Metastatic Non-squamous Non-squamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Research Articles

Comparison of Chemotherapeutic Regimens Frequently Used in Metastatic Non-squamous NSCLC Treatment.

Platinum-based chemotherapy with pemetrexed or paclitaxel/bevacizumab are regimens used in combination with checkpoint inhibitors in non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment. We conducted a real-world study to compare the outcomes of these chemotherapeutic regimens. We investigated 1,534 patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC treated with platin/pemetrexed (n=1212) or platin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab (n=322) in 9 cancer centres in the Czech Republic. The regimen containing platin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab showed significantly better overall response rate (ORR) compared to the platin/pemetrexed [40.8% vs. 32.7% (p=0.008)] in the overall population and [55.0% vs. 38.8% (p=0.002)] in the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 group. There was no significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in either of these two groups of patients. In our real-world data analysis, patients treated with platin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab had better overall response rate (ORR), but not PFS or OS. Thus, both treatment regimens are similarly effective. Their selection should therefore be based on the potential side effects.

Pemetrexed plus platinum with or without pembrolizumab in patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC: protocol-specified final analysis from KEYNOTE-189

In the phase III KEYNOTE-189 study (NCT02578680), pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed and platinum-based chemotherapy (pemetrexed-platinum) significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) versus placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum. We report updated efficacy outcomes from the protocol-specified final analysis, including outcomes in patients who crossed over to pembrolizumab from pemetrexed-platinum and in patients who completed 35 cycles (∼2 years) of pembrolizumab. Eligible patients were randomized 2 : 1 to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg (n= 410) or placebo (n= 206) every 3 weeks (for up to 35 cycles, ∼2 years) plus four cycles of pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and investigators' choice of cisplatin (75 mg/m2) or carboplatin (area under the curve 5 mg·min/ml) every 3 weeks, followed by pemetrexed until progression. Patients assigned to placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum could cross over to pembrolizumab upon progression if eligibility criteria were met. The primary endpoints were OS and PFS. After a median follow-up of 31.0 months, pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum continued to improve OS [hazard ratio (HR), 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46-0.69] and PFS (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.41-0.59) over placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 expression. Objective response rate (ORR) (48.3% versus 19.9%) and time to second/subsequent tumor progression on next-line treatment (PFS2; HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.41-0.61) were improved in patients who received pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum. Eighty-four patients (40.8%) from the placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum group crossed over to pembrolizumab on-study. Grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 72.1% of patients receiving pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum and 66.8% of patients receiving placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum. Fifty-six patients completed 35 cycles (∼2 years) of pembrolizumab; ORR was 85.7% and 53 (94.6%) were alive at data cut-off. Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum continued to show improved efficacy outcomes compared with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum, with manageable toxicity. These findings support first-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum in patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC.

Randomized phase III study of first-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed/platinum followed by pembrolizumab and maintenance olaparib versus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): KEYLYNK-006.

TPS9632 Background: First-line treatment with pembrolizumab + pemetrexed/platinum improved clinical outcomes in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC in KEYNOTE-021 and KEYNOTE-189. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi), including olaparib, have been shown to upregulate PD-L1 expression in preclinical studies, and preliminary evidence suggests potential therapeutic benefit and acceptable safety with PARPi plus anti–PD-(L)1 therapy. KEYLYNK-006 (NCT03976323) evaluates first-line pembrolizumab + pemetrexed/platinum followed by pembrolizumab + olaparib vs pembrolizumab + pemetrexed in patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC. Methods: This phase III, randomized, open-label trial enrolls patients aged ≥18 years with histologically/cytologically confirmed treatment-naive, metastatic, nonsquamous NSCLC. Patients (target n = 792) receive induction pembrolizumab 200 mg + pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 + carboplatin AUC 5 mg/mL/min or cisplatin 75 mg/m2 Q3W for 4 cycles. Patients with PR/CR or SD are randomized (target n = 618) 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W (31 cycles) + maintenance olaparib 300 mg twice daily or pembrolizumab + pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 Q3W stratified by ECOG PS (0 vs 1), PD-L1 tumor proportion score (<50% vs ≥50%), and response (CR/PR vs SD). Tumor imaging per RECIST version 1.1 (≤5 per organ; maximum 10 total lesions) by central review (BICR) is performed at baseline and Q6W until 60 weeks after randomization, then Q9W until disease progression, start of new cancer therapy, study withdrawal, or death. Primary endpoints are PFS (RECIST 1.1 by BICR) and OS estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, stratified log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazard model with Efron’s method of tie handling. Secondary endpoints are safety and quality of life; ORR and duration of response are exploratory endpoints. AEs are monitored throughout the study until 30 days after the last dose of treatment (90 days for serious AEs) and graded using NCI CTCAE, version 4.0. The study began enrolling in June 2019. Clinical trial information: NCT03976323 .

