- and post-vaccine era. We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 infections and their impact on cancer in COVID-19 vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients from three German cancer centers. Overall, 133 patients with SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled in pre- and post-vaccine eras: 84 non-vaccinated and 49 vaccinated, respectively. A mild course of COVID-19 was documented more frequently in vaccinated patients (49% vs. 29%), while the frequency of severe and critical courses occurred in approximately one-half of the non-vaccinated patients (22% vs. 42%, p = 0.023). Particularly, patients with hematologic neoplasms benefited from vaccination in this context (p = 0.031). Admissions to intermediate- and intensive-care units and the necessity of non-invasive and invasive respiratory support were reduced by 71% and 50% among vaccinated patients, respectively. The median length of admission was 11 days for non-vaccinated and 5 days for vaccinated patients (p = 0.002). COVID-19 mortality was reduced by 83% in vaccinated patients (p = 0.046). Finally, the median time from SARS-CoV-2 infection to restarting cancer therapy was 12 and 26 days among vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups, respectively (p = 0.002). Although this study does not have enough power to perform multivariate analyses to account for confounders, it provides data on COVID-19 in non-vaccinated and vaccinated cancer patients and illustrates the potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccines for these patients.

Following the PACIFIC trial, durvalumab has been approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for consolidation of locally advanced PD-L1-positive NSCLC after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Patients were treated with durvalumab in the EAP from 22.11.2017 to 15.10.2018 allowing analysis of its efficacy and safety.211 patients were registered by 90 German centres. Data were collected retrospectively by questionnaire and queries. 56 centres reported data on 126 patients who actually received at least one cycle of durvalumab. In contrast to the PACIFIC-trial population, some patients with oligometastatic disease and a history of autoimmune disease are included in the EAP population. Information on PD-L1 status was obtained for 111 patients. Baseline data include age, gender, ECOG, stage (IASLC 8th ed.), and smoking history. Treatment data include mode of chemoradiotherapy, used chemotherapy agent, and duration of durvalumab therapy. Adverse evants were documented according to CTAEC 5.0. Data were analysed for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AE). The results were published in Lung Cancer [1].

Background: Antiangiogenic agents have been shown to stimulate the immune system and cause synergistic effects with chemotherapy. Effects might be even stronger after immune-checkpoint-inhibitor (ICI) therapy. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of ramucirumab plus docetaxel (R + D) as third-line treatment after failure of a first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and a second-line ICI treatment in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stage IV. Methods: Retrospective data were collected from 9 German thoracic oncology centers. Only patients who had received at least 1 cycle of third-line R + D were included. The numbers of cycles, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were investigated. Results: Sixty-seven patients met the criteria for inclusion. Third-line treatment with R + D achieved an ORR of 36% and a disease control rate (DCR) of 69%. Median PFS for third-line therapy was 6.8 months with a duration of response (DOR) of 10.2 months. A median OS of 29 months was observed from the start of first-line therapy with a median OS of 11.0 months from the start of third-line treatment. No unexpected toxicities occurred. Conclusion: R + D is a highly effective and safe third-line treatment after failure of second-line programmed cell death protein 1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD1/PD-L1)-derived ICI therapy irrespective of NSCLC histology. As there may be synergistic effects of second- and third-line treatments, this sequence is a very suitable option for patients not treated with first-line ICI. In addition, R + D should continue to be investigated as a second-line treatment option after failure of chemotherapy plus ICI in the palliative first–line treatment.

