Unresectable Stage Research Articles

Comparison of immunochemotherapy and chemotherapy alone in conversion therapy for locally advanced unresectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

The clinical value of preoperative immunochemotherapy and simple chemotherapy induction regimen in the conversion therapy of locally advanced unresectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is still unclear. Retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with unresectable cT4b stage ESCC who underwent conversion surgery in our hospital from January 2020 to December 2022. According to the preoperative induction treatment plan, they were divided into induction immunochemotherapy group (iICT group) and induction chemotherapy group (iCT group). The conversion surgery rate, R0 resection rate, radiological and pathological tumor responses, safety, and short-term survival outcomes were analyzed. The results showed that a total of 199 patients with cT4b locally advanced unresectable ESCC who underwent preoperative induction therapy were included in this study. Among them, there were 64 cases (32.2%) in the iICT group, 135 cases (67.8%) in the iCT group. There was a statistically significant difference in objective response rate (73.5% vs 48.9%) and conversion surgery rate (81.3% vs 66.7%), between the iICT and iCT groups (P=0.001 and P=0.019). Among the two groups of patients who underwent surgery, there were statistically significant differences in R0 resection rate (94.2% vs 82.2%) and pathological complete remission rate (23.1% vs 6.7%) between the iICT and iCT groups (P=0.043 and P=0.004). And there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of grade 3 and above between two groups (P=0.928). The 2-year EFS of the iICT group and iCT group were 76.4% and 42.4%, respectively, with statistically significant differences (P=0.006). Compared with simple chemotherapy, the combination of PD-1 inhibitors and chemotherapy can achieve better conversion surgery rate, tumor response and event-free survival in the conversion therapy of locally advanced unresectable ESCC.

A Comparative Study of Palliative Hypo-fractionated vs Conventional Fractionated Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Non Small Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose: To compare the compliance, tumor response, quality of life and survival between a hypo-fractionated and a conventional fractionated RT schedule in locally advanced NSCLC patients. Materials and Methods: Total 50 patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC were given 3 cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. After 3-4 weeks of completion of 3rd cycle, 25 patients received a total 17Gy in 2 fr (8.5Gy/fr) on day 1 and day 8 in study arm, 25 patients received a total 50 Gy in 25 fr (2Gy/fr) administered daily (5days/week) for 5 weeks. Disease response was evaluated by RECIST criteria at 1, 3 and 6 month. Then follow up was done after 1yr, 2yr and 3yr to evaluate the overall survival. Result: none of patients in both arms had complete response at any follow up. Locoregional disease control was observed in 18% & 27% in study and control arm respectively (p value>0.05). Median survival was 10 months and 12.5 months in study and control arm respectively which was not statistically significant. There was no statistically difference in grade of toxicities. OS rates at 1, 2 and 3years were 40%, 10% and 0% in study arm and 50%, 20% and 5% in control arm but difference in OS was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Many patients were lost to follow up in our study; although among the patients followed, we found to concluded that for improvement of quality of life in locally advanced NSCLC patients with poor PS and short life span, the palliative hypo-fractionated regimen of short duration (17Gy/2fr) could be considered as a reasonable alternative and also economically feasible & required shorter duration of stay in the hospital. In conclusion, large number of patients with strict follow up need to be done to ascertain the need and benefits of this palliative TRT.

MDT-BRIDGE: Neoadjuvant Durvalumab Plus Chemotherapy Followed by Either Surgery and Adjuvant Durvalumab or Chemoradiotherapy and Consolidation Durvalumab in Resectable or Borderline-resectable Stage IIB–IIIB NSCLC

IntroductionIn the AEGEAN trial, neoadjuvant durvalumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (D+CT) followed by adjuvant durvalumab, versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, significantly improved pathological complete response (pCR) rate and event-free survival (EFS) in patients with resectable NSCLC. In the PACIFIC trial, consolidation durvalumab significantly improved progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC after chemoradiotherapy. Strong pathological and clinical outcomes with chemoimmunotherapy have generated interest in its use to enable patients with borderline-resectable NSCLC to undergo surgery. Additionally, for patients initially deemed resectable but who later become unresectable/inoperable during neoadjuvant treatment, consolidation immunotherapy after chemoradiotherapy should be explored. Patients and methodsMDT-BRIDGE (NCT05925530) is a multicenter, phase II, non-randomized study in ∼140 patients with EGFR/ALK wild-type, stage IIB–IIIB (N2) NSCLC. Following baseline multidisciplinary team (MDT) assessment to determine resectable/borderline-resectable status, all patients receive 2 cycles of neoadjuvant D+CT every 3 weeks, followed by MDT reassessment of resectability. Patients deemed resectable receive 1-2 additional cycles of D+CT followed by surgery (Cohort 1). Patients deemed unresectable receive standard-of-care chemoradiotherapy (Cohort 2). Cohort 1 patients who become ineligible for surgery can enter Cohort 2. Following surgery or chemoradiotherapy, patients receive adjuvant or consolidation durvalumab for 1 year. The primary endpoint is resection rate in all patients. Additional endpoints include resection rates by baseline resectable/borderline-resectable status, resection outcomes, EFS/PFS, OS, pCR rate, circulating tumor DNA dynamics pre- and post-surgery (including correlation with clinical outcomes), and safety. ConclusionEnrollment began in February 2024; primary completion is anticipated in April 2026.

Neoadjuvant SHR-1701 with or without chemotherapy in unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: A proof-of-concept, phase 2 trial

We conducted a proof-of-concept, phase 2 trial to assess neoadjuvant SHR-1701 with or without chemotherapy, followed by surgery or radiotherapy, and then consolidation SHR-1701 in unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the primary cohort of patients receiving neoadjuvant combination therapy (n= 97), both primary endpoints were met, with a post-induction objective response rate of 58% (95% confidence interval [CI] 47-68) and an 18-month event-free survival (EFS) rate of 56.6% (95% CI 45.2-66.5). Overall, 27 (25%) patients underwent surgery; all achieved R0 resection. Among them, 12 (44%) major pathological responses and seven (26%) pathological complete responses were recorded. The 18-month EFS rate was 74.1% (95% CI 53.2-86.7) in surgical patients and 57.3% (43.0-69.3) in radiotherapy-treated patients. Neoadjuvant SHR-1701 with chemotherapy, followed by surgery or radiotherapy, showed promising efficacy with a tolerable safety profile in unresectable stage III NSCLC. Surgical conversion was feasible in a notable proportion of patients and associated with better survival outcomes.

Dosimetric and NTCP advantages of robust proton therapy over robust VMAT for Stage III NSCLC in the immunotherapy era

AimsTo assess the robustness and to define the dosimetric and NTCP advantages of pencil-beam-scanning proton therapy (PBSPT) compared with VMAT for unresectable Stage III non-small lung cancer (NSCLC) in the immunotherapy era. Material and methods10 patients were re-planned with VMAT and PBSPT using: 1) ITV-based robust optimization with 0.5 cm setup uncertainties and (for PBSPT) 3.5 % range uncertainties on free-breathing CT 2) CTV-based RO including all 4DCTs anatomies. Target coverage (TC), organs at risk dose and TC robustness (TCR), set at V95%, were compared. The NTCP risk for radiation pneumonitis (RP), 24-month mortality (24MM), G2 + acute esophageal toxicity (ET), the dose to the immune system (EDIC) and the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery V15 < 10 % were registered. Wilcoxon test was used. ResultsBoth PBSPT methods improved TC and TCR (p < 0.01). The mean lung dose and lung V20 were lower with PBSPT (p < 0.01). Median mean heart dose reduction with PBSPT was 8 Gy (p < 0.001). PT lowered median LAD V15 (p = 0.004).ΔNTCP > 5 % with PBSPT was observed for two patients for RP and for five patients for 24 MM. ΔNTCP for ≥ G2 ET was not in favor of PBSPT for all patients. PBSPT halved median EDIC (4.9/5.1 Gy for ITV/CTV-based VMAT vs 2.3 Gy for both ITV/CTV-based PBSPT, p < 0.01). ConclusionsPBSPT is a robust approach with significant dosimetric and NTCP advantages over VMAT; the EDIC reduction could allow for a better integration with immunotherapy. A clinical benefit for a subset of NSCLC patients is expected.

Neoadjuvant camrelizumab (an anti-PD-1 antibody) plus chemotherapy or apatinib (a VEGFR-2 inhibitor) for initially unresectable stage II–III non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicentre, two-arm, phase 2 exploratory study

This multicentre, two-arm, phase 2 study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus chemotherapy or apatinib in patients with initially unresectable stage II–III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Eligible patients regardless of PD-L1 expression received neoadjuvant camrelizumab 200 mg and platinum-doublet chemotherapy every 3 weeks (arm A) or those with PD-L1-positive tumors received neoadjuvant camrelizumab and apatinib 250 mg once daily (arm B), for 2–4 cycles, followed by surgery. The primary endpoint was major pathological response (MPR) rate. Thirty patients in arm A and 21 in arm B were enrolled. Surgery rates were 50.0% (15/30) in arm A and 42.9% (9/21) in arm B, with all patients achieving R0 resections. Of these patients, the MPR and pathological complete response rates were both 20.0% (95% CI 4.3–48.1) in arm A and were 55.6% (95% CI 21.2–86.3) and 11.1% (95% CI 0.3–48.2) in arm B, respectively. The corresponding objective response rates were 33.3% (95% CI 11.8–61.6) and 55.6% (95% CI 21.2–86.3). With a median follow-up of 22.4 months (95% CI 19.0–26.0), the median event-free survival was not reached (NR; 95% CI 13.6-NR) in arm A and 16.8 months (95% CI 8.6-NR) in arm B. Grade 3 or above treatment-related adverse events occurred in eight (26.7%) patients in arm A and three (14.3%) in arm B. Biomarker analysis showed baseline TYROBP expression was predictive of treatment response in arm B. Neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus chemotherapy or apatinib exhibits preliminary efficacy and manageable toxicity in patients with initially unresectable stage II–III NSCLC.

Predictive value of primary tumor volume change during concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer

Background and purposeNo established early biomarkers currently exist to predict responses during concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with unresectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study investigated the potential of gross tumor volume (GTV) and its changes during CCRT as predictors of survival outcomes. Materials and methodsWe identified 227 patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC who underwent definitive CCRT followed by durvalumab between November 2018 and December 2022. GTV was defined as the volume of the primary tumor, assessed at two time points: before starting CCRT for initial planning (GTV1), and at the fourth week of CCRT for adaptive planning (GTV2). Both relative and absolute regressions between GTV1 and GTV2 were calculated. ResultsThe median GTV1 volume was 90 mL (range, 5–840 mL), and the median GTV2 volume was 64 mL (range, 1–520 mL), resulting in median absolute and relative regressions of 18.6 mL and 25.0 %, respectively. Among the GTV parameters, relative GTV regression exhibited the strongest predictive value, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.804 for in-field progression and 0.711 for overall progression. The 1-year progression-free survival rates for the high (>30 %), intermediate (0–30 %), and low (≤0%) relative regression groups were 88.0 %, 62.6 %, and 14.3 %, respectively (p = 0.006 for high vs. intermediate; p < 0.001 for intermediate vs. low). Additionally, GTV2 volume demonstrated stronger associations with survival outcomes than GTV1 volume. ConclusionRelative GTV regression was identified as a promising early predictor for patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC. Further development of a multi-parametric predictive model is warranted to guide patient-tailored therapeutic approaches.

Combination of encorafenib and binimetinib followed by ipilimumab and nivolumab versus ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with advanced BRAF-V600E/K-mutated melanoma: The primary analysis of an EORTC randomized phase II study (EBIN).

LBA9503 Background: The benefit of an induction treatment with targeted therapy (TT) with BRAF+MEK inhibitors prior to a combined immunotherapy (IT) with ipilimumab (ipi) + nivolumab (nivo) in patients (pts) with advanced BRAF-V600E/K mutant melanoma is still unclear. Methods: EBIN is an international randomized controlled phase II trial comparing upfront IT (arm A: nivo [3mg/kg] + ipi [1mg/kg] q3w x4 followed by nivo 480 mg q4w) with the sequential approach (arm B: 3 months induction with TT with encorafenib 450 mg QD + binimetinib 45 mg BID orally, followed by IT using the same regimen as in arm A), total treatment [Tx] duration in both arms: 2 years. In arm B, pts were allowed to be rechallenged with TT after progression. Pts with measurable BRAF-V600E/K unresectable stage III/IV melanoma, except pts with uveal melanoma, untreated or symptomatic brain or leptomeningeal involvement were randomly assigned 1:1 to arm A or B. Prior Tx for advanced melanoma was not allowed but adjuvant Tx completed at least 6 months before randomization was permitted. The primary objective was to show superiority of arm B in progression-free survival (PFS) using the log-rank test stratified by stage and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) with a 1-sided alpha error set at 5%. The study had a power of 80% to detect a HR of 0.65. The study planned to randomize 135 pts in each arm. Results: All 136 pts randomized to arm B and 131 out of 135 in arm A started protocol Tx. At baseline, 170 (63%) pts had stage M1c, 129 (48%) had LDH above upper limit normal (ULN), 74 (27%) had a liver metastasis, and 19 (7%) received adjuvant therapy. The median follow-up was 21 months. In arm B, 135 (99%) pts were free of progression at week 12, when the end of TT was scheduled. In the intention-to-treat population, there was no evidence of a longer PFS in arm B (HR = 0.87, 90% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.12, p = 0.36). In a prespecified subgroup analysis, the HR for arm B vs arm A was 2.09 (95% CI 0.96-4.53), 0.74 (95% CI 0.43-1.29), 0.86 (95% CI 0.54-1.37), and 0.46 (95% CI 0.21-1.03) in pts with stage III with LDH≤ULN or M1a, M1b/M1c with LDH≤ULN, ULN &lt; LDH≤2ULN, and LDH &gt; 2ULN, respectively (p-value for interaction 0.045). In a post-hoc subgroup analysis, pts with ≥3 metastatic sites or a sum of target lesions ≥10cm at baseline did not have a longer PFS in arm B but in pts with liver metastasis the Tx HR was 0.48 (95% CI 0.28-0.80, p-value for interaction 0.008). The objective response rate was 53% in arm B and 45% in arm A. Complete response rate was 12% in arm B and 10% in arm A. Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 58% of pts in arm B and 51% in arm A. Conclusion: The EBIN trial shows there is no difference in PFS between the two treatment arms for unselected patients but supports the hypothesis that patients with very high LDH and those with liver metastases benefit from the sequential approach. Clinical trial information: NCT03235245 .

Osimertinib (osi) after definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients (pts) with unresectable stage (stg) III epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated (EGFRm) NSCLC: Primary results of the phase 3 LAURA study.

LBA4 Background: EGFR mutations occur in up to one-third of pts with unresectable stg III NSCLC. Consolidation durvalumab is standard of care (SoC) for pts who do not progress after concurrent CRT (cCRT), yet the benefit of consolidation immunotherapy specifically for EGFRm NSCLC remains uncertain, with limited data available. Osi, a 3rd-generation CNS-active EGFR-TKI, is recommended for EGFRm advanced/metastatic NSCLC and as adjuvant therapy for resectable EGFRm NSCLC. We report primary results from the global, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled Phase 3 LAURA study (NCT03521154), assessing efficacy/safety of osi in unresectable stg III EGFRm NSCLC without progression after definitive CRT. Methods: Eligible pts: aged ≥18 years (≥20 in Japan), WHO PS 0/1, unresectable stg III EGFRm (Ex19del/L858R) NSCLC, had received definitive platinum-based cCRT/sequential CRT (sCRT) with no progression. Pts were stratified (cCRT vs sCRT; stg IIIA vs IIIB/IIIC; Chinese vs non-Chinese) and randomized 2:1 to receive osi 80 mg or PBO QD until progression (blinded independent central review [BICR]-confirmed)/discontinuation. Imaging, including brain MRI, was mandated at baseline, every 8 wks to wk 48, then every 12 wks, until progression by BICR. Open-label osi was offered after progression by BICR. Primary endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS; RECIST v1.1) assessed by BICR. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Data cut-off: January 5, 2024. Results: Overall, 216 pts were randomly assigned: osi n=143, PBO n=73. Baseline characteristics were generally balanced across osi/PBO arms: female 63/58%, stg IIIA 36/33%, IIIB 47/52%, IIIC 17/15%, Ex19del 52/59%. Osi significantly improved PFS by BICR vs PBO: HR 0.16; 95% CI 0.10, 0.24; p&lt;0.001. Median PFS was 39.1 mo (95% CI 31.5, not calculable) for osi vs 5.6 mo (95% CI 3.7, 7.4) for PBO; 12-mo PFS rate was 74% (osi) vs 22% (PBO); 24-mo PFS rate was 65% (osi) vs 13% (PBO). Investigator-assessed PFS (HR 0.19; 95% CI 0.12, 0.29; nominal p&lt;0.001) was consistent with PFS by BICR. PFS benefit was consistent across predefined subgroups. Interim OS analysis (20% maturity) showed a trend in favor of osi: HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.42, 1.56; p=0.530; 81% of pts (PBO arm) received osi after progression. All-causality AEs were reported in 98% vs 88% pts; ≥Grade 3 AEs in 35% vs 12%; serious AEs in 38% vs 15% for osi vs PBO, respectively. Radiation pneumonitis AEs (grouped term): 48% (osi) vs 38% (PBO), majority Grade 1/2. Any AEs leading to discontinuation were reported in 13% vs 5% for osi vs PBO, respectively. Conclusions: Osi after definitive CRT demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS, for unresectable stg III EGFRm NSCLC, with no unexpected safety signals. These results establish osi as the new SoC for EGFRm NSCLC in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT03521154 .

Phase III randomized trial evaluating tilsotolimod in combination with ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced refractory melanoma (ILLUMINATE 301).

LBA9516 Background: There are limited treatment options for advanced melanoma that has progressed during or after immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Intratumoral (IT) immunotherapy may improve tumor-specific immune activation by promoting local tumor antigen presentation while avoiding systemic toxicities. The Phase 3 ILLUMINATE-301 study (NCT03445533) evaluated tilsotolimod, a toll-like receptor 9 agonist, with or without ipilimumab in patients with anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1)-advanced refractory melanoma. Methods: Patients with unresectable Stage III–IV melanoma that progressed during or after anti-PD-1 therapy were randomized 1:1 to receive 24 weeks of tilsotolimod plus ipilimumab or 10 weeks of ipilimumab alone. Nine IT injections of tilsotolimod were administered to a single designated lesion over 24 weeks. Intravenous ipilimumab 3 mg/kg was administered every 3 weeks from Week 2 in the tilsotolimod arm and Week 1 in the ipilimumab arm. The primary endpoint was efficacy measured using objective response rate (ORR; independent review) and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of481 patients received tilsotolimod plus ipilimumab (n = 238) or ipilimumab alone (n = 243). ORRs were 8.8% in the tilsotolimod arm and 8.6% in the ipilimumab arm, with disease control rates of 34.5% and 27.2%, respectively. Median OS was 11.6 months in the tilsotolimod arm and 10.0 months in the ipilimumab arm (hazard ratio (HR) 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77–1.19]; P = 0.7). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 61.1% and 55.5% of patients in the tilsotolimod and ipilimumab arms, respectively. Conclusion: Adding tilsotolimod to ipilimumab did not improve response or OS in patients with PD-1 refractory advanced melanoma. However, the results represent the largest prospective dataset reported to date on using ipilimumab in this setting and are a valuable addition to the knowledge base. Clinical trial information: NCT03445533 .

