Search

Introduction: S1400F is a non-match substudy of Lung Cancer Master Protocol (Lung-MAP) evaluating the immunotherapy combination of durvalumab and tremelimumab to overcome resistance to anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-(L)1) therapy in patients with advanced squamous lung carcinoma (sq non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC))., Methods: Patients with previously treated sqNSCLC with disease progression after anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy, who did not qualify for any active molecularly targeted Lung-MAP substudies, were eligible. Patients received tremelimumab 75 mg plus durvalumab 1500 mg once every 28 days for four cycles then durvalumab alone every 28 days until disease progression. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (RECIST V.1.1). Primary and acquired resistance cohorts, defined as disease progression within 24 weeks versus ≥24 weeks of starting prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy, were analyzed separately and an interim analysis for futility was planned after 20 patients in each cohort were evaluable for response., Results: A total of 58 eligible patients received drug, 28 with primary resistance and 30 with acquired resistance to anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy. Grade ≥3 adverse events at least possibly related to treatment were seen in 20 (34%) patients. The response rate in the primary resistance cohort was 7% (95% CI 0% to 17%), with one complete and one partial response. No responses were seen in the acquired resistance cohort. In the primary and resistance cohorts the median progression-free survival was 2.0 months (95% CI 1.6 to 3.0) and 2.1 months (95% CI 1.6 to 3.2), respectively, and overall survival was 7.7 months (95% CI 4.0 to 12.0) and 7.6 months (95% CI 5.3 to 10.2), respectively., Conclusion: Durvalumab plus tremelimumab had minimal activity in patients with advanced sqNSCLC progressing on prior anti-PD-1 therapy. Trial registration number NCT03373760., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors’ financial disclosures include: NBL received travel support and institutional research funding from Astra Zeneca and personal fees (CME lectures) from MSD and BMS, unrelated to the study. MR salary support from Hope Foundation, participation on DMSB for AstraZeneca, unrelated to study. NR received personal fees from Abbvie, Apricity, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Calithera, Dracen, Editas, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, G1 Therapeutics, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmith Kline, Illumina, Merck, Neogenomics, Novartis and Takeda, and personal fees and stock options from Arcus, Belicum, Brooklyn ImmunoTherapeutics, and Gritstone; royalties for patent filed by MSKCC identifying determinants of cancer response to immunotherapy (PCT/US2015/062208 licensed to Personal Genome Diagnostics; PM reports personal fees from Guardant Health. LHS research support from Merck, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, and Boehringer, participating in DSMB for Regeneron, patent with Varian. SCR fees for expert testimony. JC reports consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Coherus, Merck, NCCN, Pfizer and travel support from AstraZeneca, GI Therapeutics, participating on DSMB or Ad Board for Beyond Spring, Celegene, G1 Therapeutics, Janssen, Merrimack, Mylan, Roche. JDB is principal investigator of AstraZeneca sponsored trial (PACIFIC 2), research support and consulting fees from Varian. TS institutional grants from Genentech/Roche, Blueprint Medicines, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Advaxis, Regeneron, participation on DSMB or ad board for Takeda, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Foundation Medicine, Pfizer, EMD Serono, Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly, Puma Biotechnology, Janssen Oncology, Regeneron. SR grants from Tesaro, Merck, AstraZeneca, Advaxis, BMS, Amgen, Takeda, Genmab, GSK, consult fees from Amgen, BMS, Genentech/Roche, Merck, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Eisai, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, GSK, Lilly. RSH reports membership in board of directors for Immunocore Holdings Ltd, Junshi Pharmaceuticals, consulting including travel support from AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Merck, Ventana Medical Systems, Inc., consulting with ARMO Biosciences, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Bolt Biotherapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Candel Therapeutics, Cybrexa Therapeutics, eFFECTOR Therapeutics, Eli Lilly and Company, EMD Serono, Foundation Medicine, Genmab, Gilead, Halozyme Therapeutics, Heat Biologics, I-Mab Biopharma, Immunocore, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Loxo Oncology, Mirati Therapeutics, Nektar, Neon Therapeutics, NextCure, Novartis, Ocean Biomedical, Oncternal Therapeutics, Pfizer, Ribbon Therapeutics, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Shire PLC, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, STCube Pharmaceuticals, Symphogen, Takeda, Tesaro, Tocagen, Ventana Medical Systems, WindMIL Therapeutics, Xencor. Research support from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Genentech/Roche, Merck. VP research funding from AstraZeneca, BMS, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Merck, F. Hoffman-La Roche, Nektar Therapeutics, Janssen, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Checkmate, Incyte, consulting fees from AbbVie, Araxes, Arrys Therapeutics, Bolt Therapeutics, Clovis Oncology, Exelixis, G2 Innovation, Gritstone, Ideaya, Leeds Biolabs, Loxo Oncology, Takeda, Tesaro, TRM Oncology, AstraZeneca, BMS, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Merck, F. Hoffman-La Roche, Nektar Therapeutics, Janssen, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, personal fees from F. Hoffman-La Roche, employee of Pfizer. KK travel and consultant fees from AstraZeneca.DRG consultant and participation on advisory boards for AstraZeneca (institutional), Roche-Genentech (institutional), Guardant Health (institutional), IO Biotech (institutional) and Oncocyte (institutional) fees paid to institution, research funding from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Genentech and Merck, personal fees from Inivata, Lilly, Merck and Novartis.The following investigators have no financial disclosures to report: FH, JW, WjI, KM, JM., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Upregulated expression and aberrant activation of the epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR) are found in lung cancer, making EGFR a relevant target for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Treatment with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) is associated with modest improvement in overall survival in patients with squamous cell lung cancer (SqCLC) who have a significant unmet need for effective treatment options. While there is evidence that using EGFR gene copy number, EGFR mutation, and EGFR protein expression as biomarkers can help select patients who respond to treatment, it is important to consider biomarkers for response in patients treated with combination therapies that include EGFR mAbs., Design: Randomized trials of EGFR-directed mAbs cetuximab and necitumumab in combination with chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or antiangiogenic therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC, including SqCLC, were searched in the literature. Results of associations of potential biomarkers and outcomes were summarized., Results: Data from phase III clinical trials indicate that patients with NSCLC, including SqCLC, whose tumors express high levels of EGFR protein (H-score of ≥200) and/or gene copy numbers of EGFR (e.g. ≥40% cells with ≥4 EGFR copies as detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization; gene amplification in ≥10% of analyzed cells) derive greater therapeutic benefits from EGFR-directed mAbs. Biomarker data are limited for EGFR mAbs used in combination with immunotherapy and are absent when used in combination with antiangiogenic agents., Conclusions: Therapy with EGFR-directed mAbs in combination with chemotherapy is associated with greater clinical benefits in patients with NSCLC, including SqCLC, whose tumors express high levels of EGFR protein and/or have increased EGFR gene copy number. These data support validating the role of these as biomarkers to identify those patients who derive the greatest clinical benefit from EGFR mAb therapy. However, data on biomarkers for EGFR-directed mAbs combined with immunotherapy or antiangiogenic agents remain limited.