Since 2009, several first, second, and third generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) have been approved for targeted treatment of EGFR mutated metastatic non-small lung cancer (NSCLC). A vast majority of patients is improving quickly on treatment; however, resistance is inevitable and typically occurs after one year for TKI of the first and second generation. Osimertinib, a third generation TKI, has recently been approved for first line treatment in the palliative setting and is expected to become approved for the adjuvant setting as well. Progression-free survival (PFS) under osimertinib is superior to its predecessors but its spectrum of resistance alterations appears significantly more diverse compared to first and second generation EGFR TKI. As resistance mechanisms to osimertinib are therapeutically targetable in some cases, it is important to comprehensively test for molecular alterations in the relapse scenario. Liquid biopsy may be advantageous over tissue analysis as it has the potential to represent tumor heterogeneity and clonal diversification. We have previously shown high concordance of hybrid capture (HC) based next generation sequencing (NGS) in liquid biopsy versus solid tumor biopsies. In this study, we now present real-word data from 56 patients with metastatic NSCLC that were tested by liquid biopsy at the time of disease progression on mostly second line treated osimertinib treatment. We present examples of single and multiple TKI resistance mechanisms, including mutations in multiple pathways, copy number changes and rare fusions of RET, ALK, FGFR3 and BRAF. In addition, we present the added value of HC based NGS to reveal polyclonal resistance development at the DNA level encoding multiple EGFR C797S and PIK3CA mutations.

Oncologists face challenges in the management of SARS-CoV-2 infections and post-SARS-CoV-2 cancer treatment. We analyzed diagnostic, clinical and post-SARS-CoV-2 scenarios in patients from three German cancer centers with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Sixty-three patients with SARS-CoV-2 and hematologic or solid neoplasms were included. Thirty patients were initially asymptomatic, 10 of whom developed COVID-19 symptoms subsequently. Altogether 20 (32%) patients were asymptomatic, 18 (29%) had mild, 12 (19%) severe and 13 (20%) critical courses. Lymphocytopenia increased risk of severe/critical COVID-19 three-fold (p = 0.015). Asymptomatic course was not associated with age, remission status, therapies or co-morbidities. Secondary bacterial infection accompanied more than one third of critical COVID-19 cases. Treatment was delayed post-SARS-CoV-2 in 46 patients, 9 of whom developed progressive disease (PD). Cancer therapy was modified in 8 SARS-CoV-2 survivors because of deteriorating performance or PD. At the last follow-up, 17 patients had died from COVID-19 (n = 8) or PD (n = 9) giving an estimated 73% four-month overall survival rate. SARS-CoV-2 infection has a heterogenous course in cancer patients. Lymphocytopenia carries a significant risk of severe/critical COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 disruption of therapy is as serious as SARS-CoV-2 infection itself. Careful surveillance will allow early restart of the anti-cancer treatment.

In recent years, Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has evolved into a prime example for precision oncology with multiple FDA-approved “precision” drugs. For the majority of NSCLC lacking targetable genetic alterations, immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) has become standard of care in first-line treatment or beyond. PD-L1 tumor expression represents the only approved predictive biomarker for PD-L1/PD-1 checkpoint inhibition by therapeutic antibodies. Since PD-L1-negative or low-expressing tumors may also respond to ICI, additional factors are likely to contribute in addition to PD-L1 expression. Tumor mutation burden (TMB) has emerged as a potential candidate; however, it is the most complex biomarker so far and might represent a challenge for routine diagnostics. We therefore established a hybrid capture (HC) next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay that covers all oncogenic driver alterations as well as TMB and validated TMB values by correlation with the assay (F1CDx) used for the CheckMate 227 study. Results of the first consecutive 417 patients analyzed in a routine clinical setting are presented. Data show that fast reliable comprehensive diagnostics including TMB and targetable alterations are obtained with a short turn-around time. Thus, even complex biomarkers can easily be implemented in routine practice to optimize treatment decisions for advanced NSCLC.

EGFR-mutant lung cancers develop a wide range of potential resistance alterations under therapy with the third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor osimertinib. MET amplification ranks among the most common acquired resistance alterations and is currently being investigated as a therapeutic target in several studies. Nevertheless, targeted therapy of MET might similarly result in acquired resistance by point mutations in MET, which further expands therapeutic and diagnostic challenges. Here, we report a 50-year-old male patient with EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma and stepwise acquired resistance by a focal amplification of MET followed by D1246N (D1228N), D1246H (D1228H), and L1213V (L1195V) point mutations in MET, all detected by NGS. The patient successfully responded to the combined and sequential treatment of osimertinib, osimertinib/crizotinib, and third-line osimertinib/cabozantinib. This case highlights the importance of well-designed, sequential molecular diagnostic analyses and the personalized treatment of patients with acquired resistance.

