Search

Background: While osimertinib, a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) is the standard treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with sensitising EGFR and acquired T790M mutations, progression inevitably occurs. The angiogenic pathway is implicated in EGFR TKI resistance. Patients and methods: BOOSTER is an open-label randomised phase II trial investigating the efficacy and safety of combined osimertinib 80 mg daily and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks, versus osimertinib alone, in patients with EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC and acquired T790M mutations after failure on previous EGFR TKI therapy. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs). Results: Between May 2017 and February 2019, 155 patients were randomised (combination: 78; osimertinib: 77). At data cut-off of 22 February 2021, median follow-up was 33.8 months [interquartile range (IQR): 26.5-37.6 months] and 129 (83.2%) PFS events were reported in the intention-to-treat population. There was no difference in median PFS between the combination [15.4 months; 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.2-18.0 months] and osimertinib arm (12.3 months; 95% CI 6.2-17.2 months; stratified log-rank P = 0.83), [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.96; 95% CI 0.68-1.37]. Median OS was 24.0 months (95% CI 17.8- 32.1 months) in the combination arm and 24.3 months (95% CI 16.9-37.0 months) in the osimertinib arm (stratified log-rank P = 0.91), (HR = 1.03; 95% CI 0.67-1.56). Exploratory analysis revealed a significant interaction of smoking history with treatment for PFS (adjusted P = 0.0052) with a HR of 0.52 (95% CI 0.30-0.90) for smokers, and 1.47 (95% CI 0.92-2.33) for never smokers. ORR was 55% in both arms and the median time to treatment failure was significantly shorter in the combination than in the osimertinib arm, 8.2 months versus 10.8 months, respectively (P = 0.0074). Safety of osimertinib and bevacizumab was consistent with previous reports with grade >= 3 treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) reported in 47% and 18% of patients on combination and osimertinib alone, respectively. Conclusions: No difference in PFS was observed between osimertinib plus bevacizumab and osimertinib alone. Grade >= 3 TRAEs were more common in patients on combination.

Around 3-7% of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), which represent 85% of diagnosed lung cancers, have a rearrangement in the ALK gene that produces an abnormal activity of the ALK protein cell signaling pathway. The developed ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib and lorlatinb present good performance treating ALK+ NSCLC, although all patients invariably develop resistance due to ALK secondary mutations or bypass mechanisms. In the present study, we compare the potential differences between brigatinib and alectinib's mechanisms of action as first-line treatment for ALK+ NSCLC in a systems biology-based in silico setting. Therapeutic performance mapping system (TPMS) technology was used to characterize the mechanisms of action of brigatinib and alectinib and the impact of potential resistances and drug interferences with concomitant treatments. The analyses indicate that brigatinib and alectinib affect cell growth, apoptosis and immune evasion through ALK inhibition. However, brigatinib seems to achieve a more diverse downstream effect due to a broader cancer-related kinase target spectrum. Brigatinib also shows a robust effect over invasiveness and central nervous system metastasis-related mechanisms, whereas alectinib seems to have a greater impact on the immune evasion mechanism. Based on this in silico head to head study, we conclude that brigatinib shows a predicted efficacy similar to alectinib and could be a good candidate in a first-line setting against ALK+ NSCLC. Future investigation involving clinical studies will be needed to confirm these findings. These in silico systems biology-based models could be applied for exploring other unanswered questions.

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive malignancy characterized by a rapid progression and a high resistance to treatments. Unlike other solid tumors, there has been a scarce improvement in emerging treatments and survival during the last years. A better understanding of SCLC biology has allowed for the establishment of a molecular classification based on four transcription factors, and certain therapeutic vulnerabilities have been proposed. The universal inactivation of TP53 and RB1, along with the absence of mutations in known targetable oncogenes, has hampered the development of targeted therapies. On the other hand, the immunosuppressive microenvironment makes the success of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), which have achieved a modest improvement in overall survival in patients with extensive disease, difficult. Currently, atezolizumab or durvalumab, in combination with platinum-etoposide chemotherapy, is the standard of care in first-line setting. However, the magnitude of the benefit is scarce and no predictive biomarkers of response have yet been established. In this review, we describe SCLC biology and molecular classification, examine the SCLC tumor microenvironment and the challenges of predictive biomarkers of response to new treatments, and, finally, assess clinical and molecular characteristics of long-term survivor patients in order to identify possible prognostic factors and treatment vulnerabilities.