Site-Specific Response and Resistance Patterns in Patients with Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated with First-Line Systemic Therapy.

Patients with advanced NSCLC have heterogenous responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with or without chemotherapy. In NSCLC, the impact of the distribution of metastatic sites and the response to systemic therapy combinations remain poorly understood. In a retrospective cohort study of patients with unresectable stage III/IV NSCLC who received first-line systemic therapy, we sought to assess the association between the site of metastases with patterns of response and progression. Data regarding demographics, tumour characteristics (including site, size, and volume of metastases), treatment, and outcomes were examined at two cancer care centres. The endpoints included organ site-specific response rate, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Two-hundred and eighty-five patients were included in the analysis. In a multivariate analysis, patients with bone metastases had a reduced ORR, PFS, and OS. Primary resistance was also more likely in patients with bone metastases. Patients with bone or liver metastases had a shorter OS when receiving ICIs with or without chemotherapy, but not with chemotherapy alone, suggesting an immunological basis for therapeutic resistance. A directed assessment of the tumour microenvironment in these locations and a deeper understanding of the drivers of organ-specific resistance to immunotherapy are critical to optimise novel combination therapies and sequencing in these patients.

Osimertinib after Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III EGFR-Mutated NSCLC

BackgroundOsimertinib is a recommended treatment for advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation and as adjuvant treatment for resected EGFR-mutated NSCLC. EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors have shown preliminary efficacy in unresectable stage III EGFR-mutated NSCLC.MethodsIn this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients with unresectable EGFR-mutated stage III NSCLC without progression during or after chemoradiotherapy to receive osimertinib or placebo until disease progression occurred (as assessed by blinded independent central review) or the regimen was discontinued. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review.ResultsA total of 216 patients who had undergone chemoradiotherapy were randomly assigned to receive osimertinib (143 patients) or placebo (73 patients). Osimertinib resulted in a significant progression-free survival benefit as compared with placebo: the median progression-free survival was 39.1 months with osimertinib versus 5.6 months with placebo, with a hazard ratio for disease progression or death of 0.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10 to 0.24; P<0.001). The percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 12 months was 74% (95% CI, 65 to 80) with osimertinib and 22% (95% CI, 13 to 32) with placebo. Interim overall survival data (maturity, 20%) showed 36-month overall survival among 84% of patients with osimertinib (95% CI, 75 to 89) and 74% with placebo (95% CI, 57 to 85), with a hazard ratio for death of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.42 to 1.56; P=0.53). The incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher was 35% in the osimertinib group and 12% in the placebo group; radiation pneumonitis (majority grade, 1 to 2) was reported in 48% and 38%, respectively. No new safety concerns emerged.ConclusionsTreatment with osimertinib resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than placebo in patients with unresectable stage III EGFR-mutated NSCLC. (Funded by AstraZeneca; LAURA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03521154.)

Phase II study of induction platinum doublet in combination with nivolumab followed by surgery or concurrent chemotherapy-nivolumab-radiation in unresectable stage IIIA-C non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

TPS8122 Background: For patients (pts) with stage IIIA-IIIC NSCLC, though standard of care chemo-radiation (XRT) followed by 1 year of durvalumab has improved 5 year overall survival (OS), fewer than 50% survive 5 years. In this study, we adopted the established neoadjuvant chemotherapy (chemo) plus nivolumab (nivo) CheckMate-816 regimens for resectable stage I(&gt;4cm)-IIIA yielding an increased complete pathologic response (pCR) rate and event free survival compared to chemo alone, as induction therapy in unresectable stage IIIA-IIIC NSCLC. The intent is to use induction chemo-nivo to treat pts traditionally considered unresectable (multi-station N2 or N3 disease) in order to downstage them enough to permit surgical resection. The study is structured to change (1) the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) regimen to induction rather than consolidation which enables the chance to observe the systemic therapy’s efficacy, treat micro-metastatic disease earlier, and may decrease the morbidity of the ablative therapies (2) the ICI containing regimen by increasing from single agent ICI to combination chemo plus nivo which may improve systemic efficacy (3) the duration of treatment with pre and post ablative ICI containing therapy.Induction also provides a platform for studying tumor biology with the chance to discover surrogate markers of response and resistance to the induction regimen matched against response ahead of the definitive therapy. Methods: This is an investigator initiated trial for pts with newly diagnosed clinical stage IIIA-IIIC EGFR/ALK/ROS1 WT, SQ and NSQ NSCLC with PS 0-1. Pts must be able to tolerate surgery and have a primary tumor which is technically resectable with an N stage IIIA &gt; 2 or more lymph node (LN) stations positive. Pts are treated with the same platinum doublet plus nivo regimens used in CheckMate-816 for 3 cycles followed by repeat CT and repeat biopsy of all LN stations biopsied at baseline and LN stations which at baseline had a high suspicion of harboring disease and which look technically unresectable. If the cancer is down-staged to a single LN station-N2, or is N1 or N0, the pt is offered surgery with an option of post-operative XRT. If not sufficiently down-staged, pts are treated with definitive chemo-nivo-XRT. All pts receive 1 year of consolidation nivo. The primary outcome is response to the induction regimen by repeat CT scan. Secondary outcomes include the rate of converting non-surgical stage III(A-C) to surgically resectable disease, pCR rate, extent of post-induction XRT field decrease, 2-year progression free survival, OS, quality of life, and exploratory outcomes include markers of resistance and response, and remote symptom monitoring. Enrolment will be 37 pts. The study is accruing with a plan to open at a second site. Clinical trial information: NCT06003075 .

