Search

Background: We report 5-year efficacy and safety outcomes from CheckMate 9LA in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) and exploratory analyses in key patient subgroups., Methods: Adults with stage IV/recurrent NSCLC and no sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations were randomized to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy (n = 361) or chemotherapy (n = 358). Outcomes were assessed in all randomized patients and subgroups., Results: With 57.3 months' minimum follow-up, patients continued to derive overall survival (OS) benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy over chemotherapy (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62-0.85; 5-year OS rates, 18% vs. 11%), regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (PD-L1 < 1%, 22% vs. 8%; PD-L1 ≥ 1%, 18% vs. 11%), histology (squamous, 18% vs. 7%; non-squamous, 19% vs. 12%), or presence of baseline brain metastases (20% vs. 6%). Five-year duration of response (DOR) rates were 19% versus 8% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy, with consistent benefit across subgroups. Patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy due to treatment-related adverse events had a 5-year OS rate of 37%. Five-year progression-free survival and DOR rates in 5-year survivors were 55% versus 38% and 59% versus 46%, respectively. No new safety signals were observed in 5-year survivors, regardless of the number of ipilimumab doses received., Conclusion: This 5-year update supports the long-term, durable OS benefit and improved 5-year survivorship with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy over chemotherapy in patients with mNSCLC, regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression or histology., Gov Registration: NCT03215706., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:, (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Osimertinib is a standard treatment for patients with EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and is highly effective for brain metastases (BMs). However, it is unclear whether local treatment (LT) for BMs prior to osimertinib administration improves survival in EGFR-mutant NSCLC. We aimed to reveal the survival benefit of upfront local treatment (LT) for BMs in patients treated with osimertinib., Materials and Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included consecutive patients with EGFR mutation (19del or L858R)-positive NSCLC who had BMs before osimertinib initiation between August 2018 and October 2021. We compared overall survival (OS) and central nervous system progression-free survival (CNS-PFS) between patients who received upfront LT for BMs (the upfront LT group), and patients who received osimertinib only (the osimertinib-alone group). Inverse-probability treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was performed to adjust for potential confounding factors., Results: Of the 121 patients analyzed, 57 and 64 patients had 19del and L858R, respectively. Forty-five and 76 patients were included in the upfront LT group and the osimertinib-alone groups, respectively. IPTW-adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the OS of the upfront LT group was significantly longer than that of the osimertinib-alone group (median, 95 % confidence intervals [95 %CI]: Not reached [NR], NR-NR vs. 31.2, 21.7-33.2; p = 0.021). The hazard ratio (HR) for OS and CNS-PFS was 0.37 (95 %CI, 0.16-0.87) and 0.36 (95 %CI, 0.15-0.87), respectively., Conclusions: The OS and CNS-PFS of patients who received upfront LT for BMs followed by osimertinib were significantly longer than those of patients who received osimertinib alone. Upfront LT for BMs may be beneficial in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC treated with osimertinib., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: [Takehiro Tozuka has received honoraria from CHUGAI PHARMACEUTICAL and AstraZeneca. Rintaro Noro has received honoraria from CHUGAI PHARMACEUTICAL, AstraZeneca, Merck Pharmaceutical, Pfizer Pharmaceutical, Meijiseika Pharmaceutical, GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo Pharmaceutical, and has received Fund for the Promotion of Joint International Research (Fostering Joint International Research), and Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C). Taiki Hakozaki has received honoraria from Chugai Pharmaceutical, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Eisai. Tomoyuki Naito has received honoraria from AstraZeneca. Yukio Hosomi has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly Japan, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Ono Pharmaceutical, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kyowa Kirin, Nippon Kayaku, Takeda, Eisai, Novartis, and Pfizer. Takashi Hirose has received honoraria from AstraZeneca. Tetsuya Okano has received honoraria from Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim Co., Ltd., AstraZeneca K.K., Bristol-Myers Squibb K.K., Eli Lilly Japan K.K., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, and has received from Payment for expert testimony from Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. Masahiro Seike has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, MSD