Background: Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with both epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) positive mutation and B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia/lymphoma-like 11 (BIM) deletion polymorphism had a poor clinical response to EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). The current study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and tolerability of EGFR-TKIs plus chemotherapy versus EGFR-TKIs alone as first-line treatment in advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations and BIM deletion polymorphism., Methods: A retrospective, non-randomized analysis was conducted. BIM deletion polymorphism was detected using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis and direct sequencing of DNA from peripheral blood cells. Clinical characteristics, overall survival (OS), progress-free-survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events were compared between EGFR-TKIs alone versus EGFR-TKIs plus chemotherapy group., Results: 65 patients were enrolled. 36 of them received EGFR-TKIs and 29 received EGFR-TKIs plus chemotherapy. EGFR-TKIs plus chemotherapy had significantly higher ORR than TKIs alone (65.5% vs. 38.9%, P = 0.046). Median PFS was significantly longer in EGFR-TKIs plus chemotherapy group than in TKIs group (7.2 vs 4.7 m; P = 0.008). Median OS was numerically longer in EGFR-TKIs plus chemotherapy group than in TKIs alone (18.5 vs 14.2 m; P = 0.107). EGFR-TKIs plus chemotherapy was associated with more grade 3 or 4 hematological toxic effects than EGFR-TKIs alone., Conclusion: EGFR-TKIs plus chemotherapy conferred a significantly higher ORR, prolonged PFS and numerically longer OS in advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR mutation and BIM deletion polymorphism. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these findings., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Durable responses and encouraging survival have been demonstrated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), but predictive markers are unknown. We used whole exome sequencing to evaluate the impact of tumor mutational burden on efficacy of nivolumab monotherapy or combined with ipilimumab in patients with SCLC from the nonrandomized or randomized cohorts of CheckMate 032. Patients received nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or nivolumab plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg plus 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four cycles, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks). Efficacy of nivolumab ± ipilimumab was enhanced in patients with high tumor mutational burden. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab appeared to provide a greater clinical benefit than nivolumab monotherapy in the high tumor mutational burden tertile., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Before mutation testing of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene was recognized as highly associated with the activity of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), clinically defined patient populations with bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC) and never smokers were identified as likely to benefit from EGFR TKIs. From preclinical and clinical data suggesting potentially improved efficacy with a combination of an EGFR TKI and the antiangiogenic agent bevacizumab, the Southwestern Oncology Group (SWOG) initiated paired phase II trials to evaluate the combination of erlotinib/bevacizumab in patients with advanced BAC (SWOG S0635) or never smokers with advanced lung adenocarcinoma (SWOG S0636)., Materials and Methods: Eligible patients with BAC or adenocarcinoma with BAC features (SWOG S0635) or never smokers with advanced lung adenocarcinoma (SWOG S0636) received erlotinib 150 mg/day with bevacizumab 15 mg/kg until progression or prohibitive toxicity. Never smokers with BAC were preferentially enrolled to SWOG S0636. The primary endpoint for both trials was overall survival., Results: A total of 84 patients were enrolled in the SWOG S0635 trial and 85 in the SWOG S0636 trial. The objective response rate was 22% (3% complete response) in the SWOG S0635 trial and 50% (38% confirmed; 3% complete response) in the SWOG S0636 trial. The median progression-free survival was 5 and 7.4 months in the S0635 and S0636 trials, respectively. The median overall survival was 21 and 29.8 months, respectively. Toxicity consisted mainly of rash and diarrhea in both trials., Conclusion: Although the field has moved toward molecular, rather than clinical, selection of patients as optimal candidates for EGFR TKI therapy, these results support the hypothesis that a subset of patients in whom erlotinib is particularly active could receive an incremental benefit from the addition of bevacizumab., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: EGFR antibodies have shown promise in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), particularly with squamous cell histology. We hypothesised that EGFR copy number by fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH) can identify patients most likely to benefit from these drugs combined with chemotherapy and we aimed to explore the activity of cetuximab with chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC who are EGFR FISH-positive., Methods: We did this open-label, phase 3 study (SWOG S0819) at 277 sites in the USA and Mexico. We randomly assigned (1:1) eligible patients with treatment-naive stage IV NSCLC to receive paclitaxel (200 mg/m 2 ; every 21 days) plus carboplatin (area under the curve of 6 by modified Calvert formula; every 21 days) or carboplatin plus paclitaxel and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg; every 21 days), either with cetuximab (250 mg/m 2 weekly after loading dose; cetuximab group) or without (control group), stratified by bevacizumab treatment, smoking status, and M-substage using a dynamic-balancing algorithm. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival in patients with EGFR FISH-positive cancer and overall survival in the entire study population. We analysed clinical outcomes with the intention-to-treat principle and analysis of safety outcomes included patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT00946712)., Findings: Between Aug 13, 2009, and May 30, 2014, we randomly assigned 1313 patients to the control group (n=657; 277 with bevacizumab and 380 without bevacizumab in the intention-to-treat population) or the cetuximab group (n=656; 283 with bevacizumab and 373 without bevacizumab in the intention-to-treat population). EGFR FISH was assessable in 976 patients and 400 patients (41%) were EGFR FISH-positive. The median follow-up for patients last known to be alive was 35·2 months (IQR 22·9-39·9). After 194 progression-free survival events in the cetuximab group and 198 in the control group in the EGFR FISH-positive subpopulation, progression-free survival did not differ between treatment groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0·92, 95% CI 0·75-1·12; p=0·40; median 5·4 months [95% CI 4·5-5·7] vs 4·8 months [3·9-5·5]). After 570 deaths in the cetuximab group and 593 in the control group, overall survival did not differ between the treatment groups in the entire study population (HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·83-1·04; p=0·22; median 10·9 months [95% CI 9·5-12·0] vs 9·2 months [8·7-10·3]). In the prespecified analysis of EGFR FISH-positive subpopulation with squamous cell histology, overall survival was significantly longer in the cetuximab group than in the control group (HR 0·58, 95% CI 0·36-0·86; p=0·0071), although progression-free survival did not differ between treatment groups in this subgroup (0·68, 0·46-1·01; p=0·055). Overall survival and progression-free survival did not differ among patients who were EGFR FISH non-positive with squamous cell histology (HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·78-1·40; p=0·77; and 1·02, 0·77-1·36; p=0·88 respectively) or patients with non-squamous histology regardless of EGFR FISH status (for EGFR FISH-positive 0·88, 0·68-1·14; p=0·34; and 0·99, 0·78-1·27; p=0·96; respectively; and for EGFR FISH non-positive 1·00, 0·85-1·17; p=0·97; and 1·03, 0·88-1·20; p=0·69; respectively). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (210 [37%] in the cetuximab group vs 158 [25%] in the control group), decreased leucocyte count (103 [16%] vs 74 [20%]), fatigue (81 [13%] vs 74 [20%]), and acne or rash (52 [8%] vs one [<1%]). 59 (9%) patients in the cetuximab group and 31 (5%) patients in the control group had severe adverse events. Deaths related to treatment occurred in 32 (6%) patients in the cetuximab group and 13 (2%) patients in the control group., Interpretation: Although this study did not meet its primary endpoints, prespecified subgroup analyses of patients with EGFR FISH-positive squamous-cell carcinoma cancers are encouraging and support continued evaluation of anti-EGFR antibodies in this subpopulation., Funding: National Cancer Institute and Eli Lilly and Company., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The treatment options for squamous cell non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are limited. We assessed the efficacy and safety of onartuzumab plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy in previously untreated advanced squamous cell NSCLC., Patients and Methods: The patients were randomized to receive onartuzumab plus paclitaxel plus carboplatin/cisplatin (n = 55) or placebo plus paclitaxel plus carboplatin/cisplatin (n = 54). Randomization was stratified by MET diagnostic status: MET immunohistochemistry (IHC)-positive (MET IHC 3+/2+) or MET IHC-negative (MET IHC 1+/0). The co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intent-to-treat and the MET IHC + populations., Results: The risk of disease progression or death was similar between the 2 treatment arms in both the intent-to-treat (stratified hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.43) and MET IHC + populations (unstratified hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-2.32). Comparable results were obtained for overall survival and the objective response rate. In all safety-evaluable patients, the grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurring at a > 5% greater incidence in the onartuzumab-containing versus the placebo-containing arm were neutropenia (14.8% vs. 5.8%) and pulmonary embolism (5.6% vs. 0%). Eight patients died as a result of adverse events: 1 case each of pneumonitis, pneumonia, cardiac failure, and unexplained death in the onartuzumab arm and 1 case each of hemorrhage, cardiac arrest, hemoptysis, and febrile neutropenia in the placebo arm., Conclusion: Studies using alternative assays of MET activation might help to clarify the role of onartuzumab. However, with the lack of clinical activity seen in the present study, the development of onartuzumab for squamous cell NSCLC will not be pursued further., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Patients with advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and borderline performance status (performance status 2 [PS2]) are often excluded from clinical trials and platinum-based therapy. In light of the potential role for serum proteomics in predicting the benefit of erlotinib beyond that of epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutational status, we conducted a trial in which the Veristrat proteomics assay was used for data enrichment when selecting a cohort of patients with NSCLC and PS2 to receive erlotinib with and without chemotherapy., Methods: Patients with metastatic NSCLC, PS2, acceptable end-organ function, and Veristrat-good status were randomly assigned to receive either 150 mg of erlotinib orally daily (arm 1) or 150 mg of erlotinib orally daily on days 2 through16 plus four cycles of carboplatin (area under the curve = 5 on day 1) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1) followed by 150 mg of erlotinib orally (arm 2). The arm 2 agents were pharmacodynamically separated to mitigate potential antagonism. The arm with superior observed median progression-free survival (PFS) would be selected for further evaluation, but only if PFS lasted for at least 3 months., Results: The trial terminated before the planned accrual of 98 patients for regulatory reasons. A total of 156 patients were screened. Of the 83 (59%) who were classified as Veristrat good, 59 met the trial eligibility criteria and were randomly assigned to one of two arms (33 patients in arm 1 and 26 in arm 2). The patients in arm 2 patients had a higher response rate (23% versus 6%, p = 0.06), disease control rate (77% versus 41%, p = 0.0046), median PFS (4.6 versus 1.6 months, p = 0.06), and median overall survival (11 versus 6 months, p = 0.27). Treatment-related grade 4 adverse events were seen in two patients in arm 1 (thrombosis and hypomagnesemia) and in five patients in arm 2 (neutropenia in five, febrile neutropenia in one, and leukopenia in one)., Conclusions: In a proteomics-enriched cohort of patients with NSCLC and PS2, pharmacodynamically separated erlotinib plus chemotherapy had better efficacy than did erlotinib alone and surpassed the protocol-specified benchmark of PFS of at least 3 months required for further study., (Copyright © 2015 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Vandetanib, added to cisplatin and radiation therapy (RT) overcomes chemoradiation therapy (CRT) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor resistance in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) lines and models., Methods: Patients with previously untreated HNSCC received vandetanib daily for 14 days (starting dose 100 mg) and then vandetanib + RT (2.2 Gy/day, 5 days/week) for 6 weeks (regimen 1) or vandetanib + RT (2 Gy/day, 5 days/week) + cisplatin (30 mg/m(2) weekly) for 7 weeks (regimen 2). The primary objective was the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of vandetanib with RT +/- cisplatin., Results: Of 33 treated patients, 30 completed therapy (regimen 1, n = 12; regimen 2, n = 18). MTD in regimen 2 was 100 mg (3 dose limiting toxicities [DLTs] at 200 mg), whereas regimen 1 was stopped because of poor recruitment (1 DLT at 200 mg). Most common grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were dysphagia (30%), stomatitis (33%), and mucosal inflammation (27%). Five patients discontinued vandetanib because of AEs., Conclusion: Vandetanib with CRT was feasible., (© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

