Search

Background: Pembrolizumab monotherapy is an established front-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS)≥50%. However, real-world data on its long-term efficacy remains sparse., Methods: This study assessed 5-year outcomes of first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy in a large, multicenter, real-world cohort of patients with advanced NSCLC and PD-L1 TPS≥50%, referred to as Pembro-real 5Y. Individual patient-level data (IPD) from the experimental arm of the KEYNOTE-024 trial were extracted (KN024 IPD cohort) to compare the long-term outcomes between the two cohorts. To further assess the reproducibility of clinical trial results, we reconstructed the "KN024 look-alike" cohort by excluding patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-performance status (ECOG-PS)≥2, those requiring corticosteroids with doses ≥10 mg of prednisolone/equivalent, patients with positive/unknown epidermal growth factor receptor/anaplastic lymphoma kinase genotype, and those with pre-existing autoimmune disease. We additionally provided a hierarchical organization of determinants of long-term benefit through a conditional inference tree analysis., Results: The study included 1050 patients from 61 institutions across 14 countries, with a median follow-up of 70.3 months. The 5-year survival rate was 26.9% (95% CI: 23.8% to 30.2%), and median OS was 21.8 months (95% CI: 19.1 to 25.7), while 32 (3.0%) patients who achieved a complete response remained progression-free at the data cut-off. The KN024 look-alike cohort had a 5-year survival rate of 29.3% (95% CI: 25.5% to 33.6%) and a median OS of 27.5 months (95% CI: 22.8 to 31.3). Neither the overall study population nor the KN024 look-alike cohort exhibited significantly different OS compared with the KN024 IPD cohort. By the data cut-off, 1015 patients (96.7%) had permanently discontinued treatment: 659 (64.9%) due to progressive disease, 156 (15.4%) due to toxicity, 77 (7.6%) due to treatment completion, and 106 (10.4%) due to other reasons. Overall, 222 participants (21.1%) were treated for a minimum period of 24 months, among them the 5-year survival rates were: 31.7%, 72.7%, 78.6%, 84.2% for patients who discontinued treatment due to progressive disease, toxicity, treatment completion, and other reasons, respectively., Conclusion: This study provides valuable real-world evidence that confirms the long-term efficacy of pembrolizumab outside of clinical trials. Hierarchical organization indicates ECOG-PS, age and PD-L1-TPS as the most important predictors of 5-year survival, potentially informing clinical practice., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AC received grants for consultancies/advisory boards from MSD, BMS, OncoC4, IQVIA, AstraZeneca, REGENERON, Access Infinity, Ardelis Health, Alpha Sight, Guidepoint, Roche; speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, MSD, Sanofi/REGENERON; payment for writing/editorial activity from BMS, MSD; travel support from Sanofi/REGENERON, MSD. JB declares honoraria/consulting or advisory role from AstraZeneca, BMS, Roche, Access Oncology, travel support from MSD, Roche, Janssen Oncology. GPS has received payment or honoraria for advisory boards from Novartis, Roche, Bayer, unrelated to this project. DO’R has received conference attendance support from Takeda, Janssen, Servier, MSD. EB has received grants or contracts from AstraZeneca, Roche and honoraria for lectures from Merck-Sharp & Dome, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Eli-Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Takeda and Roche; EB has been member of Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of Merck-Sharp & Dome, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Celltrion and Roche. AA declares consulting or advisory role for Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Astellas, Takeda, and Amgen; speaker’s bureau for Eli Lilly, and AstraZeneca. AR has received advisory board or speaker bureau honoraria from AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, BMS, Takeda, and Amgen; compensated activity for editorial projects from AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, Roche, and Regeneron. AL has received speakers’ fee for AstraZeneca, MSD, Sanofi and Takeda; he also received travel support from MSD and Novartis, has been on advisory board for AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Novartis and Sanofi, and has attended editorial activities sponsored by Eli Lilly and Roche. FM received honorary for advisory board roles with MDS, BMS, Takeda, Roche, AstraZeneca, Novartis. Paolo Bironzo served as consultant/advisory board for Regeneron, Pierre-Fabre, Janssen, Seagen. DO declares research funding/grants (to institution) from BMS, Merck, Palobiofarma, Pfizer, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Nuvalent, AbbVie, Onc.AI. TN-D received support to attend educational conferences from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, MSD, Otsuka, Roche, Takeda; advisory roles for AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli-Lilly, EQRx, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Novocure, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda; speaker bureau from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Chugai, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Medscape, Guardant, Merck, MSD, Roche, Takeda; trial steering committees’ member for AstraZeneca, Roche. BT received lecture fees from Pfizer. LC is an employee of Fortrea. BT declares honoraria from Roche. IM declares travel support from Takada, MSD, Pfizer, Oxyvie and speaker fees from Regeneron. A-MD declares research grants from Amgen, the Dutch Cancer Society and HANART, consulting fees from Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Inglheim, Sanofy, Roche, Janssen and AstraZeneca, speaker fees from Janssen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Lilly and Takeda, advisory board role for Takeda and Roche. GLR declares fees for advisory boards, travel support, consultancies from MSD, BMS, Roche, Sanofi, Regeneron, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Pfizer, Novartis, Bayer, Takeda, Amgen, GSK, Daichii. TAH declares stock interests for GlaxoSmithKline and honoraria from Novartis. BR served as consultant/advisory board for AMGEN, Regeneron, AstraZeneca, Capvision. Speaker fee: AstraZeneca. Received honoraria from Targeted Oncology, SITC. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest associated with the present study., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2025. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ Group.)