K.K, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly, Ono Pharmaceutical, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer Novartis, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Nippon Kayaku, Daiichi-Sankyo Company, Merck Biopharma, Amgen inc, and has received grants or contracts from any entity from Taiho Pharmaceutical, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly, Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim, Nippon Kayaku, and Kyowa Hakko Kirin]., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: As first-line treatment for stage IV or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer, combination immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab, with or without chemotherapy, had demonstrated survival benefits over chemotherapy; however, data on Japanese patients are limited., Methods: LIGHT-NING was a multicenter, observational study and retrospectively collected data. In this interim analysis, we analyzed patients who received combination immunotherapy between 27 November 2020 and 31 August 2021 for the treatment status, safety objectives (treatment-related adverse events and immune-related adverse events incidences), and effectiveness objectives (objective response rate and progression-free survival) to determine the characteristics and early safety information., Results: We analyzed 353 patients, with a median follow-up of 7.1 (interquartile range, 5.0-9.7) months. Overall, 60.1 and 39.9% received nivolumab plus ipilimumab with and without chemotherapy, respectively. In these cohorts, the median age was 67 and 72 years; 10.8 and 35.5% were aged ≥75 years; 80.2 and 79.4% were male; 5.2 and 13.5% had a performance score ≥ 2; 32.1 and 27.0% developed grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events; treatment-related deaths were observed in 6 (2.8%) and 5 (3.5%) patients, respectively. Grade 3-4 immune-related adverse event incidence was the highest within the first month of treatment in both cohorts, although the immune-related adverse event risk persisted throughout. No new safety signals were observed at this interim analysis. The median progression-free survival was 6.0 (95% confidence interval, 5.2-7.6) and 5.8 (4.3-7.0) months in nivolumab plus ipilimumab with and without chemotherapy cohorts, respectively., Conclusions: LIGHT-NING offers valuable insights into combination immunotherapy for untreated patients with stage IV or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer in Japanese real-world settings., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Importance: The combination of an antibody to programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) or to its ligand (PD-L1) with chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Bevacizumab is expected to enhance the efficacy not only of chemotherapy but also of PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies through blockade of vascular endothelial growth factor-mediated immunosuppression, but further data are needed to support this., Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab administered with platinum combination therapy and atezolizumab in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC., Design, Setting, and Participants: An open-label phase 3 randomized clinical trial was conducted at 37 hospitals in Japan. Patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC without genetic driver alterations or those with genetic driver alterations who had received treatment with at least 1 approved tyrosine kinase inhibitor were enrolled between January 20, 2019, and August 12, 2020., Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either atezolizumab plus carboplatin with pemetrexed (APP) or atezolizumab, carboplatin plus pemetrexed, and bevacizumab (APPB). After 4 cycles of induction therapy, maintenance therapy with atezolizumab plus pemetrexed or with atezolizumab, pemetrexed, and bevacizumab was administered until evidence of disease progression, development of unacceptable toxic effects, or the elapse of 2 years from the initiation of protocol treatment., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population., Results: A total of 412 patients were enrolled (273 men [66%]; median age, 67.0 [range, 24-89] years) and randomly assigned, with 205 in the APPB group and 206 in the APP group of the ITT population after exclusion of 1 patient for good clinical practice violation. The median BICR-assessed PFS was 9.6 months with APPB vs 7.7 months with APP (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70-1.07; 1-sided stratified log-rank test; P = .92). According to prespecified subgroup analysis of BICR-assessed PFS, an improved PFS with APPB vs APP was apparent specifically in driver oncogene-positive patients (median, 9.7 vs 5.8 months; stratified HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.46-0.98). Toxic effects related to bevacizumab were increased in the APPB group., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this trial did not show superiority of APPB over APP for patients with nonsquamous NSCLC; however, this regimen showed a similar tolerability and improved survival relative to APP in patients with driver oncogenes., Trial Registration: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials Identifier: jRCT2080224500.