Non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are the most common type of lung cancer and can be classified according to the presence of mutually exclusive oncogenic drivers. The majority of NSCLC patients present a non-actionable oncogenic driver, and treatment resistance through the amplification of the MET proto-oncogene (MET) or the expression of programmed cell death protein 1 ligand (PD-L1) is common. Herein, we investigated the relation between MET gene amplification and PD-L1 expression in patients with advanced NSCLC and no other actionable oncogenic driver (i.e., EGFR, ALK, ROS1). Our retrospective observational study analyzed data from 48 patients (78% men, median age 66 years) admitted to the Germans Trias i Pujol Hospital, Spain, between July 2015 and February 2019. Patients presenting MET amplification showed a higher proportion of PD-L1 expression (93% vs. 39%; p < 0.001) and overexpression (64% vs. 27%; p = 0.020) than those with non-amplified MET. PD-L1 expression was not significantly different when analyzed by sex (p = 0.624), smoking history (p = 0.429), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (p = 0.597) Overall survival rates were not significantly affected by MET amplification (high and intermediate amplification vs low amplification and non-amplificated) (p = 0.252) nor PD-L1 expression (> vs =< 50%) (p = 0.893). In conclusion, a positive correlation was found between MET gene amplification and PD-L1 expression and highly expressed (above 50%) in patients with NSCLC and no other actionable oncogenic driver. It could be translated as new guided-treatment oportunities for these patients.

Introduction: Longitudinal evaluation of mutations in blood samples was a prespecified secondary objective in the BELIEF trial of erlotinib and bevacizumab in advanced EGFR-positive NSCLC. Here, we report the testing results and explore the correlation of EGFR status in blood with clinical outcomes. Methods: Blood samples were prospectively collected from patients at baseline, at response evaluation, and at progression and sent to a central laboratory. Circulating free DNA was purified and EGFR mutations were analyzed with a validated real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay. Results: EGFR exon 19/21 mutations were detected in 55 of 91 baseline blood samples (60.4%) and correlated with a significantly worse progression-free survival: 11.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.0−14.8 mo) for the patients who were positive versus 22.9 months (95% CI: 9.5−33.9 mo) for those who were negative (log-rank p = 0.0020). Among the 74 samples at response, exon 19/21 mutations were detected only in three samples (4.1%). In contrast, 29 of 58 patients (50.0%) were exon 19/21 positive at progression and showed a significantly worse median overall survival of 21.7 months (95% CI: 17.0−30.9 mo) compared with 37.4 months (95% CI: 22.6−53.1 mo) for those who were negative (log-rank p = 0.011). Blood samples at the three time points were available for 48 patients. Of those, among 14 exon 19/21 EGFR-negative at presentation, 13 (93%) were persistently negative for the sensitizing mutations after progression and the p.T790M could only be detected in the blood of two patients. Conclusions: Longitudinal testing of EGFR mutations in blood can offer valuable clinical information. In patients of the BELIEF study, detection of EGFR mutations in circulating free DNA at presentation was associated with shorter progression-free survival, whereas positivity at progression correlated with shorter overall survival. Finally, patients negative in blood at presentation were almost invariably negative at relapse. © 2019

KRAS mutations are one of the most prevalent alterations in non-small cell lung cancer. However, patients with this driver alteration present heterogeneous clinical outcomes. In this study, we have explored the potential clinical impact of coexisting alterations in this subset of patients.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.25478.].

Background: Second primary malignancies (SPM) in the lung are not common in breast cancer (BC) patients. EGFR-mutant lung cancer (LC) is a separate molecular subset, and the coexistence of EGFR-mutant LC and BC has not been explored. We hypothesized that EGFR-mutant LC patients could have higher rates of primary BC than those with EGFR-wild type (WT). Methods: We collected data on clinical and molecular characteristics and outcomes of female patients with LC and a previous or simultaneous history of primary BC treated in our hospital from 2008 to 2014. Results: Data on treatment, follow-up, and EGFR mutation status were available for 356 patients. 17.7% (11/62) of patients with EGFR mutations had BC, compared to 1.02% (3/294) of EGFR-WT patients (p < 0.001). Both tumors were metachronous in 81.8%, with LC diagnosed 9 years after the diagnosis of BC. 5 of the 6 (83.3%) BC patients treated with radiotherapy developed LC in an area within the radiation field. No EGFR mutations were detected in BC tissue and no HER2 expression was detected in LC samples. Conclusion: SPM in the lung and breast occur more frequently among EGFR-mutant compared to EGFR-WT LC patients. Radiotherapy for BC may increase the risk of developing primary LC. (c) 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel