PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors plus Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone for Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: The benefit of adding programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors to the treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), both neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) and adjuvant therapy (AT), is not yet fully elucidated. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCT) that investigated PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy for resectable stage NSCLC. We computed hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: A total of seven RCTs comprising 3915 patients with resectable stage NSCLC were randomized to chemotherapy with or without PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as NAT or AT. As NAT, the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy group demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.51-0.86) and event-free survival (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.43-0.67) compared with the chemotherapy alone group. There was a significant increase in favor of the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy group for major pathological response (OR 6.40; 95% CI 3.86-10.61) and pathological complete response (OR 8.82; 95% CI 4.51-17.26). Meanwhile, as AT, disease-free survival was significant in favor of the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy group (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.69-0.90). Conclusions: In this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs, the incorporation of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors alongside chemotherapy offers a promising prospect for reshaping the established treatment paradigms for patients diagnosed with resectable stages of NSCLC. Moreover, our analyses support that neoadjuvant administration with these agents should be encouraged, in light of the fact that it was associated with an increased survival and pathological response, at the expense of a manageable safety profile.

A Phase II Trial of Atezolizumab Plus Carboplatin Plus Pemetrexed Plus Bevacizumab in the Treatment of Patients with Stage IV Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Big Ten Cancer Research Consortium (BTCRC)- LUN 17-139

INTRODUCTION

LUN17-139 evaluated the safety and efficacy of Atezolizumab (A) plus Carboplatin (C) plus Pemetrexed (Pem) plus Bevacizumab (B) (ACBPem) in treatment naïve patients with stage IV non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (Ns-NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this multicenter, single-arm phase II trial, all patients received A (1200-mg, D1) + C (AUC 5, D1) + Pem (500-mg/m2, D1) + B (15-mg/kg D1) q3 week x4. If no PD (progressive disease), patients received maintenance ABPem until PD or intolerable side effects. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The positive PFS result was considered as PFS>6m (historical control). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) defined by complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) + stable disease (SD) ≥ 2 months, overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were enrolled from November 2018 to October 2020. The study was closed early due to 3 patient deaths, possibly related to treatment. Median age 64 (range 38-83); Men/Women 20/10; PD-L1 TPS < 1%/1-49%/ ≥ 50% (8/15/7). The median follow-up was 20.3 months ( 1-28.1). ORR 42.9% (95% CI, 24.5-62.8%), DCR 96.4% (95% CI, 81.7-99.9%). The median PFS and OS were 11.3m (5.5-14.9,P > .05) and 22.4m (22.4-NR), respectively. Four patients had G4 toxicity (anemia, febrile-neutropenia, severe neutropenia, sepsis), and 3 patients had G5 toxicity (thromboembolism, sepsis, colonic perforation).

CONCLUSION

ABCPem was associated with increased PFS compared to historical controls but this difference did not meet the statistical significance. Three on-treatment deaths and 5 thromboembolic events prompted early closure.

Correlations between objective response rate and survival-based endpoints in first-line advanced non-small cell lung Cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The study objective was to estimate the relationship between objective response and survival-based endpoints by drug class, in first-line advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of first-line aNSCLC therapies reporting overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and/or objective response rate (ORR). Trial-level and arm-level linear regression models were fit, accounting for inclusion of immunotherapy (IO)-based or chemotherapy-only RCT arms. Weighted least squares-based R² were calculated along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For the main trial-level analysis of OS vs. ORR, the surrogate threshold effect was estimated. Exploratory analyses involved further stratification by: IO monotherapy vs. chemotherapy, dual-IO therapy vs. chemotherapy, and IO + chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy.

RESULTS

From 17,040 records, 57 RCTs were included. In the main analysis, trial-level associations between OS and ORR were statistically significant in both the IO-based and chemotherapy-only strata, with R² estimates of 0.54 (95% CI: 0.26-0.81) and 0.34 (0.05-0.63), respectively. OS gains associated with a given ORR benefit were statistically significantly larger within IO vs. chemotherapy comparisons compared to chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy comparisons (p < 0.001). Exploratory analysis suggested a trend by IO type: for a given change in ORR, 'pure' IO (IO monotherapy and dual-IO) vs. chemotherapy RCTs tended to have a larger OS benefit than IO + chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy RCTs. For ORR vs. PFS, trial-level correlations were strong in the IO-based vs. chemotherapy (R² = 0.84; 0.72-0.95), and chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy strata (R² = 0.69; 0.49-0.88). For OS vs. PFS, correlations were moderate in both strata (R² = 0.49; 0.20-0.78 and R² = 0.49; 0.23-0.76).