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., (© 2015 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Necitumumab is a second-generation, recombinant, human immunoglobulin G1 EGFR antibody. In this study, we aimed to compare treatment with necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin versus gemcitabine and cisplatin alone in patients with previously untreated stage IV squamous non-small-cell lung cancer., Methods: We did this open-label, randomised phase 3 study at 184 investigative sites in 26 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IV squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 and adequate organ function and who had not received previous chemotherapy for their disease were eligible for inclusion. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned centrally 1:1 to a maximum of six 3-week cycles of gemcitabine and cisplastin chemotherapy with or without necitumumab according to a block randomisation scheme (block size of four) by a telephone-based interactive voice response system or interactive web response system. Chemotherapy was gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) administered intravenously over 30 min on days 1 and 8 of a 3-week cycle and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) administered intravenously over 120 min on day 1 of a 3-week cycle. Necitumumab 800 mg, administered intravenously over a minimum of 50 min on days 1 and 8, was continued after the end of chemotherapy until disease progression or intolerable toxic side-effects occurred. Randomisation was stratified by ECOG performance status and geographical region. Neither physicians nor patients were masked to group assignment because of the expected occurrence of acne-like rash--a class effect of EGFR antibodies--that would have unmasked most patients and investigators to treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. We report the final clinical analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00981058., Findings: Between Jan 7, 2010, and Feb 22, 2012, we enrolled 1093 patients and randomly assigned them to receive necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (n=545) or gemcitabine and cisplatin (n=548). Overall survival was significantly longer in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group than in the gemcitabine and cisplatin alone group (median 11·5 months [95% CI 10·4-12·6]) vs 9·9 months [8·9-11·1]; stratified hazard ratio 0·84 [95% CI 0·74-0·96; p=0·01]). In the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group, the number of patients with at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event was higher (388 [72%] of 538 patients) than in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group (333 [62%] of 541), as was the incidence of serious adverse events (257 [48%] of 538 patients vs 203 [38%] of 541). More patients in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group had grade 3-4 hypomagnesaemia (47 [9%] of 538 patients in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group vs six [1%] of 541 in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group) and grade 3 rash (20 [4%] vs one [<1%]). Including events related to disease progression, adverse events with an outcome of death were reported for 66 (12%) of 538 patients in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group and 57 (11%) of 541 patients in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group; these were deemed to be related to study drugs in 15 (3%) and ten (2%) patients, respectively. Overall, we found that the safety profile of necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin was acceptable and in line with expectations., Interpretation: Our findings show that the addition of necitumumab to gemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy improves overall survival in patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer and represents a new first-line treatment option for this disease., Funding: Eli Lilly and Company., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Necitumumab is a second-generation recombinant human immunoglobulin G1 EGFR monoclonal antibody that competitively inhibits ligand binding. We aimed to compare necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin with pemetrexed and cisplatin alone in patients with previously untreated, stage IV, non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: We did this randomised, open-label, controlled phase 3 study at 103 sites in 20 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 and adequate organ function, were randomly assigned 1:1 to treatment with a block randomisation scheme (block size of four) via a telephone-based interactive voice-response system or interactive web-response system. Patients received either cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) and pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 1 of a 3-week cycle for a maximum of six cycles alone, or with necitumumab 800 mg on days 1 and 8. Necitumumab was continued after the end of chemotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. Randomisation was stratified by smoking history, ECOG performance status, disease histology, and geographical region. Patients and study investigators were not masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00982111., Findings: Between Nov 11, 2009, and Feb 2, 2011, we randomly assigned 633 patients to receive either necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin (n=315) or pemetrexed and cisplatin alone (n=318). Enrolment was stopped on Feb 2, 2011, after a recommendation from the independent data monitoring committee. There was no significant difference in overall survival between treatment groups, with a median overall survival of 11·3 months (95% CI 9·5-13·4) in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group versus 11·5 months (10·1-13·1) in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group (hazard ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·84-1·21]; p=0·96). The incidence of grade 3 or worse adverse events, including deaths, was higher in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group than in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group; in particular, deaths regarded as related to study drug were reported in 15 (5%) of 304 patients in the necitumumab group versus nine (3%) of 312 patients in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group. Serious adverse events were likewise more frequent in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group than in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group (155 [51%] of 304 vs 127 [41%] of 312 patients). Patients in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group had more grade 3-4 rash (45 [15%] of 304 vs one [<1%] of 312 patients in the pemetrexed and cisplatin alone group), hypomagnesaemia (23 [8%] vs seven [2%] patients), and grade 3 or higher venous thromboembolic events (23 [8%] vs 11 [4%] patients) than did those in the pemetrexed and cisplatin alone group., Interpretation: Our findings show no evidence to suggest that the addition of necitumumab to pemetrexed and cisplatin increases survival of previously untreated patients with stage IV non-squamous NSCLC. Unless future studies identify potentially useful predictive biomarkers, necitumumab is unlikely to provide benefit in this patient population when combined with pemetrexed and cisplatin., Funding: Eli Lilly and Company., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Rapid development of molecularly targeted drugs requires a "companion diagnostic" that could delay drug development and limit availability of active drugs for relevant patients. Were the negative results from MetMab studies in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer due to drug failure or failure of the right companion diagnostic?, (©2014 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: We investigated whether expression of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) was associated with survival and disease control in this secondary analysis of a phase II trial of cetuximab+chemoradiation for stage III non-small cell lung cancer., Methods: Patients received cetuximab weekly before and during radiation (63 Gy/35 fractions/7 weeks) with weekly carboplatin + paclitaxel. We analyzed EGFR expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in pretreatment biopsy specimens and compared findings with overall and progression-free survival (OS, PFS) and time to progression (TTP)., Results: Specimens for IHC and FISH were collected from 51 and 45 of 87 evaluable patients. Pretreatment characteristics did not differ for patients with (n = 51) or without (n= 36) EGFR IHC data, or with (n = 45) or without (n = 42) FISH data. However, patients without IHC data had worse OS (HR = 1.63, P = 0.05), worse PFS (HR = 1.88, P = 0.008), and worse TTP [HR = 1.99, P = 0.01] than those with IHC data. EGFR protein expression was not related to pretreatment characteristics or OS; FISH-positive disease was associated with better performance status but not with OS, PFS, or TTP., Conclusions: Surprisingly, outcomes differed not by EGFR expression but by the availability of samples for analysis, underscoring the importance of obtaining biopsy samples in such trials., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Cetuximab and bevacizumab have each been demonstrated to prolong survival when added to chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the potential benefit of combining cetuximab and bevacizumab together with a platinum-based doublet had not been explored. We designed this phase II trial to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of the combination of carboplatin, paclitaxel, cetuximab, and bevacizumab in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced, nonsquamous NSCLC., Methods: Patients received with up to six cycles of carboplatin (area under curve 6), paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)), cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) day 1 then 250 mg/m(2) weekly), and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) every 21 days. Patients with an objective response or stable disease received maintenance cetuximab (250 mg/m(2) weekly) and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 21 days) until disease progression. The primary endpoint was safety as defined by the frequency and severity of hemorrhagic toxicities. Secondary endpoints included response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and toxicity. Molecular biomarkers were assessed in an exploratory manner., Results: The primary endpoint of grade 4 or higher hemorrhage of 2% (95% confidence interval: 0%-7%) met prespecified criteria for safety. One hundred ten patients were enrolled. There were four treatment-related deaths including lung hemorrhage (2), infection (1), and unknown (1). Median progression-free survival was 7 months and median overall survival was 15 months. The response rate was 56% with an overall disease control rate of 77%., Conclusion: This regimen was safe, feasible, and effective as a frontline treatment of advanced NSCLC, providing the basis for the ongoing phase III trial S0819.