Ramucirumab plus docetaxel (RD) can cause febrile neutropenia (FN), which frequently requires the prophylactic administration of pegfilgrastim. However, the effects of prophylactic pegfilgrastim on FN prevention, therapeutic efficacy, and prognosis after RD have not been fully evaluated in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Two hundred and eighty-eight patients with advanced NSCLC who received RD as second-line therapy after platinum-based chemotherapy plus PD-1 blockade were included. Patients were divided into groups with and without prophylactic pegfilgrastim, and adverse events, efficacy, and prognosis were compared between both groups. Of the 288 patients, 247 received prophylactic pegfilgrastim and 41 did not. The frequency of grade 3/4 neutropenia was 62 patients (25.1%) in the pegfilgrastim group and 28 (68.3%) in the control group (p < 0.001). The frequency of FN was 25 patients (10.1%) in the pegfilgrastim group and 10 (24.4%) in the control group (p = 0.018). The objective response rate was 31.2% and 14.6% in the pegfilgrastim and control groups (p = 0.039), respectively. The disease control rate was 72.9% in the pegfilgrastim group and 51.2% in the control group (p = 0.009). Median progression free survival was 4.3 months in the pegfilgrastim group and 2.5 months in the control group (p = 0.002). The median overall survival was 12.8 and 8.1 months in the pegfilgrastim and control groups (p = 0.004), respectively. Prophylactic pegfilgrastim for RD reduced the frequency of grade 3/4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia and did not appear to be detrimental to patient outcome RD.Clinical Trial Registration Number: UMIN000042333., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: In CheckMate 9LA, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression or histology. We report updated efficacy and safety in all randomized patients with a minimum 4-year follow-up and an exploratory treatment-switching adjustment analysis in all treated patients who received chemotherapy and subsequent immunotherapy., Methods: Adults with stage IV/recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), no sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations, and ECOG performance status ≤1 were randomized 1:1 to nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks with chemotherapy (two cycles) or chemotherapy (four cycles, with optional maintenance pemetrexed for the nonsquamous population). Assessments included OS, progression-free survival, and objective response rate. Exploratory analyses included efficacy by tumor PD-L1 expression and histology and in patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy due to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and a treatment-switching adjustment analysis using inverse probability of censoring weighting., Results: With a 47.9-month minimum follow-up for OS, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy continued to prolong OS over chemotherapy in all randomized patients (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.87; 4-year OS rate: 21% versus 16%), regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression (HR (95% CI): PD-L1<1%, 0.66 (0.50 to 0.86) and ≥1%, 0.74 (0.60 to 0.92)) or histology (squamous, 0.64 (0.48 to 0.84) and non-squamous, 0.80 (0.66 to 0.97)). In patients who discontinued all components of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy due to TRAEs (n=61), the 4-year OS rate was 41%. With treatment-switching adjustment for the 36% of patients receiving subsequent immunotherapy in the chemotherapy arm, the estimated HR of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy was 0.66 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.80). No new safety signals were observed., Conclusions: In this 4-year update, patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy continued to have long-term, durable efficacy benefit over chemotherapy regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression and/or histology. A greater estimated relative OS benefit was observed after adjustment for subsequent immunotherapy use in the chemotherapy arm. These results further support nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic/recurrent NSCLC, including those with tumor PD-L1<1% or squamous histology, populations with high unmet needs., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DPC has received consulting fees from Arcus Biosciences, Bristol Myers Squibb, BMS KK, Boehringer Ingelheim, Curio Science, Daiichi Sankyo, Genentech/Roche, GI Therapeutics (Intellisphere), GSK, Janssen, Merck, Mirati, Novartis, Novocure, OncoCyte, OncoHost, Roche China, and Seattle Genetics; and has participated on the advisory board of Amgen, Arcus Biosciences, AstraZeneca, Merck, Flame Biosciences, Gritstone Oncology, Cantargia (PPD), Daiichi Sankyo, EMD Serono GSK, Lilly, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Seattle Genetics and the data safety monitoring board of EORTC, AbbVie, and Lilly. T-EC has received honoraria from Astellas Pharma, Janssen, MSD, Merck Serono, Amgen, Roche, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, Servier, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Bristol Myers Squibb; and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board of Astellas Pharma, Janssen, MSD, Merck Serono, Amgen, Roche, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, Servier, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Bristol Myers Squibb. MS has received funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Merck Serono, Pfizer, GSK, Roche, Bayer, Astellas, Amgen, Gilead, Tesaro, Clovis, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Regeneron, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, PharmaMar, Mylan, Samsung Pharmaceuticals, Bioven, BeiGene, and Daiichi Sankyo. OJ-V has received grants from AstraZeneca Spain, honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche/Genentech, MSD Oncology, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, and Takeda; has served as a consultant for Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Takeda, AstraZeneca Spain, and Janssen Oncology, and has received travel support from Takeda, AstraZeneca/MedImmune. NR has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Merck, Pfizer, Symphogen, and Takeda; travel support from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Hoffmann-La Roche, and Takeda; and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Merck and Symphogen. BZ has received honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Janssen-Cilag, MSD