A phase I study of ADXS-503 alone and in combination with pembrolizumab in subjects with metastatic squamous or non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

e21682 Background: ADXS-503 (A503) is an off-the-shelf, attenuated Listeria monocytogenes (Lm)-based immunotherapy bioengineered to elicit potent T cell responses against 22 tumor antigens commonly found in NSCLC (i.e., 11 hotspot mutations and 11 tumor-associated antigens, TAAs). Pembrolizumab (Pembro) is a programed death receptor-1 (PD-1)- blocking antibody with proven efficacy in NSCLC. A503 and Pembro have complementary mechanisms of immune activation and reversal of immune tolerance. Methods: This is a phase I study of A503 ± Pembro in patients (pts) with metastatic squamous or non-squamous NSCLC. Dose escalation with A503 alone has been tested at two dose levels (i.e., 1 and 5 x108 CFU) in Part A in pts refractory or intolerant to prior systemic therapy. In dose escalation Part B, A503 is being evaluated at the same dose levels (DLs) in combination with Pembro in pts with disease progression on Pembro. Part C will be a dose expansion cohort with A503 + Pembro as first-line treatment in the metastatic setting. A503 ± Pembro (200 mg) will be infused intravenously every 3 weeks until disease progression or limiting toxicity. Main endpoints include safety, tolerability and immune-correlative data. Results: Nine patients have been treated: 7 with A503-alone in Part A and two pts with A503+ Pembro in Part B-DL1. No pts in Part A experienced dose-limiting toxicities at the 2 DLs tested. Two Grade 3 adverse events occurred in one pt related to the infusion: hypertension and flu-like syndrome. A transient and manageable SAE (Grade 2 acute kidney injury) was possibly related to A503 alone at 5 x108 CFU. A503+ Pembro have been well tolerated in 2 pts in Part B-DL1. Four pts achieved a best overall response of stable disease, three in Part A and one in Part B. A503 alone induced immune responses in pts so far evaluated in Part A. Conclusions: ADXS-503 alone has demonstrated a manageable safety profile and immune responses in Part A. The 1x108 CFU was identified as the recommended phase II dose. Dose escalation with A503+ Pembro is ongoing and dose expansion in first line treatment is due to start shortly. Clinical trial information: NCT03847519.

Final analysis of KEYNOTE-189: Pemetrexed-platinum chemotherapy (chemo) with or without pembrolizumab (pembro) in patients (pts) with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

9582 Background: The phase III KEYNOTE-189 study (NCT02578680), showed significant improvements in OS and PFS with pembro + chemo vs placebo + chemo in pts with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR/ALK mutations. We report the protocol-specified final analysis of KEYNOTE-189. Methods: Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive 35 cycles of pembro 200 mg Q3W (n = 410) or placebo Q3W (n = 206) plus 4 cycles of pemetrexed (pem) and carboplatin/cisplatin followed by maintenance pem. Pts in the placebo + chemo arm could crossover to pembro upon PD. PFS and OS were primary endpoints; ORR was a secondary endpoint. PFS2 (time from randomization to objective tumor progression on next-line treatment/death), was an exploratory endpoint. Results: At data cutoff (May 20, 2019), median (range) time from randomization to data cutoff was 31.0 (26.5–38.8) mo. 17 pts in the pembro + chemo arm and 1 pt in the placebo + chemo arm were receiving initially assigned treatment; 84 pts crossed over to pembro. Median (95% CI) OS (22.0 [19.5–24.5] vs 10.6 [8.7–13.6] mo; HR 0.56 [95% CI, 0.46–0.69]) and PFS (9.0 [8.1–10.4] vs 4.9 [4.7–5.5] mo; HR 0.49 [95% CI, 0.41–0.59]) were longer with pembro + chemo vs placebo + chemo (Table). The 2-y OS rate was 45.7% vs 27.3% and the 2-y PFS rate was 22.0% vs 3.4%. ORR was 48.3% with pembro + chemo vs 19.9% with placebo + chemo. 56 pts in the pembro + chemo arm completed 35 cycles of pembro among whom ORR was 85.7% (4 CR, 44 PR, 8 SD) and median OS was not reached. 292 (72.1%) pts in the pembro + chemo arm and 135 (66.8%) pts in the placebo + chemo arm had grade 3–5 AEs. Conclusions: Pembro + chemo continued to show improved outcomes in OS, PFS, ORR and PFS2 compared with placebo + chemo, with manageable toxicity. These findings support first-line pembro + chemo in pts with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC. Clinical trial information: NCT02578680 . [Table: see text]