Objective: Histologic subtyping has been advocated to select chemotherapy for patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To determine whether histologic subtype was associated with efficacy for the commonly used antimicrotubule (AMT) agents, paclitaxel, docetaxel, and vinorelbine plus a platinum compound, we examined the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) lung cancer database., Methods: Data from 4 randomized trials (S9308, S9509, S9806, and S0003) administering an AMT agent plus platinum in patients receiving first-line treatment for advanced-stage NSCLC were analyzed. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) comparisons were performed using Cox proportional hazard regression, adjusting for sex. Median survival times were estimated by Kaplan-Meier., Results: Of 1146 patients included in this analysis, 640 had adenocarcinoma (56%), 220 had squamous cell carcinoma (19%), 121 had large cell carcinoma (11%), and 165 had NSCLC not otherwise specified (NOS) (14%). Median OS times by histologic subtypes were 8.5, 8.4, 8.2, and 9.6 months, respectively, and median PFS times were 4.2, 4.3, 4.3, and 4.6 months, respectively. No difference in OS or PFS was observed by histologic subtype and, specifically, between nonsquamous and squamous histologies., Conclusions: This pooled analysis from 4 SWOG trials using an AMT-platinum regimen did not show a difference in survival outcomes by histologic subtype. Because the majority of patients with advanced NSCLC continue to receive chemotherapy, defining molecular-based predictive markers of responsiveness is warranted., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The EGF receptor (EGFR)-directed monoclonal antibody cetuximab is the only targeted therapy approved for the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) but is only effective in a minority of patients. Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) has been implicated as a drug resistance mechanism in multiple cancers, and the EGFR and Hedgehog pathways (HhP) are relevant to this process, but the interplay between the two pathways has not been defined in HNSCC. Here, we show that HNSCC cells that were naturally sensitive to EGFR inhibition over time developed increased expression of the HhP transcription factor GLI1 as they became resistant after long-term EGFR inhibitor exposure. This robustly correlated with an increase in vimentin expression. Conversely, the HhP negatively regulated an EGFR-dependent, EMT-like state in HNSCC cells, and pharmacologic or genetic inhibition of HhP signaling pushed cells further into an EGFR-dependent phenotype, increasing expression of ZEB1 and VIM. In vivo treatment with cetuximab resulted in tumor shrinkage in four of six HNSCC patient-derived xenografts; however, they eventually regrew. Cetuximab in combination with the HhP inhibitor IPI-926 eliminated tumors in two cases and significantly delayed regrowth in the other two cases. Expression of EMT genes TWIST and ZEB2 was increased in sensitive xenografts, suggesting a possible resistant mesenchymal population. In summary, we report that EGFR-dependent HNSCC cells can undergo both EGFR-dependent and -independent EMT and HhP signaling is a regulator in both processes. Cetuximab plus IPI-926 forces tumor cells into an EGFR-dependent state, delaying or completely blocking tumor recurrence., (©2013 AACR.)

