Search

Claudin6(CLDN6) is a tight junction protein of claudin-tetraspanin family and is of the earliest molecules expressed in embryonic epithelium. CLDN6 is frequently aberrantly expressed in testicular germ-cell tumors(GCT). ASP1650 is a chimeric-mouse/human-IgG1 antibody directed against CLDN6. Two-part, open-label, phase-II trial investigating ASP1650 in patients with relapsed/refractory GCT and no curable options. Part1 was a safety lead-in to establish the recommended-phase-II-dose(RP2D). Part2 was a phase-II study designed to evaluate the antitumor effects of ASP1650. CLDN6 expression was centrally assessed on archival tumor tissue using immunohistochemistry. The primary objectives were to establish the RP2D(safety lead-in) and the antitumor activity(phase-II) of ASP1650. Nineteen male patients were enrolled: 6 patients in 1000 mg/m 2 safety lead-in group, and 13 in 1500 mg/m 2 group. Median age 37.2 years(range,20-58). Histology was non-seminoma in 17/19 patients. Median number of previous chemotherapy regimens was 3. Thirteen patients had prior high-dose chemotherapy. No dose-limiting toxicity events were reported at any study drug dose. A RP2D of 1500 mg/m 2 every 2 weeks was established. No partial or complete responses were observed. The study was stopped at the end of Simon Stage-I due to lack of efficacy. 15/16 subjects with available tissue had CLDN6 positive staining. The mean percent membrane staining was 71.6% and the mean membrane H score was 152.6(SD 76). ASP1650 did not appear to have clinically meaningful single-agent activity in relapsed/refractory GCT. CLDN6 expression seems ubiquitous in all elements of GCT and is worthy of investigation as a diagnostic biomarker and therapeutic target. (Clinical trial information: NCT03760081)., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose Provide evidence-based recommendations updating the 2015 ASCO guideline on systemic therapy for patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods The ASCO NSCLC Expert Panel made recommendations based on a systematic review of randomized controlled trials from February 2014 to December 2016 plus the Cancer Care Ontario Program in Evidence-Based Care's update of a previous ASCO search. Results This guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous guideline update. Fourteen randomized controlled trials provide the evidence base; earlier phase trials also informed recommendation development. Recommendations New or revised recommendations include the following. Regarding first-line treatment for patients with non-squamous cell carcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma (without positive markers, eg, EGFR/ALK /ROS1), if the patient has high programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, pembrolizumab should be used alone; if the patient has low PD-L1 expression, clinicians should offer standard chemotherapy. All other clinical scenarios follow 2015 recommendations. Regarding second-line treatment in patients who received first-line chemotherapy, without prior immune checkpoint therapy, if NSCLC tumor is positive for PD-L1 expression, clinicians should use single-agent nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab; if tumor has negative or unknown PD-L1 expression, clinicians should use nivolumab or atezolizumab. All immune checkpoint therapy is recommended alone plus in the absence of contraindications. For patients who received a prior first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor, clinicians should offer standard chemotherapy. For patients who cannot receive immune checkpoint inhibitor after chemotherapy, docetaxel is recommended; in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC, pemetrexed is recommended. In patients with a sensitizing EGFR mutation, disease progression after first-line epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy, and T790M mutation, osimertinib is recommended; if NSCLC lacks the T790M mutation, then chemotherapy is recommended. Patients with ROS1 gene rearrangement without prior crizotinib may be offered crizotinib, or if they previously received crizotinib, they may be offered chemotherapy.