FCN-159, a MEK1/2 inhibitor, in patients with advanced melanoma harboring NRAS or NF1mutations: A phase 1B dose-expansion study.

3095 Background: In phase 1A dose-escalation study, preliminary anti-tumor activity of FCN-159 was observed in advanced melanoma patients harboring NRAS mutations (ORR: 19.0%, mPFS: 3.8 months) with tolerable safety profile, which was posted during AACR 2022 (No.: 22-LB-7398-AACR). Here, we report the results from phase 1B dose-expansion study in advanced NRAS- or NF1-mutant melanoma patients at RP2D predetermined at 12 mg. Methods: This open-label, dose-expansion, phase 1B study (NCT03932253) consists of two cohorts, which enrolled patients with unresectable stage III/IV melanoma harboring NRAS or NF1 mutations, respectively. Patients received FCN-159 orally at 12 mg once daily (QD) continuously in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was anti-tumor activity. Results: As of July 17, 2023, 46 patients (32 patients with NRASmutations in Cohort 1 and 14 patients with NF1mutations in Cohort 2) were enrolled and received 12 mg FCN-159 QD. The median follow-up time was 8.6 months. Among 25 patients who failed in previous anti-PD-1 therapy in Cohort 1, 6 had confirmed partial responses (ORR, 24.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.4–45.1). Median DOR was 6.5 months (95% CI, 2.7–NE). Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 3.6 months (95% CI, 1.8–5.5). Among 14 patients in Cohort 2, 1 had PR (ORR, 7.1%; 95% CI, 0.2-33.9) and mPFS was 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.8-5.5) (Table). Grade≥3 FCN-159-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 10 (21.7%) patients in both cohorts; the most common was blood creatine phosphokinase increased (13.0%). FCN-159–related serious AEs (SAEs) were reported in 3 (6.5%) patients, which were edema lower limb, cellulitis and pneumonia. Two (4.3%) patients discontinued treatment due to FCN-159 related TEAEs, including serous retinal detachment and herpes zoster. No FCN-159-related TEAEs led to death. Conclusions: FCN-159 showed encouraging efficacy data with well tolerated safety profile in patients with NRAS-mutant advanced melanoma, especially those who failed in previous anti-PD-1 therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT03932253 . [Table: see text]

A DNA plasmid melanoma cancer vaccine, SCIB1, combined with nivolumab + ipilimumab in patients with advanced unresectable melanoma: Efficacy and safety results from the open-label phase 2 SCOPE trial.

9535 Background: Targeting melanoma by T cells drives anti-tumor responses. We previously showed that SCIB1, a DNA vaccine incorporating T cell epitopes from TRP-2/gp100 into an antibody framework to allow Fc targeting of activated dendritic cells, was successful as monotherapy in a Phase 1/2 trial in Stage III/IV melanoma patients. Disease control was achieved in 60% of cases of unresectable melanoma. In addition, 88% of 20 Stage III/IV patients treated with SCIB1 who had had a previous successful tumor resection, were disease free for 5 years. 1st line combination treatment with nivolumab and ipilimumab in advanced melanoma has a reported ORR of 50%. The current SCOPE trial tests the hypothesis that patients with unresectable melanoma may improve response rate when SCIB1 is given with checkpoint inhibitors (CPI). Methods: Previously untreated patients with unresectable Stage III/IV melanoma were treated with nivolumab with ipilimumab and SCIB1 (8 mg) i.m. using needle-free injections at a fixed dosing schedule for a total of 10 doses over 24 months. The CPI therapy was administered in accordance with respective SmPC. ORR, as measured by RECIST 1.1 in the intention-to-treat population, is the primary endpoint. The study is designed using Simon's two stage methodology with 80% power when the ORR of no interest is 50% and the true ORR is 70% with an overall type I error of 5%. In the 1st stage, 15 patients have been enrolled and as there were more than 8 clinical responses (ORR [CR or PR]) within 25 weeks of the 1st SCIB1 dose. Having passed Simon Stage 1, further recruitment continues. The null hypothesis will be rejected if 27 or more responses are observed in 43 patients. Results: To date, 23 patients have received the combination of SCIB1 with nivolumab and ipilimumab. At study entry, all patients were Stage IV. 13 patients have reached the first imaging timepoint at 13 weeks, the objective response rate is 11/13 (85%). 11/11 responses were confirmed in a subsequent scan (1 CR and 10 PRs); DCR 12/13 (92%) and 1 PD. Patients showed a 40-100% reduction in tumor volume at 13 and/or 25 weeks. Most of the SCIB1 adverse reactions were Grade 1/2 injection site related or headaches. 3 patients reported Grade 3 events (rash, neutropenia and raised GGT) all related to the CPIs. Observed toxicity frequency and intensity was in line with reported figures from ipilimumab/nivolumab therapy. Serious adverse reactions to date have all been related only to the CPIs. Conclusions: SCIB1 given with nivolumab and ipilimumab, as 1st line treatment in unresectable melanoma, improved the ORR to 85% without an increase in clinically meaningful adverse events. These results, if confirmed in the larger ongoing patient cohort, provide confidence in initiating a randomized registration program in unresectable melanoma patients with this novel DNA plasmid technology. Clinical trial information: NCT04079166 .