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Atezolizumab Plus Chemotherapy in the First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

The purpose of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the United States (US) payers' perspective in the first-line treatment. A mathematical Markov model was developed to estimate cost and effectiveness of atezolizumab combination therapy versus carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel alone in the first-line therapy of metastatic non-squamous NSCLC from the data of IMpower130. Costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were analyzed, and model robustness was assessed by sensitivity analysis. Additional subgroup analyses were performed as well. Compared to chemotherapy, treatment with atezolizumab plus chemotherapy yields an increase of 0.16QALYs with an increase in cost of $109,809.13, resulting in an ICER of $670,309.66 per QALY. The most influential factor in this model was the cost of atezolizumab. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that there was 0% probability that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy was cost-effective at willingness-to-pay (WTP) values of $150,000 per QALY. The results of subgroup analyses showed that the ICER remained greater than $150,000/QALY across the all patient subgroups. First-line treatment with atezolizumab in combination with carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel is not a cost-effective option in patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC.

Updated Analysis From KEYNOTE-189: Pembrolizumab or Placebo Plus Pemetrexed and Platinum for Previously Untreated Metastatic Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

In KEYNOTE-189, first-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non‒small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), irrespective of tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. We report an updated analysis from KEYNOTE-189 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02578680). Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive pemetrexed and platinum plus pembrolizumab (n = 410) or placebo (n = 206) every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, then pemetrexed maintenance plus pembrolizumab or placebo for up to a total of 35 cycles. Eligible patients with disease progression in the placebo-combination group could cross over to pembrolizumab monotherapy. Response was assessed per RECIST (version 1.1) by central review. No alpha was assigned to this updated analysis. As of September 21, 2018 (median follow-up, 23.1 months), the updated median (95% CI) OS was 22.0 (19.5 to 25.2) months in the pembrolizumab-combination group versus 10.7 (8.7 to 13.6) months in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.70]). Median (95% CI) PFS was 9.0 (8.1 to 9.9) months and 4.9 (4.7 to 5.5) months, respectively (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.58). Median (95% CI) time from randomization to objective tumor progression on next-line treatment or death from any cause, whichever occurred first (progression-free-survival-2; PFS-2) was 17.0 (15.1 to 19.4) months and 9.0 (7.6 to 10.4) months, respectively (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.59). OS and PFS benefits with pembrolizumab were observed regardless of PD-L1 expression or presence of liver/brain metastases. Incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events was similar in the pembrolizumab-combination (71.9%) and placebo-combination (66.8%) groups. First-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum continued to demonstrate substantially improved OS and PFS in metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression or liver/brain metastases, with manageable safety and tolerability.

Biomarker testing for personalized, first-line therapy in advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer patients in the real world setting in Japan: a retrospective, multicenter, observational study (the BRAVE study).

Background:Molecular diagnostic testing is necessary to guide optimal first-line treatment. The number of patients who receive first-line treatment based on biomarker analysis in Japan is unknown. We aimed to determine the proportion of nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients for whom first-line treatment was selected based on biomarker testing.Methods:This retrospective, multicenter, observational study registered patients aged ⩾20 years with locally advanced or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC who started first-line treatment between August and December 2017 in Japan. Data were collected from medical records between January and May 2018. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with confirmed biomarker status for first-line treatment decision.Results:Among 202 patients enrolled from 11 centers, 161 (79.7%; 95% confidence interval, 74.2–85.2%) had confirmed biomarker status. The testing rate was highest for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR; 97.5%), followed by anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK; 88.1%), programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1; 87.1%), and ROS1 (67.3%). For first-line treatment, 70/75 patients with EGFR-positive tumors were administered an EGFR-TKI; 14/15 patients with ALK-positive tumors received an ALK inhibitor; 2/2 patients with ROS1-positive tumors received a ROS1 inhibitor; and 29/36 driver mutation-negative patients with a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ⩾50% were administered an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody. Median times from confirmed diagnosis date to first-line treatment initiation, and from first biomarker test order to last biomarker test result were 19 and 11 days, respectively.Conclusions:The proportion of nonsquamous NSCLC patients with confirmed biomarker status for first-line treatment was considered insufficient and in need of improvement.