COVID-19 vaccines have become an integral element in the protection of cancer patients against SARS-CoV-2. To date, there are no direct comparisons of the course of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients between the pre- and post-vaccine era. We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 infections and their impact on cancer in COVID-19 vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients from three German cancer centers. Overall, 133 patients with SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled in pre- and post-vaccine eras: 84 non-vaccinated and 49 vaccinated, respectively. A mild course of COVID-19 was documented more frequently in vaccinated patients (49% vs. 29%), while the frequency of severe and critical courses occurred in approximately one-half of the non-vaccinated patients (22% vs. 42%, p = 0.023). Particularly, patients with hematologic neoplasms benefited from vaccination in this context ( p = 0.031). Admissions to intermediate- and intensive-care units and the necessity of non-invasive and invasive respiratory support were reduced by 71% and 50% among vaccinated patients, respectively. The median length of admission was 11 days for non-vaccinated and 5 days for vaccinated patients ( p = 0.002). COVID-19 mortality was reduced by 83% in vaccinated patients ( p = 0.046). Finally, the median time from SARS-CoV-2 infection to restarting cancer therapy was 12 and 26 days among vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups, respectively ( p = 0.002). Although this study does not have enough power to perform multivariate analyses to account for confounders, it provides data on COVID-19 in non-vaccinated and vaccinated cancer patients and illustrates the potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccines for these patients.

Background: Chemotherapy plus immune-checkpoint inhibitor (CTx+ICI) therapy has become the preferred 1st line treatment in patients with metastatic NSCLC without oncogenic driven mutations. However, the optimal subsequent 2nd line treatment is not defined and several alternatives exist. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of 2nd line docetaxel plus ramucirumab (D+R) initiated after failure of 1st line CTx+ICI., Methods: Retrospective data were collected during routine care from German thoracic oncology centers. Only patients who had received at least one course of 2nd line D+R were included. ORR, PFS, OS and numbers of courses of D+R were investigated with PFS after initiation of D+R being the primary endpoint., Results: Seventy-seven patients met the inclusion criteria. 2nd line treatment with D+R achieved an ORR and DCR of 32.5% and 62.4%, respectively. Median PFS for 2nd line therapy was 3.9 months with a DOR of 6.4 months. Median OS of 15.5 and 7.5 months were observed from the start of 1st line therapy and 2nd line treatment, respectively. No unexpected toxicities occurred. Presence of KRAS mutations was associated with significantly worse median PFS to D+R (2.8 vs. 4.5 months in wild-type cases; P=0.021) and was an independent predictor of inferior PFS in multivariate analysis., Conclusions: D+R is an effective and safe 2nd line treatment after failure of 1st line CTx+ICI irrespective of NSCLC histology. However, patients with a KRAS mutation did not benefit from D+R in terms of PFS and will require further investigations., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tlcr-21-197). Albrecht Stenzinger serves as an unpaid editorial board member of Translational Lung Cancer Research from Sep 2019 to Sep 2021. The following authors received honoraria for lectures, presentation, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: WMB from AstraZeneca, Boehringer, Novartis, MSD, BMS, Roche and Lilly; MR from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer, Lilly, Minde, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche; AR from AbbVIe, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche; CW from Boehringer, Lilly, MSD, Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, Sanofi Aventis and Takeda; GHW from Boehringer, Lilly, MSD, Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, Sanofi Aventis, Takeda, Glaxo and Berlin Chemie; PC from Roche, Takeda, AstraZeneca and Novartis; AS from Aignostics, Bayer, Thermo Fisher, Illumina, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics, MSD, BMS, Takeda and Lilly; AT from GSK, Novartis, Amgen, BMS, MSD, Lilly, Pfizer, Boehringer, Roche, Takeda and Celgene; JHF from AstraZeneca, Boehringer, Novartis, MSD, BMS and Roche. The following authors received support for attending meetings and/or travel: WMB from Boehringer, AstraZeneca and Roche; CW from Boehringer, MSD, Roche, AstraZeneca and BMS; GW from Boehringer, MSD, Roche, AstraZeneca and Berlin Chemie; PC from AstraZeneca, Takeda, Novartis and Lilly; AT from GSK, Novartis, Amgen, MSD, BMS, Lilly, Pfizer, Boehringer, Roche, Takeda and Celgene; JHF from Boehringer and AstraZeneca. The following authors participated on a data safety monitoring board or an advisory board: WMB on AstraZeneca, Boehringer, Novartis, MSD, Lilly, BMS and Roche; JK on Roche, Boehringer, BMS, Merck, Amgen, Takeda and Lilly (all outside the submitted work and all without receiving any personal fees; CW on Boehringer, MSD, Roche, AstraZeneca and MBS; GHW on Boehringer, MSD, Roche, AstraZeneca and BMS; PC on Pfizer, Chugai, Boehringer and Roche; AT on GSK, Novartis, Amgen, MSD, BMS, Lilly, Pfizer, Boehringer, Roche, Takeda, Celgene and AIO Leadership Group; PH on Lilly, MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Roche, Boehringer and Pfizer; JHF on AstraZenca. The following authors receipt equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts or other services: WMB from Boehringer (for medical writing); JHF from Novartis (for medical writing); the following authors received consulting fees: AR from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche. The following authors received grants or contracts form any entity: PC from Roche, Takeda, AstraZeneca and Novartis (all research grants to the institution; AT from AstraZeneca (research grant). The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2021 Translational Lung Cancer Research. All rights reserved.)