CONCLUSION

The larger OS benefit per unit of ORR benefit in IO-based RCTs compared to chemotherapy-only RCTs provides an important addition to the established knowledge regarding the durability and depth of response in IO-based treatments.

Tumor Immunology and Immunotherapy of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Historically, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been regarded as a nonimmunogenic tumor; however, recent studies have shown that NSCLCs are among the most responsive cancers to monoclonal antibody immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). ICIs have dramatically improved clinical outcomes for a subset of patients (∼20%) with locally advanced and metastatic NSCLC, and they have also demonstrated promise as neoadjuvant therapy for early-stage resectable disease. Nevertheless, the majority of patients with NSCLC are refractory to ICIs for reasons that are poorly understood. Thus, major questions are: how do we initially identify the patients most likely to derive significant clinical benefit from these therapies; how can we increase the number of patients benefiting; what are the mechanisms of primary and acquired resistance to immune-based therapies; are there additional immune checkpoints besides PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 that can be targeted to provide greater clinical benefit to patients; and how do we best combine ICI therapy with surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy? To answer these questions, we need to deploy the latest technologies to study tumors and their microenvironment and how they interact with components of the innate and adaptive immune systems. There is also a need for new preclinical model systems to investigate the molecular mechanisms of resistance to treatment and identify novel therapeutic targets. Recent advances in technology are beginning to shed new light on the immune landscape of NSCLC that may uncover biomarkers of response and maximize the clinical benefit of immune-based therapies. Identification of the mechanisms of resistance should lead to the identification of novel targets and the generation of new therapeutic strategies that improve outcomes for a greater number of patients. In the sections below, we discuss the results of studies examining the immune microenvironment in NSCLC, summarize the clinical experience with immunotherapy for NSCLC, and review candidate biomarkers of response to these agents in NSCLC.

Severe immune-related adverse events of immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

A complete toxicity profile, toxicity profile, and safety ranking of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) will be provided in this network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched 14 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) including 9572 NSCLC patients by PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Randomized pairwise and network meta-analyses were used to compare the incidence of severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs) across different ICIs-based treatments using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

For severe dermatologic irAEs, the corresponding ranking of incidences of the nine groups from high to low was: nivolumab + ipilimumab + platinum (79.1%), pembrolizumab (75.2%), nivolumab + ipilimumab (72.9%), camrelizumab + platinum (64.9%), atezolizumab + platinum (47.4%), nivolumab (44.2%), durvalumab (40.5%), pembrolizumab + platinum (15.5%), platinum-based chemotherapy (10.3%). For severe colitis, the corresponding ranking of incidences of the seven groups from high to low was: nivolumab + ipilimumab + platinum (72.4%), nivolumab (63.1%), atezolizumab + platinum (56.9%), durvalumab (56.6%), pembrolizumab (54.9%), pembrolizumab + platinum (38.6%), platinum-based chemotherapy (7.4%). For severe endocrine irAEs, the corresponding ranking of incidences of the nine groups from high to low was: durvalumab (74.3%), atezolizumab + platinum (54.5%), nivolumab + ipilimumab (54.0%), camrelizumab + platinum (51.7%), nivolumab + ipilimumab + platinum (51.6%), pembrolizumab + platinum (49.8%), pembrolizumab (49.2%), nivolumab (46.3%), platinum-based chemotherapy (18.6%). For severe pneumonitis, the corresponding ranking of incidences of the nine groups from high to low was: nivolumab (84.3%), pembrolizumab (84.1%), durvalumab (66.1%), camrelizumab + platinum (61.4%), atezolizumab + platinum (50%), pembrolizumab + platinum (43.4%), platinum-based chemotherapy (16.2%), atezolizumab (6.2%). For severe hepatitis, the corresponding ranking of incidences of the eight groups from high to low was: pembrolizumab (68.8%), nivolumab + ipilimumab + platinum (65%), pembrolizumab + platinum (64.6%), durvalumab (57.9%), nivolumab (47.1%), atezolizumab + platinum (43.4%), camrelizumab + platinum (42%), platinum-based chemotherapy (11.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to platinum-based chemotherapy, pembrolizumab + platinum for severe dermatologic irAEs and colitis, nivolumab for severe endocrine irAEs, atezolizumab for severe pneumonitis, camrelizumab + platinum for severe hepatitis may be associated with lower rates of irAEs than other immune-based regimens.

The efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in thoracic malignancies

The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has rapidly transformed the treatment paradigm for multiple cancer types, including thoracic malignancies. In advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), ICIs have shifted treatment paradigm and improved overall survival reaching almost one-third of patients alive at 5 years. ICIs therapies have also modified the therapeutic strategy in first-line setting in metastatic small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients as well as in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) improving the overall survival compared with standard treatment. This phenomenon is of huge relevance as both SCLC and MPM were considered orphan diseases without any significant improvement in the therapeutic strategy in the first-line setting during the last 15 years. In this review, we aim to review the efficacy of ICI in thoracic malignancies either in monotherapy or in combination, according to predictive biomarkers, and to the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency approvals of treatment strategies. We address the efficacy of these agents, especially in NSCLC according to PD-L1 expression and histologic subtype.

Progression-free survival assessed per immune-related or conventional response criteria, which is the better surrogate endpoint for overall survival in trials of immune-checkpoint inhibitors in lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Progression-free survival (PFS) has been used as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in lung cancer trials. The pattern of response to immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) differs from that to conventional chemotherapy, so immune-related response evaluation criteria were proposed. This study aims at determining which PFS measure, PFS assessed per immune-related response evaluation criteria (iPFS), or conventional criteria (cPFS), is the better surrogate endpoint for OS in trials of ICIs in lung cancer. We selected clinical trials in lung cancer that administered ICIs to at least one arm and reported both median OS and median PFS from PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library. We compared the correlation between treatment effect (hazard ratio) on OS and cPFS or iPFS and the correlation between median OS and median cPFS or iPFS using weighted linear regression at trial level. We analyzed 78 ICI arms (13,438 patients) from 54 studies, including 66 arms with cPFS, seven arms with iPFS, and five arms with both kinds of PFS. We demonstrated an excellent correlation between treatment effect (hazard ratio) on OS and iPFS (RWLS2  = 0.91), while the correlation was moderate for cPFS (RWLS2  = 0.38). Similarly, the correlation between median OS and median iPFS was also strong (RWLS2 ranging from 0.86 to 0.96) across different phases of trials and different types of lung cancer, ICI, and treatment modalities, while it was much weaker for median cPFS (RWLS2 ranging from 0.28 to 0.88). In conclusion, iPFS provides better trial-level surrogacy for OS than cPFS in trials of ICIs in lung cancer.

Which treatment after first line therapy in NSCLC patients without genetic alterations in the era of immunotherapy?

Cancer immunotherapy has produced an unprecedented durable response rate, thus shifting from traditional doublet chemotherapy to immunotherapy-based treatments with and without chemotherapy as the first line strategies for advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients without a molecular driver. However, the majority of patients do not benefit from the treatment or may relapse after a period of response. As few treatment options are available after failure of cancer immunotherapy, including the combination of chemotherapy and anti-angiogenic drugs, a better understanding of the mechanisms limiting cancer immunotherapy may be of help in the definition of the best second line. Whereas only retrospective data support an immunotherapy rechallenge approach, new combination strategies including immunotherapy and cell-signaling inhibitors or double immunotherapy represent the newest and most promising strategy to overcome primary or acquired resistance to first line immunotherapy.

Immune-Related Adverse Events Associated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Objective: This network meta-analysis will provide a complete toxicity profile, toxicity profile, and safety ranking of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods: We found 12 phase II or III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) including 8,453 patients with NSCLC by searching Pubmed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to compare the rate of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) for different ICIs-based treatments using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.

Results: For dermatologic irAEs, the corresponding ranking of incidences of the seven groups from high to low was: nivolumab + ipilimumab (97.4%), pembrolizumab (80.1%), nivolumab (67.1%), pembrolizumab + platinum (43.3%), atezolizumab + platinum (39.9%), durvalumab (17.5%), platinum-based chemotherapy (4.7%). For colitis, the corresponding ranking of incidences of the six groups from high to low was: atezolizumab + platinum (77.1%), nivolumab (67.3%), pembrolizumab (60.5%), durvalumab (45.2%), pembrolizumab + platinum (41.4%), platinum-based chemotherapy (8.5%). For endocrine irAEs, the corresponding ranking of incidences of the seven groups from high to low was: nivolumab + ipilimumab (79.1%), durvalumab (69.1%), pembrolizumab (61.9%), atezolizumab + platinum (60.4%),nivolumab (45.7%), pembrolizumab + platinum (33.5%), platinum-based chemotherapy (0.3%). For pneumonitis, the corresponding ranking of incidences of the seven groups from high to low was: pembrolizumab (99.3%), pembrolizumab + platinum (65.1%), durvalumab (62.2%), atezolizumab + platinum (56%), nivolumab (35.9%), platinum-based chemotherapy (18.1%),atezolizumab (13.3%). For hepatitis, the corresponding ranking of incidences of the six groups from high to low was: pembrolizumab (71.2%), pembrolizumab + platinum (64.3%), durvalumab (56.4%), atezolizumab + platinum (53.8%), nivolumab (44.5%), platinum-based chemotherapy (9.8%).

Conlusion: In addition to platinum-based chemotherapy, durvalumab for dermatologic and liver irAEs, pembrolizumab for gastrointestinal irAEs, pembrolizumab + platinum for endocrine irAEs, and atezolizumab for pneumonitis may be associated with lower rates of irAEs than other immune-based regimens. Nivolumab + ipilimumab for dermatologic and endocrine irAEs, atezolizumab + platinum for colitis, and pembrolizumab for pneumonitis and hepatitis may be associated with higher rates of irAEs.

Impact of Smoking History on Response to Immunotherapy in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives

To evaluate the impact of smoking history on the clinical benefit of immunotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

Twenty-three randomized clinical trials and seven real-world studies were included in this meta-analysis. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and odds ratios for the overall response rate (ORR) were extracted. A fixed-effects or random-effects model was applied to obtain pooled estimates.

Results

Data from 16 high-quality trials involving 10,643 NSCLC patients receiving either immunotherapy or chemotherapy/placebo enabled direct comparison of the survival impact of smoking. Anti-PD-1/PD-L1/CTLA-4 immunotherapy was found to significantly prolong OS and PFS as compared to chemotherapy/placebo in smokers (HR for OS, 0.76 [0.69-0.83], P<0.00001; HR for PFS, 0.65 [0.56-0.75], P<0.00001), and these trends were less or not significant in non-smokers (HR for OS, 0.91 [0.78-1.06], P=0.25; HR for PFS, 0.68 [0.45-1.03], P=0.07). Consistent results were obtained for the first-line or second/third-line use of immunotherapy and for non-squamous NSCLC patients only. Furthermore, the data from 7 trials and 7 real-world studies involving 4,777 patients receiving immunotherapy allowed direct comparison of therapeutic outcomes between smokers and non-smokers. Prolonged OS (HR 0.86 [0.75-0.99], P=0.04) and PFS (HR 0.69 [0.60-0.81], P<0.0001) and a higher response rate (ORR 1.20 [0.94-1.53], P=0.15) were observed in smokers compared to non-smokers receiving immunotherapy.

Conclusions

Immunotherapy was found to have a greater benefit in NSCLC patients with a smoking history than in those who had never smoked.