Background: The phase III EXTREME and CRYSTAL studies demonstrated that the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy significantly improved survival in the first-line treatment of recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) and KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), high EGFR expression was identified as a tumour biomarker that can predict survival benefit associated with the addition of cetuximab to first-line chemotherapy. We investigated whether tumour EGFR expression level was predictive of cetuximab benefit in EXTREME and CRYSTAL study patients., Methods: Prospectively collected tumour immunohistochemistry data were used to generate an EGFR immunohistochemistry score (scale 1-300) for patients in the EXTREME and CRYSTAL studies. For each study, the association between tumour immunohistochemistry score and cetuximab benefit was investigated. The EXTREME and CRYSTAL studies are registered with Clinical Trials.gov, numbers NCT00122460 and NCT00154102, respectively., Findings: Tumour EGFR immunohistochemistry data were available for 411 of 442 (93%) patients from the EXTREME study intention-to-treat (ITT) population and 664 of 666 (100%) patients from the ITT population of the CRYSTAL study with EGFR-expressing, KRAS wild-type disease. The distribution of immunohistochemistry scores was similar between the treatment arms of each study, but differed between studies. A clinically relevant benefit for progression-free and overall survival associated with the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy was seen across the full score range in EXTREME study patients. Similarly, CRYSTAL study patients derived a clinical benefit across the full score range, with no meaningful association between EGFR expression level and benefit., Interpretation: The addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy improved survival in the first-line treatment of recurrent/metastatic SCCHN and KRAS wild-type mCRC regardless of tumour EGFR expression level, indicating that in contrast to findings in NSCLC, EGFR expression level is not a clinically useful predictive biomarker in these settings., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pemetrexed-based chemotherapy represents the standard of care in first-line treatment of advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). However, there are no established predictors of clinical benefit. Pemetrexed inhibits multiple enzymes involved in pyrimidine and purine synthesis, but the main target is thymidylate synthase (TS). After cellular uptake pemetrexed is converted into more effective polyglutamated forms by folylpoly-γ-glutamate synthetase (FPGS). We hypothesized that FPGS and TS protein expressions are associated with clinical outcome after pemetrexed-based chemotherapy., Methods: Pretreatment tumor samples from 84 patients with histologically confirmed MPM, who received pemetrexed combined with platinum (79 of 84) or single-agent pemetrexed (5 of 84) as first-line treatment, were retrospectively analyzed. FPGS and TS protein expressions were semiquantitatively assessed by using the Hybrid (H)-scoring system (range, 0-300). H-scores were correlated with radiological response according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: Median H-score of the entire cohort was 230 for FPGS (range, 100-300), and 210 for TS (range, 100-300). High FPGS protein expression was significantly associated with longer PFS (pCOX = 0.0337), better objective tumor response (partial response versus stable disease + progressive disease; pKW = 0.003), and improved disease-control rate (partial response + stable disease versus progressive disease; pKW = 0.0208), but not with OS. In addition, high TS protein expression was associated with progressive disease under pemetrexed-based therapy (p = 0.0383), and shorter OS (pCOX = 0.0071), but no association with PFS was observed., Conclusion: FPGS and TS expressions were associated with clinical response and outcome to pemetrexed-based first-line chemotherapy in MPM. Prospective evaluation of FPGS and TS expressions and their prognostic/predictive power in MPM patients is warranted.

Background: Tubulin-binding agents (TBAs) are effective in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment. Both βIII- and βV-tubulins are expressed by cancer cells and may lead to resistance against TBAs., Methods: Pre-treatment samples from 65 locally advanced or oligometastatic NSCLC patients, who underwent uniform induction chemotherapy with paclitaxel and platinum followed by radiochemotherapy with vinorelbine and platinum were retrospectively analysed by immunohistochemistry. Protein expression of βIII- and βV-tubulin was morphometrically quantified., Results: Median pre-treatment H-score for βIII-tubulin was 110 (range: 0-290), and 160 for βV-tubulin (range: 0-290). Low βIII-tubulin expression was associated with improved overall survival (OS) (P=0.0127, hazard ratio (HR): 0.328). An association between high βV-tubulin expression and prolonged progression-free survival (PFS, median 19.2 vs 9.4 months in high vs low expressors; P=0.0315, HR: 1.899) was found. Further, high βV-tubulin expression was associated with objective response (median H-score 172.5 for CR+PR vs 120 for SD+PD patients, P=0.0104) or disease control following induction chemotherapy (170 for CR+PR+SD vs 100 for PD patients, P=0.0081), but not radiochemotherapy., Conclusion: Expression of βV-tubulin was associated with treatment response and PFS following paclitaxel-based chemotherapy of locally advanced and oligometastatic NSCLC patients. Prolonged OS was associated with low levels of βIII-tubulin. Prospective evaluation of βIII/βV-tubulin expression in NSCLC is warranted.

Purpose: Erlotinib prolongs survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report the results of a randomized, phase II study of erlotinib alone or intercalated with chemotherapy (CT + erlotinib) in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced NSCLC who were positive for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) protein expression and/or with high EGFR gene copy number., Patients and Methods: A total of 143 patients were randomly assigned to either erlotinib 150 mg daily orally until disease progression (PD) occurred or to chemotherapy with paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) and carboplatin dosed by creatinine clearance (AUC 6) IV on day 1 intercalated with erlotinib 150 mg orally on days 2 through 15 every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by erlotinib 150 mg orally until PD occurred (CT + erlotinib). The primary end point was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included response rate, PFS, and survival. EGFR, KRAS mutation, EGFR fluorescent in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry, and E-cadherin and vimentin protein levels were also assessed., Results: Six-month PFS rates were 26% and 31% for the two arms (CT + erlotinib and erlotinib alone, respectively). Both were less than the historical control of 45% (P = .001 and P = .011, respectively). Median PFS times were 4.57 and 2.69 months, respectively. Patients with tumors harboring EGFR activating mutations fared better on erlotinib alone (median PFS, 18.2 months v 4.9 months for CT + erlotinib)., Conclusion: The feasibility of a multicenter biomarker-driven study was demonstrated, but neither treatment arms exceeded historical controls. This study does not support combined chemotherapy and erlotinib in first-line treatment of EGFR-selected advanced NSCLC, and the patients with tumors harboring EGFR mutations had a better outcome on erlotinib alone.

Purpose: Randomized clinical trials failed to show a survival benefit for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors plus concurrent chemotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with preclinical data suggesting potential negative interactions. In contrast, pilot trials of the EGFR-targeted antibody, cetuximab, plus chemotherapy suggested enhanced antitumor activity. This randomized phase II trial was designed to select a cetuximab plus chemotherapy regimen for phase III evaluation., Patients and Methods: Treatment-naive patients with advanced-stage NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive paclitaxel (225 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (area under the curve, 6) every 3 weeks plus concurrent cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) loading dose followed by 250 mg/m(2) weekly) for four cycles followed by maintenance cetuximab or sequential paclitaxel-carboplatin for four cycles followed by cetuximab., Results: Of 242 patients enrolled, 224 were eligible and assessable for response (106 and 118 patients in the concurrent and sequential arms, respectively). With a median follow-up time of 32 months, the median overall survival was 10.9 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 13.0 months) for patients receiving concurrent therapy and 10.7 months (95% CI, 8.5 to 12.8 months) for patients receiving sequential therapy (P = .57); 1-year survival rates were 45% (95% CI, 36% to 54%) and 44% (95% CI, 35% to 53%), respectively. Response rates and progression-free survival times were similar in both arms, as was grade 3 rash, whereas sensory neuropathy was higher in the concurrent arm (15% v 5% in the sequential arm; P = .036)., Conclusion: Although both regimens met the efficacy criterion for continued evaluation, the concurrent regimen of paclitaxel/carboplatin plus cetuximab was chosen.

Purpose: TRIBUTE was a phase III trial evaluating the addition of erlotinib to carboplatin and paclitaxel as a first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer that did not meet its primary end point of improving overall survival. Here, we assess the value of using epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene copy number in tumor biopsy samples, as determined by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), as a predictor of treatment outcome., Methods: EGFR FISH analysis was done using LSI EGFR SpectrumOrange/CEP7 SpectrumGreen probe., Results: Of 275 samples, 245 (89.1%) were successfully analyzed by FISH. One hundred (40.8%) of patients were EGFR FISH(+). Median overall survival was not different between FISH(+) and FISH(-) patients in either the chemotherapy+erlotinib arm or the chemotherapy+placebo arm. In FISH(+) patients, median time to progression (TTP) was 6.3 months in the erlotinib arm versus 5.8 months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.99; P = 0.0430); in FISH(-) patients, median TTP was 4.6 months versus 6.0 months (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-2.14; P = 0.0895; treatment interaction test, P = 0.007). After 6 months of treatment, a notable separation of the TTP curves in favor of erlotinib emerged. Objective response rates were 11.6% versus 29.8% in FISH(+) patients (chemotherapy+erlotinib arm versus chemotherapy+placebo arm; P = 0.0495) and 21.8% versus 25.4%, respectively, for FISH(-) patients (P = 0.6954)., Conclusions: EGFR gene copy number by FISH did not predict survival benefit. However, among EGFR FISH(+) patients, TTP was longer in patients who received erlotinib and continued to receive it after completing first-line therapy.