and Roche. AA has received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Roche, provided expert testimony for Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Sandoz, and received travel support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi. LP-A has received grants or contracts from MSD, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Bristol Myers Squibb; consulting fees from Lilly, MSD, Roche, PharmaMar, Merck KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany), AstraZeneca, Novartis, Servier, Amgen, Pfizer, Sanofi, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Mirati, GSK, Janssen, Takeda, and Daichii Sankyo; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Merck, and Mirati; and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Altum Sequencing and Genomica. SL has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Hutchinson MediPharma, Simcere, ZaiLab, GenomiCare, Roche, and Hanosh, and honoraria from AstraZeneca, Roche, and Hanosh. TJ has received consulting fees from Roche, Merck, MSD, Puma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Amgen, Gilead, and Specialised Therapeutics; and honoraria from AstraZeneca. XZ holds stock in Bristol Myers Squibb. IS has received consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb. JRP holds stock in Bristol Myers Squibb. AL holds stock in Bristol Myers Squibb. MR has received consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeiGene, Lilly, Mirati, MSD, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Regeneron, Roche, Takeda, and Samsung Bioepis; honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeiGene, Lilly, Mirati, MSD, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Regeneron, Roche, Takeda, and Samsung Bioepis; travel support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeiGene, Lilly, Mirati, MSD, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Regeneron, Roche, Takeda, and Samsung Bioepis; and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeiGene, Lilly, Mirati, MSD, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Regeneron, Roche, Takeda, and Samsung Bioepis. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Thymic carcinoma (TC) is a rare thymic epithelial tumor, and advanced or recurrent TC has limited prognosis. Treatment for chemotherapy-naïve, advanced, or recurrent TC remains unchanged with the combination of carboplatin and paclitaxel; therefore, a new treatment strategy is warranted. Immune checkpoint blockades inhibiting the programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) pathway (PD-1 and its ligand, PD-L1) have shown potential as a monotherapy for TC, although the efficacy of monotherapy was moderate for previously treated TC. We hypothesized that the combination of an anti-PD-L1 antibody, atezolizumab, with carboplatin and paclitaxel, would be effective in inducing immunogenic cell death in patients with advanced or recurrent TC., Methods: We initiated a multicenter, single-arm, open-label phase II study of atezolizumab combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel for metastatic or recurrent TC. Eligible patients will receive atezolizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel every 3 weeks for up to 6 cycles, followed by atezolizumab every 3 weeks for up to 2 years until progression or unacceptable toxicity. A total of 47 patients will be enrolled in this study, with a 24-month enrollment period and 12-month follow-up. The primary endpoint is the objective response rate (ORR), based on an independent central review. The secondary endpoints are the investigator-assessed ORR, disease control rate, progression-free survival, duration of response, overall survival, and safety., Results: This study aims to establish the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with advanced or recurrent TC., Trial Registration: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT), jRCT2031220144. Registered on June 18, 2022, https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCT2031220144., Competing Interests: Disclosure TA reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly Japan, Merck Biopharma, MSD, Nippon Kayaku, Ono, Pfizer, Taiho, and Takeda. T Shukuya reports grant support for the current study from Chugai Pharmaceutical; grant support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai Pharmaceutical, MSD, Novartis; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, MSD, Nippon Kayaku, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer, Taiho, and Takeda. YG reports grant support for the clinical trial group from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, institutional grant support from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Kyorin, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer, and Preferred Networks; honoraria from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer, Taiho, and Thermo Fischer; participation on an advisory board for AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Guardant Health, Illumina, MSD, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer, and Taiho; and leadership or fiduciary role at Cancer Net Japan and Japanese Association of Medical Technologists. HT reports institutional grant support from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Merck Biopharma, MSD, Ono, Taiho, and Takeda; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Merck Biopharma, MSD, Novartis, Ono, Sun Pharmaceutical, Taiho, and Takeda. K Takayama reports grant support for Chugai Pharmaceutical; honoraria from Chugai Pharmaceutical. YT reports institutional grant support for Ono and Pfizer Health Research Foundation; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Chugai Pharmaceutical, and Daiichi Sankyo. MT reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Ono, and Takeda. T Suzuki reports honoraria from AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim. KK reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly, Ono, and Taiho. RK reports grant support from AstraZeneca and MSD; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, MSD, Ono, Pfizer, Taiho, and Takeda. YZ reports grant support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck Biopharma, and MSD; honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Kyowa Kirin, MSD, Nihon Kayaku, Novartis, Pfizer, Taiho, and Takeda. HA reports grant support from Amgen, Chugai Pharmaceutica, and MSD; honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly, MSD, Nippon Kayaku, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer, Taiho