Oncologists face challenges in the management of SARS-CoV-2 infections and post-SARS-CoV-2 cancer treatment. We analyzed diagnostic, clinical and post-SARS-CoV-2 scenarios in patients from three German cancer centers with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Sixty-three patients with SARS-CoV-2 and hematologic or solid neoplasms were included. Thirty patients were initially asymptomatic, 10 of whom developed COVID-19 symptoms subsequently. Altogether 20 (32%) patients were asymptomatic, 18 (29%) had mild, 12 (19%) severe and 13 (20%) critical courses. Lymphocytopenia increased risk of severe/critical COVID-19 three-fold ( p = 0.015). Asymptomatic course was not associated with age, remission status, therapies or co-morbidities. Secondary bacterial infection accompanied more than one third of critical COVID-19 cases. Treatment was delayed post-SARS-CoV-2 in 46 patients, 9 of whom developed progressive disease (PD). Cancer therapy was modified in 8 SARS-CoV-2 survivors because of deteriorating performance or PD. At the last follow-up, 17 patients had died from COVID-19 ( n = 8) or PD ( n = 9) giving an estimated 73% four-month overall survival rate. SARS-CoV-2 infection has a heterogenous course in cancer patients. Lymphocytopenia carries a significant risk of severe/critical COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 disruption of therapy is as serious as SARS-CoV-2 infection itself. Careful surveillance will allow early restart of the anti-cancer treatment.

Since 2009, several first, second, and third generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) have been approved for targeted treatment of EGFR mutated metastatic non-small lung cancer (NSCLC). A vast majority of patients is improving quickly on treatment; however, resistance is inevitable and typically occurs after one year for TKI of the first and second generation. Osimertinib, a third generation TKI, has recently been approved for first line treatment in the palliative setting and is expected to become approved for the adjuvant setting as well. Progression-free survival (PFS) under osimertinib is superior to its predecessors but its spectrum of resistance alterations appears significantly more diverse compared to first and second generation EGFR TKI. As resistance mechanisms to osimertinib are therapeutically targetable in some cases, it is important to comprehensively test for molecular alterations in the relapse scenario. Liquid biopsy may be advantageous over tissue analysis as it has the potential to represent tumor heterogeneity and clonal diversification. We have previously shown high concordance of hybrid capture (HC) based next generation sequencing (NGS) in liquid biopsy versus solid tumor biopsies. In this study, we now present real-word data from 56 patients with metastatic NSCLC that were tested by liquid biopsy at the time of disease progression on mostly second line treated osimertinib treatment. We present examples of single and multiple TKI resistance mechanisms, including mutations in multiple pathways, copy number changes and rare fusions of RET , ALK , FGFR3 and BRAF . In addition, we present the added value of HC based NGS to reveal polyclonal resistance development at the DNA level encoding multiple EGFR C797S and PIK3CA mutations.

