Search

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important side effect of thoracic Radiotherapy (RT), which may impair quality of life and survival. This study aimed to develop a prediction model for new-onset AF in patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) receiving RT alone or as a part of their multi-modal treatment., Patients and Methods: Patients with stage I-IV NSCLC treated with curative-intent conventional photon RT were included. The baseline electrocardiogram (ECG) was compared with follow-up ECGs to identify the occurrence of new-onset AF. A wide range of potential clinical predictors and dose-volume measures on the whole heart and six automatically contoured cardiac substructures, including chambers and conduction nodes, were considered for statistical modeling. Internal validation with optimism-correction was performed. A nomogram was made., Results: 374 patients (mean age 69 ± 10 years, 57 % male) were included. At baseline, 9.1 % of patients had AF, and 42 (11.2 %) patients developed new-onset AF. The following parameters were predictive: older age (OR=1.04, 95 % CI: 1.013-1.068), being overweight or obese (OR=1.791, 95 % CI: 1.139-2.816), alcohol use (OR=4.052, 95 % CI: 2.445-6.715), history of cardiac procedures (OR=2.329, 95 % CI: 1.287-4.215), tumor located in the upper lobe (OR=2.571, 95 % CI: 1.518-4.355), higher forced expiratory volume in 1 s (OR=0.989, 95 % CI: 0.979-0.999), higher creatinine (OR=1.008, 95 % CI: 1.002-1.014), concurrent chemotherapy (OR=3.266, 95 % CI: 1.757 to 6.07) and left atrium D max (OR=1.022, 95 % CI: 1.012-1.032). The model showed good discrimination (area under the curve = 0.80, 95 % CI: 0.76-0.84), calibration and positive net benefits., Conclusion: This prediction model employs readily available predictors to identify patients at high risk of new-onset AF who could potentially benefit from active screening and timely management of post-RT AF., 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 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Lorlatinib is a potent, brain penetrant, next-generation ALK/ROS1 TKI, with high response rates and durable responses, including the brain. However, a significant drawback is the manifestation of neurocognitive adverse events (NCAEs). Despite being generally low-grade in severity, these NCAEs can be physically and mentally disabling. Extensive neurocognitive testing in this group of patients is lacking; therefore we conducted this study., Patients and Methods: This observational prospective study was conducted across 3 Dutch university hospitals. Patients with metastatic NSCLC with an ALK- or ROS1-rearrangement and having an indication to start lorlatinib in daily clinical practice were eligible. The primary endpoints were to identify changes in neurocognitive functioning, measured through neurocognitive assessment at intervals of 2 weeks and 2 months after starting lorlatinib, in comparison to baseline. As a secondary endpoint, the correlation between neurocognitive impairment and self-reported neurocognitive dysfunction was examined., Results: Between June 2019 and October 2022, 22 patients were included. Among the various neurocognitive tests administered, only the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised parts b and c demonstrated a significant and clinically relevant decrease in scoring 2 weeks post initiation of lorlatinib (P = .036 and P = .003, respectively). However, these returned to baseline at the 2-month evaluation. The questionnaires did not result in significantly different outcomes over time., Conclusion: Lorlatinib treatment did not result in a sustained and significant decline within any of the specified neurocognitive domains., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The current work aimed to investigate the clinical benefit of radiotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) developing acquired resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors., Method: We report on a pooled, two-institution, phase II single-arm prospective cohort study. The study included patients with stage IV NSCLC who showed progression of one or more measurable lesions under anti-PD-(L)1 inhibition alone, after initially having achieved at least stable disease. Hypofractionated radiotherapy (hRT) of one to four metastases was performed, while one or more lesions were kept untreated. Following hRT, treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors was continued unchanged until further evidence of tumor progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint of the pooled analysis was progression-free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and toxicity., Results: A total of 48 patients were enrolled: mean age was 67.1 ± 9.3 years, 50 % were male and 72.9 % were PD-L1 positive. Immunotherapy was in 95.8 % of patients the first or second line therapy at time of enrollment. hRT was performed to one (93.8 % of cases) or more lesions (median total dose: 27.5 Gy, median 6.5 Gy/fraction). Forty-five patients (93.8 %) were able to continue immunotherapy for a median of 6.2 months following hRT. Median PFS was 4.4 months, with 62.5 % disease control at three months and 37.5 % at six months. Median OS was 14.9 months. Severe adverse events (grade ≥ 2) were reported in 12 cases (25 %), of which none were radiotherapy-related and four were immunotherapy-related. Salvage therapy consisted of chemotherapy (48.8 %) or repeated irradiation (21.9 %). No further tumor treatment was performed in 29.3 % of patients., Conclusions: The current pooled analysis is a prospective evaluation of the role of radiation therapy for metastatic NSCLC in the setting of newly acquired immunotherapy resistance. Hypofractionated radiotherapy can support the outcome of immune checkpoint inhibitors and thus allow continuation of treatment for a relevant amount of time despite initial tumor progression., 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 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The standard first-line treatment for non-oncogene driven metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) based strategy. Although guidelines increasingly advise adding local radical treatment (LRT) to patients with synchronous oligometastatic (sOMD) NSCLC responding to systemic therapy, this recommendation is based on the studies without ICI. Furthermore, the majority of published oligometastatic studies were not on an intention-to-treat basis, resulting in selection bias. Moreover, staging Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PET-CT) and brain imaging were often not mandatory and definitions of oligometastatic were heterogeneous. Therefore, this study focused on a single centre retrospective series, including all adequately staged patients with sOMD NSCLC according to the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer definition (maximum of 5 metastases in 3 organs) that were treated with induction (chemo)-ICI and compared outcomes to those treated with chemotherapy only, with and without LRT. The primary end-points were median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients treated with induction (chemo)-ICI versus chemotherapy. Out of 68 included patients, 38 (56%) eventually received LRT. With a median follow-up of 26.7 months, the median PFS was 19.0 months for (chemo)-ICI (n = 18) versus 6.8 for chemotherapy-only (n = 50) (HR 0.5, p = 0.03), the median OS was 19.3 versus 15.7 months, respectively (HR 0.8, p = 0.4). In patients having received LRT, median PFS was 19.0 months for (chemo)-ICI versus 8.3 for chemotherapy-only (HR 0.6, p = 0.2). In conclusion, an ICI-based systemic treatment is feasible and may result in superior survival outcomes. This should be investigated in prospective trials. Strategies to improve response rates to systemic treatment are also needed., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: LH: Outside of this manuscript personal fees as an invited speaker from Benecke, Medtalks, Medimix and VJOncology; personal fees for participation in mentorship programme funded by AstraZeneca; personal fees for travel support from Roche; personal fees as member of the committee that revised the Dutch guidelines on NSCLC, brain metastases and leptomeningeal metastases; fees paid to her institution for an educational webinar from Janssen; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership from Amgen, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Takeda; fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Bayer, high5oncology, Lilly and Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD); fees paid to her institution for interview sessions from Roche; fees paid to her institution for podcast appearance from Takeda; institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Takeda, Merck and Pfizer (Novartis under negotiation); institutional funding as a local principal investigator (PI) from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Merck Serono, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Roche and Takeda; non-remunerated roles as chair for metastatic NSCLC of the lung cancer group for EORTC (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer) and as the secretary of the studies foundation for NVALT (Nederlandse Vereniging van Artsen voor Longziekten en Tuberculose). DR: Outside of this manuscript research grant/ support/ Advisory Board: Institutional financial interests (no personal financial interests) from AstraZeneca, BMS, Beigene, Philips, Olink and Advisory Board: Institutional financial interests (no personal financial interests) for Eli-Lilly. MJ,VB,TL,MS,SD: None declared., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Chemotherapy plus immunotherapy is the standard of care for patients with metastatic NSCLC. No study has evaluated the outcomes of second-line chemotherapy treatments after progression following first-line chemo-immunotherapy., Method: This multicenter retrospective study evaluated the efficacy of second line (2L) chemotherapies after progression under first-line (1L) chemo-immunotherapy, measured by overall survival (2L-OS) and progression free survival (2L-PFS)., Results: A total of 124 patients were included. The mean age was 63.1 years, 30.6 % of the patients were female, 72.6 % had an adenocarcinoma and 43.5 % had a poor ECOG-performance status prior to 2L initiation. Sixty-four (52.0 %) patients were considered resistant to first line chemo-immunotherapy. (1L-PFS < 6 months). In 2L treatments, 57 (46.0 %) patients received taxane monotherapy, 25 (20.1 %) taxane plus anti-angiogenic, 12 (9.7 %) platinum-based chemotherapy and 30 (24.2 %) other chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 8.3 months (95 %CI: 7.2-10.2), post initiation of 2L treatment, the median 2L-OS was 8.1 months (95 % CI: 6.4-12.7) and the median 2L-PFS was 2.9 months (95 %CI: 2.4-3.3). Overall, the 2L-objective response and 2L-disease control rates were 16.0 %, and 42.5 %, respectively. Taxane plus anti-angiogenic and platinum rechallenge achieved longest median 2L-OS: not reached (95 %CI: 5.8-NR) and 17.6 months (95 %CI 11.6-NR), respectively (p = 0.05). Patients resistant to the 1L treatment had inferior outcomes (2L-OS 5.1 months, 2L-PFS 2.3 months) compared with 1L responders (2L-OS 12.7 months, 2L-PFS 3.2 months)., Conclusion: In this real-life cohort, 2L chemotherapy achieved modest activity following progression under chemo-immunotherapy. 