Search

Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis, as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating provider and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2). Updates are published regularly and can be found at https://ascopubs.org/nsclc-da-living-guideline .

Introduction: Sarcoid-like reactions (SLRs) to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a rare but increasingly recognized immune-related adverse event of which the clinical significance is unclear., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary academic center of consecutive patients who received at least one dose of ICI from 2013 to 2020. Patient characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes were compared between patients with and without SLR following ICI treatment., Results: A total of 2963 cancer patients received at least 1 dose of ICI between 2013 and 2020, and 7 patients (0.24 %) developed SLR. There were no significant demographic differences between patients with and without SLR following ICI. SLRs occurred in 5 of 451 (1.07 %) melanoma patients and 2 of 840 (0.24 %) non-small cell lung cancer patients. Two of the 7 patients had multi-organ SLR, and both were symptomatic requiring systemic corticosteroids and permanent ICI discontinuation, while single organ SLR patients did not require immune suppression. Development of SLR did not appear to have negative impact on cancer progression or overall survival; in fact, a trend towards improved progression-free and overall survival was observed (median time: 1363 days vs 127 days, p = 0.091; 1387 days vs 428.5 days, p = 0.19, respectively)., Conclusions: SLRs are a known but understudied complication associated with ICI therapy. Multisystem SLR patients were more symptomatic and required ICI discontinuation and immune suppression. Larger studies are needed to fully evaluate the impact of SLR on cancer outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest There is no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Durvalumab improves survival when used as consolidation therapy after chemoradiation (CRT) in patients with stage III NSCLC. The optimal consolidation therapy for patients with EGFR-mutant (EGFRmut) stage III NSCLC remains unknown., Methods: In this multi-institutional, international retrospective analysis across 24 institutions, we evaluated outcomes in patients with stage III EGFRmut NSCLC treated with concurrent CRT followed by consolidation therapy with osimertinib, durvalumab, or observation between 2015 and 2022. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS, primary end point) and overall survival (secondary end point). Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) during consolidation treatment were defined using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used., Results: Of 136 patients with stage III EGFRmut NSCLC treated with definitive concurrent CRT, 56 received consolidation durvalumab, 33 received consolidation osimertinib, and 47 was on observation alone. Baseline characteristics were similar across the three cohorts. With a median follow-up of 46 months for the entire cohort, the median duration of treatment was not reached (NR) for osimertinib (interquartile range: NR-NR) and was 5.5 (interquartile range: 2.4-10.8) months with durvalumab. After adjusting for nodal status, stage III A/B/C, and age, patients treated with consolidation osimertinib had significantly longer 24-month rwPFS compared to those treated with durvalumab or in the observation cohorts (osimertinib: 86%, durvalumab: 30%, observation: 27%, p < 0.001 for both comparisons). There was no difference in rwPFS between the durvalumab and the observation cohorts. No significant difference in overall survival across the three cohorts was detected, likely due to the limited follow-up. Any-grade trAE occurred in 52% (2 [6.1%] grade ≥3) and 48% (10 [18%] grade ≥3) of patients treated with osimertinib and durvalumab, respectively. Of 45 patients who progressed on consolidation durvalumab, 37 (82%) subsequently received EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Of these, 14 (38%) patients developed trAEs including five patients with pneumonitis (14%; 2 [5.4%] grade ≥3) and five patients with diarrhea (14%; 1 [2.7%] grade ≥3)., Conclusions: This study suggests that among patients with stage III unresectable NSCLC with a sensitizing EGFR mutation, consolidation osimertinib was associated with a significantly longer rwPFS compared to durvalumab or observation. No unanticipated safety signals were observed with consolidation osimertinib., Competing Interests: Disclosure Dr. Nassar receives honoraria from OncLive, TEMPUS, and Korean Society for Medical Oncology and consulting fees from Guidepoint Global. Dr. Kim is on the advisory board for Amgen. Dr. Shepherd reports having stock and other ownership interests from Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca; receiving honoraria from AstraZeneca, Merck Serono, Takeda, and Daiichi Sankyo; having consulting/advisory role at AstraZeneca and Merck Serono; and receiving research funding from Eli Lilly (inst), Pfizer (inst), Bristol-Myers Squibb (inst), AstraZeneca/MedImmune (inst), and Roche Canada (inst). Dr. Gray reports receiving grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, G1 Therapeutics, Ludwig Institute of Cancer Research, Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis, and Pfizer; receiving consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, EMD Serono, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Loxo Oncology Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis, OncoCyte Biotechnology, Spectrum ODAC, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, and Triptych Health Partners; and having leadership role as SWOG Lung Committee Chair, IASLC Board of Director member, and ASCO Education Committee Ex-Chair. Dr. Dilling reports receiving consulting fees from AstraZeneca and support for travel from NCCN. Dr. Neal reports receiving grants from Genentech/Roche, Merck, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Exelixis, Nektar Therapeutics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Adaptimmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, AbbVie, and Novocure; receiving consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Exelixis, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly and Company, Amgen, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Blueprint Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Natera, Sanofi/Regeneron, D2G Oncology, Surface Oncology, Turning Point Therapeutics, Mirati Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, AbbVie, Summit Therapeutics, Novartis, Novocure, Janssen Oncology, and AnHeart Therapeutics; and receiving honorarium from CME Matters, Clinical Care Options CME, Research to Practice CME, Medscape CME, Biomedical Learning Institute CME, MLI Peerview CME, Prime Oncology CME, Projects in Knowledge CME, Rockpointe CME, MJH Life Sciences CME, Medical Educator Consortium, and HMP Education. Dr. Wakelee reports receiving grants from Arrys Therapeutics Research, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech/Roche, Merck, Helsinn, Seagen, and Xcovery; and serving on