OA07.02 LKB1 Mutations in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (mNSCLC): Prognostic Value in the Real World

STK11/LKB1-Deficient Phenotype Rather Than Mutation Diminishes Immunotherapy Efficacy and Represents STING/Type I Interferon/CD8+ T-Cell Dysfunction in NSCLC

INTRODUCTION

Conflicting findings have been reported regarding the association between STK11/LKB1 mutations and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICB) efficacy in NSCLC. It has been reported that tumors could exhibit impaired STK11/LKB1 function even without STK11 mutations. We hypothesized that STK11 phenotype rather than mutation may better stratify ICB outcomes.

METHODS

Selected functional STK11 events and LKB1 protein data were leveraged to establish a transcriptomics-based classifier of STK11 phenotype (STK11-deficient [-def] or -proficient [-prof]). We analyzed in-house and Genentech/Roche's data of three randomized trials of programmed cell death protein-1 or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibition in NSCLC (ORIENT-11, n = 171; OAK, n = 699; POPLAR, n = 192) and The Cancer Genome Atlas-NSCLC cohort.

RESULTS

Tissue STK11 mutation did not affect ICB outcomes. However, the survival benefit of ICB versus chemotherapy were lost or reversed in STK11-def tumors (hazard ratios for death, 95% confidence interval: OAK [0.97, 0.69-1.35]; POPLAR [1.61, 0.88-2.97]; ORIENT-11 [1.07, 0.50-2.29]), while remaining in STK11-prof tumors (hazard ratios for death, 95% confidence interval: OAK [0.81, 0.66-0.99]; POPLAR [0.66, 0.46-0.95]; ORIENT-11 [0.59, 0.37-0.92]). In tumors differentially classified by phenotype and mutation status, STK11-wild-type/def tumors had significantly worse ICB outcomes than STK11-mutated (STK11-MUT)/prof tumors (p < 0.05). The deleterious impact of STK11 deficiency was independent of STK11/KRAS/KEAP1 status or PD-L1 expression. The STING/interferon-I signaling, which was previously shown to be suppressed in STK11-MUT models, was perturbed in patients with STK11-def tumors rather than those with STK11-MUT tumors. Surprisingly, whereas high CD8+ T-cell infiltration was significantly associated with prolonged survival with ICB in STK11-prof tumors (p < 0.05 for 3 trials), it predicted an opposite trend toward worse ICB outcomes in STK11-def tumors across three trials. This suggested an association between STK11 deficiency and CD8+ T-cell dysfunction, which might not be reversed by programmed cell death protein 1 or PD-L1 blockade.

CONCLUSIONS

STK11 phenotype rather than mutation status can accurately identify patients with ICB-refractory NSCLC and reflect immune suppression. It can help refine stratification algorithms for future clinical research and also provide a reliable resource aiding basic and translational studies in identifying therapeutic targets.

Optimal Management of Patients with Advanced NSCLC Harboring High PD-L1 Expression and Driver Mutations

OPINION STATEMENT

Patients with stage IV or recurrent/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumors harbor high PD-L1 expression and driver mutations with approved targeted treatments (EGFR, ALK, BRAF^V600E, ROS1) should receive initial therapy with targeted therapy based on impressive clinical activity. PD-(L)1 inhibitors have demonstrated minimal activity in many driver mutation subsets including EGFR and ALK and appears to have more benefit in smoking-associated oncogenic drivers (KRAS, BRAF). For KRAS-driven tumors, co-mutations such as STK11/LKB1 are negative predictive markers of immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy. Therefore, driver mutations need to be evaluated before pursuing immunotherapy independent of PD-L1 expression level. Caution should be used with TKIs following or concurrent with immunotherapy owing to potentially increased toxicity. New immunotherapy combinations are needed especially for oncogene-driven tumors associated with never or light smoking history.

LKB1 mutations are not associated with the efficacy of first-line and second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a post hoc analysis of the TAILOR trial

PURPOSE

In patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma, the impact of LKB1 mutations on cytotoxic chemotherapy efficacy remains poorly explored. Here, we aimed at investigating the potential impact of LKB1 mutational status on chemotherapy efficacy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients enrolled in the TArceva Italian Lung Optimisation tRial (TAILOR) trial.

METHODS

The multicenter TAILOR trial randomised patients with EGFR-wild type (wt) advanced NSCLC progressing on/after previous platinum-based chemotherapy to receive docetaxel or erlotinib. Here, we evaluated the impact of LKB1 mutational status on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with second-line docetaxel/erlotinib or during prior platinum-based chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Out of 222 patients randomised in the TAILOR trial, left-over tumour tissues were available for 188 patients, and 120 patients with evaluable LKB1 status were included. Of them, 17 (14.17%) patients had LKB1-mutated tumours, while 103 (85.83%) had LKB1-wt disease. During second-line treatment, PFS and OS were not statistically significantly different in patients with LKB1-mutated when compared with LKB1-wt NSCLC (adjusted HR (aHR)=1.29, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.21; p=0.364 and aHR=1.41, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.44; p=0.218, respectively). Similarly, we found no significant association between LKB1 mutations and patient PFS or OS during prior first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (aHR=1.04, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.97; p=0.910 and aHR=0.83, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.65; p=0.602, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Among advanced NSCLC patients receiving two lines of systemic therapy, LKB1 mutations were not associated with PFS or OS during second-line docetaxel or prior first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. While larger prospective trials are needed to confirm our findings, cytotoxic chemotherapy remains the backbone of investigational combination strategies in this patient population.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Thoracic Malignancies: Review of the Existing Evidence by an IASLC Expert Panel and Recommendations

In the past 10 years, a deeper understanding of the immune landscape of cancers, including immune evasion processes, has allowed the development of a new class of agents. The reactivation of host antitumor immune response offers the potential for long-term survival benefit in a portion of patients with thoracic malignancies. The advent of programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death ligand-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), both as single agents and in combination with chemotherapy, and more recently, the combination of ICI, anti-programmed cell death protein 1, and anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 antibody, have led to breakthrough therapeutic advances for patients with advanced NSCLC, and to a lesser extent, patients with SCLC. Encouraging activity has recently emerged in pretreated patients with thymic carcinoma (TC). Conversely, in malignant pleural mesothelioma, pivotal positive signs of activity have not been fully confirmed in randomized trials. The additive effects of chemoradiation and immunotherapy suggested intriguing potential for therapeutic synergy with combination strategies. This has led to the introduction of ICI consolidation therapy in stage III NSCLC, creating a platform for future therapeutic developments in earlier-stage disease. Despite the definitive clinical benefit observed with ICI, primary and acquired resistance represent well-known biological phenomena, which may affect the therapeutic efficacy of these agents. The development of innovative strategies to overcome ICI resistance, standardization of new patterns of ICI progression, identification of predictive biomarkers of response, optimal treatment duration, and characterization of ICI efficacy in special populations, represent crucial issues to be adequately addressed, with the aim of improving the therapeutic benefit of ICI in patients with thoracic malignancies. In this article, an international panel of experts in the field of thoracic malignancies discussed these topics, evaluating currently available scientific evidence, with the final aim of providing clinical recommendations, which may guide oncologists in their current practice and elucidate future treatment strategies and research priorities.