1L-resistant patients remained a refractory population, highlighting a need for new 2L strategies., 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. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Competing Interests: Disclosure LEH reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Benecke, Medtalks and VJOncology; personal fees for participation in mentorship programme funded by AstraZeneca; personal fees for travel support from Roche; personal fees as member of the committee that revised the Dutch guidelines on NSCLC, brain metastases and leptomeningeal metastases; fees paid to her institution for an educational webinar from Janssen; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Takeda; fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Bayer, high5oncology, Lilly and MSD; fees paid to her institution for interview sessions from Roche; fees paid to her institution for podcast appearance from Takeda; institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Takeda, Pfizer and Merck; institutional funding as a local principal investigator (PI) from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Merck Serono, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Roche and Takeda; non-remunerated roles as chair for metastatic NSCLC of the lung cancer group for European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and as the secretary of the studies foundation for NVALT (Nederlandse Vereniging van Artsen voor Longziekten en Tuberculose). KMK reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Medscape, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Prime Oncology, Roche and Roche Diagnostics/Ventana; personal fees for consultancy and advisory board membership from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Debiopharm, Diaceutics, Janssen, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche and Roche Diagnostics/Ventana; non-remunerated roles as the past Pathology Committee Chair for IASLC (International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer) and member of the UK Lung Cancer Consortium. JM reports fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, MSD and Roche; fees paid to her institution for expert testimony from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and MSD; fees paid to her institution for travel expenses from Ipsen. TSM reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Daz Group, Eli Lilly, Fishawack Facilitate, InMed Medical Communication, Janssen, Jiahui Holdings Co., LiangYiHui Healthcare, Lucene Health Inc., Lunit USA, Inc., MD Health, Medscape/WebMD, Merck Serono, MSD, MiRXES, Novartis, OrigiMed, PeerVoice, PER, Permanyer SL, Pfizer, Prime Oncology, Research to Practice, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Shanghai BeBirds Translation & Consulting Co., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Takeda and Touch Medical Media; personal fees for advisory board membership from AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, Berry Oncology, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, C4 Therapeutics, Cirina Ltd., Covidien LP, CStone Pharma, Curio Science, D3 Bio Ltd., Da Volterra, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Fishawack Facilitate, G1 Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Gritstone Oncology, Guardant Health, Hengrui, Ignyta, Incyte, Inivata, IQVIA, Janssen, Lakeshore Biotech, Loxo Oncology, Lucene Health Inc., Lunit USA, Inc., Medscape/WebMD, Merck Serono, Mirati Therapeutics, MiRXES, MoreHealth, MSD, Novartis, OrigiMed, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pfizer, Puma Tech, Qiming Development, Roche, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi-Aventis, SFJ Pharmaceutical Ltd., Synergy Research, Takeda, Tigermed, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Virtus Medical and Yuhan; personal fees as the Chairman for ACT Genomics-Sanomics Group; personal fees as a member of the board of directors from AstraZeneca and HutchMed; holds stocks/shares from AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, Biolidics Ltd., HutchMed and Sanomics Ltd.; institutional funding from AstraZeneca, BMS, Clovis Oncology, G1 Therapeutics, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Takeda and XCovery; non-remunerated roles as an invited speaker with AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, Lunit USA, Inc. and Sanomics Ltd. and for an advisory role with geneDecode; non-remunerated leadership roles with ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology), ATORG (Asian Thoracic Oncology Research Group), CLCRF (Chinese Lung Cancer Research Foundation Limited), CSCO (Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology), HKCF (Hong Kong Cancer Fund), HKCTS (Hong Kong Cancer Therapy Society), IASLC and St. Stephen’s College & Prep School (Hong Kong). UN reports fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from MSD; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership and a writing engagement from AstraZeneca; institutional funding as a coordinating PI for Bayer; non-remunerated roles as a PI for clinical trials funded by Deutsche Krebshilfe and as a member of the board of directors and vice-chair of ‘Strahlenschutzkommission’ from the German Commission on Radiological Protection. AP reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Mundipharma and Takeda; personal fees for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer and Roche; non-remunerated activities with AIOM (Italian Association of Medical Oncology) as member of the Scientific Committee for lung cancer guidelines. SP reports personal fees for an editorial role as an Associate Editor for Annals of Oncology; fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, e-cancer, Eli Lilly, Fishawack, Illumina, Imedex, Medscape, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, OncologyEducation, PER, Pfizer, PRIME, RMEI, Roche/Genentech, RTP, Sanofi and Takeda; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership from AbbVie, Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Bio Invent, Biocartis, Blueprint Medicines, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, F-Star, Foundation Medicine, Genzyme, Gilead, GSK, Illumina, Incyte, IQVIA, iTeos, Janssen, Merck Serono, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Novocure, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Phosplatin Therapeutics, Regeneron, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda and Vaccibody; institutional funding as a steering committee member from AstraZeneca, BeiGene, BMS, iTeos, Mirati, MSD, PharmaMar, Phosplatin Therapeutics and Roche/Genentech; institutional funding as a coordinating PI from AstraZeneca; institutional funding as a trial chair from GSK and Roche/Genentech; non-remunerated role as President and Council Member for the Ballet Béjart Lausanne Foundation; non-remunerated leadership roles as President of ESMO (2020-2022), Vice-President of SAMO (Swiss Academy of Multidisciplinary Oncology), Vice-President of Lung Group for SAKK (Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research); non-remunerated role as PI involved in academic trials for ETOP (European Thoracic Oncology Platform)/EORTC/SAKK; non-remunerated role as Council Member and Scientific Committee Chair for ETOP/IBCSG Partners (International Breast Cancer Study Group); member of AACR (American Association for Cancer Research), ASCO, ASMAC/VSAO (Association of Swiss Interns and Residents), FMH (Association of Swiss Physicians) and IASLC. DP reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Novartis, Peer CME, Pfizer, priME Oncology and Samsung; personal fees for advisory board membership from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Samsung; institutional funding as a PI from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi and Sanofi-Aventis. EFS reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Boehringer Ingelheim and Daiichi Sankyo; personal fees for advisory board membership from Merck Serono; fees paid to his institution for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Roche, Sanofi and Takeda; institutional funding as a local PI from AstraZeneca, Genmab, Gilead and Pfizer. BJS reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Pfizer and Roche/Genentech; personal fees for advisory board membership from Amgen and Roche/Genentech; fees paid to his institution for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck and Novartis; fees paid to his institution for steering committee membership from Novartis, Pfizer and Roche/Genentech; personal fees as a member of the board of directors from Cancer Council Victoria and Thoracic Oncology Group of Australasia; personal fees as a consultant from Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre; royalties from UpToDate. GV reports personal fees as an invited speaker and for advisory board membership from Roche; personal fees as a consultant from Ab Medica; institutional funding as a PI from AIRC (Fondazione AIRC per la ricerca sul cancro ETS) and the Italian Ministry of Health. MR reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi; personal fees for advisory board membership from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Mirati, MSD, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi.