the advisory board of Mirati (compensated)—ended November 2022, IOBiotech (compensated)—October 2023, Merck (NOT compensated), and Genentech/Roche/Bristol-Myers Squibb/AstraZeneca (NOT compensated). Dr. S.H. Lin reports receiving grants from STCube Pharmaceuticals, Beyond Spring, and Nektar Therapeutics; consulting fees from XRAD Therapeutics; serving on the advisory board of AstraZeneca; having stock/stock options from Apple, Google, Amazon, Tesla, Meta, Rivian, and CreatvMicrotech; and having other support from SEEK Diagnostics (co-founder). Dr. Patil reports receiving grants from Gilead Research Scholars and LUNGevity Foundation Award; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bicara, Daiichi, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Mirati Therapeutics, Pfizer, Sanofi, Regeneron, Roche/Genentech, Takeda, Gilead Research Scholars, and LUNGevity Foundation Award; and honorarium from Janssen. Dr. Bar reports receiving grants from Merck Sharp & Dohme, AstraZeneca, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, AbbVie, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Pfizer; receiving consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, AbbVie, Pfizer, Bayer, and VBL; and having leadership role from Lung Ambition Consortium, Israel Lung Cancer Group, and IASLC committee. Dr. Marron receives grants from Regeneron, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Boehringer Ingelheim, NCI, and Cancer Research Institute; and serving on the advisory board of AbbVie, Celldex, and Rockefeller University. Dr. Yu receives grants/contracts from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Daiichi Cullinan Oncology, Janssen, Novartis, Blueprint med, Black Diamond, and Systimmune and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Daiichi, Taiho, Takeda, Janssen, Amgen, AbbVie, Novocure, and Ipsen. Dr. Owen receives grants/contracts from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Palobiofarma, Genentech, Onc.AI, and Pfizer; and travel support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Genentech. Rocha receives grants/contracts from SEOM, ESMO Fellowship, and AECC; and travel support from Merck Sharp & Dohme, AstraZeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr. Arriola receives grants/contracts from AstraZeneca and Bristol-Myers Squibb; honorarium from Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Roche, Takeda, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Janssen, and Bristol-Myers Squibb; and travel support from AstraZeneca, Roche, and Pfizer. Dr. Cheng receives grants/contracts from AstraZeneca and Genentech; and serving on the advisory board of Janssen, G1 Therapeutics, and AstraZeneca. Dr. Parikh receives consulting fees from Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Guardant Health, and AstraZeneca; and honorarium from MJH Life Sciences. Dr. Harris receives grants/contract from NIH P30CA062203, the UC Irvine Comprehensive Cancer Center using UCI Anti-Cancer Challenge Grant, and ACS Seed Grant 129801-IRG-16-187-13-IRG; and serving on the advisory board of UC Irvine as DSMB member. Dr. Nagasaka receives consulting fees from Caris Life Sciences; honorarium/speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Daiichi, Novartis, EMD Serono self, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Regeneron, Takeda, Janssen, Blueprint, and Mirati; travel support from AnHeart Therapeutics; and stock/stock options from Mbrace Therapeutics. Dr. Valazquez receives grants/contracts from ASCO, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), LUNGevity, NIA P30AG015272, NCI 5U54CA242646-03 Conquer Cancer and Niarchos Foundation, UCSF Clinical Practice Group, and AAMC; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Merus, Novocure, and Cadence Communications & Research; and having stock/stock options from Corbus Pharmaceuticals. Dr. J.J. Lin receives grants/contracts from Hengrui Therapeutics, Turning Point Therapeutics, Neon Therapeutics, Relay Therapeutics, Bayer, Elevation Oncology, Roche, Linnaeus Therapeutics, Nuvalent, and Novartis; consulting fees from Genentech, C4 Therapeutics, Blueprint Medicines, Nuvalent, Bayer, Elevation Oncology, Novartis, Mirati Therapeutics, AnHeart Therapeutics, Takeda, CLaiM Therapeutics, Regeneron, Pfizer, Turning Point Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, and Merus. Dr. Piotrowska receives grants/contracts from Novartis, Takeda, Spectrum, AstraZeneca, Tesaro/GlaxoSmithKline, Cullinan Oncology, Daiichi Sankyo, AbbVie, Janssen, and Blueprint; consulting fees from Taiho, Janssen, Takeda, AstraZeneca, Cullinan Oncology, C4 Therapeutics, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and Blueprint; and honorarium from Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, and Eli Lilly (honoraria for nonpromotional educational events). Dr. Reuss receives grants/contracts from Genentech/Roche, Verastem, Nuvalent, and LUNGevity Foundation; consulting fees from Genentech/Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Personalis, Guardant, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Arcus, AbbVie, Daiichi Sankyo, Catalym, Seagen, and Gilead; and honorarium from AstraZeneca and Merck. Dr. Baena Espinar receives consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Roche, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; honorarium from AstraZeneca, Roche, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; payment for expert testimony from Roche; and travel support from Roche and Janssen. Leal receives research funding to institution from Pfizer, Advaxis, and Bayer, outside the submitted work. Dr. Mak receives grants/contracts from ViewRay; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Sio Capital Management; and other support from Founder of HealthAI. Dr. Naqash receives grants/contracts from SWOG Hope Foundation and FDA Broad Agency Contract; serving on the advisory board of JCO Precision Oncology; receiving travel support from SITC/American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)/Conquer Cancer Foundation/BinayTara Foundation and Foundation Med/Caris Life Sciences, and Jazz Pharmaceuticals; and funding to institution for trials from Loxo@Lilly, Surface Oncology, ADC Therapeutics, IGM Biosciences, EMD Serono, Aravive, Nikang Therapeutics, Inspirna, Exelexis, Revolution Medicine, Jacobio, Pionyr, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, NGM Biopharmaceuticals, Immunophotonics, and Selexine. Dr. Goldberg receives grants/contracts from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Mirati; and serving on the advisory board of AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Sanofi, Genzyme, Daiichi Sankyo, Regeneron, Takeda, Janssen, Summit, and Merck. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) provide recommendations for the treatment of patients with NSCLC, including diagnosis, primary disease management, surveillance for relapse, and subsequent treatment. The panel has updated the list of recommended targeted therapies based on recent FDA approvals and clinical data. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for NSCLC focuses on treatment recommendations for advanced or metastatic NSCLC with actionable molecular biomarkers.