Background: The International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) classification has been used since 1997 to allocate metastatic germ cell tumors (GCTs), but its applicability needs an update. We aimed to revisit the outcomes of intermediate and poor risk nonseminomatous GCTs (NSGCTs)., Patients and Methods: Individual patient-level data from the databases of 2 institutions were collected. Outcomes of consecutive patients who received first-line chemotherapy from 1990 to 2014 were used. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate relapse-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate potential prognostic factors of RFS and OS univariably. Forward stepwise selection was used to construct a multivariable model. A risk factor (RF) model was then constructed and compared with IGCCCG classification using the concordance statistics (CS)., Results: A total of 647 patients were identified. Four RFs for OS in the multivariable model were identified: primary mediastinal NSGCT (P < .001), brain metastases (P < .001), lung metastases (P = .016), and age at the time of diagnosis (P = .003). CS were improved on the basis of the number of RF (0, 1, 2, and 3 or 4) compared with IGCCCG (RFS: 0.63 vs. 0.58; OS: 0.65 vs. 0.59). For intermediate risk, there were no differences between 3 (n = 25) and 4 cycles of cisplatin, etoposide, and bleomycin (BEP; n = 159) or BEP × 3 + etoposide and cisplatin (EP) × 1 (n = 31) for RFS (P = .35) and OS (P = .061)., Conclusion: An improved risk stratification was obtained for intermediate and poor risk GCTs. Our reclassification system might provide an aid for a reclassification attempt of all GCT patients. Our prognostic model might be offered to clinicians to improve their ability to assess patient prognosis, enhance stratification, and inform patients., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Opinion Statement: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the USA. The treatment of locally advanced NSCLC (LA-NSCLC) is challenging and must be individualized. For patients with completely resected stage III NSCLC, adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy for 4 cycles is recommended. For patients with inoperable or unresectable stage III NSCLC, chemoradiation is the preferred treatment. Patients with a good performance status, minimal or no weight loss, and adequate pulmonary function should be offered concurrent chemoradiation. The optimal chemotherapeutic agents to be used concurrently with radiation remain undefined. In the USA, cisplatin plus etoposide or carboplatin plus paclitaxel are the most commonly used regimens. In addition, the optimal duration of therapy remains undefined, including the role of consolidation chemotherapy. Thus far, randomized phase III trials have failed to identify a survival advantage for administering chemotherapy beyond that delivered during radiation therapy. Molecularly targeted agents, angiogenesis inhibitors, and immunotherapy have a defined role for patients with metastatic disease. The role, if any, of these new classes of agents is undergoing investigation for patients with earlier stage disease, including stage III disease.

Introduction: On the basis of the promising activity of cetuximab and radiation therapy for head and neck cancers, we evaluated the efficacy of this regimen followed by surgery in patients with resectable esophageal cancer. This was a phase II, open-label, single-arm, multicenter study of patients with potentially resectable esophageal cancer., Methods: Patients received two weekly doses of cetuximab followed by weekly cetuximab combined with radiation therapy for 6 weeks. After a 6- to 8-week rest, patients' primary tumor was resected. The main objective was to evaluate pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in the primary tumor after cetuximab and radiation therapy., Results: Thirty-nine patients completed the study. Most patients were men (93%), median age was 64 years, performance status was 0 to 1 (95%), patients had a histology of adenocarcinoma (78%), and tumors were located in the esophagus (63%). Grade 3 toxicities in more than 5% of patients included dysphagia (17%), anorexia and dehydration (7%), and dyspnea, fatigue, hypernatremia (5%). Grade 5 aspiration occurred in 2% (1 patient). Four patients died, two from disease progression, one from aspiration pneumonia postsurgery, and one from septic shock. Thirty-one patients (76%) underwent esophagectomy. The pCR rate was 36.6% by intention-to-treat and 48% for patients who underwent esophagectomy. The pCR by histology was 6 of 9 (67%) for squamous cell carcinomas and 9 of 32 (28%) for adenocarcinoma. Earlier-stage disease was associated with increased pCR (IIA 70%, IIB 29%, III 28%)., Conclusions: Cetuximab and radiation therapy results in a pCR rate that seems at least comparable with that of chemotherapy and radiation therapy. This regimen may be better tolerated than preoperative chemotherapy and radiation therapy in patients with resectable esophageal cancers.