Competing Interests: Disclosure LEH reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Benecke, Medtalks and VJOncology; personal fees for participation in mentorship programme funded by AstraZeneca; personal fees for travel support from Roche; personal fees as member of the committee that revised the Dutch guidelines on NSCLC, brain metastases and leptomeningeal metastases; fees paid to her institution for an educational webinar from Janssen; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Takeda; fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Bayer, high5oncology, Lilly and MSD; fees paid to her institution for interview sessions from Roche; fees paid to her institution for podcast appearance from Takeda; institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Takeda, Pfizer and Merck; institutional funding as a local principal investigator (PI) from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Merck Serono, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Roche and Takeda; non-remunerated roles as chair for metastatic NSCLC of the lung cancer group for European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and as the secretary of the studies foundation for Nederlandse Vereniging van Artsen voor Longziekten en Tuberculose (NVALT). KK reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Medscape, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Prime Oncology, Roche and Roche Diagnostics/Ventana; personal fees for consultancy and advisory board membership from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Debiopharm, Diaceutics, Janssen, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche and Roche Diagnostics/Ventana; non-remunerated roles as the past Pathology Committee Chair for International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) and member of the UK Lung Cancer Consortium. JM reports fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, MSD and Roche; fees paid to her institution for expert testimony from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and MSD; fees paid to her institution for travel expenses from Ipsen. TSM reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Daz Group, Eli Lilly, Fishawack Facilitate, InMed Medical Communication, Janssen, Jiahui Holdings Co., LiangYiHui Healthcare, Lucene Health Inc., Lunit USA, Inc., MD Health, Medscape/WebMD, Merck Serono, MIRXES, MSD, Novartis, OrigiMed, PeerVoice, PER, Permanyer SL, Pfizer, Prime Oncology, Research to Practice, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Shanghai BeBirds Translation & Consulting Co., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Takeda and Touch Medical Media; personal fees for advisory board membership from AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, Berry Oncology, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, C4 Therapeutics, Cirina Ltd, Covidien LP, CStone Pharma, Curio Science, D3 Bio Ltd, Da Volterra, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Fishawack Facilitate, G1 Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Gritstone Oncology, Guardant Health, Hengrui, Ignyta, Incyte, Inivata, IQVIA, Janssen, Lakeshore Biotech, Loxo Oncology, Lucene Health Inc., Lunit USA, Inc., Medscape/WebMD, Merck Serono, Mirati Therapeutics, MiRXES, MoreHealth, MSD, Novartis, OrigiMed, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pfizer, Puma Tech, Qiming Development, Roche, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi-Aventis, SFJ Pharmaceutical Ltd, Synergy Research, Takeda, Tigermed, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Virtus Medical and Yuhan; personal fees as the Chairman for ACT Genomics-Sanomics Group; personal fees as a member of the board of directors from AstraZeneca and HutchMed; holds stocks/shares from AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, Biolidics Ltd, HutchMed and Sanomics Ltd.; institutional funding from AstraZeneca, BMS, Clovis Oncology, G1 Therapeutics, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Takeda and XCovery; non-remunerated roles as an invited speaker with AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, Lunit USA, Inc. and Sanomics Ltd and for an advisory role with geneDecode; non-remunerated leadership roles with American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Asian Thoracic Oncology Research Group (ATORG), Chinese Lung Cancer Research Foundation Limited (CLCRF), Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO), Hong Kong Cancer Fund (HKCF), Hong Kong Cancer Therapy Society (HKCTS), IASLC and St. Stephen’s College & Prep School (Hong Kong). UN reports fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from MSD; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership and a writing engagement from AstraZeneca; institutional funding as a coordinating PI for Bayer; non-remunerated roles as a PI for clinical trials funded by Deutsche Krebshilfe and as a member of the board of directors and vice-chair of ‘Strahlenschutzkommission’ from the German Commission on Radiological Protection. AP reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Mundipharma and Takeda; personal fees for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer and Roche; non-remunerated activities with Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) as member of the Scientific Committee for lung cancer guidelines. SP reports personal fees for an editorial role as an Associate Editor for Annals of Oncology; fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, ecancer, Eli Lilly, Fishawack, Illumina, Imedex, Medscape, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, OncologyEducation, Physician’s Education Resource (PER), Pfizer, Partnerships in International Medical Education (PRIME), RMEI Medical Education, LLC (RMEI), Roche/Genentech, Research To Practice (RTP), Sanofi and Takeda; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership from AbbVie, Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Bio Invent, Biocartis, Blueprint Medicines, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, F-Star, Foundation Medicine, Genzyme, Gilead, GSK, Illumina, Incyte, IQVIA, iTeos, Janssen, Merck Serono, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Novocure, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Phosplatin Therapeutics, Regeneron, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda and Vaccibody; institutional funding as a steering committee member from AstraZeneca, BeiGene, BMS, iTeos, Mirati, MSD, PharmaMar, Phosplatin Therapeutics and Roche/Genentech; institutional funding as a coordinating PI from AstraZeneca; institutional funding as a trial chair from GSK and Roche/Genentech; non-remunerated role as President and Council Member for the Ballet Béjart Lausanne Foundation; non-remunerated leadership roles as President of ESMO (2020-2022), Vice- President of Swiss Academy of Multidisciplinary Oncology (SAMO), Vice-President of Lung Group for Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK); non-remunerated role as PI involved in academic trials for European Thoracic Oncology Platform (ETOP)/EORTC/SAKK; non-remunerated role as Council Member and Scientific Committee Chair for ETOP/International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) Partners member of American Association of Cancer Research (AACR), ASCO, Association Suisse des médecines-assistant(e)s et chef(fe)s de Clinique (ASMAC)/Verband Schweizerischer Assistenz- und Oberärztinnen und- ärzte (VSAO), Fédération des médecins suisses (FMH) and IASLC. DP reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Novartis, Peer CME, Pfizer, priME Oncology and Samsung; personal fees for advisory board membership from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Samsung; institutional funding as a PI from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi and Sanofi-Aventis. ES reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Boehringer Ingelheim and Daiichi Sankyo; personal fees for advisory board membership from Merck Serono; fees paid to his institution for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Roche, Sanofi and Takeda; institutional funding as a local PI from AstraZeneca, Genmab, Gilead and Pfizer. BJS reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Pfizer and Roche/Genentech; personal fees for advisory board membership from Amgen and Roche/Genentech; fees paid to his institution for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck and Novartis; fees paid to his institution for steering committee membership from Novartis, Pfizer and Roche/Genentech; personal fees as a member of the board of directors from Cancer Council Victoria and Thoracic Oncology Group of Australasia; personal fees as a consultant from Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre; royalties from UpToDate. GV reports personal fees as an invited speaker and for advisory board membership from Roche; personal fees as a consultant from Ab Medica; institutional funding as a PI from Fondazione AIRC per la ricerca sul cancro ETS (AIRC) and the Italian Ministry of Health. MR reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi; personal fees for advisory board membership from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Mirati, MSD, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi.