Aim: MET exon 14 (MET ex14) skipping occurs in 3-4% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases. Low frequency of this alteration necessitated open-label, single-arm trials to investigate MET inhibitors. Since broad MET biomarker testing was only recently introduced in many countries, there is a lack of historical real-world data from patients with MET ex14 skipping NSCLC receiving conventional therapies. Given the rarity of this population and limitations of existing real-world data sources, the MOMENT registry aims to prospectively collect uniform, comprehensive, high-quality data from patients with MET ex14 skipping advanced NSCLC treated in routine clinical practice, which can support clinical and regulatory decision making. Patients & methods: MOMENT is a multinational, non-interventional disease registry collecting data on patients with MET ex14 skipping advanced NSCLC receiving any systemic anticancer therapy. Newly diagnosed patients and those already receiving treatment are eligible. Patients with previous participation in a clinical trial can be included if they receive at least one subsequent therapy line in a routine clinical setting. Eligible systemic treatment includes all available anticancer therapies (approved, conditionally approved or provided through Early Access). Data collection includes biomarker testing results, demographics, baseline clinical characteristics, treatment details and effectiveness, safety information and imaging. Registry site inclusion is dependent on confirmation that local MET ex14 skipping detection methods are sufficient to confirm MET ex14 skipping status. MOMENT is currently active at more than 60 sites across Europe and North America and approximately 700 patients are expected to be enrolled within the next 4 years. The first patient was enrolled on 4 October 2022. After completion of data collection, MOMENT data can be shared with external parties to conduct non-interventional studies. Discussion/conclusion: The MOMENT registry collects comprehensive, high-quality real-world data from patients with MET ex14 skipping advanced NSCLC receiving systemic anticancer treatment in a routine clinical setting, to enable future studies informing regulatory decisions and optimal care for this rare population. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05376891 (ClinicalTrials.gov); EUPAS47602 (EU PAS register no.).

About one third of patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) presents at diagnosis with localized or locally advanced disease amenable to curative surgical resection. Surgical operability refers to stage I to IIIA and selected stage IIIB NSCLC. One of the main challenges in the management of early-stage resectable NSCLC is the optimization of available therapeutic strategies to prevent local and distant disease relapse, thus improving survival outcomes. There is evidence supporting the clinical use of both adjuvant and neoadjuvant immunotherapy-based strategies for resected/resectable, stage IB-IIIA NSCLC. Available data from randomized phase III trials have led to the incorporation of several immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) into the international guidelines for early-stage NSCLC. Preclinical rationale of targeting specific subsets of T-cells by acting early on immune checkpoint receptors (e.g., PD-(L)1 and CTLA-4) is strong. Recent evidence is in favor of the neoadjuvant approach alone or as a part of perioperative strategy, demonstrating survival benefit. Combining neoadjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy before surgery results in both pathologic complete response (pCR) and major pathologic response (MPR) improvement, and survival outcomes, with no major safety issues. In this review, we summarize the rationale behind neoadjuvant/perioperative immunotherapy strategies and, due to the clinical relevance of immunotherapy in resectable NSCLC, we provide current evidence of this cutting-edge approach among special populations including older adults, women, and oncogene addicted NSCLC. To conclude, we present future perspectives in the use of immunotherapy for operable NSCLC with a special focus on novel investigational combinations underway., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) exon 14 (METex14) skipping mutation is a rare alteration in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), occurring in about 3%-4% of cases. Here we report disease and patient characteristics, and efficacy and tolerability of MET inhibitors among advanced METex14 NSCLC patients from the Italian real-world registry ATLAS., Materials and Methods: Clinical-pathological and molecular data, and treatment efficacy/tolerability outcomes were retrospectively collected from the ATLAS registry., Results: From July 2020 to July 2023 a total of 146 METex14 advanced NSCLC patients were included across 27 Italian centers. Median age was 74 years, and most patients were male (52%), with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status < 2 (72%) and adenocarcinoma subtype (83%). One hundred and twenty-five out of 146 (86%) patients received at least one line of systemic anticancer therapy. Fifty-six (38%) were treated with capmatinib and 34 (23%) with tepotinib. 29% and 52% of them received targeted treatment in the first and second line, respectively. In the cohort of patients treated with MET inhibitors, the response rate (RR) was 37% (33% in previously treated patients and 46% in treatment-naïve) with a disease control rate of 62%. With a median follow-up of 10.8 months, progression-free survival was 6.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.3-8.3 months] and overall survival was 10.7 months (95% CI 7.2-19.3 months). In patients with measurable brain metastases (17 cases), the intracranial RR was 41%. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 12% of patients with grade 3 peripheral edema in 7% of cases. A fatal adverse reaction occurred in one patient due to pneumonitis. TRAEs-related dose reduction and discontinuation were reported in 6% and 8% of cases, respectively., Conclusion: Capmatinib and tepotinib represent an effective treatment option in NSCLC patients with METex14. Real-world efficacy outcomes are worse than those reported in prospective clinical trials. Their activity is more pronounced in the treatment-naïve population, suggesting that this is the right setting in the management of patients with METex14., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sotorasib showed a significant improvement of progression free survival (PFS), safety and quality of life over docetaxel in patients with KRASp.G12C-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) within the CodeBreak-200 study. Here we report real-world efficacy and tolerability data from NSCLC patients who received sotorasib within the Italian expanded access program (EAP)., Methods: Sotorasib (960 mg, orally, once daily) was available on physician request for KRASp.G12C mutant advanced NSCLC patients. Clinical-pathological and molecular data were collected from the Italian ATLAS real-world registry. Patients underwent CT-scan and responses were evaluated by RECIST criteria. Efficacy and tolerability outcomes have been assessed., Results: A total of 196 advanced NSCLC patients were treated across 30 Italian centers. Median age was 69 years old (range 33-86). Most patients were male (61 %), former (49 %) or current smokers (43 %), with ECOG-PS 0/1 (84 %) and adenocarcinoma subtype (90 %). 