Background: Poor PS is a negative prognostic factor for survival and a risk factor for treatment-related toxicity with standard platinum-doublet chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC. A phase II study combining erlotinib and bevacizumab for treatment of recurrent NSCLC showed encouraging efficacy and acceptable toxicity., Patients and Methods: This single-arm phase II study evaluated erlotinib and bevacizumab as first-line therapy for newly diagnosed nonsquamous advanced NSCLC patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS ≥ 2 or age 70 or older. Only patients eligible for bevacizumab per label were enrolled. Patients received erlotinib 150 mg orally daily and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 every 21 days for up to 6 cycles. The primary end point was the rate of nonprogressive disease at 4 months (alternative hypothesis > 60%)., Results: Twenty-five patients were enrolled, with median age 77 years (range, 52-90 years), 44% female, 20% never- or remote-smokers. Ninety-two percent of patients enrolled had PS of 2 per investigator assessment. The rate of nonprogressive disease at 4 months was 28%. There were no complete responses, 1 patient achieved a partial response, and 11 patients (44%) experienced stable disease as best response. Rash, fatigue, and diarrhea were the most common toxicities., Conclusion: The combination of erlotinib and bevacizumab had insufficient activity in the absence of known activating epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations to warrant study in newly diagnosed elderly or poor PS patients with nonsquamous NSCLC., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Pemetrexed is a standard treatment against recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and cetuximab has single-agent activity against NSCLC. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of the combination of these agents in patients with advanced NSCLC., Patients and Methods: Patients with recurrent NSCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1 were entered. Patients on the phase I portion of the study received cetuximab 400 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) on day -7 followed by weekly doses of cetuximab at 250 mg/m2 IV with escalating doses of pemetrexed every 3 weeks (dose levels: 500, 600, 750, 900 mg/m2) in a standard 3 + 3 design. Once the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination was determined, patients were enrolled on the phase II portion. The primary end point was to determine the median time to disease progression (TTP) (null hypothesis 12 weeks, alternative hypothesis 24 weeks)., Results: Thirty-six patients were enrolled (phase I: n = 13, phase II: n = 23). Patient characteristics included 60.6% men, median age 64 years (range, 37-80 years), 57.6% had performance status 0 and 54.6% had adenocarcinoma histology. The median number of previous regimens was 2 (range, 1-6). The maximum tolerated dose of pemetrexed in combination with cetuximab was determined to be 750 mg/m2. The median TTP was 14.6 weeks. The median survival time was 42 weeks and 1-year survival was 38.5%., Conclusion: The combination of pemetrexed at 750 mg/m2 every 21 days with weekly cetuximab at 250 mg/m2 was feasible; however, in this unselected patient population, the combination regimen does not seem to improve TTP compared with historical controls of either single agent.

Purpose of Review: Advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a therapeutic challenge. Traditional chemotherapy provides response rates of about 20-40% and median survivals of 8-10 months. The outcome of patients presenting at an advanced stage is therefore disappointing. In order to improve patients' outcomes, there has been a renewed interest in evaluating the role of maintenance or consolidation chemotherapy or both. Therefore, this review is timely and also relevant to clinical practice., Recent Findings: Thirteen randomized clinical trials have reported that consolidation or maintenance therapy or both improves progression free survival in patients with advanced NSCLC who have achieved disease control following their initial therapy. This does not translate into survival benefits in the same patient populations. Furthermore, prolonged therapy results in more treatment-related toxicity without improvements in quality of life as documented in 11 of these trials. We summarize the current data and perspectives of consolidation/maintenance therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC., Summary: Completed trials evaluating consolidation or maintenance therapy or both in patients with advanced NSCLC consistently demonstrate that this strategy will improve progression free survival but not overall survival. Administering maintenance or consolidation therapy to patients with advanced NSCLC to improve progression free survival alone is not recommended.

In patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), chemotherapy combined with radiation therapy modestly improves survival when compared with radiotherapy alone. In light of the small survival benefit,there is a need to quantify any potential loss of neurocognitive function that may result from chemotherapy in this patient population. The current study examines cognitive functioning in 14 stage III NSCLC patients who received treatment with cisplatin/etoposide/radiotherapy. Patients were assessed before receiving chemotherapy and at 1 and 7 months after treatment. At each time point, participants were administered a comprehensive battery of psychological and neuropsychological tests. In all, 71% of patients demonstrated cognitive impairment prior to any treatment. One month post chemotherapy, the majority of patients (62%) experienced cognitive decline; however, these negative effects apparently dissipated by 7 months post treatment, suggesting that the untoward effects of chemotherapy in these specific patients given this chemotherapy regimen may have been transitory. Cognitive decline did not appear to be associated with age, mood, fatigue, or quality-of-life measures. These findings demonstrated the importance of employing both a pre- and extended post-treatment assessment in chemotherapy research.

Advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) remains a challenge to treat due to its high local and systemic recurrence. The overall survival remains poor despite the approval of several new chemotherapeutic agents in the management of advanced NSCLC. Overexpression or mutations in the EGFR have been shown to be associated with a significant percentage of NSCLC. The development of targeted agents, such as cetuximab, against the EGFR is therefore a rational objective. Several preclinical and clinical studies suggest that cetuximab is active against NSCLC. This paper reviews the application of cetuximab in NSCLC.

Objective: The purpose of this study is to determine the control of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) and highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) with the combined use of palonosetron and olanzapine, and dexamethasone with the dexamethasone given on day 1 only., Materials and Methods: Forty chemotherapy-naive patients received on the day of chemotherapy, day 1, an anti-emetic regimen consisting of dexamethasone, palonosetron, and olanzapine. Patients continued olanzapine for days 2-4 after chemotherapy administration. Patients recorded daily episodes of emesis, daily symptoms utilizing the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory, and the utilization of rescue therapy., Results: For the first cycle of chemotherapy, the complete response (no emesis, no rescue) for the acute period (24 h post-chemotherapy) was 100%, the delayed period (days 2-5 post-chemotherapy) 75%, and the overall period (0 120 h post-chemotherapy) 75% in 8 patients receiving HEC and was 97, 75, and 72% in 32 patients receiving MEC. Patients with no nausea for the acute period was 100%, the delayed period 50%, and the overall period 50% in 8 patients receiving HEC and was 100, 78, and 78% in 32 patients receiving MEC., Discussion: The complete response and control of nausea in subsequent cycles of chemotherapy were not significantly different from cycle one., Conclusion: Olanzapine combined with a single dose of dexamethasone and a single dose of palonosetron was very effective in controlling acute and delayed CINV in patients receiving both HEC and MEC.

Purpose: To determine the efficacy of cetuximab in patients with recurrent or progressive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after receiving at least one prior chemotherapy regimen., Patients and Methods: This was an open-label, phase II study of patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) -positive and EGFR-negative advanced NSCLC with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1. Patients received cetuximab 400 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) during 120 minutes on week 1 followed by weekly doses of cetuximab 250 mg/m2 IV during 60 minutes. A cycle was considered as 4 weeks of treatment and therapy was continued until disease progression or intolerable toxicities. The primary end point was to assess response rate. Secondary end points included an estimation of time to progression and survival., Results: Patient and disease characteristics (n = 66) included EGFR-positive status (n = 60); EGFR-negative status (n = 6); number of prior regimens (one, n = 28; two, n = 27; > or = three, n = 11); male (n = 41); female (n = 25); adenocarcinoma (n = 36); and smoking status (never, n = 13; former, n = 45; current, n = 8). Grade 3/4 toxicities included acne-like rash (6.1%), anaphylactic reactions (1.5%), and diarrhea (1.5%). The response rate for all patients (n = 66) was 4.5% (95% CI, 0.9% to 12.7%) and the stable disease rate was 30.3% (95% CI, 19.6% to 42.9%). The response rate for patients with EGFR-positive tumors (n = 60) was 5% (95% CI, 1.0% to 13.9%). The median time to progression for all patients was 2.3 months (95% CI, 2.1 to 2.6 months) and median survival time was 8.9 months (95% CI, 6.2 to 12.6 months)., Conclusion: Although the response rate with single-agent cetuximab in this heavily pretreated patient population with advanced NSCLC was only 4.5%, the disease control rates and overall survival seem comparable to that of pemetrexed, docetaxel, and erlotinib in similar groups of patients.