Efficacy of weekly paclitaxel-bevacizumab combination in advanced non squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) progressing after immune checkpoint inhibitors - AVATAX , a retrospective multicentric study: Preliminary data

Efficacy of weekly paclitaxel-bevacizumab combination in advanced non squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) progressing after immune checkpoint inhibitors - AVATAX , a retrospective multicentric study: Preliminary data

1567P - Efficacy of weekly paclitaxel-bevacizumab combination in advanced non squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A retrospective multicentric study

BackgroundULTIMATE, a phase III trial, showed a significant superiority in terms of progression free survival (PFS) and less toxicity of the combination paclitaxel-bevacizumab versus docetaxel as second or third-line treatment. With the growing role of immunotherapy as first-line setting for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), there is a need to redefine strategies to failure. The use of the paclitaxel-bevacizumab combination could be an option. MethodsThis retrospective study identified patients treated with paclitaxel and bevacizumab according to the ULTIMATE study in 3 centers in France. Main objectives were to describe safety and efficacy of this combination in metastatic non-squamous NSCLC as second-line therapy or beyond, with a particular interest for the sub-group of patients treated just after immune checkpoint inhibitors. ResultsFrom 1st September 2010 to 1st avril 2018, 76 patients started the paclitaxel-bevacizumab combination : 42 (55%) male, 18 (24%) and 36 (47%) treated in second and third-line respectively, and 22 (29%) in fourth-line or more. Objective response rate (ORR) was 37% (28/76) and disease control rate 74 % (56/76). Median PFS and OS were 5,7 [95%CI: 4,1-6,9] months and 11,2 [95%CI: 8-not reached] months respectively. For patients treated in second and third-line, ORR was respectively 39% and 42%, PFS 4 months [95%CI: 2,5-7,7] and 6 months [95%CI: 4-7], OS 9,4 months [95%CI: 2,7-not reached] and was not reached in third-line at 12 months. Grade 3–4 adverse events included asthenia 5% (4/76), neurotoxicity 3% (2/76), bleeding events 4% (3/76), and hematological toxicity 1% (1/76). Interestingly, in the subgroup of patients treated with immunotherapy just before paclitaxel-bevacizumab (33/76), ORR was 42% (14/33), median PFS was 6,2 [95% CI: 4,6-7,7] months, and median overall survival was not reached at 12 months. ConclusionsThis results exhibited an acceptable toxicity profile and an encouraging efficacy as second-line treatment or beyond for non-squamous NSCLC patients. For patient treated just after immunotherapy the results are very promising. Legal entity responsible for the studyDr Chantal Decroisette CH Annecy Genevois France. FundingHas not received any funding. DisclosureAll authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

1565P - A phase III study comparing SB8, a proposed bevacizumab biosimilar, and reference bevacizumab in patients with metastatic or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC

BackgroundSB8 is a proposed biosimilar of the reference bevacizumab (BEV). This study compared the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of SB8 to BEV in patients with metastatic or recurrent non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MethodsIn this randomised, double-blind, multicentre study, patients were randomised (1:1) to receive SB8 or BEV with paclitaxel and carboplatin Q3W followed by SB8 or BEV maintenance therapy until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or 1 year from the randomisation of the last patient. The primary endpoint was the best overall response rate (ORR) by 24 weeks of chemotherapy; risk ratio was analyzed in the full analysis set (FAS) and risk difference was analyzed in the per-protocol set (PPS). Secondary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response (DOR), safety, PK, and immunogenicity. ResultsA total of 763 patients (SB8, n=379; BEV, n=384) were randomized. Baseline characteristics were balanced between SB8 and BEV. In the FAS, the best ORR was 47.6% in SB8 and 42.8% in BEV; the risk ratio was 1.11 and its 90% CI was [0.975, 1.269], which was within the pre-defined equivalence margin of [0.737, 1.357]. In the PPS, the best ORR was 50.1% in SB8 and 44.8% in BEV; the risk difference was 5.3% and its 95% CI was [−2.2%, 12.9%], of which the lower margin was contained within and the upper margin was outside the pre-defined equivalence margin of [−12.5%, 12.5%]. The secondary efficacy endpoints in the FAS were comparable between SB8 vs BEV: median PFS (8.50 vs 7.90 months), median OS (14.90 vs 15.80 months), and median DOR (5.60 vs 5.85 months). The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was comparable between SB8 vs BEV (92.1% vs 91.1%). The most frequently occurring TEAEs were alopecia, anaemia, and nausea. PK parameters (Ctrough and Cmax) and the incidence of overall anti-drug antibodies (16.1% vs 11.0%) were comparable between SB8 vs BEV. ConclusionsThis study demonstrated equivalence between SB8 and BEV in terms of best ORR risk ratio. Other efficacy endpoints, safety, PK, and immunogenicity were comparable between SB8 and BEV. Clinical trial identificationNCT02754882. Legal entity responsible for the studySamsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. FundingSamsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. DisclosureM. Reck: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd.; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: AbbVie; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Amgen; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: BMS; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Boehringer Ingelheim; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Celgene; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Lilly; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Merck; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: MSD; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Novartis; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Pfizer; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Roche. J. Choi: Full / Part-time employment: Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. D. Shin: Full / Part-time employment: Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial of first-line pembrolizumab + platinum doublet chemotherapy (chemo) ± lenvatinib in patients (pts) with metastatic nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): LEAP-006.