The standard of care for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) followed by 1 year of adjuvant durvalumab. Despite the survival benefit granted by immunotherapy in this setting, only 1/3 of patients are alive and disease free at 5 years. Novel treatment strategies are under development to improve patient outcomes in this setting: different anti-programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 [anti-PD-(L)1] antibodies after CCRT, consolidation immunotherapy after sequential chemoradiotherapy, induction immunotherapy before CCRT and immunotherapy concurrent with CCRT and/or sequential chemoradiotherapy. Cross-trial comparison is particularly challenging in this setting due to the different timing of immunotherapy delivery and different patients' inclusion and exclusion criteria. In this review, we present the results of clinical trials investigating immune therapy in unresectable stage III NSCLC and discuss in-depth their biological rationale, their pitfalls and potential benefits. Particular emphasis is placed on the potential mechanisms of synergism between chemotherapy, radiation therapy and different monoclonal antibodies, and how this affects the tumor immune microenvironment. The designs and questions tackled by ongoing clinical trials are also discussed. Last, we address open questions and unmet clinical needs, such as the necessity for predictive biomarkers (e.g. radiomics and circulating tumor DNA). Identifying distinct subsets of patients to tailor anticancer treatment is a priority, especially in a heterogeneous disease such as stage III NSCLC., Competing Interests: Disclosure FC support for attending meeting: Eli-Lilly (institutional fees). SP AbbVie, advisory board, institutional. Amgen, advisory board, institutional. Arcus, advisory board, institutional. AstraZeneca, advisory board, institutional. AstraZeneca, invited speaker, institutional. Bayer, advisory board, institutional. BeiGene, advisory board, institutional. BioInvent, advisory board, institutional. Biocartis, advisory board, institutional. Blueprint Medicines, advisory board, institutional. Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), advisory board, Institutional. BMS, invited speaker, institutional. Boehringer Ingelheim, invited speaker, institutional. Boehringer Ingelheim, advisory board, institutional. Daiichi Sankyo, advisory board, institutional. Debiopharm, advisory board, institutional. ecancer, invited speaker, institutional. Eli Lilly, invited speaker, institutional. Eli Lilly, advisory board, institutional. Elsevier, other, personal, associate Editor Annals of Oncology. F-Star, advisory board, institutional. Fishawack, invited speaker, institutional. Foundation Medicine, advisory board, institutional. Genzyme, advisory board, institutional. Gilead, advisory board, institutional. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), advisory board, institutional. Illumina, advisory board, institutional. Illumina, invited speaker, institutional. Imedex, invited speaker, institutional. Incyte, advisory board, institutional. IQVIA, advisory board, institutional. iTheo, advisory board, institutional. Janssen, advisory board, institutional. Medscape, invited speaker, institutional. Merck Serono, advisory board, institutional. Mirati, advisory board, institutional. Mirati, invited speaker, institutional. Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), advisory board, institutional. MSD, invited speaker, institutional. Novartis, advisory board, institutional. Novartis, invited speaker, institutional. Novocure, advisory board, institutional. Oncology Education, invited speaker, institutional. PER, invited speaker, institutional. Pfizer, invited speaker, institutional. Pfizer, advisory board, institutional. PharmaMar, advisory board, institutional. Phosplatin Therapeutics, advisory board, institutional. PRIME, invited speaker, institutional. Regeneron, advisory board, institutional. RMEI, invited speaker, institutional. Roche/Genentech, advisory board, institutional. Roche/Genentech, invited speaker, institutional. RTP, invited speaker, institutional. Sanofi, invited speaker, institutional. Sanofi, advisory board, institutional. Seattle Genetics, advisory board, institutional. Takeda, invited speaker, institutional. Takeda, advisory board, institutional. Vaccibody, advisory board, institutional. No financial interest, Coordinating PI: MERMAID-1, Steering Committee Member, MERMAID-2, POSEIDON, MYSTIC, BGB-A317-A1217-301/AdvanTIG-301, CheckMate 743, CheckMate 73L, CheckMate 331 and 451 RELATIVITY 095, Clinical Trial Chair ZEAL-1, Phase 2 Inupadenant with chemo, SAPPHIRE, PEARLS, MK-7684A, LAGOON, phase I/II trials, Skyscraper-01; ALEX; BFAST; BEAT-Meso; ImPower-030, IMforte. EW research grant: AstraZeneca; invited speaker: AstraZeneca; support for attending meeting: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo; advisory board: Boehringer Ingelheim; consulting fee: MSD. Payment for manuscript writing: BMS (all institutional fees). JV AstraZeneca, advisory board, institutional. AstraZeneca, invited speaker, institutional BMS, advisory board, institutional. BMS, invited speaker, institutional. Daiichi Sankyo, advisory board, institutional. Eli Lilly, invited speaker, institutional. Janssen, invited speaker, institutional. Janssen, advisory board, institutional. Merck, advisory board, institutional. MSD, advisory board, institutional. Novartis, advisory board, institutional. Novartis, invited speaker, institutional. PDC∗line, advisory board, institutional. Pfizer, advisory board, institutional. Roche, advisory board, institutional. Roche, invited speaker, institutional. Sanofi, advisory board, institutional. MSD, research grant, institutional. DDR investigator initiated study: AstraZeneca, BMS, BeiGene; research support: AstraZeneca, Philips, advisory board. AstraZeneca, BMS, Philips (all institutional fees). LELH Outside of current manuscript: research funding Roche Genentech, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Takeda (all institution, BeiGene under negotiation); advisory board: BMS, Eli Lilly, Roche Genentech, Pfizer, Takeda, MSD, Merck, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen, Janssen (all institution, Roche one time self); speaker: MSD, Lilly, AstraZeneca (institution); travel/conference reimbursement: Roche Genentech (self); mentorship program with key opinion leaders: funded by AstraZeneca; fees for educational webinars/podcast: Benecke, Medtalks, VJOncology (self), high5oncology, Takeda (institution); interview sessions funded by Roche Genentech, Bayer, Lilly (institution); local PI of clinical trials: AstraZeneca, Novartis, BMS, MSD/Merck, GSK, Takeda, Blueprint Medicines, Roche Genentech, Mirati, AbbVie. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosure A-MCD reports receipt of honoraria for participation in advisory boards and/or lectures from Roche, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Amgen, Novartis, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Takeda and PharmaMar; research funding from BMS, AbbVie and Amgen. MF reports receipt of advisory board honoraria to institution from BMS, Takeda, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD and Roche. AA reports receipt of honoraria for participation in advisory boards from AstraZeneca, Roche, MSD, BMS, Lilly, Takeda and Bayer; research grant from BMS. BB reports receipt of grants/research support to institute from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Blueprint Medicines, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cristal Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Ignyta, IPSEN, Inivata, Janssen, Merck KGaA, MSD, Nektar, Onxeo, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Roche-Genentech, Sanofi, Servier, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, Tiziana Pharma and Tolero Pharmaceuticals. CF-F reports participation in advisory boards for AstraZeneca; research funding from MSD and AstraZeneca. LEH reports research funding to institution from Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim and AstraZeneca; advisory board honoraria to institution from BMS, Lilly, Roche, Pfizer, Takeda, MSD, Amgen and Boehringer Ingelheim; speaker fees from MSD; travel/conference reimbursement from Roche and BMS; participation in mentorship program funded by AstraZeneca; fees for educational webinars from Quadia; fees to institution for interview sessions from Roche. SL reports consulting activities for MSD, AstraZeneca, BMS, Bayer and Eli Lilly. SP reports receipt of honoraria to institute for consultancy, advisory boards and/or lectures from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biocartis, Bioinvent, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, Roche, Foundation Medicine, Illumina, Janssen, MSD, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Mirati, Novartis, PharmaMar, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda and Vaccibody; institutional financial support for clinical trials from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biodesix, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Clovis, Roche, Illumina, MSD, Merck Serono, Novartis and Pfizer. NR reports receipt of speaker honoraria from MSD, BMS, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Guardant Health, Pfizer, AbbVie, Ipsen, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Takeda and Amgen; fees for organising educational events from Amgen and Roche; advisory panel honoraria from MSD, BMS, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Guardant Health, Pfizer, AbbVie, Ipsen, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Takeda and Amgen; sponsorship to attend scientific meetings from Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD and Roche; research grants from Novartis and Pfizer. CMR reports consultancy for AbbVie, Amgen, Ascentage, AstraZeneca, Bicycle, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Genentech/Roche, Ipsen, Jazz, Lilly, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Syros and Vavotek; serves on scientific advisory boards for Bridge Medicines and Harpoon Therapeutics. DDR reports receipt of research grants to institute from BMS, AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim; advisory board honoraria to institute from BMS, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and Philips; funding to institute for investigator-initiated study from Olink. PEVS reports board membership of IASLC; treasurer of BACTS; fees to institution for serving as an external expert for AstraZeneca, MSD and National Cancer Institute, France. JV reports receipt of advisory board honoraria and/or lecture fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer and BMS; research grant to institute from MSD. MR reports receipt of honoraria for lectures and consultancy from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Samsung; funding for academic research from BMS and Boehringer Ingelheim.