Purpose: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene copy number detected by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) has proven to be useful for selection of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients for treatment with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Here, we evaluate EGFR FISH as a predictive marker in NSCLC patients receiving the EGFR monoclonal antibody inhibitor cetuximab plus chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: Two hundred twenty-nine chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced-stage NSCLC were enrolled onto a phase II selection trial evaluating sequential or concurrent chemotherapy (paclitaxel plus carboplatin) with cetuximab., Results: EGFR FISH was assessable in 76 patients with available tumor tissue and classified as positive (four or more gene copies per cell in >/= 40% of the cells or gene amplification) in 59.2%. Response (complete response/partial response) was numerically higher in FISH-positive (45%) versus FISH-negative (26%) patients (P = .14), whereas disease control rate (complete response/partial response plus stable disease) was statistically superior (81% v 55%, respectively; P = .02). Patients with FISH-positive tumors had a median progression-free survival time of 6 months compared with 3 months for FISH-negative patients (P = .0008). Median survival time was 15 months for the FISH-positive group compared with 7 months for patients who were FISH negative. (P = .04). Furthermore, survival favored FISH-positive patients receiving concurrent therapy., Conclusion: These results are the first to suggest that EGFR FISH is a predictive factor for selection of NSCLC patients for cetuximab plus chemotherapy. Prospective validation of these findings is warranted.

The promise of effective targeted therapy for lung cancer requires rigorous identification of potential targets combined with intensive discovery and development efforts aimed at developing effective "drugs" for these targets. We now recognize that getting the right drug to the right target in the right patient is more complicated than one could have imagined a decade ago. As knowledge of targets and development of agents have proliferated and advanced, so too have data demonstrating the biologic heterogeneity of tumors. The finding that lung cancers are genetically diverse and can exhibit several pathways of resistance in response to targeted agents makes the prospect for curative therapy more daunting. It is becoming increasingly clear that single-agent treatment will be the exception rather than the rule. This information raises important new questions about the development and assessment of novel agents in lung cancer treatment: (1) How do we identify the most important drug targets for tumor initiation and maintenance? (2) What is the best way to assess drug candidates that may only be relevant in a small fraction of patients? (3) What models do we use to predict clinical response and identify effective combinations? And (4) how do we bring combination regimens to the clinic, particularly when the agents are not yet approved individually and may be under development from different companies? The Fifth Cambridge Conference on Novel Agents in the Treatment of Lung Cancer was held in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on October 1-2, 2007, to discuss these questions by reviewing recent progress in the field and advancing recommendations for research and patient care. New information, conclusions, and recommendations considered significant for the field by the program faculty are summarized here and presented at greater length in the individual articles and accompanying discussions that comprise the full conference proceedings. A CME activity based on this summary is also available at www.informedicalcme.com/cme.

Background: A critical point in designing clinical trials comparing chemotherapy with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the expected benefit with standard chemotherapy in presence of biological features indicative of TKI sensitivity. The aim of this study was to assess whether EGFR and HER2 gene copy number and Akt activation are associated with response to first-line chemotherapy., Methods: Tumor samples from 190 patients with NSCLC were analyzed. EGFR and HER2 gene copy number were evaluated by fluorescence in situ hybridization in 185 and 184 cases, respectively. Akt activation was assessed by immunohistochemistry (n = 176). Additional biomarkers included EGFR DNA sequencing (n = 65), and EGFR immunohistochemistry (n = 185)., Results: Response rate was not associated with EGFR, HER2, and P-Akt status, irrespective of the method used for biomarker assessment. Among patients with EGFR gene mutations, response to chemotherapy was observed only in individuals with exon 19 deletion (response rate: 46.6% versus 0%, p = 0.02). Among the 190 patients analyzed, 123 received a treatment with a TKI as second- or third-line therapy. When assessed by fluorescence in situ hybridization or DNA sequencing, EGFR-positive patients seemed to be more sensitive to TKIs than to chemotherapy in terms of response rate and time to progression, whereas in EGFR-negative patients, response rate and time to progression favored chemotherapy., Conclusion: This study suggested that EGFR expression and gene copy number, HER2 gene copy number, and P-Akt expression are not associated with response to first-line chemotherapy in NSCLC. Prospective phase III trials should compare standard chemotherapy with a TKI in selected NSCLC.

Chemotherapy continues to play an essential role in the treatment of most stages of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In fact, within the past 5 years, this role has greatly expanded into adjuvant therapy for early-stage resected disease. Likewise, agents targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), particularly the tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefitinib and erlotinib, have proven to be clinically active in patients with advanced-stage NSCLC. Because of these findings, it is logical to expect that combinations of these 2 classes of antineoplastic agents would prove more efficacious than either one alone. Yet 4 large randomized phase III trials of chemotherapy with or without an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor in unselected patients with advanced-stage NSCLC, altogether totaling > 4000 patients, did not demonstrate improvement in clinical outcomes with the combination. Whether these negative results will be reproduced in ongoing combination studies of chemotherapy plus monoclonal antibodies directed against EGFR remain to be determined. Herein, we review recent preclinical and clinical data addressing this topic and explore the biologic rationale for developing new combination strategies based on patient selection by molecular and clinical factors, or by pharmacodynamic parameters.

Bronchioloalveolar cell carcinoma (BAC) has fascinated physicians with its unique epidemiology, pathology, clinical manifestations, and natural history when compared with other non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) subtypes. However, the relative rarity of pure BAC as defined by the WHO, and the inconsistent definitions used in various series, has limited systematic study of this entity. Retrospective and prospective studies suggest that patients with BAC treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy have a longer median survival than those with other subtypes of NSCLC. However, the widely accepted view that BAC is less chemosensitive than other NSCLCs is not clearly supported by the small body of available literature. Antitumor activity of cytotoxic agents and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors has been documented in phase II trials but no phase III trials have been conducted in this disease. The observation that profound responses to gefitinib and erlotinib often occurred in NSCLC patients with BAC, and that EGFR tyrosine kinase domain mutations were identified in large part by careful study of such patients, serves as a paradigm for translational research in this disease. The recognition that pure BAC and adenocarcinoma with BAC features behave similarly and as such represent a relatively common entity will facilitate accrual to BAC specific studies. Alternatively, stratification of these histologic subtypes in broader clinical trials in NSCLC is warranted. However, for either strategy to succeed in advancing our understanding of the molecular biology of BAC, it must be accompanied by central pathologic review with detailed classification of such, and of adequate tissue for measurement of known or putative targets of action of the agent under study.