TPS9118 Background: Lenvatinib (multiple-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1–3, fibroblast growth factor receptors 1–4, platelet-derived growth factor receptors α, c-kit, and RET) has antitumor activity in combination with pembrolizumab (anti–PD-1 inhibitor) or with chemo in advanced NSCLC. LEAP-006 (NCT03829319) evaluates first-line lenvatinib with pembrolizumab + chemo for metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, 2-part, phase 3 study enrolls pts ≥18 years with histologically/cytologically confirmed metastatic, nonsquamous, treatment-naive NSCLC without sensitizing genetic aberrations. Pts receive lenvatinib 8 mg daily or matching placebo + pembrolizumab 200 mg + pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 + carboplatin AUC 5 mg/mL/min or cisplatin 75 mg/m2 Q3W (4 cycles) followed by maintenance pembrolizumab (35 cycles) + lenvatinib/placebo + pemetrexed (no limit). In part 1 (open-label safety run-in), ~12 pts receive lenvatinib + pembrolizumab + chemo (n ≥6 in each chemo arm). If < 3 dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; select prespecified AEs) occur in 6 pts in each arm in cycle 1, part 2 will begin enrolling. If ≥3 DLTs occur in 6 pts in each arm, enrollment in part 1 may continue with advisement by the study oversight committee. In part 2, pts are randomized 1:1 to lenvatinib or placebo + pembrolizumab + chemo, stratified by PD-L1 tumor proportion score ( < 50%/≥50%), geographic site (East Asian/other), and ECOG PS (0/1). Tumor imaging occurs at baseline and Q6W until wk 18; then Q9W until wk 54; then Q12W until verified PD, initiation of new cancer therapy, study withdrawal, or death. AEs are graded by NCI CTCAE v4.0. The primary endpoint in part 1 is safety. The primary endpoints in part 2 are PFS (RECIST v1.1 by BICR) and OS, analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method and stratified log-rank test. Secondary endpoints in part 2 are ORR and DOR (RECIST v1.1 by BICR), safety, and quality of life. Enrollment into part 1 will begin in March 2019. For part 2, approximately 714 pts will enroll in 160 sites in 17 countries. Clinical trial information: NCT03829319.

Atezolizumab for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC

BackgroundThe cancer-cell–killing property of atezolizumab may be enhanced by the blockade of vascular endothelial growth factor–mediated immunosuppression with bevacizumab. This open-label, phase 3 study evaluated atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had not previously received chemotherapy.MethodsWe randomly assigned patients to receive atezolizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (ACP), bevacizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (BCP), or atezolizumab plus BCP (ABCP) every 3 weeks for four or six cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with atezolizumab, bevacizumab, or both. The two primary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival both among patients in the intention-to-treat population who had a wild-type genotype (WT population; patients with EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were excluded) and among patients in the WT population who had high expression of an effector T-cell (Teff) gene signature in the tumor (Teff-high WT population) and overall survival in the WT population. The ABCP group was compared with the BCP group before the ACP group was compared with the BCP group.ResultsIn the WT population, 356 patients were assigned to the ABCP group, and 336 to the BCP group. The median progression-free survival was longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group (8.3 months vs. 6.8 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.74; P<0.001); the corresponding values in the Teff-high WT population were 11.3 months and 6.8 months (hazard ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.68]; P<0.001). Progression-free survival was also longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group in the entire intention-to-treat population (including those with EGFR or ALK genetic alterations) and among patients with low or negative programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, those with low Teff gene-signature expression, and those with liver metastases. Median overall survival among the patients in the WT population was longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group (19.2 months vs. 14.7 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.96; P=0.02). The safety profile of ABCP was consistent with previously reported safety risks of the individual medicines.ConclusionsThe addition of atezolizumab to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival among patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression and EGFR or ALK genetic alteration status. (Funded by F. Hoffmann–La Roche/Genentech; IMpower150 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02366143.)