Background: dNLR at the baseline (B), defined by neutrophils/[leucocytes-neutrophils], correlates with immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) outcomes in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). However, dNLR is dynamic under therapy and its longitudinal assessment may provide data predicting efficacy. We sought to examine the impact of dNLR dynamics on ICI efficacy and understand its biological significance., Patients and Methods: aNSCLC patients receiving ICI at 17 EU/US centres were included [Feb/13-Jun/18]. As chemotherapy-only group was evaluated (NCT02105168). dNLR was determined at (B) and at cycle2 (C2) [dNLR≤3 = low]. B+C2 dNLR were combined in one score: good = low (B+C2), poor = high (B+C2), intermediate = other situations. In 57 patients, we prospectively explored the immunophenotype of circulating neutrophils, particularly the CD15+CD244-CD16 low cells (immature) by flow cytometry., Results: About 1485 patients treatment with ICI were analysed. In ICI-treated patients, high dNLR (B) (~1/3rd) associated with worse progression-free (PFS)/overall survival (OS) (HR 1.56/HR 2.02, P < 0.0001) but not with chemotherapy alone (N = 173). High dNLR at C2 was associated with worse PFS/OS (HR 1.64/HR 2.15, P < 0.0001). When dNLR at both time points were considered together, those with persistently high dNLR (23%) had poor survival (mOS = 5 months (mo)), compared with high dNLR at one time point (22%; mOS = 9.2mo) and persistently low dNLR (55%; mOS = 18.6mo) (P < 0.0001). The dNLR impact remained significant after PD-L1 adjustment. By cytometry, high rate of immature neutrophils (B) (30/57) correlated with poor PFS/OS (P = 0.04; P = 0.0007), with a 12-week death rate of 49%., Conclusion: The dNLR (B) and its dynamics (C2) under ICI associate with ICI outcomes in aNSCLC. Persistently high dNLR (B+C2) correlated with early ICI failure. Immature neutrophils may be a key subpopulation on ICI resistance., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement LM: Sponsored Research: Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim. Consulting, advisory role: Roche Diagnostics, Takeda, Roche. Lectures and educational activities: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Tecnofarma, Roche. Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche. Mentorship program with key opinion leaders: funded by AstraZeneca. IP has served as a consultant for AstraZeneca, Pfizer and BluePrint Medicines. EA: Travel expenses: Mundipharma. Lectures and educational activities: Sanofi Genzymes. DS, HR, JR, SP, SC, FB, FT, MLR, PS, JG, AJP, MC, MN, CR, APM, LC and WPhad nothing to disclose. LH: none related to the current article, outside of the current article: research funding Roche Genentech, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca (all institution), advisory board: Boehringer, BMS, Eli Lilly, Roche Genentech, Pfizer, Takeda, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen (all institution), speaker: MSD, travel/conference reimbursement: Roche Genentech (self); mentorship program with key opinion leaders: funded by AstraZeneca; fees for educational webinars: Quadia (self), interview sessions funded by Roche Genentech (institution), local PI of clinical trials: AstraZeneca, Novartis, BMS, MSD/Merck, GSK, Takeda, Blueprint Medicines, Roche Genentech, Janssen Cilag. EN: none related to the current article, outside of the current article: research support from Roche and Pfizer; advisory boards from Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Lilly, Roche, Pfizer, Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen and AstraZeneca. PM: Principal/subinvestigator of Clinical Trials for Abbvie, Adaptimmune, Aduro Biotech, Agios Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Argen-X Bvba, Arno Therapeutics, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Astra Zeneca Ab, Aveo, Basilea Pharmaceutica International Ltd, Bayer Healthcare Ag, Bbb Technologies Bv, Beigene, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ca, Celgene Corporation, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co, Clovis Oncology, Cullinan-Apollo, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eisai, Eisai Limited, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Forma Tharapeutics, Gamamabs, Genentech, Glaxosmithkline, H3 Biomedicine, Hoffmann La Roche Ag, Imcheck Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Institut De Recherche Pierre Fabre, Iris Servier, Janssen Cilag, Janssen Research Foundation, Kyowa Kirin Pharm. Dev, Lilly France, Loxo Oncology, Lytix Biopharma As, Medimmune, Menarini Ricerche, Merck Sharp & Dohme Chibret, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Merus, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Molecular Partners Ag, Nanobiotix, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis Pharma, Octimet Oncology Nv, Oncoethix, Oncopeptides, Orion Pharma, Ose Pharma, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Pierre Fabre, Medicament, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Sotio A.S, Syros Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Pharma, Tesaro, Xencor Research Grants from Astrazeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Cilag, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi Non-financial support (drug supplied) from Astrazeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boringher Ingelheim, Medimmune, Merck, NH TherAGuiX, Pfizer, Roche. CAV: Personal fees from Roche, AbbVie, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Takeda and Ipsen. PB: Speaker bureau: AstraZeneca, BMS, Roche, MSD. Honoraria: Beigene. SN: Speaker Bureau/Advisor: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer, Beigene, MSD, Roche, Takeda, Pfizer. MDH receives research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb; has been a compensated consultant for Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Nektar, Syndax, Mirati, Shattuck Labs, Immunai, Blueprint Medicines, Achilles and Arcus; received travel support/honoraria from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Bristol-Myers Squibb; has options from Shattuck Labs, Immunai and Arcus; has a patent filed by his institution related to the use of tumour mutation burden to predict response to immunotherapy (PCT/US2015/062,208), which has received licensing fees from PGDx. GZ: Grants and personal fees from BMS, non-financial support from MSD, personal fees from Borhinger, non-financial support from Roche, personal fees from Astra-Zeneca, non-financial support from Abbvie, outside the submitted work. MM: Grants and personal fees from BMS, personal fees and non-financial support from MSD, personal fees and non-financial support from BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM, personal fees, non-financial support and other from ASTRA ZENENCA, personal fees, non-financial support and other from ROCHE, personal fees from KYOWA KYRIN, personal fees from PIERRE FABRE, outside the submitted work. LPA: Honoraria (self): Adacap, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Ipsen, Merck, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmamar, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Sysmex, Takeda; Leadership role: Altum sequencing; Research grant/Funding (self): AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Pfizer; Officer/Board of Directors Genómica. AMD: Consulting, advisory role or lectures: Roche, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, BMS, Amgen, Novartis, MSD, Takeda, Pharmamar. Research support: Amgen, Abbvie, BMS. DP: Consulting, advisory role or lectures: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer; Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Peer. CME, Roche. Honoraria: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene. Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Peer CME, Roche. Clinical trials research: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Medimmune, Sanofi-Aventis, Taiho Pharma, Novocure, Daiichi Sankyo. Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, prIME Oncology, Pfizer. NC: Sponsored Research at Gustave Roussy Cancer Center BMS fondation, GSK, Sanofi, advisory role and lectures: AstraZeneca. These are outside the scope of this work. GL: Research support Merck serono, BMS, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Blueprint medicines. KA: Consultant for Astrazeneca and Iovance Biotherapeutics. Her institution has received non-monetary research support from Takeda and Novartis on her behalf. BB: Sponsored Research at Gustave Roussy Cancer Center Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Blueprint Medicines, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, GSK, Ignyta, IPSEN, Merck KGaA, MSD, Nektar, Onxeo, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Sanofi, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, Tiziana Pharma., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Monotherapy with pembrolizumab is the preferred first-line treatment for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥50 %, without targetable oncogenic drivers. Although targeted therapies are in development for patients with specific Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) mutations, these are not available in daily care yet. It is not clear whether there is a difference in survival on first-line pembrolizumab for patients with a high PD-L1 status with or without a KRAS mutation. We aim to compare this survival based on real-world data., Materials and Methods: This is a real-world retrospective population-based study using data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. We selected patients with stage IV lung adenocarcinoma with PD-L1 expression ≥50 % diagnosed