BBR 3464 is a novel triplatinum compound that has exhibited anti-tumor activity in both cisplatin-sensitive and cisplatin-resistant, as well as in p53 mutant tumor models. In phase I testing, the dose-limiting toxicities have included myelosuppression and diarrhea. Both an intermittent (day 1 every 21-28 days) and a continuous (dailyx5 days) schedule have been studied, and the intermittent schedule has been chosen for further development. The primary objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of BBR 3464 administered at a dose of 0.9 mg/m i.v. over 1 h every 21 days in patients with small cell lung cancer who have progressed after first-line therapy. Pharmacokinetic analysis was also performed and will be reported. Patients were stratified based on prior response into resistant and sensitive (response duration 3 months or longer) subgroups. Thirty-seven patients were enrolled onto this multicenter study. The median number of cycles delivered was 2 in the resistant subgroup (range 1-12) and 3 in the sensitive subgroup (range 1-8). Most common grade 3/4 hematological toxicities included neutropenia (62%), febrile neutropenia (16%), anemia (10%), fatigue (5%) and hypokalemia (5%). Although no objective responses were seen in 34 evaluable patients, 11 patients (32%) had disease stabilization (four resistant/seven sensitive) with 23 patients (68%) experiencing continued disease progression (12 resistant/11 sensitive). Median time to progression was 53 days in the resistant subgroup [95% confidence interval (CI) 37-63] and 66 days in the sensitive subgroup (95% CI 51-136). The median and 1-year survival rate based on subgroup was 78 (resistant) (95% CI 56-165) versus 209 days (sensitive) (95% CI 83-296) and 6 (resistant) (95% CI 0-17) versus 20% (95% CI 2-38%), respectively. We conclude that the toxicity profile of BBR 3464 in this phase II trial is consistent with the phase I experience. The lack of activity in either patient subgroup, however, does not support further evaluation of this drug as a single agent in this disease.

Background: Many patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who achieve radiographic responses to treatment with the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefitinib and erlotinib have somatic mutations in the EGFR tyrosine kinase domain. However, little is known about the efficacy of cetuximab, an antibody against the EGFR extracellular domain, in EGFR mutant NSCLC., Methods: NSCLC cell lines carrying wild-type EGFR (A549, H441, and H1666) or mutant EGFR (H3255, DFCILU-011, PC-9, and HCC827) were treated with various dilutions of gefitinib or cetuximab relative to maximal achievable serum concentration. Cell growth was analyzed by the MTS assay, with differences between dose-response curves analyzed nonparametrically. Apoptosis was analyzed by propidium iodide staining and immunoblotting for PARP. Phosphorylation of EGFR and the downstream signaling components ERK1/2 and Akt were analyzed by immunoblotting. Statistical tests were two-sided., Results: Growth of NSCLC lines with wild-type EGFR was slightly (A549 and H441) or moderately (H1666) inhibited by gefitinib and cetuximab, and the effects of the two agents were similar. Both agents also induced no (H441) or moderate (H1666) apoptosis in NSCLC cells with wild-type EGFR. By contrast, gefitinib was statistically significantly more effective than cetuximab at inhibiting growth of EGFR mutant cells (H3255: P = .003, DFCILU-011: P = .011, and PC-9: P = .003), and gefitinib-treated EGFR mutant cells had higher levels of apoptosis than cetuximab-treated cells (mean fold increase in apoptosis by 1 microM of gefitinib and 10 microg/mL of cetuximab relative to control, H3255: 8.3 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 4.8 to 11.8] and 2.1 [95% CI = 2.0 to 2.2], respectively, P = .025; DFCILU-011: 5.7 [95% CI = 5.1 to 6.3] and. 0.9 [95% CI = 0.3 to 1.5], respectively, P < .001). Gefitinib treatment decreased EGFR, ERK1/2, and Akt phosphorylation in EGFR mutant cell lines whereas cetuximab had relatively little effect. Both gefitinib and cetuximab inhibited the growth of HCC827 cells, but gefitinib inhibited growth to a greater extent (P = .003)., Conclusions: EGFR mutations in NSCLC cells are associated with sensitivity to gefitinib but not to cetuximab.

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and toxicity of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had a performance status 0 to 2, previous treatment with one prior chemotherapy regimen for advanced NSCLC, and adequate organ function. Patients received pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) intravenously (i.v.) day 1 with vitamin B(12), folic acid, and dexamethasone or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1 with dexamethasone every 21 days. The primary end point was overall survival., Results: Five hundred seventy-one patients were randomly assigned. Overall response rates were 9.1% and 8.8% (analysis of variance P =.105) for pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 2.9 months for each arm, and median survival time was 8.3 versus 7.9 months (P = not significant) for pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. The 1-year survival rate for each arm was 29.7%. Patients receiving docetaxel were more likely to have grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (40.2% v 5.3%; P <.001), febrile neutropenia (12.7% v 1.9%; P <.001), neutropenia with infections (3.3% v 0.0%; P =.004), hospitalizations for neutropenic fever (13.4% v 1.5%; P <.001), hospitalizations due to other drug related adverse events (10.5% v 6.4%; P =.092), use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support (19.2% v 2.6%, P <.001) and all grade alopecia (37.7% v 6.4%; P <.001) compared with patients receiving pemetrexed., Conclusion: Treatment with pemetrexed resulted in clinically equivalent efficacy outcomes, but with significantly fewer side effects compared with docetaxel in the second-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC and should be considered a standard treatment option for second-line NSCLC when available.

Platinum-based chemotherapy offers a modest survival advantage over best supportive care (BSC) in chemotherapy-naive patients with a good performance status and advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Based on 2 landmark studies that reported improved survival times and quality of life when comparing docetaxel with ifosfamide, vinorelbine, or BSC alone, docetaxel at 75 mg/m(2) given once every 3 weeks has been the standard of care as second-line chemotherapy since 2000. Docetaxel given at this dose and schedule resulted in significant hematologic toxicity, with many patients at risk for neutropenic fever. Pemetrexed is a novel multitargeted antifolate agent with single-agent activity in first- and second-line treatment of NSCLC. A phase III study in 571 patients comparing pemetrexed with docetaxel demonstrated clinically equivalent therapeutic outcomes in second-line treatment of patients with recurrent NSCLC; however, patients on the pemetrexed arm had a more favorable hematologic toxicity profile, with fewer episodes of neutropenia, neutropenic fever, and infections and less use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support. Based on these data, pemetrexed is a reasonable second-line chemotherapy option for patients with recurrent, advanced NSCLC.

Background Combination chemotherapy and immunotherapy regimens have significantly improved survival for patients with previously untreated advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Improvements in overall survival (OS) in two separate pembrolizumab trials have demonstrated survival improvements over chemotherapy alone, regardless of PD-L1 status. The optimal chemotherapy backbone for combination with immunotherapy is unknown. We hypothesized nab -paclitaxel may be a well-suited platinum partner to use in combination with checkpoint inhibitor therapy for both adenocarcinoma and squamous histology and conducted a phase I/II trial to assess the efficacy of this regimen in advanced NSCLC. Methods Adult patients with previously untreated, stage IIIB/IV NSCLC (any histology) with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, any PD-L1 expression, and no EGFR mutations or ALK translocations, received carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 6 day 1, nab -paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15, and pembrolizumab 200 mg day 1 q21 days for 4 cycles followed by maintenance pembrolizumab q3w. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Results Forty-six evaluable patients enrolled, 14 in phase I and 32 in phase II, from June 2015 to July 2018 with a median duration of follow-up of 35.4 months. Median time from enrollment to data lock was 42 months. In the ITT population, the ORR was 35%, median PFS was 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.6-8.2), and median OS was 15.4 months (CI, 12.4-28.1). There were no statistical differences in PFS or OS by PD-L1 status. The 2- and 3-year landmark OS rates were 33% and 24%, respectively. Conclusion Carboplatin, nab -paclitaxel, and pembrolizumab are a safe and effective regimen for patients with both squamous and nonsquamous NSCLC. Although this study did not meet the prespecified endpoints, the median and landmark OS results are consistent with durable benefit of this regimen as seen in phase III trials for first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses evidence-based changes in the first-line treatment of patients with stage IV lung cancer and reflects a shifting paradigm for the subset of patients whose Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer is without actionable mutation away from primarily solely cytotoxic chemotherapy.