Following the PACIFIC trial, durvalumab has been approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for consolidation of locally advanced PD-L1-positive NSCLC after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Patients were treated with durvalumab in the EAP from 22.11.2017 to 15.10.2018 allowing analysis of its efficacy and safety. 211 patients were registered by 90 German centres. Data were collected retrospectively by questionnaire and queries. 56 centres reported data on 126 patients who actually received at least one cycle of durvalumab. In contrast to the PACIFIC-trial population, some patients with oligometastatic disease and a history of autoimmune disease are included in the EAP population. Information on PD-L1 status was obtained for 111 patients. Baseline data include age, gender, ECOG, stage (IASLC 8th ed.), and smoking history. Treatment data include mode of chemoradiotherapy, used chemotherapy agent, and duration of durvalumab therapy. Adverse evants were documented according to CTAEC 5.0. Data were analysed for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AE). The results were published in Lung Cancer [1]., Competing Interests: Martin Faehling received speaker's honoraria and participated as PI in clinical trials of AstraZeneca, Roche, MSD, and BMS. Christian Schumann received speaker's honoraria and participated in clinical trials by AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda. Petros Christopoulos received research funding from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Roche, Takeda, and advisory board/lecture fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda. Petra Hoffknecht does not report any COIs. Jürgen Alt received speaker's honoraria by AstraZeneca. Marlitt Horn does not report any COIs. Stephan Eisenmann received speaker's honoraria by AstraZeneca. Anke Schlenska-Lange does not report any COIs. Philipp Schütt does not report any COIs. Felix Steger does not report any COIs. Wolfgang M. Brückl received honoraria for consulting from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer and Roche Pharma. Daniel C. Christoph received speaker's honoraria and participated as PI in clinical trials of AstraZeneca, Roche, MSD, Boehringer, and BMS. The results of our study were not influenced by the reported competing interests., (© 2020 The Author(s).)

Background: Antiangiogenic agents have been shown to stimulate the immune system and cause synergistic effects with chemotherapy. Effects might be even stronger after immune-checkpoint-inhibitor (ICI) therapy. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of ramucirumab plus docetaxel (R + D) as third-line treatment after failure of a first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and a second-line ICI treatment in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stage IV., Methods: Retrospective data were collected from 9 German thoracic oncology centers. Only patients who had received at least 1 cycle of third-line R + D were included. The numbers of cycles, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were investigated., Results: Sixty-seven patients met the criteria for inclusion. Third-line treatment with R + D achieved an ORR of 36% and a disease control rate (DCR) of 69%. Median PFS for third-line therapy was 6.8 months with a duration of response (DOR) of 10.2 months. A median OS of 29 months was observed from the start of first-line therapy with a median OS of 11.0 months from the start of third-line treatment. No unexpected toxicities occurred., Conclusion: R + D is a highly effective and safe third-line treatment after failure of second-line programmed cell death protein 1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD1/PD-L1)-derived ICI therapy irrespective of NSCLC histology. As there may be synergistic effects of second- and third-line treatments, this sequence is a very suitable option for patients not treated with first-line ICI. In addition, R + D should continue to be investigated as a second-line treatment option after failure of chemotherapy plus ICI in the palliative first-line treatment., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interest:The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: W.M.B. and J.H.F. have received honoraria for consulting from Astra Zeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, and Roche Pharma. P.C. reports consulting honoraria from Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda. P.H. has received honoraria for consulting from Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Takeda, Roche Pharma, Lilly, BMS, MSD, AstraZeneca, and Abbvie. F.R. has received honoraria for consulting from Astra Zeneca, Chugai Pharma, and Roche Pharma. C.W. and G.H.W. have received honoraria for consulting from Astra Zeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, and Roche Pharma. The other authors reported no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