Overexpression of the HER2/neu oncogene and receptor protein has been reported in 20%-30% of patients with breast cancer and is associated with a poor prognosis. HER2/neu expression in breast cancer patients assessed by fluorescence in situ hybridization or immunohistochemistry is a predictor for response to trastuzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against the HER2/neu cell-surface protein. Data regarding HER2/neu expression in lung cancer are more limited, and there is little information regarding HER2/neu expression and response to trastuzumab alone or in combination with chemotherapeutic agents. Gemcitabine is an active agent against non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and has demonstrated activity in breast cancer as well. In vitro modified tetrazolium salt growth assays were performed to determine whether the combination of trastuzumab/gemcitabine produced synergistic or additive effects on breast and lung cancer cell lines. The effects of trastuzumab alone, gemcitabine alone, and the trastuzumab/gemcitabine combination was evaluated on 4 NSCLC cell lines, 1 small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) cell line, and 2 breast cancer cell lines. HER2/neu surface protein expression was assessed by fluorescence flow cytometry and immunohistochemistry. Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis was used to study gene expression. Trastuzumab treatment alone resulted in growth inhibition in all cell lines expressing HER2/neu and the inhibitive effect correlated with the level of cell surface HER2/neu protein expression. Treatment with gemcitabine alone resulted in growth inhibition in both breast and NSCLC cell lines. A synergistic growth inhibition effect was seen with the trastuzumab/ gemcitabine combination as indicated by combination index values < 1. The degree of synergy observed did not directly correlate with the level of surface protein expression, as synergy was seen even in cancer cell lines expressing low levels of HER2/neu. No treatment effect was seen in the SCLC cell line, which did not express HER2/neu. These preclinical studies indicate a need to study the clinical synergistic effects of the gemcitabine/trastuzumab combination in breast cancer and NSCLC patients whose tumors overexpress HER2/ neu.

Purpose: A prospective randomized trial in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) was performed to determine if intensification of the platinum dose by giving cisplatin and carboplatin in combination to patients with SCLC yields higher response rates and survival, than carboplatin alone in a combination chemotherapy regimen., Patients and Methods: Between September 1992 and October 1997, 280 patients were included in a two armed prospective randomized trial, stratified by stage of disease, LDH and performance status. The treatment was in arm A: three courses induction chemotherapy with carboplatin (AUC = 4, day 1), cisplatin (35 mg/m2, days 2 and 3), teniposide (50 mg/m2, day 1-5), vincristine (1.3 mg/m2, day 1) every four weeks, followed by cyclophosphamide (3 g/m2, day 84), 4-epirubicin (4-epidoxorubicin) (150 mg/m2, day 112), and finally one course cisplatin, carboplatin, teniposide and vincristine, (days 140-144). Arm B also comprised a total of six courses, identical to those in arm A except for omission of cisplatin., Results: There were no significant differences in the overall treatment outcome for A vs. B, in terms of response rates (72% in both arms), complete response rates (40% and 34%, respectively), or median survival (314 days and 294 days, respectively). However, for patients with limited disease both the CR rate (54% vs. 37%, P < 0.05), overall survival (log-rank test, P < 0.05), and the two-year survival rate (11% vs. 6%, P < 0.05) were higher in the high-dose platinum arm compared to the carboplatin alone arm., Conclusions: The intensification of platinum dose (cisplatin plus carboplatin) in combination chemotherapy significantly increased the complete response rate, overall survival and number of two-year survivors among SCLC patients with limited disease compared to combination therapy with carboplatin alone, suggesting that a more aggressive treatment to this category of patients is worthwhile, while no difference in treatment outcome was observed for patients with extensive disease.

Purpose: To determine the side effects and feasibility of cisplatin and carboplatin each in combination with paclitaxel as front-line therapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly allocated to receive paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) intravenously as a 3-hour infusion followed by either cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) or carboplatin (area under the plasma concentration-time curve of 5), both on day 1. The schedule was repeated every 3 weeks for at least six cycles. Women allocated to paclitaxel-cisplatin were admitted to the hospital, whereas the carboplatin regimen was administered to outpatients., Results: A total of 208 eligible patients were randomized. Both regimens could be delivered in an optimal dose and without significant delay. Paclitaxel-carboplatin produced significantly less nausea and vomiting (P: <.01) and less peripheral neurotoxicity (P: =.04) but more granulocytopenia and thrombocytopenia (P: <.01). The overall response rate in 132 patients with measurable disease was 64% (84 of 132 patients), and in patients with elevated CA 125 levels at start, it was 74% (132 of 178 patients). With a median follow-up time of 37 months, the median progression-free survival time of all patients was 16 months and the median overall survival time was 31 months. The small number of patients entered onto the study caused wide confidence intervals (CIs) around the hazards ratio for progression-free survival of paclitaxel-carboplatin compared with paclitaxel-cisplatin (hazards ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.48) and did not allow conclusions about efficacy., Conclusion: Paclitaxel-carboplatin is a feasible regimen for outpatients with ovarian cancer and has a better toxicity profile than paclitaxel-cisplatin.

Background: The aim was to define the MTD of topotecan (TPT) given before cisplatin in patients with previously untreated SCLC., Patients and Methods: Alternating cycles A and B to a total of 6 cycles were given. Cycle A: TPT days 1-5 and cisplatin (50 mg/m2) day 5. Cycle B consisted of teniposide, carboplatin, vincristine, and cisplatin. TPT was escalated at doses 0.75, 1.0, 1.25, and 1.5 mg/m2. DLT was defined for the first cycle as grade 4 neutropenia with fever or when lasting > 7 days, or grade 4 thrombocytopenia., Results: Fifteen patients with limited disease and six patients with extensive disease were included. No episodes of DLT were recorded in the first cycles A and consequently 1.5 mg/m2 was defined as MTD. At 1.5 mg/m2 (11 patients, 30 cycles), four and three episodes of grade 4 thrombocytopenia and neutropenia lasting more than seven days occurred in subsequent cycles A. Thrombocytopenia and anaemia were cumulative as more cycles were administrated. Non-hematological toxicity was mild. The response rate was 86% (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 64%-97%) with 33% (95% CI: 15%-57%) achieving CR., Conclusions: 1.5 mg/m2 TPT can be delivered safely with 50 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 5 in patients with previously untreated SCLC.

Based on an increased frequency of early death (death within the first treatment cycle) in our two latest randomized trials of combination chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), we wanted to identify patients at risk of early non-toxic death (ENTD) and early toxic death (ETD). Data were stored in a database and logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictive factors for early death. During the first cycle, 118 out of 937 patients (12.6%) died. In 38 patients (4%), the cause of death was sepsis. Significant risk factors were age, performance status (PS), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and treatment with epipodophyllotoxins and platinum in the first cycle (EP). Risk factors for ENTD were age, PS and LDH. Extensive stage had a hazard ratio of 1.9 (P = 0.07). Risk factors for ETD were EP, PS and LDH, whereas age and stage were not. For EP, the hazard ratio was as high as 6.7 (P = 0.0001). We introduced a simple prognostic algorithm including performance status, LDH and age. Using a prognostic algorithm to exclude poor-risk patients from trials, we could minimize early death, improve long-term survival and increase the survival differences between different regimens. We suggest that other groups evaluate our algorithm and exclude poor prognosis patients from trials of dose intensification.

During the past two decades many different treatment regimens of combination chemotherapy have been applied in extensive stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). This study was carried out to identify whether these modifications have resulted in an improved overall survival for extensive stage during the past two decades. In total, 1111 patients with extensive stage SCLC were included in six consecutive randomised trials in our setting from 1973 until 1992. Of these, 526 patients treated in the early period (1973-1981) were compared with 585 patients treated in the late period (1981-1992) with respect to pretreatment prognostic factors, staging, treatment and outcome. No change in the distribution of prognostic factors was detected and the frequency of patients with extensive stage was equal in the two periods, and no difference in overall response rates and survival was observed (P = 0.49). Median survival in the two periods was 208 days and 215 days, respectively. No stage migration or treatment-related improved outcome was observed in extensive disease. We suggest restricting aggressive treatment to patients with favorable prognosis and long-term survival as a realistic aim.