45 % and 32 % of patients received sotorasib in 2nd and 3rd line, respectively. Overall, response rate was 26 % and the median duration of response was 5.7 months (95 % CI: 4.4-7.0). Median PFS and OS were 5.8 months (95 % CI: 5 - 6.5) and 8.2 months (95 % CI: 6.3 - 9.9). Grade 3-4 TRAEs occurred in 16.5 % of patients, with Grade ≥ 3 liver enzyme increase and TRAEs-related discontinuation reported in 12 % and 4.6 % of cases., Conclusion: Real-world data from the Italian EAP confirm the tolerability and effectiveness of sotorasib in patients with KRASp.G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC and highlight the value of the national ATLAS network as source of real-world evidence driving the clinical management of NSCLC patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Molecular modifiers of KRASG12C inhibitor (KRASG12Ci) efficacy in advanced KRASG12C-mutant NSCLC are poorly defined. In a large unbiased clinicogenomic analysis of 424 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we identified and validated coalterations in KEAP1, SMARCA4, and CDKN2A as major independent determinants of inferior clinical outcomes with KRASG12Ci monotherapy. Collectively, comutations in these three tumor suppressor genes segregated patients into distinct prognostic subgroups and captured ∼50% of those with early disease progression (progression-free survival ≤3 months) with KRASG12Ci. Pathway-level integration of less prevalent coalterations in functionally related genes nominated PI3K/AKT/MTOR pathway and additional baseline RAS gene alterations, including amplifications, as candidate drivers of inferior outcomes with KRASG12Ci, and revealed a possible association between defective DNA damage response/repair and improved KRASG12Ci efficacy. Our findings propose a framework for patient stratification and clinical outcome prediction in KRASG12C-mutant NSCLC that can inform rational selection and appropriate tailoring of emerging combination therapies., Significance: In this work, we identify co-occurring genomic alterations in KEAP1, SMARCA4, and CDKN2A as independent determinants of poor clinical outcomes with KRASG12Ci monotherapy in advanced NSCLC, and we propose a framework for patient stratification and treatment personalization based on the comutational status of individual tumors. See related commentary by Heng et al., p. 1513. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1501., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Despite the positive results obtained by first-line chemoimmunotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), only a few second-line options are available after disease progression. Combi-TED is a phase II international study that will assess the efficacy of Tedopi ® , a cancer vaccine, combined with either docetaxel or nivolumab and compared with docetaxel monotherapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC after chemoimmunotherapy. The study, currently in the recruitment phase, will assess 1-year overall survival (primary end point), patient's progression-free survival and overall response rate, as well as the correlation of efficacy with several tumor or blood biomarkers. The results will hopefully provide more information on Tedopi combinational treatment compared with current standard of care in NSCLC patients who fail first-line chemoimmunotherapy. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04884282 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Background: We previously demonstrated the cumulative poor prognostic role of concomitant medications on the clinical outcome of patients with advanced cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors, creating and validating a drug-based prognostic score to be calculated before immunotherapy initiation in patients with advanced solid tumours. This 'drug score' was calculated assigning score 1 for each between proton-pump inhibitor and antibiotic administration until a month before cancer therapy initiation and score 2 in case of corticosteroid intake. The good risk group included patients with score 0, intermediate risk with score 1-2 and poor risk with score 3-4., Methods: Aiming at validating the prognostic and putative predictive ability depending on the anticancer therapy, we performed the present comparative analysis in two cohorts of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), respectively, receiving first-line pembrolizumab or chemotherapy through a random case-control matching and through a pooled multivariable analysis including the interaction between the computed score and the therapeutic modality (pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy)., Results: Nine hundred fifty and 595 patients were included in the pembrolizumab and chemotherapy cohorts, respectively. After the case-control random matching, 589 patients from the pembrolizumab cohort and 589 from the chemotherapy cohort were paired, with no statistically significant differences between the characteristics of the matched subjects. Among the pembrolizumab-treated group, good, intermediate and poor risk evaluable patients achieved an objective response rate (ORR) of 50.0%, 37.7% and 23.4%, respectively, (p < 0.0001), whereas among the chemotherapy-treated group, patients achieved an ORR of 37.0%, 40.0% and 32.4%, respectively (p = 0.4346). The median progression-free survival (PFS) of good, intermediate and poor risk groups was 13.9 months, 6.3 months and 2.8 months, respectively, within the pembrolizumab cohort (p < 0.0001), and 6.2 months, 6.2 months and 4.3 months, respectively, within the chemotherapy cohort (p = 0.0280). Among the pembrolizumab-treated patients, the median overall survival (OS) for good, intermediate and poor risk patients was 31.4 months, 14.5 months and 5.8 months, respectively, (p < 0.0001), whereas among the chemotherapy-treated patients, it was 18.3 months, 16.8 months and 10.6 months, respectively (p = 0.0003). A similar trend was reported considering the two entire populations. At the pooled analysis, the interaction term between the score and the therapeutic modality was statistically significant with respect to ORR (p = 0.0052), PFS (p = 0.0003) and OS (p < 0.0001), confirming the significantly different effect of the score within the two cohorts., Conclusion: Our 'drug score' showed a predictive ability with respect to ORR in the immunotherapy cohort only, suggesting it might be a useful tool for identifying patients unlikely to benefit from first-line single-agent pembrolizumab. In addition, the prognostic stratification in terms of PFS and OS was significantly more pronounced among the pembrolizumab-treated patients., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement S.B. received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and for the advisory role from Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Pfizer, MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca and Novartis. M.B. received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events from Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Novartis, AstraZeneca and Pfizer and as a consultant for the advisory role from Novartis, BMS and Pfizer; she also received fees for copyright transfer from Sciclone Pharmaceuticals and research funding from Seqirus UK, Pfizer, Novartis, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche S.p.A. and Sanofi Genzyme. R.G. received speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and Roche. J.G.J.V.A. reports receiving commercial research grants from Amphera and Roche, holds ownership interest (including patents) in Amphera BV and is a consultant/advisory board member for Amphera, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD and Roche. A.F. received grant consultancies from Roche, Pfizer, Astellas and BMS. F.M. received grant consultancies from MSD and Takeda. R.C. received speaker fees from BMS, MSD, Takeda, Pfizer, Roche and AstraZeneca. C.G. received speaker fees/grant consultancies from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche and MSD. M.R. received honoraria for scientific events from Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD and Boehringer Ingelheim. E.B. received speaker and travel fees from MSD, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Helsinn, Eli Lilly, BMS, Novartis and Roche and grant consultancies from Roche and Pfizer. M.C.G. received grants from MSD, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Celgene, Tiziana Sciences, Clovis, Merck, Bayer, GSK, Spectrum and Blueprint; personal fees from Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Otsuka Pharma, AstraZeneca, Novartis, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Celgene, Incyte, Inivata, Takeda, Bayer, MSD, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics and Daiichi Sankyo and other financial supports from Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Novartis, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Celgene, Tiziana Sciences, Clovis, Merck Serono, MSD, GSK, Spectrum and Blueprint. A.A. received grant consultancies from Takeda, MSD, BMJ, AstraZeneca, Roche and Pfizer. M.D.M. received research funding from Tesaro-GlaxoSmithKline and acted in a consulting/advisory role for Novartis, Pfizer, Eisai, Takeda, Janssen, Astellas, Roche and AstraZeneca. D.J.P. received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare and Bayer Healthcare; travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche and AstraZeneca and research funding (to the institution) from MSD and BMS. M.T. received honoraria from MSD, BMS, Boehringer (BI), Takeda and AstraZeneca and research funding from AstraZeneca. A.C. received speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca, MSD, BMS, Roche, Novartis, Istituto Gentili and Astellas. All the other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Treatment sequencing with first-line immunotherapy, followed by second-line chemotherapy, is still a viable option for NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%., Methods: We evaluated post-progression treatment pathways in a large real-world cohort of metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50% treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy., Results: Overall, 974 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 22.7 months (95%CI: 21.6-38.2), the median overall survival (OS) of the entire population was 15.8 months (95%CI: 13.5-17.5; 548 events). At the data cutoff, among the 678 patients who experienced disease progression, 379 (55.9%) had not received any further treatment, and 359 patients (52.9%) had died. Patients who did not receive post-progression therapies were older (p = 0.0011), with a worse ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and were on corticosteroids prior to pembrolizumab (p = 0.0024). At disease progression, 198 patients (29.2%) received a switched approach and 101 (14.9%) received pembrolizumab ByPD either alone (64 [9.4%]) or in combination with local ablative treatments (37 [5.5%]) (LATs). After a random-case control matching according to ECOG-PS, CNS metastases, bone metastases, and (previous) best response to pembrolizumab, patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD plus LATs were confirmed to have a significantly longer post-progression OS compared to patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD alone 13.9 months versus 7.8 months (p = 0.0179) 241 patients (35.5%) among the 678 who had experienced PD, received a second-line systemic treatment (regardless of previous treatment beyond PD). As compared to first-line treatment commencement, patients' features at the moment of second-line initiation showed a significantly higher proportion of patients aged under 70 years (p = 0.0244), with a poorer ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and having CNS (p = 0.0001), bone (p = 0.0266) and liver metastases (p = 0.0148)., Conclusions: In the real-world scenario NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% treated with first-line single-agent pembrolizumab achieve worse outcomes as compared to the Keynote-024 trial. Poor post-progression outcomes are major determinants of the global results that should be considered when counselling patients for first-line treatment choices., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement Dr Alessio Cortellini received speaker fees and grant consultancies by Astrazeneca, MSD, BMS, Roche, Novartis, Istituto Gentili and Astellas. Dr Raffaele Giusti received speaker fees and grant consultancies by Astrazeneca and Roche. Dr Joachim GJV Aerts reports receiving commercial research grants from Amphera and Roche, holds ownership interest (including patents) in Amphera BV, and is a consultant/advisory board member for Amphera, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli-Lilly, MSD and Roche. Dr Alex Friedlaender received grant consultancies by Roche, Pfizer, Astellas and BMS. Dr Alessandro Morabito received speaker fees by Astra, Roche, BMS, MSD, Boehringer, Pfizer, Takeda. Dr Francesca Mazzoni received grant consultancies by MSD and Takeda. Dr Rita Chiari received speaker fees by BMS, MSD, Takeda, Pfizer, Roche and Astrazeneca. Dr Carlo Genova received speaker fees/grant consultancies by Astrazeneca, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Roche and MSD. Dr Marco Russano received honoraria for scientific events by Roche, Astrazeneca, BMS, MSD and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Marcello Tiseo received speakers’ and consultants’ fee from Astra-Zeneca, Pfizer, Eli-Lilly, BMS, Novartis, Roche, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Otsuka, Takeda, Pierre Fabre. Dr Alfredo Addeo received grant consultancies by Takeda, MSD, BMJ, Astrazeneca, Roche and Pfizer. Dr Rita Chiari received speaker fees by BMS, MSD, Takeda, Pfizer, Roche and Astrazeneca. Dr Carlo Genova received speaker fees/grant consultancies by Astrazeneca, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Roche and MSD. Dr David J Pinato received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare and travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche, Astra Zeneca; received research funding (to institution) from MSD, BMS. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: To stratify the prognosis of patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥ 50% advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) treated with first-line immunotherapy., Methods: Baseline clinical prognostic factors, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), PD-L1 tumour cell expression level, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and their combination were investigated by a retrospective analysis of 784 patients divided between statistically powered training (n = 201) and validation (n = 583) cohorts. Cut-offs were explored by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and a risk model built with validated independent factors by multivariate analysis., Results: NLR < 4 was a significant prognostic factor in both cohorts (P < 0.001). It represented 53% of patients in the validation cohort, with 1-year overall survival (OS) of 76.6% versus 44.8% with NLR > 4, in the validation series. The addition of PD-L1 ≥ 80% (21% of patients) or LDH < 252 U/l (25%) to NLR < 4 did not result in better 1-year OS (of 72.6% and 74.1%, respectively, in the validation cohort). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 2 [P < 0.001, hazard ratio (HR) 2.04], pretreatment steroids (P < 0.001, HR 1.67) and NLR < 4 (P < 0.001, HR 2.29) resulted in independent prognostic factors. A risk model with these three factors, namely, the lung immuno-oncology prognostic score (LIPS)-3, accurately stratified three OS risk-validated categories of patients: favourable (0 risk factors, 40%, 1-year OS of 78.2% in the whole series), intermediate (1 or 2 risk factors, 54%, 1-year OS 53.8%) and poor (>2 risk factors, 5%, 1-year OS 10.7%) prognosis., Conclusions: We advocate the use of LIPS-3 as an easy-to-assess and inexpensive adjuvant prognostic tool for patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% aNSCLC., Competing Interests: Disclosure AC received speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca, MSD, BMS, Roche, Novartis and Astellas. EB received speaker and travel fees from MSD, Astra-Zeneca, Pfizer, Helsinn, Eli-Lilly, BMS, Novartis and Roche; received grant consultancies from Roche and Pfizer. MT received speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Eli-Lilly, BMS, Novartis, Roche, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Otsuka, Takeda and Pierre Fabre. AM received speaker fees from Astra, Roche, BMS, MSD, Boehringer, Pfizer and Takeda. FM received grant consultancies from MSD and Takeda. RG received speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and Roche. AF received grant consultancies from Roche, Pfizer, Astellas and BMS. AA received grant consultancies from Takeda, MSD, BMJ, AstraZeneca, Roche and Pfizer. RC received speaker fees from BMS, MSD, Takeda, Pfizer, Roche and AstraZeneca. CG received speaker fees/grant consultancies from Astra Zeneca, BMS and Boehringer-Ingelheim. GLB personal fees from Janssen Cilag, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca and Roche, outside the submitted work. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest. Data sharing The datasets used during this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Some concomitant medications including antibiotics (ATB) have been reproducibly associated with worse survival following immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in unselected patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (according to programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and treatment line). Whether such relationship is causative or associative is matter of debate., Methods: We present the outcomes analysis according to concomitant baseline medications (prior to ICI initiation) with putative immune-modulatory effects in a large cohort of patients with metastatic NSCLC with a PD-L1 expression ≥50%, receiving first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy. We also evaluated a control cohort of patients with metastatic NSCLC treated with first-line chemotherapy. The interaction between key medications and therapeutic modality (pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy) was validated in pooled multivariable analyses., Results: 950 and 595 patients were included in the pembrolizumab and chemotherapy cohorts, respectively. Corticosteroid and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy but not ATB therapy was associated with poorer performance status at baseline in both the cohorts. No association with clinical outcomes was found according to baseline statin, aspirin, β-blocker and metformin within the pembrolizumab cohort. On the multivariable analysis, ATB emerged as a strong predictor of worse overall survival (OS) (HR=1.42 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.79); p=0.0024), and progression free survival (PFS) (HR=1.29 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.59); p=0.0192) in the pembrolizumab but not in the chemotherapy cohort. Corticosteroids were associated with shorter PFS (HR=1.69 (95% CI 1.42 to 2.03); p<0.0001), and OS (HR=1.93 (95% CI 1.59 to 2.35); p<0.0001) following pembrolizumab, and shorter PFS (HR=1.30 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.56), p=0.0046) and OS (HR=1.58 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.94), p<0.0001), following chemotherapy. PPIs were associated with worse OS (HR=1.49 (95% CI 1.26 to 1.77); p<0.0001) with pembrolizumab and shorter OS (HR=1.12 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.24), p=0.0139), with chemotherapy. At the pooled analysis, there was a statistically significant interaction with treatment (pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy) for corticosteroids (p=0.0020) and PPIs (p=0.0460) with respect to OS, for corticosteroids (p<0.0001), ATB (p=0.0290), and PPIs (p=0.0487) with respect to PFS, and only corticosteroids (p=0.0033) with respect to objective response rate., Conclusion: In this study, we validate the significant negative impact of