Purpose: To provide evidence-based recommendations for patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer with driver alterations., Methods: This ASCO living guideline offers continually updated recommendations based on an ongoing systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), with the latest time frame spanning February to October 2023. An Expert Panel of medical oncology, pulmonary, community oncology, research methodology, and advocacy experts were convened. The literature search included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials. Outcomes of interest include efficacy and safety. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations., Results: This guideline consolidates all previous updates and reflects the body of evidence informing this guideline topic. Eight new RCTs were identified in the latest search of the literature to date., Recommendations: Evidence-based recommendations were updated to address first, second, and subsequent treatment options for patients based on targetable driver alterations.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/living-guidelines.

Purpose: To provide evidence-based recommendations for patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without driver alterations., Methods: This ASCO living guideline offers continually updated recommendations based on an ongoing systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), with the latest time frame spanning February to October 2023. An Expert Panel of medical oncology, pulmonary, community oncology, research methodology, and advocacy experts were convened. The literature search included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials. Outcomes of interest include efficacy and safety. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations., Results: This guideline consolidates all previous updates and reflects the body of evidence informing this guideline topic. Ten new RCTs were identified in the latest search of the literature to date., Recommendations: Evidence-based recommendations were updated to address first, second, and subsequent treatment options for patients without driver alterations.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/living-guidelines.

Mutations in BRAF are present in 4% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), of which half are well-characterized activating variants affecting codon 600 (classified as class I). These mutations, most commonly BRAF V600E, have been associated with response to BRAF/MEK-directed small molecule kinase inhibitors. NSCLC with kinase-activating BRAF mutations occurring at other codons (class II variants) represent a substantial portion of BRAF-mutated NSCLC, but use of targeted therapy in these tumors is still under investigation. Class II mutations have been described in other tumor types and have been associated with response to BRAF/MEK-targeted agents, although optimal treatment strategies for these patients are lacking. This report presents a case of a woman with metastatic NSCLC harboring a class II BRAF p.N486&#95;P490del variant who had a sustained clinical response to combination therapy with dabrafenib and trametinib. This first report of the use of BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy for this variant in NSCLC supports consideration of such treatment for tumors with class II BRAF variants.

Background: We investigated the role of A2B-adenosine receptor in regulating immunosuppressive metabolic stress in the tumor microenvironment. Novel A2B-adenosine receptor antagonist PBF-1129 was tested for antitumor activity in mice and evaluated for safety and immunologic efficacy in a phase I clinical trial of patients with non-small cell lung cancer., Methods: The antitumor efficacy of A2B-adenosine receptor antagonists and their impact on the metabolic and immune tumor microenvironment were evaluated in lung, melanoma, colon, breast, and epidermal growth factor receptor-inducible transgenic cancer models. Employing electron paramagnetic resonance, we assessed changes in tumor microenvironment metabolic parameters, including pO2, pH, and inorganic phosphate, during tumor growth and evaluated the immunologic effects of PBF-1129, including its pharmacokinetics, safety, and toxicity, in patients with non-small cell lung cancer., Results: Levels of metabolic stress correlated with tumor growth, metastasis, and immunosuppression. Tumor interstitial inorganic phosphate emerged as a correlative and cumulative measure of tumor microenvironment stress and immunosuppression. A2B-adenosine receptor inhibition alleviated metabolic stress, downregulated expression of adenosine-generating ectonucleotidases, increased expression of adenosine deaminase, decreased tumor growth and metastasis, increased interferon γ production, and enhanced the efficacy of antitumor therapies following combination regimens in animal models (anti-programmed cell death 1 protein vs anti-programmed cell death 1 protein plus PBF-1129 treatment hazard ratio = 11.74 [95% confidence interval = 3.35 to 41.13], n = 10, P < .001, 2-sided F test). In patients with non-small cell lung cancer, PBF-1129 was well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities; demonstrated pharmacologic efficacy; modulated the adenosine generation system; and improved antitumor immunity., Conclusions: Data identify A2B-adenosine receptor as a valuable therapeutic target to modify metabolic and immune tumor microenvironment to reduce immunosuppression, enhance the efficacy of immunotherapies, and support clinical application of PBF-1129 in combination therapies., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a first-line and perioperative treatment for lung cancer. Pneumonitis is a potentially life-threatening complication of ICI treatment in 2% to 5% of patients; however, risk factors for developing ICI pneumonitis (ICI-p) remain undefined., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with lung cancer who received at least one dose of ICI from 2015 through 2020 at The Ohio State University. Pneumonitis cases were documented by the treating oncologist and retrospectively evaluated for agreement between an oncologist and a pulmonologist. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded and summarized between those with and without pneumonitis for the overall cohort. Univariate and multivariable survival analyses using the Fine-Gray competing risk model were used to examine the associations., Results: A total of 471 patients with lung cancer were included, of which 402 had non-small cell lung cancer and 69 had small cell lung cancer; 39 (8%) patients in the overall cohort developed ICI-p. Preexisting interstitial abnormalities and prior chest radiation were both significantly associated with ICI-p on univariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 8.91; 95% CI, 4.69-16.92; P<.001; and HR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.50-5.28; P=.001). On multivariable analyses, interstitial abnormalities remained a strong independent risk factor for ICI-p when controlling for chest radiation and type of immunotherapy (HR, 9.77; 95% CI, 5.17-18.46; P<.001). Among patients with ICI-p (n=39), those with severe (grade 3-5) pneumonitis had worse overall survival compared with those with mild (grade 1 or 2) pneumonitis (P=.001). Abnormal pulmonary function test results at both 12 and 18 months prior to ICI initiation were not significantly associated with ICI-p., Conclusions: Preexisting interstitial abnormalities on chest CT and prior chest radiation are independent risk factors that are strongly associated with ICI-p in patients with lung cancer. These findings highlight a potential need for closer observation for ICI-p among patients with these risk factors.

Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis; as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating provider and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2). Updates are published regularly and can be found at https://ascopubs.org/nsclc-da-living-guideline .

Purpose: Compared with people living without HIV (PWOH), people living with HIV (PWH) and cancer have traditionally been excluded from immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) trials. Furthermore, there is a paucity of real-world data on the use of ICIs in PWH and cancer., Methods: This retrospective study included PWH treated with anti-PD-1- or anti-PD-L1-based therapies for advanced cancers. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Objective response rates (ORRs) were measured per RECIST 1.1 or other tumor-specific criteria, whenever feasible. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) was used to compare OS and PFS between matched PWH and PWOH with metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC)., Results: Among 390 PWH, median age was 58 years, 85% (n = 331) were males, 36% (n = 138) were Black; 70% (n = 274) received anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 monotherapy. Most common cancers were NSCLC (28%, n = 111), hepatocellular carcinoma ([HCC]; 11%, n = 44), and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC; 10%, n = 39). Seventy percent (152/216) had CD4+ T cell counts ≥200 cells/µL, and 94% (179/190) had HIV viral load <400 copies/mL. Twenty percent (79/390) had any grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and 7.7% (30/390) had grade ≥3 irAEs. ORRs were 69% (nonmelanoma skin cancer), 31% (NSCLC), 16% (HCC), and 11% (HNSCC). In the matched mNSCLC cohort (61 PWH v 110 PWOH), 20% (12/61) PWH and 22% (24/110) PWOH had irAEs. Adjusted 42-month RMST difference was -0.06 months (95% CI, -5.49 to 5.37; P = .98) for PFS and 2.23 months (95% CI, -4.02 to 8.48; P = .48) for OS., Conclusion: Among PWH, ICIs demonstrated differential activity across cancer types with no excess toxicity. Safety and activity of ICIs were similar between matched cohorts of PWH and PWOH with mNSCLC.

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.)

Introduction: Patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may not response to treatment and are at risk for immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Platelet function has been linked to both oncogenesis and immune evasion. We studied the association between the change in mean platelet volume (MPV), platelet count, survival, and the risk of developing irAEs in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have received first-line ICI., Methods: In this retrospective study, delta (∆) MPV was defined as the difference between cycle 2 and baseline MPV. Patient data were collected via chart review, and Cox proportional hazard and Kaplan-Meier method were used to assess the risk and estimate median overall survival., Results: We identified 188 patients treated with first-line pembrolizumab, with or without concurrent chemotherapy. There were 80 (42.6%) patients received pembrolizumab monotherapy, and 108 (57.4%) received pembrolizumab in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients whose MPV (∆MPV ≤ 0) decreased had hazard ratio (HR) = 0.64 (95% CI 0.43-0.94) for death with p = 0.023. Patients with ∆MPV ≤ - 0.2 fL (median), there was a 58% increase in the risk of developing irAE (HR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.04-2.40, p = 0.031). Thrombocytosis at baseline and cycle 2 was associated with shorter OS with p = 0.014 and 0.039, respectively., Conclusion: Change in MPV after 1 cycle of pembrolizumab-based treatment was significantly associated with overall survival as well as the occurrence of irAEs in patients with metastatic NSCLC in the first-line setting. In addition, thrombocytosis was associated with poor survival., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis; as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual. ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines. Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating provider and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2). Updates are published regularly and can be found at https://ascopubs.org/nsclc-non-da-living-guideline .

Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis; as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual. ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines. Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating provider and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2). Updates are published regularly and can be found at https://ascopubs.org/nsclc-da-living-guideline .

Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis; as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating provider and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information ( Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 ). Updates are published regularly and can be found at https://ascopubs.org/nsclc-da-living-guideline .

Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis, as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating provider and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information ( Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 ). Updates are published regularly and can be found at https://ascopubs.org/nsclc-non-da-living-guideline .

Objective: Multimodality treatment for resectable non-small cell lung cancer has long remained at a therapeutic plateau. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are highly effective in advanced non-small cell lung cancer and promising preoperatively in small clinical trials for resectable non-small cell lung cancer. This large multicenter trial tested the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant atezolizumab and surgery., Methods: Patients with stage IB to select IIIB resectable non-small cell lung cancer and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1 were eligible. Patients received atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for 2 cycles or less followed by resection. The primary end point was major pathological response in patients without EGFR/ALK+ alterations. Pre- and post-treatment computed tomography, positron emission tomography, pulmonary function tests, and biospecimens were obtained. Adverse events were recorded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.4.0., Results: From April 2017 to February 2020, 181 patients were entered in the study. Baseline characteristics were mean age, 65.1 years; female, 93 of 181 (51%); nonsquamous histology, 112 of 181 (62%); and clinical stages IIB to IIIB, 147 of 181 (81%). In patients without EGFR/ALK alterations who underwent surgery, the major pathological response rate was 20% (29/143; 95% confidence interval, 14-28) and the pathological complete response rate was 6% (8/143; 95% confidence interval, 2-11). There were no grade 4/5 treatment-related adverse events preoperatively. Of 159 patients (87.8%) undergoing surgery, 145 (91%) had pathologic complete resection. There were 5 (3%) intraoperative complications, no intraoperative deaths, and 2 postoperative deaths within 90 days, 1 treatment related. Median disease-free and overall survival have not been reached., Conclusions: Neoadjuvant atezolizumab in resectable stage IB to IIIB non-small cell lung cancer was well tolerated, yielded a 20% major pathological response rate, and allowed safe, complete surgical resection. These results strongly support the further development of immune checkpoint inhibitors as preoperative therapy in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis, as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual. ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines. Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating provider and do not account for individual variation among patients. See Appendix 1 (online only) for disclaimers and other important information. Updates are published regularly and can be found at https://ascopubs.org/nsclc-non-da-living-guideline .

Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis, as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual. ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines. Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating provider and do not account for individual variation among patients. See Appendix 1 (online only) for disclaimers and other important information. Updates are published regularly and can be found at https://ascopubs.org/nsclc-da-living-guideline .

In an ongoing, open-label, single-arm phase II study ( NCT02927301 ), 181 patients with untreated, resectable, stage IB-IIIB non-small cell lung cancer received two doses of neoadjuvant atezolizumab monotherapy. The primary end point was major pathological response (MPR; ≤10% viable malignant cells) in resected tumors without EGFR or ALK alterations. Of the 143 patients in the primary end point analysis, the MPR was 20% (95% confidence interval, 14-28%). With a minimum duration of follow-up of 3 years, the 3-year survival rate of 80% was encouraging. The most common adverse events during the neoadjuvant phase were fatigue (39%, 71 of 181) and procedural pain (29%, 53 of 181), along with expected immune-related toxicities; there were no unexpected safety signals. In exploratory analyses, MPR was predicted using the pre-treatment peripheral blood immunophenotype based on 14 immune cell subsets. Immune cell subsets predictive of MPR in the peripheral blood were also identified in the tumor microenvironment and were associated with MPR. This study of neoadjuvant atezolizumab in a large cohort of patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer was safe and met its primary end point of MPR ≥ 15%. Data from this single-arm, non-randomized trial suggest that profiles of innate immune cells in pre-treatment peripheral blood may predict pathological response after neoadjuvant atezolizumab, but additional studies are needed to determine whether these profiles can inform patient selection and new therapeutic approaches., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are now utilized as a standard of care treatment for multiple cancers, including in both the metastatic setting as well as in earlier stages of disease. The identification of unique immune-related adverse events (irAE) that occur during ICI treatment has led to intense research to identify potential risk factors and biomarkers that may assist in clinical decision making. Although initial studies in ICI were primarily in advanced stage disease, the use of ICI in earlier stages of disease as adjuvant therapies requires a better understanding of patient risk stratification to mitigate or prevent serious irAE., Areas Covered: In this review, we set out to describe the current state of research regarding potential risk factors for irAE in patients with non-small cell lung cancer, as well as explore the barriers to understanding irAE. We review data from irAE that occur in large phase 3 trials and prospective studies focusing on irAE, as well as the many retrospective studies that currently form the bulk of our understanding of irAE.

Background: Cancer cachexia exhibits decreased albumin and associates with short overall survival (OS) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but whether on-treatment albumin changes associate with OS in NSCLC patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and combination chemoimmunotherapy has not been thoroughly evaluated., Patients and Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective study of patients with advanced NSCLC who received first-line ICI with or without chemotherapy between 2013 and 2020. The association of pretreatment albumin and early albumin changes with OS was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression models., Results: A total of 210 patients were included: 109 in ICI cohort and 101 in ICI + Chemo cohort. Within a median of 21 days from treatment initiation, patients with ≥ 10% of albumin decrease had significantly shorter OS compared to patients without albumin decrease in ICI cohort. Pretreatment albumin and albumin decrease within the first or second cycle of treatment were significantly and independently associated with OS in ICI cohort, but not in ICI + Chemo cohort. The lack of association between albumin and OS with the addition of chemotherapy was more pronounced among patients with ≥ 1% PD-L1 expression in subgroup analysis., Conclusion: Pretreatment serum albumin and early albumin decrease in ICI monotherapy was significantly associated with OS in advanced NSCLC. Early albumin change, as a routine lab value tested in clinic, may be combined with established biomarkers to improve outcome predictions of ICI monotherapy. The underlying mechanism of the observed association between decreased albumin and ICI resistance warrants further investigation., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The timing of immune-related adverse events (irAE) associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is highly variable. Although the development of irAE has been associated with ICI clinical benefit, how irAE timing influences this association is unknown. We analyzed two independent cohorts including 154 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors at a single institution (UTSW cohort) and a multi-center cohort of 433 patients with NSCLC who received second-line anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy (Global cohort) to assess the association between ICI outcomes and irAE timing. In both cohorts, late-onset irAE occurring more than 3 months after ICI initiation compared to irAE occurring earlier were associated with greater rates of radiographic response (UTSW cohort, 41% versus 28%, P = .26; Global cohort, 60% versus 35%, P = .02), longer progression-free (UTSW cohort, 13.7 versus 5.6 months, P < .01; Global cohort, not reached versus 6.0 months, P < .01) and overall survival (UTSW cohort, 30.9 versus 14.6 months, P < .01; Global cohort, not reached versus 10.6 months, P < .01). Modified landmark analysis at 6 months confirmed an overall survival difference between early- and late-onset irAE. Late-onset irAE was similarly associated with greater response rates and prolonged survival in a cohort of 130 patients with non-NSCLC malignancies, suggesting a conserved association across tumor types. The favorable association between irAE and ICI clinical outcomes may be attributed to later-onset events, which is not wholly explained by survivor bias. These results allude to a distinct biology between early- and late-onset irAE and may guide clinician expectations and thresholds for continuing or modifying immunotherapy., Competing Interests: No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s)., (© 2022 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.)

Importance: Geriatric (aged ≥80 years) patients are historically underrepresented in cancer clinical trials. Little is known about the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in geriatric patients. These agents are associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which may be particularly associated with morbidity in this population., Objective: To provide insight into the clinical outcomes and safety of ICIs among geriatric patients (aged ≥80 years) with cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: A Multicenter, international retrospective study of 928 geriatric patients with different tumors treated with single-agent ICIs between 2010 to 2019 from 18 academic centers in the US and Europe. Analyses were conducted from January 2021 to April 2021., Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical outcomes and irAE patterns in geriatric patients treated with single-agent ICIs., Results: Median (range) age of the 928 patients at ICI initiation was 83.0 (75.8-97.0) years. Most patients (806 [86.9%]) were treated with anti-programmed cell death 1 therapy. Among the full cohort, the 3 most common tumors were non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC, 345 [37.2%]), melanoma (329 [35.5%]), and genitourinary (GU) tumors (153 [16.5%]). Objective response rates for patients with NSCLC, melanoma, and GU tumors were 32.2%, 39.3%, and 26.2%, respectively. Median PFS and OS, respectively, were 6.7 and 10.9 months (NSCLC), 11.1 and 30.0 months (melanoma), and 6.0 and 15.0 months (GU). Within histologically specific subgroups (NSCLC, melanoma, and GU), clinical outcomes were similar across age subgroups (aged <85 vs ≥85 years). Among all 928 patients, 383 (41.3%) experienced ≥1 irAE(s), including 113 (12.2%) that were reported to be grade (G) 3 to 4 based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 5.0). The median time to irAE onset was 9.8 weeks; 219 (57%) occurred within the first 3 months after ICI initiation. Discontinuation of treatment with ICIs owing to irAEs occurred in 137 (16.1%) patients. There was no significant difference in the rate of irAEs among patients aged younger than 85, 85 to 89, and 90 years or older. Despite the similar rate of G3 or higher irAEs, ICIs were discontinued due to irAEs more than twice as often among patients aged 90 years or older compared with patients younger than 90 years (30.9% vs 15.1%, P = .008)., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this international cohort study suggest that treatment with ICIs may be effective and generally well tolerated among older patients with cancer, though ICI discontinuation owing to irAEs was more frequent with increasing age.