and Takeda; data safety monitoring or advisory board participation with Amgen, Janssen, and Sandoz; and a leadership or fiduciary role with World Conference on Lung Cancer Patient Advocate Committee. JT reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Janssen Pharmaceutical, MSD, Nihon Medi-Physics, Ono, Nippon Boehringer-Ingelheim, Nippon Kayaku, Taiho, and Pfizer. SI reports institutional grant support for AstraZeneca and Chugai; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly, Ono, Pfizer, and Takeda. SS reports honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly, Kyowa Kirin, Merck Biopharma, MSD, Nippon Kayaku, Novartis, Ono, Otsuka, Pfizer, Taiho, Takeda, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Towa Pharmaceutical, and Yakult Honsha. KM reports honoraria from Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly, and Ono. K Takahashi reports grant support from Asahi Kasei Pharma, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Kyorin, Nippon Kayaku, Kyowa Kirin, Nippon Pharma, Nippon Shinyaku, Novartis, Ono, Sanofi, Shionogi, Taiho, Takeda, Teijin, Tsumura, and Pfizer; honoraria from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Kyorin, Meiji Seika Pharma, Merck Biopharma, MSD, Nippon Kayaku, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer, Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma, Taiho, Takeda, Thermo Fisher Scientific and Viatris; patent with Oncolys BioPharma; and leadership or fiduciary role with The Japan Lung Cancer Society and The Japan Respiratory Society. All other authors (HM, TM) declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In CheckMate 227 Part 1 (NCT02477826), first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab demonstrated long-term durable overall survival (OS) benefit versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. We report results in Japanese patients with ≥ 5-year follow-up., Methods: Adults with stage IV/recurrent NSCLC without EGFR/ALK aberrations were randomized 1:1:1 to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab alone, or chemotherapy (patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1%), or nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy (patients with tumor PD-L1 < 1%). Five-year efficacy and safety were assessed in Japanese patients., Results: At 62.1 months' minimum follow-up, 143 Japanese patients with PD-L1 ≥ 1% or < 1% were randomized to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 66) or chemotherapy (n = 77). Five-year OS rates were 46% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 34% with chemotherapy (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 36% versus 19% (PD-L1 < 1%). Median duration of response was 59.1 versus 7.1 months (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 17.3 versus 3.0 months (PD-L1 < 1%). Among 5-year survivors treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1%; n = 27), 59% (95% CI, 39%-75%) were off treatment for ≥ 3 years without receiving subsequent therapy. No new safety signals were observed., Conclusions: At 5-year follow-up, nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to show long-term durable clinical benefit versus chemotherapy, regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. Consistent with findings for the global population, these data support the use of nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line treatment in Japanese patients with metastatic NSCLC., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Ramucirumab plus docetaxel (RD) is a promising treatment for previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, its clinical significance after platinum-based chemotherapy plus programmed death-1 (PD-1) blockade remains unclear., Research Question: What is the clinical significance of RD as a second-line treatment after the failure of chemo-immunotherapy in NSCLC?, Study Design and Methods: In this multicentre retrospective study, 288 patients with advanced NSCLC who received RDas second-line therapy after platinum-based chemotherapy plus PD-1 blockade, at 62 Japanese institutions from January 2017 to August 2020, were included. Prognostic analyses were performed using the log-rank test. Prognostic factor analyses were performed using a Cox regression analysis., Results: A total of 288 patients were enrolled: 222 were men (77.1%), 262 were aged <75 years (91.0%), 237 (82.3%) had smoking history and 269 (93.4%) had a performance status (PS) of 0-1. One hundred ninety-nine patients (69.1%) were classified as adenocarcinoma (AC) and 89 (30.9%) as non-AC. The types of PD-1 blockade used in the first-line treatment were anti-PD-1 antibody and anti-programmed death-ligand 1 antibody in 236 (81.9%) and 52 (18.1%) patients, respectively. The objective response rate for RD was 28.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.7-34.4). The disease control rate was 69.8% (95% CI, 64.1-75.0).The median progression free survival and overall survival were 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.5-4.6) and 11.6 months (95% CI, 9.9-13.9), respectively. In a multivariate analysis, non-AC and PS 2-3 were independent prognostic factors for worse progression free survival , while bone metastasis on diagnosis, PS 2-3 and non-AC were identified as independent prognostic factors for poor overall survival., Interpretation: RD is a feasible second-line treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC who had received combined chemo-immunotherapy with PD-1 blockade., Clinical Trial Registration Number: UMIN000042333., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Patients with uncommon EGFR- mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) demonstrated lower clinical efficacy of first-generation EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors compared with patients harboring common EGFR- mutated NSCLC. The US FDA has approved afatinib for uncommon EGFR mutation positive NSCLC based on the pooled analysis in the first- or second-line setting. Osimertinib has limited evidence in the small sample sizes of phase 2 studies in any-line settings. The aim of the present single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 study is to evaluate the efficacy of osimertinib for previously untreated NSCLC. The primary end point is to assess the overall response to osimertinib. The secondary end points include disease control rate, progression-free survival, duration of time-to-treatment failure, overall survival and safety. Clinical trial registration: jRCTs071200002.