ATB on pembrolizumab monotherapy but not chemotherapy outcomes in NSCLC, producing further evidence about their underlying immune-modulatory effect. Even though the magnitude of the impact of corticosteroids and PPIs is significantly different across the cohorts, their effects might be driven by adverse disease features., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AC received speaker fees and grant consultancies by Astrazeneca, MSD, BMS, Roche, Novartis, Istituto Gentili and Astellas. RG received speaker fees and grant consultancies by Astrazeneca and Roche. JA reports receiving commercial research grants from Amphera and Roche, holds ownership interest (including patents) in Amphera BV, and is a consultant/advisory board member for Amphera, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli-Lilly, MSD and Roche. AF received grant consultancies by Roche, Pfizer, Astellas and BMS. FM received grant consultancies by MSD and Takeda. RC received speaker fees by BMS, MSD, Takeda, Pfizer, Roche and Astrazeneca. CG received speaker fees/grant consultancies by Astrazeneca, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Roche and MSD. MR received honoraria for scientific events by Roche, Astrazeneca, BMS, MSD and Boehringer Ingelheim. EB received speaker and travel fees from MSD, Astra-Zeneca, Pfizer, Helsinn, Eli-Lilly, BMS, Novartis and Roche; grant consultancies by Roche and Pfizer. MCG received grants from MSD, Astrazeneca, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Celgene, Tiziana Sciences, Clovis, Merck, Bayer, GSK, Spectrum, Blueprint, personal fees from Eli Lilly, Boheringer, Otsuka Pharma, Astrazeneca, Novartis, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Celgene, Incyte, Inivata, Takeda, Bayer, MSD, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Daichii Sankyo, other financial supports from Eli Lilly, Astrazeneca, Novartis, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Celgene, Tiziana Sciences, Clovis, Merck Serono, MSD, GSK, Spectrum and Blueprint. AA received grant consultancies by Takeda, MSD, BMJ, Astrazeneca, Roche and Pfizer. MDM received research funding from Tesaro-GlaxoSmithKline; acted in a consulting/advisory role for Novartis, Pfizer, Eisai, Takeda, Janssen, Astellas, Roche, AstraZeneca. FP received grant consultancies by MSD and Astrazeneca. PB received grant consultancies by Astrazeneca and Boehringer-Ingelheim. DJP received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare and travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche, Astra Zeneca; received research funding (to institution) from MSD, BMS. All other authors declare no competing interests. DJP is supported by grant funding from the Wellcome Trust Strategic Fund (PS3416) and has received direct project funding by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), ITMAT Push for Impact Grant Scheme 2019. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care., (© 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: Improved outcome in tobacco smoking patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following immunotherapy has previously been reported. However, little is known regarding this association during first-line immunotherapy in patients with high PD-L1 expression. In this study we compared clinical outcomes according to the smoking status of two large multicenter cohorts., Methods: We compared clinical outcomes according to the smoking status (never smokers vs. current/former smokers) of two retrospective multicenter cohorts of metastatic NSCLC patients, treated with first-line pembrolizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy., Results: A total of 962 NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% who received first-line pembrolizumab and 462 NSCLC patients who received first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were included in the study. Never smokers were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of disease progression (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.49 [95% CI: 1.15-1.92], p = 0.0022) and death (HR = 1.38 [95% CI: 1.02-1.87], p = 0.0348) within the pembrolizumab cohort. On the contrary, a nonsignificant trend towards a reduced risk of disease progression (HR = 0.74 [95% CI: 0.52-1.05], p = 0.1003) and death (HR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.45-1.01], p = 0.0593) were reported for never smokers within the chemotherapy cohort. After a random case-control matching, 424 patients from both cohorts were paired. Within the matched pembrolizumab cohort, never smokers had a significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 1.68 [95% CI: 1.17-2.40], p = 0.0045) and a nonsignificant trend towards a shortened overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.32 [95% CI: 0.84-2.07], p = 0.2205). On the contrary, never smokers had a significantly longer PFS (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.49-0.95], p = 0.0255) and OS (HR = 0.66 [95% CI: 0.45-0.97], p = 0,0356) compared to current/former smoker patients within the matched chemotherapy cohort. On pooled multivariable analysis, the interaction term between smoking status and treatment modality was concordantly statistically significant with respect to ORR (p = 0.0074), PFS (p = 0.0001) and OS (p = 0.0020), confirming the significantly different impact of smoking status across the two cohorts., Conclusions: Among metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% receiving first-line pembrolizumab, current/former smokers experienced improved PFS and OS. On the contrary, worse outcomes were reported among current/former smokers receiving first-line chemotherapy., (© 2021 The Authors. Thoracic Cancer published by China Lung Oncology Group and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Purpose: MET -deregulated NSCLC represents an urgent clinical need because of unfavorable prognosis and lack of specific therapies. Although recent studies have suggested a potential role for crizotinib in patients harboring MET amplification or exon 14 mutations, no conclusive data are currently available. This study aimed at investigating activity of crizotinib in patients harboring MET or ROS1 alterations., Patients and Methods: Patients with pretreated advanced NSCLC and evidence of ROS1 rearrangements (cohort A) or MET deregulation (amplification, ratio MET/CEP7 >2.2 or MET exon 14 mutations, cohort B) were treated with crizotinib 250 mg twice daily orally. The coprimary endpoint was objective response rate in the two cohorts., Results: From December 2014 to March 2017, 505 patients were screened and a total of 52 patients (26 patients per cohort) were enrolled onto the study. At data cutoff of September 2017, in cohort A, objective response rate was 65%, and median progression-free survival and overall survival were 22.