A phase II randomized trial evaluating consolidative nivolumab in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer post neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus nivolumab and concurrent chemoradiotherapy (GASTO-1091).

8008 Background: Enhancing clinical outcomes in resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been associated with neoadjuvant or perioperative administration of nivolumab. However, the efficacy and safety of consolidation nivolumab versus observation following neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus nivolumab, hypofractionated radiotherapy and concurrent chemotherapy (hypo-CCRT) in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC remain underexplored. Methods: Conducted as a randomized, multi-center, phase 2 trial in patients with unresectable stage IIIA-C NSCLC, this study enrolled individuals aged 18 to 75 with an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Neoadjuvant therapy consisted of docetaxel, cisplatin, and nivolumab (360mg every 3 weeks for 2 cycles), followed by hypo-CCRT. Patients without disease progression or G2+ pneumonitis after hypo-CCRT were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab (360 mg every 3 weeks for up to 12 months) or undergo observation. Randomization factors included age, sex, smoking history, and EGFR mutation status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) from randomization, with preplanned analysis results reported herein. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04085250. Results: Between Dec 3rd, 2019, and Aug 18th, 2023, 264 patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy, 242 received hypo-CCRT, and 172 were randomly assigned to nivolumab consolidation (n = 86) or observation (n = 86) post hypo-CCRT. At the January 31, 2024, data cutoff, the median follow-up for all randomized patients was 22.8 months. Nivolumab consolidation exhibited significantly longer PFS compared to observation (median not reached vs. 12.2 months [95% CI 6.2-18.1]; hazard ratio 0.49 [95% CI 0.31-0.79], p = 0.002). The 12-month and 18-month PFS rates were 72.6% and 64.8% in the consolidation group, contrasting with 52.5% and 42.3% in the observation group. Grade 3-4 nonhematological adverse events occurred in 14.0% (37/264) during neoadjuvant therapy and hypo-CCRT. Following randomization, grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 7.0% (6/86) with consolidation (G3 pneumonitis, 2.3%; G5 pneumonitis, 1.2%; G3 proximal bronchial tree toxicity, 3.5%) and 4.6% (4/86) with observation (G3 pneumonitis, 2.3%; G3 proximal bronchial tree toxicity, 2.3%). Conclusions: Consolidation with nivolumab after neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus nivolumab and hypo-CCRT demonstrates effectiveness and tolerability for patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC. Extended follow-up is essential for confirming these findings. Clinical trial information: NCT04085250 .

A phase 2/3 study of fianlimab, cemiplimab, plus chemotherapy versus cemiplimab plus chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