Background: This randomized, double-blind, phase 2 trial evaluated whether the addition of vandetanib to platinum plus etoposide for previously untreated extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC) prolonged the time to disease progression in comparison with chemotherapy alone.Methods: Patients with previously untreated extensive-stage SCLC received platinum (cisplatin or carboplatin) with etoposide in combination with vandetanib (100 mg daily) or a placebo for up to 4 total cycles (no maintenance therapy). An initial safety run-in phase was conducted with the first 6 patients enrolled; all these patients received vandetanib with cisplatin and etoposide. With an overall sample size of 68 patients, the study had 80% power to detect a 3-month difference in the time to progression (TTP) from 4 to 7 months (significance level,.10 [1-sided log-rank test]).Results: Seventy-four patients were enrolled between April 2008 and May 2013. Thirty-three patients were ultimately randomized to each arm. The baseline characteristics were well balanced, and the median number of treatment cycles was 4 for each arm. Thirty-one patients in each arm were evaluable for TTP; the median TTP was 5.62 months with vandetanib and 5.68 months with the placebo (P = .9518). The median overall survival was 13.24 months with vandetanib and 9.23 months with the placebo (P = .4577; 33 evaluable patients in each arm). Nonhematologic toxicity was increased with vandetanib versus the placebo. No correlation was seen between vascular endothelial growth factor polymorphisms and outcomes.Conclusions: The addition of vandetanib to platinum and etoposide did not improve outcomes for patients with newly diagnosed extensive-stage SCLC. Toxicity was increased in comparison with chemotherapy alone. Cancer 2017;123:303-311. © 2016 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Although chemotherapy has been shown to increase survival for patients with advanced-stage disease, survival benefits have been modest and come at the cost of significant toxicity. Treatment options in the second-line setting have been limited. Pemetrexed, a multitargeted antifolate, has activity as a single agent and as part of combination chemotherapy against NSCLC. As reported in a recent phase III clinical trial, survival outcomes in the second-line setting for patients treated with pemetrexed or docetaxel are similar. More importantly, major toxicity with the use of pemetrexed with vitamin B(12) and folate supplementation is far less than with docetaxel. Based on its single agent activity, ease of administration, and favorable toxicity profile, pemetrexed has the potential to be incorporated in various settings against NSCLC, including metastatic disease, as adjuvant therapy, and for locally advanced disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Preclinical evidence supports the clinical investigation of inhibitors to the insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGFR) and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) either alone or in combination as treatment for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Methods: Patients with chemotherapy-naïve, advanced NSCLC who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible. Patients were randomized to receive carboplatin intravenously at an area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve of 6.0 plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks combined with either intravenous cetuximab weekly (arm A), intravenous cixutumumab every 2 weeks (arm B), or both (arm C). Patients who had nonprogessing disease after 12 weeks of therapy were permitted to continue on maintenance antibody therapy until they developed progressive disease. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The study design required 180 eligible patients and had 88% power to detect a 60% increase in median PFS for either comparison (arm A vs arm C or arm B vs arm C) using the log-rank test.Results: From September 2009 to December 2010, 140 patients were accrued. The study was closed to accrual early because of an excessive number of grade 5 events reported on arms A and C. Thirteen patients died during treatment (6 patients on arm A, 2 patients on arm B, and 5 patients on arm C), including 9 within approximately 1 month of starting therapy. The estimated median PFS for arms A, B, and C were similar at 3.4 months, 4.2 months, and 4 months, respectively.Conclusions: On the basis of the apparent lack of efficacy and excessive premature deaths, the current results do not support the continued investigation of carboplatin, paclitaxel, and cixutumumab either alone or in combination with cetuximab for patients with advanced NSCLC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Recent studies of pemetrexed have identified a predictive role for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) histology. We further reviewed the differential efficacy of pemetrexed according to histology in two large, phase III NSCLC trials. Methods. One study tested pemetrexed versus docetaxel in previously treated patients (n = 571) and the other tested cisplatin plus pemetrexed versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naive patients (n = 1,725) with advanced NSCLC. Cox proportional hazard models were used to test for covariate-adjusted treatment- by-histology interactions (THIs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). For each histologic subgroup, the Kaplan--Meier method was used to estimate unadjusted within-arm medians, and Cox models were used to estimate covariate-adjusted between-arm hazard ratios (HRs). Results. In both studies, treatment arms were well balanced for histology. THIs were statistically significant (p < .005) for both OS and PFS. Nonsquamous patients treated with pemetrexed-based therapy experienced longer survival than the comparators (HR, 0.78 and 0.84, respectively), whereas squamous patients had shorter survival (HR, 1.56 and 1.23, respectively). Whereas the efficacy of pemetrexed regimens differed according to histology, it did not differ for docetaxel or for cisplatin plus gemcitabine. Pemetrexed was well tolerated across histologic groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who achieve radiographic responses to treatment with the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefitinib and erlotinib have somatic mutations in the EGFR tyrosine kinase domain. However, little is known about the efficacy of cetuximab, an antibody against the EGFR extracellular domain, in EGFR mutant NSCLC. Methods: NSCLC cell lines carrying wild-type EGFR (A549, H441, and H1666) or mutant EGFR (H3255, DFCILU-011, PC-9, and HCC827) were treated with various dilutions of gefitinib or cetuximab relative to maximal achievable serum concentration. Cell growth was analyzed by the MTS assay, with differences between dose-response curves analyzed nonparametrically. Apoptosis was analyzed by propidium iodide staining and immunoblotting for PARP. Phosphorylation of EGFR and the downstream signaling components ERK½ and Akt were analyzed by immunoblotting. Statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Growth of NSCLC lines with wild-type EGFR was slightly (A549 and H441) or moderately (H1666) inhibited by gefitinib and cetuximab, and the effects of the two agents were similar. Both agents also induced no (H441) or moderate (H1666) apoptosis in NSCLC cells with wild-type EGFR. By contrast, gefitinib was statistically significantly more effective than cetuximab at inhibiting growth of EGFR mutant cells (H3255: P = .003, DFCILU-011: P = .011, and PC-9: P = .003), and gefitinib-treated EGFR mutant cells had higher levels of apoptosis than cetuximab-treated cells (mean fold increase in apoptosis by 1 µM of gefitinib and 10 µg/mL of cetuximab relative to control, H3255: 8.3 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 4.8 to 11.81 and 2.1 [95% CI = 2.0 to 2.2], respectively, P = .025; DFCILU-011: 5.7 [95% CI = 5.1 to 6.3] and. 0.9 [95% CI = 0.3 to 1.5], respectively, P<.001). Gefitinib treatment decreased EGFR, ERK½, and Akt phosphorylation in EGFR mutant cell lines whereas cetuximab had relatively little effect. Both gefitinib and cetuximab inhibited the growth of HCC827 cells, but gefitinib inhibited growth to a greater extent (P = .003). Conclusions: EGFR mutations in NSCLC cells are associated with sensitivity to gefitinib but not to cetuximab. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]