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 15.2-30.3] and not reached, respectively. In cohort B, objective response rate was 27%, median progression-free survival was 4.4 months (95% CI 3.0-5.8), and overall survival was 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.2-6.5). No difference in any clinical endpoint was observed between MET -amplified and exon 14-mutated patients. No response was observed among the 5 patients with cooccurrence of a second gene alteration. No unexpected toxicity was observed in both cohorts., Conclusions: Crizotinib induces response in a fraction of MET -deregulated NSCLC. Additional studies and innovative therapies are urgently needed., (©2019 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Bone metastases (BoM) are a negative prognostic factor in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Beyond its supportive role, bone is a hematopoietic organ actively regulating immune system. We hypothesized that BoM may influence sensitivity to immunotherapy., Methods: Pretreated non-squamous (cohort A) and squamous (cohort B) NSCLCs included in the Italian Expanded Access Program were evaluated for nivolumab efficacy according to BoM., Results: Cohort A accounted for 1588 patients with non-squamous NSCLC, including 626 (39%) with (BoM+) and 962 (61%) without BoM (BoM-). Cohort B accounted for 371 patients with squamous histology including 120 BoM+ (32%) and 251 (68%) BoM- cases. BoM+ had lower overall response rate (ORR; Cohort A: 12% versus 23%, p <  0.0001; Cohort B: 13% versus 22%, p = 0.04), shorter progression free survival (PFS; Cohort A: 3.0 versus 4.0 months, p <  0.0001; Cohort B: 2.7 versus 5.2 months, p <  0.0001) and overall survival (OS; Cohort A: 7.4 versus 15.3 months, p <  0.0001; Cohort B: 5.0 versus 10.9 months, p < 0.0001). Moreover, BoM negatively affected outcome irrespective of performance status (PS; OS in both cohorts: p < 0.0001) and liver metastases (OS cohort A: p < 0.0001; OS Cohort B: p = 0.48). At multivariate analysis, BoM independently associated with higher risk of death (cohort A: HR 1.50; cohort B: HR 1.78)., Conclusions: BoM impairs immunotherapy efficacy. Accurate bone staging should be included in clinical trials with immunotherapy.

microRNAs (miRNAs) can act as oncosuppressors or oncogenes, induce chemoresistance or chemosensitivity, and are major posttranscriptional gene regulators. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), EGF receptor (EGFR), and V-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) are major drivers of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of this study was to assess the miRNA profiles of NSCLCs driven by translocated ALK, mutant EGFR, or mutant KRAS to find driver-specific diagnostic and prognostic miRNA signatures. A total of 85 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples were considered: 67 primary NSCLCs and 18 matched normal lung tissues. Of the 67 primary NSCLCs, 17 were echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4-ALK translocated (ALK(+)) lung cancers; the remaining 50 were not (ALK(-)). Of the 50 ALK(-) primary NSCLCs, 24 were EGFR and KRAS mutation-negative (i.e., WT; triple negative); 11 were mutant EGFR (EGFR(+)), and 15 were mutant KRAS (KRAS(+)). We developed a diagnostic classifier that shows how miR-1253, miR-504, and miR-26a-5p expression levels can classify NSCLCs as ALK-translocated, mutant EGFR, or mutant KRAS versus mutation-free. We also generated a prognostic classifier based on miR-769-5p and Let-7d-5p expression levels that can predict overall survival. This classifier showed better performance than the commonly used classifiers based on mutational status. Although it has several limitations, this study shows that miRNA signatures and classifiers have great potential as powerful, cost-effective next-generation tools to improve and complement current genetic tests. Further studies of these miRNAs can help define their roles in NSCLC biology and in identifying best-performing chemotherapy regimens.

The elderly population with cancer is increasing worldwide. Currently, the median age at lung cancer diagnosis is approximately 70 years. Clinicians are increasingly dealing with a population of elderly non-small-cell lung cancer patients characterised by relevant co-morbidities and ageing-related characteristics, making treatment choice more challenging. Robust evidence demonstrated that activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene are the best predictor for sensitivity to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Nine large phase III trials conducted in both the Asian and Caucasian populations demonstrated that gefitinib, erlotinib and afatinib are superior to standard platinum-based chemotherapy as front-line treatment and subgroup analyses confirmed the superiority of erlotinib or gefitinib over chemotherapy in the second-line setting. Although no large phase III trials have been specifically conducted in EGFR mutation-positive (EGFR (mut+)) elderly non-small-cell lung cancer patients, available data, coming from subgroup analysis, retrospective series or small prospective phase II trials, replicated in the elderly the results observed in the general population, thus suggesting that age per se does not represent a criterion for treatment selection. In addition, the favourable toxicity profile of EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors makes these agents the preferred option in such a group of patients, for which concomitant medications are often required.

Background: Agents targeting programmed death-1 receptor (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) are showing promising results in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). It is unknown whether PD-1/PD-L1 are differently expressed in oncogene-addicted NSCLC., Methods: We analysed a cohort of 125 NSCLC patients, including 56 EGFR mutated, 29 KRAS mutated, 10 ALK translocated and 30 EGFR/KRAS/ALK wild type. PD-L1 and PD-1 expression were assessed by immunohistochemistry. All cases with moderate or strong staining (2+/3+) in >5% of tumour cells were considered as positive., Results: PD-1 positive (+) was significantly associated with current smoking status (P=0.02) and with the presence of KRAS mutations (P=0.006), whereas PD-L1+ was significantly associated to adenocarcinoma histology (P=0.005) and with presence of EGFR mutations (P=0.001). In patients treated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (N=95), sensitivity to gefitinib or erlotinib was higher in PD-L1+ vs PD-L1 negative in terms of the response rate (RR: P=0.01) time to progression (TTP: P<0.0001) and survival (OS: P=0.09), with no difference in PD1+ vs PD-1 negative. In the subset of 54 EGFR mutated patients, TTP was significantly longer in PD-L1+ than in PD-L1 negative (P=0.01)., Conclusions: PD-1 and PD-L1 are differentially expressed in oncogene-addicted NSCLC supporting further investigation of specific checkpoint inhibitors in combination with targeted therapies.