Abstract A084: DENALI: a 3-arm double-blind randomized phase 2 study of carboplatin, pemetrexed, and placebo (CPP) versus carboplatin, pemetrexed, and either 1 or 2 truncated courses of demcizumab (CPD) in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Abstract Introduction: Delta-like ligand 4 (DLL4) is a ligand that activates the Notch pathway, which is important for cancer stem cell (CSC) survival. Demcizumab is a humanized, anti-DLL4 antibody that has been shown using an in vivo tumorigenicity limiting dilution assay to inhibit tumor growth and decrease CSC frequency in minimally passaged human xenograft models. In addition, inhibition of DLL4 has also been shown in preclinical studies to cause dysfunctional sprouting of new vessels, resulting in an antiangiogenic effect. Data from a phase 1b study of carboplatin (C), pemetrexed (P), and demcizumab (D) in patients with 1st-line metastatic non-squamous NSCLC led to this double-blind randomized 3-arm placebo (Pl)-controlled phase 2 study. Methods: Patients with non-squamous NSCLC were randomized (1:1:1) to 1st-line therapy with either Arm 1 -CPPl, Arm 2 -CPD with a single 70-day truncated course of demcizumab or Arm 3 - CPD with two 70-day truncated courses of demcizumab (second course starting on Day 168). CP were given at usual dose and schedule; P/D was given IV on days 1 and 15 in cycles 1-3 and 7-9. The primary endpoint was response rate and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, survival, safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, and biomarkers of Notch signaling and CSCs in blood, hair follicles, and tumor cells. The primary study analyses compared CPPl to the two pooled CPD arms. Results: 82 patients were randomized and all 82 were treated. The median age was 61, the male/female ratio was 40/42, 80 pts had adenocarcinoma, 0 pts harbored EGFR mutation or ALK rearrangement, and 15 were KRAS mutated. The response/clinical benefit rates were 52%/92% and 28%/79% in the CPPl and pooled CPD arms, respectively (response p value = 0.04). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.7 months (95% CI: 5.4-12.5) in the CPPl arm and 5.5 months (95% CI: 4.1-6.9) in the pooled CPD arms (HR = 2.3; 95%CI: 1.1-4.8). The interim median overall survival (OS) for the CPPl and pooled CPD arms was not reached (95% CI: 16.0—NR) and 15.5 months (95% CI: 8.3-NR) (HR= 2.4; 95% CI: 0.94-6.1), respectively. CPD was generally well tolerated with nausea, fatigue, constipation, anemia, and hypertension being the most common reported toxicities. The incidences of the Grade 3 or greater toxicities of special interest with demcizumab therapy were hypertension (8% vs 25%), pulmonary hypertension (0% vs 0%), heart failure (0% vs. 0%), and bleeding (0% vs. 3.4%) in the CPPl and pooled CPD arms, respectively. Conclusions: The addition of either 1 or 2 truncated courses of demcizumab to 1st-line carboplatin and pemetrexed did not improve the efficacy compared to CPPl in patients with 1st-line metastatic NSCLC. CPD therapy was generally well tolerated. Citation Format: Brett Hughes, Andrew Dean, Ben Markman, Luke Dreisbach, Mariano Provencio, Libero Ciuffreda, Rachel Dear, Peter Graze, Alforia Nadal, Baerin Houghton, Teresa Moran, Rachel Roberts, Grace Dy, Taus Alvaro, Alex Martinez Marti, Rainer Brachmann, Robert Stagg, Ramaswamy Govindan. DENALI: a 3-arm double-blind randomized phase 2 study of carboplatin, pemetrexed, and placebo (CPP) versus carboplatin, pemetrexed, and either 1 or 2 truncated courses of demcizumab (CPD) in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR-NCI-EORTC International Conference: Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics; 2017 Oct 26-30; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2018;17(1 Suppl):Abstract nr A084.