Background: Tuberculosis (TB) is considered to be an adverse effect of treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Methodology & results: Our case was a 75-year-old woman diagnosed with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. After radical chemoradiotherapy was completed, durvalumab was initiated as a consolidation therapy. However, since chest CT showed appearances of infiltration shadows scattered in the periphery of the lungs after five doses of immunotherapy, duruvalumab was discontinued. 6 weeks later, the patient was aware of intermittent fever. Chest CT scan showed the appearance of a tree-in-bud pattern in the right lung. Acid-fast bacilli stain of sputum was positive and the PCR test was positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis . Conclusion: Duruvalumab as PD-L1 blockade may activate TB.

After the development of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), genetic testing of EGFR became required for effective treatment of lung cancer. Initially, the testing was conducted separately for each mutated region. However, many EGFR mutations have since been identified that determine the efficacy of EGFR-TKIs. Therefore, genetic testing of EGFR by next generation sequencing (NGS) may be a suitable strategy for lung cancer. Here we examined the applicability of the NGS method in regard to sensitivity, time and cost. A total of 939 specimens were obtained from 686 lung cancer patients at our hospital. DNA and RNA were simultaneously extracted from specimens derived from surgery, bronchoscopy, and fluid aspiration. Specimens included cerebrospinal fluid, pleural effusion, abdominal fluid, and pericardial effusion. From RNA, target regions (EGFR, KRAS, ALK fusion and RET fusion) were enriched by RT-PCR and sequenced with MiSeq. From DNA, PCR or PCR-RFLP conventional methods were performed. NGS and conventional methods were carried out routinely per week. Among the total 939 specimens, 38 specimens could not be examined with NGS. Among these, 34 specimens were analyzed by conventional testing with simultaneously extracted DNA. The remaining four specimens could not be tested with either method. Compared with the conventional method, the concordance rate of mutations was 99% (892/901), excluding specimens with NGS failure. The time period required from processing of specimens to results was 4 days, and the cost per sample was sufficiently low. In conclusion, the genetic testing with NGS method was useful for lung cancer treatment. The cost, sensitivity and time were able to tolerate routine examinations.