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of afatinib in EGFR-mutant metastatic NSCLC patients with acquired resistance to erlotinib or gefitinib., Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the outcome of patients with EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC treated with afatinib after failure of chemotherapy and EGFR TKIs., Results: A total of 96 individuals were included in the study. According to EGFR status, most patients (n = 63; 65.6%) harbored a deletion in exon 19, and de novo T790M mutation was detected in 2 cases (T790M and exon 19). Twenty-four (25%) patients underwent repeated biopsy immediately before starting afatinib and secondary T790M was detected in 8 (33%) samples. Among the 86 patients evaluable for efficacy, response rate was 11.6%, with a median progression free-survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of 3.9 and 7.3 months, respectively. No significant difference in PFS and OS was observed according to type of last therapy received before afatinib, type of EGFR mutation or adherence to Jackman criteria, and patients benefiting from afatinib therapy had longer PFS and OS (P < .001). Outcome results for repeated biopsy patients were similar to the whole population, with no evidence of response in T790M-positive patients. All patients were evaluable for toxicity, and 81% experienced an AE of any grade, with grade 3 to 4 AEs, mainly diarrhea and skin toxicity, occurring in 19 (20%) patients., Conclusion: Our results showed that afatinib has only modest efficacy in a real life population of EGFR mutant NSCLC patients with acquired resistance to erlotinib or gefitinib., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Activating mutations of the EGFR and rearrangement of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) best illustrate the therapeutic relevance of molecular characterization in NSCLC patients., Areas Covered: For this review article, all published data on the most relevant Phase III trials with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for the treatment of NSCLC were collected and analyzed., Expert Opinion: Eight Phase III trials clearly established EGFR TKIs as the best therapeutic option for front-line therapy in EGFR-mutated patients. In pretreated NSCLC, EGFR TKIs are considered more effective than standard monotherapy with cytotoxics in presence of classical EGFR mutations, whereas in the EGFR wild-type population, a similar efficacy to docetaxel or pemetrexed in term of survival has been demonstrated. In ALK-translocated NSCLC, a Phase III trial demonstrated the superiority of a multi-target TKI, including ALK, in terms of progression-free survival, response rate and toxicity profile when compared to standard second-line chemotherapy. New agents targeting EGFR or ALK are under evaluation particularly in individuals with acquired resistance to EGFR TKIs or crizotinib.

Introduction: Activating mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene and rearrangement of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene best illustrate the therapeutic relevance of molecular characterization in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Several genetic aberrations with a potential prognostic or predictive role have been identified, mainly in adenocarcinoma subtype, including ROS1, RET, MET, HER2, BRAF and KRAS. More recently oncogenic drivers, such as DDR2, FGFR1 and PI3KCA, have been characterized in squamous cell lung carcinoma (SCC) and target agents are currently under evaluation. The aim of this review is to summarize the growing scenario of new targetable oncogenes in NSCLC., Areas Covered: For this review article all published data on NSCLC genomic alterations, including the techniques employed for oncogenic drivers identification, the prevalence of each one in lung cancer subtypes, the preclinical data corroborating their role in tumorigenesis and the potential biological tailored agents tested and under evaluation were collected and analyzed using PubMed., Expert Opinion: Oncogenic products represent reliable targets for drug therapy and the expanding knowledge of molecular pathways involved in lung tumorigenesis is resulting in a dramatic change of treatment strategies leading to an improvement in disease and symptom control, extending life duration and improving quality of life.

Purpose of Review: The mesenchymal-epidermal transition (c-MET) receptor tyrosine kinase has a central role in the cancer cell's survival. MET and its ligand, hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), have recently been identified as promising targets in solid tumors, including nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Recent Findings: Aberrant MET activation can be the result of different mechanisms such as MET and HGF overexpression, MET gene amplification or mutation. Retrospective studies in NSCLC showed that MET gene copy number is a negative prognostic factor, although few data are available on the role of MET mutations. In preclinical models, cell lines with MET gene amplification are extremely sensitive to MET inhibition. Although the inner presence of gene amplification is a rare event (1-7% cases), MET amplification has emerged as one of the critical events for acquired resistance in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutated lung adenocarcinomas refractory to EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). In NSCLC with acquired resistance to EGFR-TKIs, MET amplification occurs in up to 20% cases and preclinical and clinical data indicated MET and EGFR co-inhibition as a potential effective strategy to overcome resistance., Summary: MET has recently emerged as a promising target, and ongoing trials will clarify the role of anti-MET strategies in NSCLC.

The paradigm for first-line treatment of relapsed or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is changing. Large phase III trials demonstrated that, in 2010, we cannot select a therapy without an accurate definition of tumor histology and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) status. Patients harboring an EGFR-activating mutation have a better prognosis and certainly are extremely sensitive to EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors, while other agents, such as bevacizumab or pemetrexed, are more effective and less toxic in patients with non-squamous histology. Moreover, data from large phase III trials demonstrated that maintenance therapy with pemetrexed, docetaxel or erlotinib is an effective strategy against metastatic NSCLC. Overall, the changing paradigm in first-line treatment of NSCLC inevitably is changing the second-line strategy. In addition, the emerging role of maintenance therapy is leading to early use of all agents potentially active in a second- or third-line setting, with the consequence that very few options are available at disease progression. The aim of this article is to discuss the consequences of targeted treatments for second-line therapy in metastatic NSCLC.