Assessment of interfering factors and clinical risk associated with discontinuation of pemetrexed maintenance therapy in advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer

ObjectivesPemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy after induction with platinum-based chemotherapy is a standard treatment option for non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. However, discontinuation of maintenance therapy is still a challenge in clinical practice. We aimed to investigate interfering factors and clinical risk associated with discontinuation of pemetrexed maintenance therapy (PMT). Materials and methodsData of patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-squamous NSCLC who received PMT between December 2011 and October 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients’ characteristics, performance status (PS), response and toxicity evaluation were collected. The reasons for PMT discontinuation were summarized. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model. ResultsOf the 220 patients included for final analysis, 132 patients (60.0%) continued PMT until disease progression. The patients over 60 years old (p=0.021), the patients with PS 2 at the initiation of PMT (p=0.005) and the patients experienced grade 3/4 toxicity during PMT (p<0.001) had a higher discontinuation rate. The reasons for PMT discontinuation were the regarding toxicity (39.8%), high intensity of hospital visit (17.0%), treatment cost (13.6%), patients’ preference (26.1%) and failure of pain control (3.4%). In univariate analysis, PS 0–1 at the initiation of PMT (5.6 versus 4.3 months, p=0.022) and PMT continuation (5.6 versus 4.3 months, p<0.001) were associated with improved PFS. And PMT continuation was associated with improved OS (19.2 versus 16.8 months, p=0.003) along with actionable mutations and PS 0–1 at the initiation of PMT. In multivariate analysis, PMT continuation (hazard ratio: 1.486; 95% CI: 1.050–2.104; p=0.025) was an independent prognostic factor regarding OS benefit assessed by Cox proportional hazard model. ConclusionDiscontinuation of PMT is common in clinical practice. The survival benefit suggests that fit patients should be encouraged to continue PMT until disease progression.

Antiangiogéniques en cancérologie thoracique : critères de prescription et gestion des effets indésirables

The only anti-angiogenic registered drug in first-line treatment of metastatic, nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the humanized monoclonal anti-VEFG antibody, bevacizumab, of which registration phase 3 trial is still a seminal date in history of stage IV NSCLC treatments. Indeed, in this trial for the first time, the bevacizumab-containing triplet led to an overall survival exceeding one year. If other anti-angiogenic drugs also obtained a European registration in second line setting, in combination with docetaxel (nintedanib and ramucirumab), whereas other did not obtain such registration because of negative phase 3 trials or excessing toxicity, their action, by targeting the main angiogenesis signaling pathway (VEGF or VEGF-R), is responsible for commune adverse, more or less, marked ≪ class ≫ effects, and explain commune restrictions in their indications, needing to carefully select the patients able to be treated with such drugs. Bevacizumab still remains the best model of description of these use restrictions and of these class side effects, such as systemic hypertension, hemorrhages, thrombosis or proteinuria. Furthermore, bevacizumab indications could be extended in thoracic oncology to pleural mesothelioma, because of the positivity of the MAPS randomized phase 3 trial sponsored by French Intergroup (IFCT). Thus, the rigorous patient selection has decreased the main complications incidence allowing for the use of bevacizumab, as upfront treatment with or without maintenance, for a large number of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC patients.

Pemetrexed in maintenance treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Pemetrexed, a multitargeting antifolate cytotoxic drug, plays a leading role in front-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Following its approval as second-line monotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic non-squamous NSCLC, pemetrexed has established itself as the first-line regimen in combination with cisplatin, and its powerful antitumor effects and less cumulative toxicities were then taken advantage of in the JMEN and PARAMOUNT trials, respectively, to pioneer a new treatment strategy of switch and continuation maintenance monotherapy. These developments have brought about a marked paradigm shift, and made pemetrexed indispensable in the treatment for non-squamous NSCLC. So far, only three drugs have been approved for maintenance therapy; pemetrexed both by switch and continuation maintenance, erlotinib by switch maintenance, and bevacizumab by continuation maintenance. Compared with observation alone after defined cycles of the first-line chemotherapy, subsequent pemetrexed maintenance therapy has provided significantly longer survival and infrequent severe adverse events. The cost-effectiveness of pemetrexed maintenance therapy is controversial, as well as the other two maintenance drugs, bevacizumab and erlotinib. The latest attractive attention is a combination maintenance therapy. We may have to consider epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status for selection of a combination pattern. A combination maintenance therapy of pemetrexed plus bevacizumab is potential for patients with wild-type EGFR status, while a EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor-containing combination is promising for patients with active EGFR mutation status. Pemetrexed will be a pivotal drug when a combination maintenance therapy is used in practice. For future maintenance therapy, we need to explore reliable predictive selection or exclusion markers that can predict who will really benefit from maintenance therapy.

Pemetrexed versus gefitinib as a second-line treatment in advanced nonsquamous nonsmall-cell lung cancer patients harboring wild-type EGFR (CTONG0806): a multicenter randomized trial

CTONG0806 assessed the efficacy of pemetrexed versus gefitinib as second-line treatment in advanced nonsquamous nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring wild-type epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Patients with locally advanced or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC harboring wild-type EGFR, detected by direct sequencing, and previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized to receive gefitinib (250 mg/day) orally or pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2)) i.v. on day 1 of a 21-day cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). The Independent Review Committee (IRC) evaluated all pictorial data. From February 2009 to August 2012, 161 patients were enrolled, and 157 were assessable (81 in the gefitinib arm, 76 in the pemetrexed arm). Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two arms. The median PFSs were 4.8 versus 1.6 months in the pemetrexed and gefitinib arms, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40-0.75, P < 0.001] as confirmed by IRC evaluation (5.6versus 1.7 months, HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38-0.75, P < 0.001). The median overall survival (OS) showed a trend of superiority in the pemetrexed arm (12.4 versus 9.6 months, HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.49-1.04, P = 0.077). Quality-of-life assessment showed no marked difference between the arms. No unexpected adverse events were found. Of 108 patients with sufficient DNA samples, EGFR mutation status was re-tested by Scorpion amplification refractory mutation system (ARMS); 32 (29.6%) tested positive (19 in the pemetrexed arm, 13 in the gefitinib arm; median PFS: 8.1 versus 7.0 months, HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.43-2.08, P = 0.877). CTONG0806 is the first trial to show significant improvement in PFS and an improved OS trend with pemetrexed compared with gefitinib as second-line setting treatment of EGFR wild-type advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. ARMS is superior to direct sequencing in excluding false-negative patients. NCT00891579.

Pemetrexed Continuation Maintenance in Patients with Nonsquamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: Review of Two East Asian Trials in Reference to PARAMOUNT.

PurposeA recent phase III study (PARAMOUNT) demonstrated that pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy is a new treatment paradigm for advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The majority of patients enrolled in PARAMOUNT were Caucasian (94%). We reviewed efficacy and safety data from two clinical trials, which enrolled East Asian (EA) patients, to supplement data from PARAMOUNT on pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.Materials and MethodsStudy S110 was a phase II, multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label trial in never-smoker, chemonaïve, EA patients (n=31) with locally advanced or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC (n=27). Study JMII was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, post-marketing, clinical trial in Japanese patients (n=109) with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. PARAMOUNT was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC.ResultsIn EA patients with nonsquamous NSCLC, the median progression-free survival (PFS) for pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy was 4.04 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.22 to 5.29 months) in study S110 and 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.2 to 5.2 months) in study JMII. The median PFS for pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy in PARAMOUNT was 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.2 to 4.6 months). Pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy in EA patients in studies S110 and JMII did not lead to any unexpected safety events, and was consistent with PARAMOUNT’s safety profile.ConclusionThe efficacy and safety data in the EA trials were similar to those in PARAMOUNT despite differences in patient populations and study designs. These data represent consistent evidence for pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy in EA patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC.

Pemetrexed as indispensable drug for the treatment of non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer; the role in induction and maintenance therapy

Pemetrexed is a multi-targeting antifolate cytotoxic drug and, within the last decade, has brought a new paradigm shift in treatment strategies for non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the United States, pemetrexed has been approved three times by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-squamous NSCLC in 2004, 2008 and 2009. Indications were the use as a single agent for patients in whom any prior chemotherapy has failed, the use in combination with cisplatin for the first-line treatment and the use in maintenance treatment after platinum-doublet induction chemotherapy, respectively. Owing to the advantage of less cumulative toxicities, pemetrexed has become indispensable for switch- or continuation-maintenance therapy. These maintenance methods have superseded the conventional methods of the defined cycles of chemotherapy followed by drug holidays in the front-line chemotherapy. A recent topic is a challenge of further addition of any tolerable drug to continuation-maintenance by pemetrexed alone. Comparing recent randomized phase III studies (PRAMOUNT, AVAPERL and PointBreak), the addition of bevacizumab to a standard regimen of pemetrexed plus platinum induction has enabled more patients to receive maintenance therapy and continuation-maintenance by pemetrexed plus bevacizumab has brought about longer progression-free survival than the maintenance by either of the two drugs. However, further investigation and discussion are required on the viewpoints of overall survival benefit and cost-effectiveness of adding bevacizumab and also we have to explore reliable selection markers for such expensive drugs.