between January 2017 and December 2018, treated with first-line pembrolizumab. Patients with EGFR mutations, ALK translocations or ROS1 rearrangements were excluded. The primary outcome parameter was overall survival., Results: 388 (57 %) of 595 patients had a KRAS mutation. KRAS was seen more frequently in women than in men (65 % versus 49 % respectively, p < 0.001). The median overall survival was 19.2 months versus 16.8 months for patients with and without KRAS mutation, respectively (p = 0.86). Multivariable analysis revealed WHO performance score, number of organs with metastases and PD-L1 percentage as independent prognostic factors. KRAS mutation status had no prognostic influence (hazard ratio = 1.03, 95 % CI 0.83-1.29)., Conclusion: The survival of KRAS mutated versus KRAS wild-type lung adenocarcinoma patients, treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy, is similar, suggesting that KRAS has no prognostic value with respect to treatment with pembrolizumab., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The established role of morphological evaluation of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. We aimed to determine TIL association with the outcome for ICIs and for chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC., Methods: This is a multicenter retrospective study of a nivolumab cohort of 221 patients treated between November 2012 and February 2017 and a chemotherapy cohort of 189 patients treated between June 2009 and October 2016. Patients with available tissue for stromal TIL evaluation were analysed. The presence of a high TIL count (high-TIL) was defined as ≥10% density. The primary end-point was overall survival (OS)., Results: Among the nivolumab cohort, 64% were male, with median age of 63 years, 82.3% were smokers, 77% had performance status ≤1 and 63% had adenocarcinoma histology. High-TIL was observed in 22% patients and associated with OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.48; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.28-0.81) and progression-free survival [PFS] (HR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.25-0.64). Median PFS was 13.0 months (95% CI: 5.0-not reached) with high-TIL versus 2.2 months (95% CI: 1.7-3.0) with the presence of a low TIL count (low-TIL). Median OS for high-TIL was not reached (95% CI: 12.2-not reached) versus 8.4 months (95% CI: 5.0-11.6) in the low-TIL group. High-TIL was associated with the overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) (both, P < .0001). Among the chemotherapy cohort, 69% were male, 89% were smokers, 86% had performance status ≤1 and 90% had adenocarcinoma histology. High-TIL was seen in 37%. Median PFS and OS were 5.7 months (95% CI: 4.9-6.7) and 11.7 months (95% CI: 9.3-13.0), respectively, with no association with TILs., Conclusions: High-TIL was associated with favourable outcomes in a real-world immunotherapy cohort of patients with NSCLC, but not with chemotherapy, suggesting that TILs may be useful in selecting patients for immunotherapy., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Laura Mezquita reports receiving research sponsorship from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Boehringer Ingelheim; consulting and advisory roles in Roche Diagnostics and Takeda; lectures and educational activities in Bristol-Myers Squibb, Tecnofarma and Roche; receiving travel, accommodations and expenses from Roche; and participation in the mentorship program with key opinion leaders, funded by AstraZeneca. Edouard Auclin reports receiving travel expenses from Mundipharma and lectures and educational activities in Sanofi Genzymes. Lizza Hendriks reports no conflicts related to the current manuscript; however, outside of current manuscript LH reports receiving research funding from Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim and AstraZeneca (all institution); advisory board roles in Boehringer, BMS, Lilly, Roche, Pfizer, Takeda, MSD and Boehringer Ingelheim (all institution); and speaker roles in MSD; receiving travel/conference reimbursements from Roche and BMS (self); participation in the mentorship program with key opinion leaders, funded by AstraZeneca; receiving fees for educational webinars from Quadia (self); and participation in interview sessions funded by Roche (institution). Anas Gazzah reports receiving travel, accommodation and congress registration expenses from Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche; consultant/expert roles in Novartis; roles principal/sub-investigator of clinical trials for Aduro Biotech, Agios Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Argen-X Bvba, Arno Therapeutics, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Astra Zeneca, Aveo, Bayer Healthcare Ag, Bbb Technologies Bv, Beigene, Bioalliance Pharma, Biontech Ag, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ca, Celgene Corporation, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Clovis Oncology, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm S.A., Eisai, Exelixis, Forma, Gamamabs, Genentech, Inc., Gilead Sciences, Inc, Glaxosmithkline, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, H3 Biomedicine, Inc, Hoffmann La Roche Ag, Incyte Corporation, Innate Pharma, Iris Servier, Janssen, Kura Oncology, Kyowa Kirin Pharm, Lilly, Loxo Oncology, Lytix Biopharma As, Medimmune, Menarini Ricerche, Merck Sharp & Dohme Chibret, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Merus, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Nanobiotix, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis Pharma, Octimet Oncology Nv, Oncoethix, Oncomed, Oncopeptides, Onyx Therapeutics, Orion Pharma, Oryzon Genomics, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Pierre Fabre, Rigontec Gmbh, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Sierra Oncology, Taiho Pharma, Tesaro Inc., Tioma Therapeutics Inc. and Xencor; receiving research grants from Astrazeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Cilag, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi; receiving on-financial support (drug supplied) from Astrazeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boringher Ingelheim, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Medimmune, Merck, NH TherAGuiX, Pfizer and Roche. David Planchard reports consulting, advisory roles or lectures in AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Peer CME, Roche; Honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Peer CME, Roche; roles in clinical trials research: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Medimmune, Sanofi-Aventis, Taiho Pharma, Novocure and Daiichi Sankyo; receiving travel and accommodation expenses from AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, prIME Oncology and Pfizer. Benjamin Besse reports Sponsored research sponsorship from Gustave Roussy Cancer Center Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Blueprint Medicines, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, GSK, Ignyta, IPSEN, Merck KGaA, MSD, Nektar, Onxeo, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Sanofi, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Takeda and Tiziana Pharma. Julien Adam reports advisory board roles in AstraZeneca and Bayer and honoraria from MSD and BMS. Remaining authors nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: CD28, CD57, and KLRG1 have been previously identified as markers of T-cell immunosenescence. The impact of immunosenescence on anti-PD(L)-1 (ICI) or platinum-based chemotherapy (PCT) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) is unknown., Experimental Design: The percentage of CD28 - , CD57 + , KLRG1 + among CD8 + T cells [senescent immune phenotype (SIP)] was assessed by flow cytometry on blood from patients with aNSCLC before single-agent ICI (discovery cohort). A SIP cut-off was identified by log-rank maximization method and patients with aNSCLC treated with ICI (validation cohort) or PCT were classified accordingly. Proliferation and functional properties of SIP + CD8 + T cells were assessed in vitro ., Results: In the ICI discovery cohort ( N = 37), SIP cut-off was 39.5%, 27% of patients were SIP + . In the ICI validation cohort ( N = 46), SIP + status was found in 28% of patients and significantly correlated with worse objective response rate (ORR; 0% vs. 30%, P = 0.04), median progression-free survival (PFS) [1.8 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.3-NR) vs. 6.4 (95% CI, 2-19) months, P = 0.009] and median overall survival, OS [2.8 (95% CI, 2.0-NR) vs. 20.8 (95% CI, 6.0-NR) months, P = 0.02]. SIP + status was significantly associated with circulating specific immunephenotypes, in vitro lower CD8 + T cells proliferation, lower IL2 and higher TNFα and IFNγ production. In the ICI-pooled population ( N = 83), SIP + status did not correlate with any clinical characteristics and it was associated with significantly worse ORR, PFS, and OS. In PCT cohort ( N = 61), 11% of patients were SIP + . SIP status did not correlate with outcomes upon PCT., Conclusions: Circulating T-cell immunosenescence is observed in up to 28% of patients with aNSCLC and correlates with lack of benefit from ICI but not from PCT. See related commentary by Salas-Benito et al., p. 374 ., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Anti Programmed Death-ligand (PD1/PD-L1) directed immune-checkpoint-inhibitors (ICI) are widely used to treat patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who progress after first line chemotherapy. The best strategy after early progression under first line has not been specifically studied., Patients and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study including all consecutive NSCLC patients progressing within the first 3 months following introduction of first-line chemotherapy and being treated with second line ICI monotherapy or chemotherapy between March 2010 and November 2017. We analysed the clinicopathological data and outcome under second line chemotherapy vs. second line ICI: objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS., Results: We identified 176 patients with refractory disease, 99 who received subsequent immunotherapy and 77 undergoing chemotherapy. The 2 populations were comparable regarding the main prognostic criteria, median age was 60, main histology was adenocarcimoma (68.2%). PFS was not significantly different between both treatments 1.9 [1.8-2.1] versus 1.6 month [1.4-2.0] (P=0.125). Compared to chemotherapy, ICI treated patients had a superior OS (P=0.03) (Median [95% CI] OS 4.6 [2.8-6.7] versus 4.2 months [3.4-5.9] and a non-significant improvement in ORR (17.2% versus 7.9%, respectively, P=0.072). Poor performance status (ECOG PS≥2) and a higher number of metastatic sites (≥3) were associated with poorer prognosis. KRAS-mutated patients did not seem to benefit more from ICI than chemotherapy., Conclusions: ICI appears to be the preferred second-line treatment for patients who are refractory to first line chemotherapy., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