In recent years, Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has evolved into a prime example for precision oncology with multiple FDA-approved "precision" drugs. For the majority of NSCLC lacking targetable genetic alterations, immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) has become standard of care in first-line treatment or beyond. PD-L1 tumor expression represents the only approved predictive biomarker for PD-L1/PD-1 checkpoint inhibition by therapeutic antibodies. Since PD-L1-negative or low-expressing tumors may also respond to ICI, additional factors are likely to contribute in addition to PD-L1 expression. Tumor mutation burden (TMB) has emerged as a potential candidate; however, it is the most complex biomarker so far and might represent a challenge for routine diagnostics. We therefore established a hybrid capture (HC) next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay that covers all oncogenic driver alterations as well as TMB and validated TMB values by correlation with the assay (F1CDx) used for the CheckMate 227 study. Results of the first consecutive 417 patients analyzed in a routine clinical setting are presented. Data show that fast reliable comprehensive diagnostics including TMB and targetable alterations are obtained with a short turn-around time. Thus, even complex biomarkers can easily be implemented in routine practice to optimize treatment decisions for advanced NSCLC.

Introduction: Afatinib is an effective first-line treatment in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and has shown activity in patients progressing on EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). First-line afatinib is also effective in patients with central nervous system (CNS) metastasis. Here we report on outcomes of pretreated NSCLC patients with CNS metastasis who received afatinib within a compassionate use program., Methods: Patients with NSCLC progressing after at least one line of chemotherapy and one line of EGFR-TKI treatment received afatinib. Medical history, patient demographics, EGFR mutational status, and adverse events including tumor progression were documented., Results: From 2010 to 2013, 573 patients were enrolled and 541 treated with afatinib. One hundred patients (66% female; median age, 60 years) had brain metastases and/or leptomeningeal disease with 74% having documented EGFR mutation. Median time to treatment failure for patients with CNS metastasis was 3.6 months, and did not differ from a matched group of 100 patients without CNS metastasis. Thirty-five percent (11 of 31) of evaluable patients had a cerebral response, five (16%) responded exclusively in brain. Response duration (range) was 120 (21-395) days. Sixty-six percent (21 of 32) of patients had cerebral disease control on afatinib. Data from one patient with an impressive response showed an afatinib concentration in the cerebrospinal fluid of nearly 1 nMol., Conclusion: Afatinib appears to penetrate into the CNS with concentrations high enough to have clinical effect on CNS metastases. Afatinib may therefore be an effective treatment for heavily pretreated patients with EGFR-mutated or EGFR-TKI-sensitive NSCLC and CNS metastasis.

Objective: Multi-modality approaches are increasingly employed to improve prognosis in surgically treated stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Risk and benefit of the preoperative therapeutic chemotherapy or combined radiochemotherapy on surgical morbidity and mortality are still a matter of debate., Methods: In 1995, a national phase III trial was started to compare (arm A) preoperative chemotherapy followed by twice-daily chemoradiation and consecutive surgery, with (arm B) preoperative chemotherapy alone followed by surgery and consecutive radiotherapy. An interim analysis with 277 patients was performed to assess surgical risk and complication rates., Results: of the 358 patients, 273 (71%) underwent thoracotomy, 130 (73%) in arm A and 143 (69%) in arm B. Of the 273 patients undergoing thoracotomy, 168 had stage IIIB disease. Complete resection (R0) was achieved in 212 patients (78%), 104 in arm A (80%) and 108 in arm B (76%) (P=n.s.). There was no difference in the proportion of complex resections between treatment arms (41% in arm A; 48% in arm B). Whilst bronchial stump insufficiency (3.8 vs 2.1%) and bleeding requiring re-thoracotomy (1.5 vs 0.7%) prevailed slightly in arm A, the occurrence of pneumonia divided similar in both treatment arms (4.6 vs 4.9%). Surgical mortality reached 6.1% in arm A (8/130) and 5.6% in arm B(6/143) (P=n.s.)., Conclusions: In both treatment arms, a similar percentage of patients could be forwarded to surgery, even in stage IIIB disease. Bimodality induction seems to be superior with regard to resection rates (R0) (n.s.), but was associated with a higher complication rate, especially bronchial stump insufficiency.