Objective: Amrubicin, which is used as a chemotherapeutic agent for lung cancer, can induce interstitial lung disease. There is insufficient evidence on the incidence of amrubicin-associated interstitial lung disease under practical use settings. We therefore investigated the occurrence of interstitial lung disease in the patients with lung cancer who received amrubicin in our institution., Methods: We reviewed the data of all patients with lung cancer who received amrubicin at the Nippon Medical School Hospital from March 2002 to April 2015. Interstitial lung disease was diagnosed based on clinical symptoms, radiographic findings and the exclusion of other diseases., Results: We reviewed 92 consecutive patients with lung cancer. Amrubicin-associated interstitial lung disease occurred in 3 of the 92 patients (3.3%): 2 were definite interstitial lung disease and 1 was possible interstitial lung disease. The severity of interstitial lung disease was mild to moderate, and interstitial lung disease improved with or without corticosteroid therapy in all cases. The findings in a computed tomography image analysis showed preexisting pulmonary fibrosis (n = 13), including interstitial pneumonitis (n = 10) and radiation fibrosis (n = 3). No patients showed the presence of honeycomb lung. Among the 13 patients, 1 (7.7%) developed interstitial lung disease after amrubicin chemotherapy., Conclusion: Interstitial lung disease occurred in 3.3% of the patients in our study; this appeared to be less frequent than the rates in previous reports. Preexisting pulmonary fibrosis may be a risk factor for interstitial lung disease; however, no fatal cases were found among the patients with asymptomatic pulmonary fibrosis without honeycomb lung. It is thus considered to be necessary to carefully assess the possibility of preexisting pulmonary fibrosis and clarify the presence or absence of honeycomb lung before starting amrubicin chemotherapy., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: A phase II study was conducted in order to determine the tumor efficacy and tolerance of alternating chemotherapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC)., Patients and Methods: Twenty patients with previously-untreated ED-SCLC were enrolled in the study. At least four courses of chemotherapy consisting of alternation of two drug combinations were given: alternating cycles of amrubicin and cisplatin with weekly administration of irinotecan and cisplatin at 3- or 4-week intervals., Results: The overall response rate was 85.0% (17/20). The median duration of overall survival and progression-free survival were 359 days and 227 days, respectively. Hematological toxicity was the main adverse event. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia were observed in 20 (100%), 4 (20%) and 6 (30%) patients, respectively. With regard to non-hematological adverse events, grade 3 or 4 anorexia, diarrhea, febrile neutropenia and infection were observed in 5 (25%), 2 (10%), 2 (10%) and 2 (10%) patients, respectively. No treatment-related death occurred during either regimen., Conclusion: The novel alternating non-cross-resistant chemotherapy was probably active against ED-SCLC and had acceptable toxicities. Further evaluation of this treatment for ED-SCLC in randomized phase III trials is warranted.

Background: A phase II study was conducted to determine the tumor efficacy and tolerance of alternating chemotherapy in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC)., Patients and Methods: Thirty-six patients with previously untreated ED-SCLC were enrolled in the study. At least four courses of chemotherapy consisting of alternation of two drug combinations were given: alternating cycles of etoposide and carboplatin (EC) with weekly administration of irinotecan and cisplatin (IP) at 3- or 4-week intervals., Results: The overall response rate was 81.8%. The median duration of survival and progression-free survival were 314 days and 144 days, respectively. Hematological toxicity was the main adverse event. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia were observed in 69.2, 25.6 and 23.1% of the patients, respectively. Severe diarrhea (10.8%) was remarkable during the IP regimen., Conclusion: This novel alternating chemotherapy for patients with ED-SCLC showed moderate tumor efficacy and an acceptable safety profile.

Transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β)-induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) has been shown to be related to the pathogenesis of various diseases including lung cancer. Recently, microRNAs (miRNA) have been recognized as a new class of genes involved in human tumorigenesis. MiR-23a/24/27a is a miRNA cluster located in chromosome 19p13.12, which can function as an oncogene in several human cancers. In this study, we analyzed miR-23a/24/27a expression in 10 non-small cell cancer (NSCLC) cell lines by real-time PCR analysis. Correlation between expression of these miRNAs and TGF-β/Smad signaling was evaluated. We found that miR-23a could be regulated by TGF-β1 in a Smad-dependent manner in A549 lung adenocarcinoma cells showing the EMT phenomenon. Knockdown of miR-23a partially restored E-cadherin expression under conditions of TGF-β1 stimulation. In contrast, overexpression of miR-23a could suppress E-cadherin expression and stimulate EMT. Furthermore, A549 cells with overexpressed miR-23a were more resistant to gefitinib compared to the parental cells. These findings suggest that miR-23a regulates TGF-β-induced EMT by targeting E-cadherin in lung cancer cells and may be useful as a new therapeutic target in NSCLC.

The main purpose of tumor classification is to distinguish clear differences such as deciding treatment or showing a peculiar characteristic. In the treatment of lung cancer, the standard for treatment selection is to make the important classification of small cell lung cancer(SCLC)and non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC). This is based on the fact that with a clinical-pathology difference and treatment reactivity, the prognosis differs between SCLC and NSCLC. In the 21st century, it has become insufficient to choose a treatment only by the classification of NSCLC with the advent of gefitinib a molecular target drug. Thus, treatment must be chosen in terms of the presence or absence of adenocarcinoma, an ethnic group, gender, a smoking history, and also the gene mutation. Moreover, it was reported by ASCO in 2008 that efficacy of pemetrexed is low for non-squamous cell carcinoma. From now on, not the NSCLC classification, but further detailed classification is needed to choose a treatment. Treatment selection in terms of the individual will be possible with ongoing study.