TPS8660 Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most common type of lung cancer. Anti–programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) therapies have improved outcomes in patients with NSCLC; however, most patients do not respond or only respond for a limited time. The combination of cemiplimab (anti–PD-1) and chemotherapy has been studied for the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC (aNSCLC), regardless of programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) status. While the standard of care continues to evolve for NSCLC, one approach to potentially improve outcomes is the combination of checkpoint inhibitors (IO) with chemotherapy. Fianlimab (anti–lymphocyte activation gene 3 [LAG-3]) and cemiplimab are both high-affinity, fully human IgG4 monoclonal antibody IO therapies that have shown promising clinical activity when combined in patients with aNSCLC in a Phase 1 study (NCT03005782). This ongoing study will further investigate the combination of fianlimab + cemiplimab + chemotherapy. Methods: This is a randomized, multicenter, Phase 2/3 study of fianlimab + cemiplimab + platinum-doublet chemotherapy (chemo) versus cemiplimab + chemo in patients with unresectable stage IIIB/IIIC or stage IV NSCLC irrespective of PD-L1 expression levels (NCT05800015). This study will be conducted globally at approximately 210 sites. Patient eligibility criteria: ≥18 years old; squamous or non-squamous histology with stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV disease; valid PD-L1 result; ≥1 radiographically measurable lesion by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1; adequate organ and bone marrow function. The Phase 2 portion will be used to determine the fianlimab dose selected for the Phase 3 portion: patients will be randomized 1:1:1 to receive fianlimab high dose + cemiplimab 350 mg + chemo (Arm A), fianlimab low dose + cemiplimab 350 mg + chemo (Arm B), or cemiplimab 350 mg + chemo + placebo (Arm C), Q3W IV. In Phase 3, patients will be randomized 1:1 into one of two treatment arms (either Arm A or Arm B, and Arm C) based on findings from Phase 2. The primary endpoint of Phase 2 is objective response rate (ORR) per blinded independent central review. The primary endpoint of Phase 3 is overall survival. The secondary endpoints include efficacy (ORR, disease control rate, time to tumor response, duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival), safety and tolerability, immunogenicity (anti-drug antibodies and neutralizing antibodies against fianlimab or cemiplimab in serum), patient-reported outcomes, and pharmacokinetics. This study and a parallel study of fianlimab + cemiplimab in patients with aNSCLC with tumors expressing PD-L1 ≥50% (NCT05785767) are currently open for enrollment. Clinical trial information: NCT05800015 .

Understanding quality of life issues in patients with advanced melanoma: Phase 1 and 2 in the development of the EORTC advanced melanoma module

AimsWe aimed to develop a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life (QoL) module tailored for patients with advanced (resectable or unresectable stage III/IV) melanoma receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy. MethodsFollowing the EORTC QoL Group module development guidelines, we conducted phases 1 and 2 of the development process. In phase 1, we generated a list of health-related (HR)QoL issues through a systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients with advanced melanoma. In phase 2, these issues were converted into questionnaire items to create the preliminary module. ResultsPhase 1: we retrieved 8006 articles for the literature review, of which 35 were deemed relevant, resulting in 84 HRQoL issues being extracted to create the initial issue list. Semi-structured interviews with 18 HCPs and 28 patients with advanced melanoma resulted in 28 issues being added to the initial issue list. Following EORTC module development criteria, 26 issues were removed, and two issues were added after review by patient advocates.Phase 2: To ensure uniformity and avoid duplication, 16 issues were consolidated into eight items. Additionally, an independent expert contributed one new item, resulting in a preliminary module comprising 80 HRQoL items. ConclusionWe identified a range of HRQoL issues (dry skin, xerostomia, and arthralgia) relevant to patients with stage III/IV melanoma. Future module development phases will refine the questionnaire. Once completed, this module will enable standardized assessment of HRQoL in patients with (locally) advanced melanoma.

The safety and efficacy of induction chemoimmunotherapy in initially unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer.

The safety and efficacy of induction chemoimmunotherapy in initially unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer.

Contemporary management of patients with advanced melanoma: Utility of an online interactive decision support tool to assess concordance of healthcare professional treatment patterns with expert recommendations.

e13548 Background: The treatment landscape for patients with melanoma continues to evolve with approvals of novel therapeutic agents for advanced disease and new indications for therapy in earlier-stage disease. Using an online decision support tool, we compared practice patterns and treatment recommendations between community healthcare professionals (HCPs) and key opinion leaders (KOLs). Methods: The online decision support tool was developed with input from 5 KOLs who provided treatment recommendations for 151 hypothetical patients. Case scenarios covered a spectrum of stages (III, IV), central nervous system (CNS) metastases, BRAF mutation status, and treatment histories. HCPs entered specific patient criteria into the tool to define a case and their intended therapy choice and the tool then showed 5 KOL recommendations for that patient case. An analysis of KOL recommendations and HCP-selected therapy was performed. Results: Between August 2023 and January 2024, 156 patient cases were entered by 100 HCPs. HCP and KOL recommendations were concordant in 51% (80/156) of cases. The highest level of discord among HCPs and KOLs was 72% for patients with completely resected stage IIIA melanoma and no positive lymph nodes having a metastatic focus ≥1mm (n = 25) (Table). A lower level of discordance (31%, n = 35) was observed in therapy selection for patients with stage IIIA melanoma and ≥1 positive lymph node. For first-line therapy in patients with unresectable stage III or IV BRAF wild-type melanoma (n = 16), discordance was 50% between HCPs and KOLs. The level of discordance was higher for first-line therapy for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma (68%, n = 19). For the management of patients with CNS metastases, 40% of HCP therapy selections were not aligned with KOLs (n = 40). More than one half (56%) of HCPs noted that the tool confirmed their treatment plan, and 21% intend to change practice to align with KOLs. Conclusions: This analysis identified areas of discordance in clinical practice between HCPs and KOLs for advanced melanoma that can guide further education and enhance communication of evolving evidence to HCPs. Our data suggest that use of the decision tool can confirm best practices with KOL recommendations and improve alignment of treatment choices with KOLs. [Table: see text]