Objectives: Dyspnoea is one of the symptoms frequently encountered after treatment with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Long-term data on mild to moderately severe cardiac events as underlying cause of dyspnoea in patients with stage III NSCLC are lacking. Therefore, the incidence of new cardiac events, with a common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) score of ≥2 within 5 years after diagnosis, were analysed., Design: Retrospective multicentre cohort study of patients with stage III NSCLC treated with CRT from 2006 to 2013. The medical files of the treated patients were reviewed., Outcome Measures: The primary endpoint of the study was the incidence of new cardiac events with a CTCAE score of ≥2 within 5 years after diagnosis. Secondary endpoint was to identify risk factors associated with the development of a cardiac event., Results: Four hundred and sixty patients were included in the study. Of all patients, 150 (32.6%) developed a new cardiac event. In patients with a known cardiac history (n=138), 44.2% developed an event. The most common cardiac events were arrhythmia (14.6%), heart failure (7.6%) and symptomatic coronary artery disease (6.8%). Pre-existent cardiac comorbidity (HR 1.96; p<0.01) and WHO-performance score ≥2 (HR 2.71; p<0.01) were significantly associated with developing a cardiac event. The majority of patients did not have pre-existent cardiac comorbidity (n=322). Elevated WHO/International Society of Hypertension score was not identified as a significant predictor for cardiac events., Conclusion: One-third of patients with stage III NSCLC treated in daily clinical practice develop a new cardiac event within 5 years after CRT. All physicians confronted with patients with NSCLC should take cardiac comorbidity as a serious possible explanation for dyspnoea after treatment with CRT., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DDR reports personal fees from advisory board Bristol-Myers-Squibb, advisory board Roche/ Genentech, advisory board Merck/ Pfizer, advisory board Celgene, advisory board AstraZeneca, advisory board NOXXON, advisory board Mologen, outside the submitted work. LH reports other from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche and AstraZeneca, and grants from Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Quadia, outside the submitted work. AMCD reports personal fees from advisory board BMS, advisory board MSD, advisory board Roche, advisory board Eli Lilly, advisory board Takeda, advisory board Pfizer, advisory board Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work. JD, RH, BK, GB, EH, AS: none declared, (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Phase III studies of checkpoint inhibitors changed the therapeutic landscape for lung cancer. In 2015 the Dutch Society of Chest Physicians (NVALT) introduced a national immunotherapy registry for patients with lung cancer; quality standards for hospitals were implemented. At population level we studied clinical benefit in daily practice and in patients who are underrepresented in phase III trials., Materials and Methods: From the initial introduction of checkpoint inhibitors in the Netherlands patients were centrally registered. Educational programs and quality control were provided under supervision of NVALT. The largest immunotherapy providing hospitals were compared to hospitals who provided less checkpoint inhibitors as marker of experience. Patients characteristics, treatment and side effects, response rate and survival were studied., Results: A total of 2676 patients were registered, 2302 with follow up data were evaluated. Between October 2015 and December 2017 a gradual increase from 12 to 30 qualified hospitals showed no major toxicity differences. Toxicity led to a hospital admission rate of 9.1 with an average duration of 10.4 days. Overall tumor response was 21.8 % and median overall survival 12.6 months. Overall survival was not significantly different for patients aged ≥ 75 years, those having brain metastases or selected auto-immune diseases before start checkpoint inhibitors compared to younger patients or those without, respectively. Survival outcomes were worse in patients with PS 2+, non-smokers, and patients who received any palliative radiotherapy (HR 2.1, 95 % CI 1.7-2.7; 1.3, 95 % CI 1.0-1.6 and 1.2, 95 % CI 1.1-1.4, respectively)., Conclusions: Changes in the therapeutic landscape did not lead to major differences in quality of care between hospitals. Elderly patients, those with brain metastases or selected auto-immune disease underrepresented in clinical trials did not do worse on checkpoint inhibitors, except for those with PS 2 + ., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Leptomeningeal metastases (LMs) are associated with dismal prognosis in NSCLC. Optimal management remains unknown in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC after initial tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) failure., Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study including patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC and LM. TKI failure was defined as diagnosis of LM on TKI, or progression of known LM on TKI., Results: Ninety-two patients were included, median age of 60 years, predominantly female (68%), never-smokers (74%). EGFR mutations included L858R (45%), exon 19 deletions (28%), or other mutations (14%). Median time to LM diagnosis was 18.5 months after initial diagnosis of advanced NSCLC. LM was diagnosed after a median of 2 (range: 0-9) systemic therapies. Median overall survival from LM diagnosis was 6.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.2-7.6 months). Among 87 patients with TKI failure, patients rechallenged with TKI (n = 50) had a median LM overall survival of 7.6 months (95% CI: 5.7-10.9) compared to 4.2 months (95% CI: 1.6-6.7) in patients without further therapy. Overall, 60% of patients rechallenged with TKI experienced clinical benefit (clinical response or stable disease >2 months), and 23% were treatment failure-free at 6 months. Clinical benefit was reported in 11 of 20 (55%) patients treated with erlotinib after afatinib or gefitinib. Strategies based on increasing dose intensity (n = 17) yielded clinical benefit in 59% of patients. All four patients who received osimertinib after first- and second-generation TKI experienced clinical benefit., Conclusions: TKI rechallenge strategies, including dosing intensification, may improve clinical outcomes of patients with LM from EGFR-mutated NSCLC after initial TKI failure., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been incorporated in the treatment strategy of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in first- and second-line setting improving the prognosis of these patients. However, the treatment landscape has been also drastically overturned with the advent of targeted therapies in oncogenic-addicted advanced NSCLC patients. Despite ICIs represent an active and new treatment option for a wide range of advanced NSCLC patients, the efficacy and the optimal place of ICI in the treatment strategy algorithm of oncogenic-addicted tumors remains still controversial, as only a minority of trials with ICI enrol oncogenic-addicted NSCLC patients previously treated with standard therapy. Therefore, there are still several open questions about ICI in oncogenic-driven NSCLC, such as the efficacy and toxicities, which need to be addressed before considering treatment with ICI as a standard approach in this population. It is in this framework, we provide a thorough overview on this currently controversial topic., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Biological predisposition for specific metastatic organs might differ between molecular subgroups of lung cancer. We aimed to assess the association between molecular status and metastatic organs at diagnosis in a nationwide stage IV non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer ((ns)-NSCLC) cohort., Methods: All ns-NSCLC from 2013 that were stage IV at diagnosis were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, which records information on metastatic organs at diagnosis. Tumors were matched to the Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA) from which data on molecular status established in routine practice was extracted. Four molecular subgroups (EGFR+, KRAS+, ALK+, triple-negative) were identified. For each metastatic organ, proportions of tumors metastasized to this organ were, per molecular subgroup, compared to triple-negative tumors by multivariable logistic regression analyses (adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI)), taking clinicopathological variables into account., Results: 160 EGFR+ (exon 19 del, exon 21 L858R), 784 KRAS+, 42 ALK+, and 1008 triple-negative tumors were identified. Most frequent metastatic organs were the bone (34%), pleura (24%), lung (23%), and brain (22%). Compared to triple-negatives, EGFR+ tumors had more often metastases to the bone (31.5 vs 53.8%; OR 2.55 (95% CI 1.80-3.62)) and pleura (24.1 vs 37.5%; OR 2.06 (1.42-2.98)), and less often to the brain (22.0 vs 12.5%; OR 0.53 (0.32-0.88)) and adrenal glands (19.1 vs 7.5%; OR 0.46 (0.28-0.75)). Compared to triple-negatives, KRAS+ and ALK+ tumors had at diagnosis metastasized more often to the lung (20.3 vs 26.7%; OR 1.40 (1.12-1.76)) and the liver (13.1 vs 23.8%; OR 2.07 (1.00-4.32)), respectively., Conclusion: NSCLC molecular status was associated with metastatic pattern at diagnosis. 