Purpose: We report the intracranial efficacy of selpercatinib, a highly potent and selective RET inhibitor, approved in the United States for RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: In the global phase 1/2 LIBRETTO-001 trial (NCT03157128) in advanced RET -altered solid tumors, selpercatinib was dosed orally (160 mg twice every day) in 28-day cycles. Patients with baseline intracranial metastases had MRI/CT scans every 8 weeks for 1 year (12 weeks thereafter). In this pre-planned analysis of patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC with baseline intracranial metastases, the primary endpoint was independently assessed intracranial objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints included intracranial disease control rate, intracranial duration of response, and intracranial progression-free survival (PFS) independently reviewed., Results: Eighty patients with NSCLC had brain metastases at baseline. Patients were heavily pretreated (median = 2 systemic therapies, range = 0-10); 56% of patients received ≥1 course of intracranial radiation (14% whole brain radiotherapy, 45% stereotactic radiosurgery). Among 22 patients with measurable intracranial disease at baseline, intracranial ORR was 82% [95% confidence interval (CI), 60-95], including 23% with complete responses. Among all intracranial responders (measurable and nonmeasurable, n = 38), median duration of intracranial response was not reached (95% CI, 9.3-NE) at a median duration of follow-up of 9.5 months (IQR = 5.7, 12.0). At 12 months, 55% of intracranial responses were ongoing. In all 80 patients, median intracranial PFS was 13.7 months (95% CI, 10.9-NE) at a median duration of follow-up of 11.0 months (IQR = 7.4, 16.5). No new safety signals were revealed in patients with brain metastases compared with the full NSCLC trial population., Conclusions: Selpercatinib has robust and durable intracranial efficacy in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC., (©2021 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Next-generation sequencing of circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) can identify sensitizing and resistance mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). cfDNA is helpful when tissue is insufficient for genomic testing or repeat biopsy is not feasible or poses unacceptable risk. Here we report the experience of cfDNA testing at the time of diagnosis and how this intervention can help avoid further invasive interventions, how it can be used to determine initiation of therapy, and how variation allele frequency of the somatic alteration affects response to subsequent treatment., Patients and Methods: This is a single-institution retrospective study of patients with advanced NSCLC who had cfDNA from plasma tested using the Guardant360 panel, which identifies somatic genomic alterations by massive parallel sequencing of target genes. An institutional Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments tissue panel using fluorescence in situ hybridization (for MET, RET, ROS1, and ALK) and next-generation sequencing for selected genes was used for tissue analysis. Actionable mutations are those with US Food and Drug Administration-approved targeted therapies (EGFR, ALK, ROS, BRAF, NTRK fusions) or therapies soon to be approved (RET fusions and MET amplifications, or MET exon 14 skipping mutation)., Results: A total of 163 blood samples from 143 patients were evaluated, 82 at diagnosis and 81 at disease progression. A total of 94 cases had tissue and cfDNA testing performed within 12 weeks of each other. Seventy-six (81%) of 94 cases were concordant, of which 22 cases were concordantly positive and 54 concordantly negative. Eighteen (19%) of 94 cases were discordant, of which 11 had negative blood and positive tissue results, and 7 had positive blood and negative tissue results. cfDNA testing had a sensitivity of 67% (95% confidence interval [CI], 51%, 83%), specificity of 89% (95% CI, 81%, 97%), negative predictive value of 83% (95% CI, 74%, 92%), and positive predictive value of 76% (95% CI, 60%, 91%). Nineteen (21%) of 82 cfDNA samples analyzed at diagnosis had actionable mutations identified (4 EGFR exon 19 deletion, 2 EGFR exon 21 L858R, 2 EGFR L861Q, 1 L861R, 4 EML4-ALK fusion, 2 CD74-ROS1 fusion, 2 MET exon 14 skipping mutation, 2 KIF5B-RET fusion). Of the 82 patients with cfDNA testing performed at the time of diagnosis, 8 patients (10%) initiated targeted therapy on the basis of cfDNA results only, with 6 patients experiencing partial response, 1 patient complete response, and 1 patient stable disease. The response rate for patients who initiated targeted therapies on the basis of cfDNA only at diagnosis was 88%. Variant allele frequency had no impact on response., Conclusions: Initiation of targeted therapy for advanced NSCLC was feasible based only on identification of actionable mutations by cfDNA testing in 9% of the cases for which tissue diagnosis could not be obtained. Actionable targets were identified by cfDNA in 20% of the samples sent at diagnosis. A substantial number of patients benefited from cfDNA testing at initial diagnosis because it identified actionable mutations that led to appropriate targeted treatments., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Bone metastases and skeletal-related events (SREs) are a frequent cause of morbidity in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). Data are limited on bone metastases and SREs in patients with mNSCLC treated using immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and on the efficacy of bone-modifying agents (BMAs) in this setting. Here we report the incidence, impact on survival, risk factors for bone metastases and SREs, and impact of BMAs in patients with mNSCLC treated with ICIs in a multi-institutional cohort., Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with mNSCLC treated with ICIs at 2 tertiary care centers from 2014 through 2017. Overall survival (OS) was compared between patients with and without baseline bone metastases using a log-rank test. A Cox regression model was used to evaluate the association between OS and the presence of bone metastases at ICI initiation, controlling for other confounding factors., Results: We identified a cohort of 330 patients who had received ICIs for metastatic disease. Median patient age was 63 years, most patients were treated in the second line or beyond (n=259; 78%), and nivolumab was the most common ICI (n=211; 64%). Median OS was 10 months (95% CI, 8.4-12.0). In our cohort, 124 patients (38%) had baseline bone metastases, and 43 (13%) developed SREs during or after ICI treatment. Patients with bone metastases had a higher hazard of death after controlling for performance status, histology, line of therapy, and disease burden (hazard ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.19-2.08; P=.001). Use of BMAs was not associated with OS or a decreased risk of SREs., Conclusions: Presence of bone metastases at baseline was associated with a worse prognosis for patients with mNSCLC treated with ICI after controlling for multiple clinical characteristics. Use of BMAs was not associated with reduced SREs or a difference in survival.