Purpose: The introduction of platinum compounds and epipodophyllotoxins in combination with vincristine as induction chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) was investigated in order to: (1) compare the efficacy of cisplatin with that of carboplatin in combination with teniposide and vincristine as inducers of remission over three cycles; (2) compare the toxicity pattern of carboplatin and of cisplatin when given in combination regimens; and (3) compare a chemotherapeutic regimen consisting of three alternating combinations with that of regimens consisting of four alternating combinations., Patients and Methods: From November 1985 to September 1991, 484 consecutive, previously untreated patients with SCLC, performance status 0-4, entered a three armed randomized trial with three cycles of cisplatin (arm I) or carboplatin (arm II) in combination with teniposide and vincristine alternating with three treatment blocks of cyclophosphamide, etoposide, lomustine and vincristine (block A), doxorubicin and vincristine (block B) and cisplatin, hexamethylmelamine and vindesine (block C) versus alternating treatment with block A, B and C (arm III)., Results: No difference in efficacy or toxicity was found between cisplatin and carboplatin at the present dosages. Induction chemotherapy with teniposide plus cisplatin or carboplatin did not result in higher complete response rates (objective response rates 63%, 72% and 65%, respectively) or in significantly greater toxicity, but overall survival was superior compared with the arm III (log-rank test, P = 0.02). The median survival difference was 7 weeks, and two year survival 15% versus 9%. The Cox regression analysis identified the arm III, poor performance status and elevated LDH as factors with statistically significant negative impact on survival., Conclusion: Cisplatin and carboplatin produced similar response and survival rates and similar toxicity. Induction with platinum and epipodophyllotoxins did not improve objective response rates, but significantly improved survival without increasing the toxicity.

Background: The development of therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (t-AML) with balanced translocations to chromosome bands 11q23 and 21q22 has recently been significantly related to previous treatment with several cytostatic drugs poisoning DNA topoisomerase II. A similar association was suspected for other balanced chromosomal aberrations such as the t(15;17) characteristic of acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL)., Patients and Methods: Two cases of acute promyelocytic leukemia were observed following treatment for seminoma with etoposide, cisplatin, and bleomycin and treatment for breast cancer with 4-epi-doxorubicin and subsequent cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil followed by radiotherapy. Both cases presented a t(15;17) (q22;q12) and were examined for the characteristic chimeric rearrangement of the RAR alpha and PML genes observed in acute promyelocytic leukemia de-novo., Results: In both cases the characteristic chimeric rearrangement was demonstrated. Case no. 2 in addition to the t(15;17) showed an inversion of the long arm of a chromosome no. 5 and a del(7)(q22) in all abnormal mitoses studied. Despite these findings the patient obtained a complete morphological and cytogenetic remission of the leukemia following treatment with all-trans-retinoic acid., Conclusions: Based on these two cases and a review of the literature it is concluded that the development of t-APL with the balanced translocation t(15;17) is related to previous treatment with cytostatic drugs targeting DNA topoisomerase II and that additional abnormalities of the long arms of chromosomes no. 5 and no. 7 do not interfere with the induction of remission with all-trans-retinoic acid.

The present article is a review of recent treatment protocols for patients with small cell lung cancer (SCCL) treated in Copenhagen from 1985 to 1990. Furthermore, preliminary data on long-term survivors (> 5 years) from 9 treatment protocols since 1973 are reviewed. For 484 patients < or = 70 years old, no survival difference was observed between 2 platinum (cis-platinum or carboplatin) containing regimens, while the survival was better in these two induction regimens compared to an alternating control arm. For patients > 70 years old, Etoposide (VP-16) and Teniposide (VM-26) were compared in a randomized fashion. Both drugs were highly active, and no significant difference in activity was observed. All together 1527 patients have been included in clinical trials in the Copenhagen Lung Cancer Study Group since 1973. The rates of 5- and 10-years survivors were 3.5% and 1.8% respectively. Long-term survival can be achieved in all stages of SCCL.

The outcome of two different alternating regimens of chemotherapy was investigated in a prospective controlled trial in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Both regimens comprised cyclophosphamide, lomustine, vincristine, methotrexate, doxorubicin and etoposide administered in different schedules. The investigative regimen (B) included simultaneous administration of cyclophosphamide + lomustine alternating with cyclophosphamide + doxorubicin, and with doxorubicin + lomustine. The hypothetical superiority of this regimen was based on data from experimental animal tumors suggesting potentiated efficacy of the three specific combinations. A total of 234 patients were included, and 113 vs 108 patients were eligible. Median survival in both groups was 48 weeks (p = 0.89). Complete remissions were observed in 36/101 and in 42/99 patients evaluable for response. There was no significant difference in response duration. At restaging after 18 months of chemotherapy 27 patients (16%) and 22 patients (16%), respectively, were free of disease. Six patients, three in each arm, are still alive, 8+ to 10.5+ years after diagnosis. Scheduled doses of the six agents were the same in the two regimens except for a 30% reduction of every second dose of cyclophosphamide in regimen B. Nevertheless, regimen B resulted in significantly more leukopenic patients, septicemic episodes, and blood transfusions, and the dosage of etoposide was more often reduced in arm B than in arm A. The increased toxicity was not associated with improved treatment results.

In a 2-year period, 146 patients with small cell carcinoma of the lung, staged as having extensive disease, were randomized to receive either continuous chemotherapy consisting of (a) 1-(2-chloroethyl-3-cyclohexyl-1-nitrosourea, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and vincristine followed by (b) 4'-demethylepipodophyllotoxin 9-[4,6-O-(R) ethylidene-beta-D-glucopyranoside] and doxorubicin at progression of disease or a regimen of (a) alternating with (b). Seventy-six patients received the continuous regimen; 70 patients received alternating treatment. Response rates were 68 and 72%, respectively. The median duration of response was 16 weeks in patients receiving continuous treatment compared to 28 weeks in patients receiving alternating treatment (p less than 0.05). No survival time difference was observed between the groups, median survival being 36 and 38 weeks, respectively. Four patients became long-term survivors (5.6 +, 5.5 +, 5.1, and 4.7 + years). All received alternating therapy. Six toxic deaths were observed among patients receiving continuous therapy compared to only one death among those in the alternating regimen. In conclusion, alternating combination chemotherapy leads to prolonged duration of remission. Duration of survival is not prolonged in uncured patients, but an increased possibility of long-term disease-free survival cannot be precluded.

Two hundred and eighty-eight patients with extensive small-cell carcinoma of the lung (SCCL) were entered into a three-arm prospective randomized trial. The purpose was both to compare etoposide with methotrexate (MTX) in a combination chemotherapy regimen otherwise consisting of vincristine (VCR), lomustine (CCNU), and cyclophosphamide (CTX) and to evaluate a treatment design based on cell kinetic observations suggesting enhanced sensitivity to etoposide three to six days after administration of VCR, CCNU, and CTX. In all three treatment arms, VCR, CCNU, and CTX were administered on day 1 of a 28-day cycle. In arm A, MTX was administered on days 14 and 17, while in arm B, MTX was replaced by etoposide administered on days 14 through 17. In arm C, MTX was also replaced by etoposide, but administered on days 3 through 6. Overall survival was significantly longer for patients treated with "early" etoposide (arm C; median, 33 weeks) as compared with arm A (MTX; median, 23 weeks) (P less than .05), but not statistically different from "late" etoposide administration (arm B; median, 27 weeks). However, for patients with initial favorable performance status (0 + 1), a significantly longer survival was obtained for those treated with early etoposide (arm C. median, 51 weeks) as compared with patients in arm A (median, 32 weeks) and arm B (median, 36 weeks) (P less than .05). Two-year survival was obtained in six patients (7%) in arm C compared with three patients (3%) in arm B and none in arm A. The study confirmed that etoposide is an active drug in the treatment of SCCL and when combined with CTX, CCNU, and VCR, the cell kinetic approach of an early administration yields the best results.