54% of stage IV EGFR+ ns-NSCLC patients had bone metastases at diagnosis. These observational results are hypothesis generating, and call for a prospective study where EGFR+ patients are screened for bone metastases, and treated to prevent skeletal related events., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Brain metastases (BM) are diagnosed frequently in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Despite the high incidence of BM (up to 40% in unselected patients), patients with untreated and/or unstable BM were excluded from pivotal immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) NSCLC trials. Percentage of patients with stable and treated BM in these trials ranged from 9.1 to 14.7% and ICI benefit over chemotherapy was not always demonstrated. Only small trials have been completed that demonstrated ICI efficacy in locally untreated, selected BM patients. With 33%, cranial objective response rate (ORR) was comparable to extracranial ORR and responses were often durable. With the promising survival benefits of ICI, in daily practice also unstable and/or untreated BM patients will often receive treatment with ICI and extrapolating clinical trial data to these patients can be challenging. In this review, we will summarize the preclinical rationale and potential concerns for the use of ICI in BM patients. Furthermore, we will summarize BM subgroup data from the pivotal NSCLC trials, retrospective series, the NSCLC BM specific ICI trials and the use of cranial radiation and ICI. Last, we provide an overview of response measurement criteria and future directions., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The incidence of brain metastases has increased in patients with NSCLC as a result of better systemic disease control and advances in imaging modalities. Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) has been the mainstay treatment of multiple symptomatic brain metastases for years. A number of recent publications have questioned its place in the absence of a survival and quality of life benefit and the possible risk for long-term neurotoxicity. Omission or deferral of WBRT and strategies consisting of stereotactic radiosurgery or delivery of systemic therapies alone are being proposed more and more. However, critical analysis of the literature shows that WBRT still has relevant indications in well-selected patients. Within this review, we discuss the place of WBRT in the modern management of patients with NSCLC., (Copyright © 2017 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: ALK rearrangement detection using FISH is the standard test to identify patients with non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) eligible for treatment with ALK inhibitors. Recently, ALK protein expression in resectable NSCLC showed predictive value. We evaluated tumor response rate and survival after crizotinib treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC with ALK activation using both dichotomous immunohistochemical (IHC) staining and FISH. Experimental Design: Patients with stage IV NSCLC treated with crizotinib were selected. Tumor response was assessed. ALK rearrangements were detected by FISH (Vysis ALK-break-apart FISH-Probe KIT) and IHC [Ventana ALK (D5F3) CDx assay]. Cohorts of patients with ALK-FISH-positive advanced NSCLC from four other hospitals were used for validation. Results: Twenty-nine consecutive patients with ALK-positive advanced NSCLC diagnosed by FISH and/or IHC on small biopsies or fine-needle aspirations (FNA) were treated with ALK inhibitors. All ALK-IHC-positive patients responded to crizotinib except three with primary resistance. No tumor response was observed in 13 ALK-FISH-positive but ALK-IHC-negative patients. This was confirmed in an external cohort of 16 patients. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves for ALK-IHC and ALK-FISH compared with treatment outcome showed that dichotomous ALK-IHC outperforms ALK-FISH [tumor response area under the curve: (AUC), 0.86 vs. 0.64, P = 0.03; progression-free survival (PFS): AUC 0.86 vs. 0.36, P = 0.005; overall survival (OS): AUC, 0.78 vs. 0.41, P = 0.01, respectively]. Conclusions: Dichotomous ALK-IHC is superior to ALK-FISH on small biopsies and FNA to predict tumor response and survival to crizotinib for patients with advanced NSCLC. Our data strongly suggest adapting the guidelines and using dichotomous ALK-IHC as standard companion diagnostic test to select patients with NSCLC who benefit from ALK-targeting therapy. Clin Cancer Res; 23(15); 4251-8. ©2017 AACR ., (©2017 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: To analyse the prognostic impact on overall survival (OS) of single versus multiple organ metastases, organ affected, and local disease status in a population based stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cohort., Methods: In this observational study, data were analysed of all histologically confirmed stage IV NSCLC patients diagnosed between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2012 registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Location of metastases before treatment was registered. Multivariable survival analyses [age, gender, histology, M-status, local disease status, number of involved organs, actual organ affected] were performed for all patients and for an (18)fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography ((18)FDG-PET)-staged subgroup., Results: 11,094 patients were selected: 60% male, mean age 65 years, 73% adenocarcinoma. Median OS for 1 (N = 5676), 2 (N = 3280), and ⩾ 3 (N = 2138) metastatically affected organs was 6.7, 4.3, 2.8 months, respectively (p < 0.001). Hazard ratio (HR) for 2 versus 1 organ(s) was 1.33 (p < 0.001), for ⩾ 3 versus 1 organ(s) 1.91 (p < 0.001). Results were confirmed in the (18)FDG-PET-staged cohort (N = 1517): patients with single organ versus 2 and ⩾ 3 organ metastases had higher OS (8.6, 5.7, 3.8 months, HR 1.40 and 2.17, respectively, p < 0.001). In single organ metastases, OS for low versus high TN-status was 8.5 versus 6.5 months [HR 1.40 (p < 0 .001)]. (18)FDG-PET-staged single organ metastases patients with low TN-status had a superior OS than those with high TN-status (11.6 versus 8.2 months, HR 1.62, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Patients with single organ metastases stage IV NSCLC have a favourable prognosis, especially in combination with low TN status. They have to be regarded as a separate subgroup of stage IV disease., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Both bone and brain are frequent sites of metastasis in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Conflicting data exist whether EGFR mutant (+) patients are more prone to develop brain metastases or have a better outcome with brain metastases compared to EGFR/KRAS wildtype (WT) or KRAS+ patients. For bone metastases this has not been studied., Methods: In this retrospective case-control study all EGFR+ (exons 19 and 21) patients diagnosed at two pathology departments were selected (2004/2008 to 2012). For every EGFR+ patient a consecutive KRAS+ and WT patient with metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC) was identified. Patients with another malignancy within 2 years of mNSCLC diagnosis were excluded. Data regarding age, gender, performance score, histology, treatment, bone/brain metastases diagnosis, skeletal related events (SRE) and subsequent survival were collected., Results: 189 patients were included: 62 EGFR+, 65 KRAS+, 62 WT. 32%, 35% and 40%, respectively, had brain metastases (p=0.645). Mean time to brain metastases was 20.8 [± 12.0], 10.8 [± 9.8], 16.4 [± 10.2] months (EGFR+-KRAS+, p = 0.020, EGFR+-WT, p = 0.321). Median post brain metastases survival was 12.1 [5.0-19.1], 7.6 [1.2-14.0], 10.7 [1.5-19.8] months (p = 0.674). 60%, 52% and 50% had metastatic bone disease (p=0.528). Mean time to development of metastatic bone disease was 13.4 [± 10.6], 23.3 [± 19.4], 16.4 [± 9.6] months (p = 0.201). Median post metastatic bone disease survival was 15.0 [10.6-20.3], 9.0 [5.2-12.9], 3.2 [0.0-6.9] months (p = 0.010). Time to 1st SRE was not significantly different., Conclusions: Incidence of brain and bone metastases was not different between EGFR+, KRAS+ and WT patients. Post brain metastases survival, time from mNSCLC diagnosis to metastatic bone disease and 1st SRE did not differ either. Post metastatic bone disease survival was significantly longer in EGFR+ patients. Although prevention of SRE's is important for all patients, the latter finding calls for a separate study for SRE preventing agents in EGFR+ patients., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)