Background: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) comprise a distinct spectrum of auto-inflammatory manifestations triggered due to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Current data on the association of irAEs with outcomes in NSCLC treated with nivolumab are limited., Methods and Objectives: We pooled data from 531 metastatic NSCLC patients from five centers treated with nivolumab after failing platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary objective was to investigate the relationship between irAEs with clinical benefit to nivolumab as well as to elucidate patterns of irAE-related ICI discontinuations and their impact on survival., Results: 33.0% (173/531) of patients treated with nivolumab were noted to have an irAE. Patients with irAEs had a significantly longer median PFS [6.1 vs. 3.1 months, HR 0.68 95% CI (0.55-0.85); p = 0.001] and OS [14.9 vs. 7.4 months, HR 0.66 95% CI (0.52-0.82); p < 0.001)] compared to those without irAEs. In multivariate analysis, the presence of irAEs showed a significantly better PFS [HR 0.69, 95% CI (0.55-0.87); p = 0.002] and a trend for better OS [HR 0.62, 95% CI (0.55-1.03); p = 0.057]. Patients with permanent ICI discontinuation secondary to index irAE had a significantly shorter median PFS [2.3 vs. 6.6 months, HR 1.74 95% CI (1.06-2.80); p = 0.02] and median OS [3.6 vs. 17.6 months; HR 2.61 95% CI (1.61-4.21); p < 0.001] compared to those that did not have permanent ICI discontinuation., Conclusions: Our pooled exploratory analysis demonstrates improved clinical benefit to nivolumab in NSCLC patients experiencing irAEs. We also observed negative impact of irAE-related treatment discontinuation on survival in this group of patients.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has been approved for several solid tumors, including non-small cell lung cancer. ICIs have shown unprecedented durable responses and higher response rates than chemotherapy in selected patients. The development of biomarkers that serve as predictors of response is crucial for treatment selection. Evidence suggests that the response to immunotherapy depends on tumor genomics and the interactions with the immune system and the tumor microenvironment. This article reviews the data supporting the use of these biomarkers to optimize patient selection for these therapies and explores biomarkers that are the focus of ongoing research., Competing Interests: Disclosure DHO is a supported by the Paul Calabresi Career Development Award for Clinical Oncology (K12CA133250)., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Chemotherapy remains a cornerstone treatment in non-small cell lung cancer either in combination with checkpoint inhibitors or as subsequent therapy. Identifying molecular predictors of response allows for optimal treatment selection. We performed genomic analysis on tumor samples of patients treated with carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel as part of a phase II trial to evaluate the prognostic and predictive value of mutations in DNA repair pathway in patients treated with this regimen., Materials and Methods: Next-generation sequencing libraries were produced using a capture-based targeted panel covering the coding exons of 278 genes on patients treated on clinical trial NCT00729612. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed as part of the clinical outcomes and correlated with mutation analysis., Results: Of 63 patients enrolled, 25 patients had sufficient and acceptable DNA isolated from archival tumor samples for targeted sequencing. The most commonly altered pathways included DNA repair (DR) including Fanconi anemia and homologous recombination, JAK-STAT signaling, IGF-1, mTOR, and MAPK-ERK. Four patients with mutations in homologous recombination mutations had a shorter PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 4.54, 95% CI 1.2, 17.1, p = 0.026) and OS (HR = 6.3, 95% CI 1.8, 21.3, p = 0.003)., Conclusion: In this analysis of patients with predominantly squamous cell non-small cell lung cancer treated with carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel in a phase II trial, patients with mutations in homologous recombination pathways had shorter overall and progression-free survival. Validation on additional datasets of patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy and immunotherapy combinations is warranted., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The risk factors for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) remain undefined. Recently, a correlation between irAEs and clinical benefit was suggested. We examined the risk factors for irAEs and their effect on survival in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had received immunotherapy., Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients with NSCLC treated with single-agent immunotherapy at our institution. irAEs were determined by treating physician diagnosis. A landmark analysis was performed at 3 months using log-rank tests and the Bonferroni method., Results: irAEs occurred in 27 of 91 patients (30%). The median overall survival (OS) for patients with irAEs was longer than that for patients without (24.3 vs. 5.3 months; hazard ratio, 2.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-4.92; P < .001). However, a landmark analysis of patients after 3 months of treatment revealed no difference in OS between patients with and without irAEs. No increased risk of pneumonitis was seen in patients with previous thoracic radiotherapy, although these patients had shorter survival (4.2 vs. 9.7 months; P = .004). Radiotherapy after the initiation of immunotherapy (n = 15) did not increase the risk of irAEs or pneumonitis; however, these patients had improved OS (17.3 vs. 6.0 months; P = .016)., Conclusion: The development of irAEs did not significantly correlate with survival when controlling for the duration of therapy in a landmark analysis. We found no increased risk of pneumonitis or irAEs in patients who had received radiotherapy. Radiotherapy before immunotherapy was associated with shorter survival, and radiotherapy after immunotherapy was associated with improved survival., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)