Combination strategies of immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: facts and challenges

ABSTRACT

Immunotherapy has dramatically altered the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Currently, the emergence of combination strategies in immunotherapy has brightened the prospects of improved clinical outcomes and manageable safety profiles in the first/second-line settings. However, sub-optimal response rates are still observed in several clinical trials. Hence, alternative combination models and candidate selection strategies need to be explored. Herein, we have critically reviewed and commented on the published data from several clinical trials, including combined immunotherapy and chemotherapy, anti-angiogenic agents, epidermal growth factor receptor/anaplastic lymphoma kinase tyrosine kinase inhibitors, radiotherapy, and other immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Current and future drug combination strategies based on programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer

ABSTRACT

In recent years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have made breakthroughs in the field of lung cancer and have become a focal point for research. Programmed death-1 (PD-1) or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor monotherapy was the first to break the treatment pattern for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, owing to the limited benefit of ICI monotherapy at the population level and its hyper-progressive phenomenon, it may not meet clinical needs. To expand the beneficial range of immunotherapy and improve its efficacy, several research strategies have adopted the use of combination immunotherapy. At present, multiple strategies, such as PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy, anti-angiogenic therapy, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 inhibitors, and radiotherapy, as well as combined treatment with new target drugs, have been evaluated for clinical practice. To further understand the current status and future development direction of immunotherapy, herein, we review the recent progress of ICI combination therapies for NSCLC.

Nivolumab with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab for first-line treatment of advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

This international, randomized, double-blind phase III study (ONO-4538-52/TASUKI-52) evaluated nivolumab with bevacizumab and cytotoxic chemotherapy as first-line treatment for nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between June 2017 and July 2019, this study enrolled treatment-naïve patients with stage IIIB/IV or recurrent nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR, ALK, or ROS1 alterations. They were randomly assigned in a 1 : 1 ratio to receive nivolumab or placebo in combination with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab every 3 weeks for up to six cycles, followed by nivolumab/placebo with bevacizumab until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent radiology review committee (IRRC).

RESULTS

Overall, 550 patients from Japan, Korea, and Taiwan were randomized; of these patients, 273 and 275 received the nivolumab and placebo combinations, respectively. In the present preplanned interim analysis with a median follow up of 13.7 months, the IRRC-assessed median PFS was significantly longer in the nivolumab arm than in the placebo arm (12.1 versus 8.1 months; hazard ratio 0.56; 96.4% confidence interval 0.43-0.71; P < 0.0001). The PFS benefit was observed across all patients with any programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression levels including PD-L1-negative patients. The IRRC-assessed objective response rates were 61.5% and 50.5% in the nivolumab and placebo arms, respectively. The incidence of treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 was comparable between the two arms; treatment-related adverse events leading to death were observed in five and four patients in the nivolumab and placebo arms, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The TASUKI-52 regimen should be considered a viable new treatment strategy for treatment-naïve patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC.

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

BACKGROUND

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.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy in first-line NSCLC: a meta-analysis

This study is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials involving first-line studies in which immune checkpoint inhibitors were added to chemotherapy and were compared with chemotherapy alone. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). The analyses used random-effects models and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system to rate the quality of the evidence. Nine articles were included for qualitative and quantitative synthesis. A meta-analysis of the nine randomized trials showed a significant benefit in terms of OS (hazard ratio: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.66-0.85]; p < 0.01). Only programmed death ligand-1 positive-high cancers derive a significant OS benefit. In this meta-analysis, there is moderate evidence that the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to chemotherapy may improve both OS compared with chemotherapy alone.

Anti-PD1 versus anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy in first-line therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Due to the increasing number of trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the first-line therapy of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, we performed a systematic review and meta-analyses to investigate the difference between anti PD-1 and PD-L1 antibodies, used alone or in combination with chemotherapy, through adjusted indirect analysis to minimize the potential bias regarding overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

A systematic review of studies reporting clinical outcomes and toxicity associated with first-line therapy employing anti-PD1 or anti-PD-L1 antibodies alone, or in combination with chemotherapy, to treat metastatic, treatment-naïve NSCLC patients was performed. Primary outcomes were OS, PFS, ORR and grade 3-5 AEs. We used a random-effects model to generate pooled estimates for proportions. Meta-analyses using pooled risk ratios were performed for binary outcomes from comparative studies with the random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 13 eligible studies met our eligibility criteria, including 7673 patients. In the ICI-chemotherapy combination subgroup, we observed that anti-PD1 therapy was associated with better OS (p = 0.022) and PFS (p = 0.029) compared with anti-PD-L1 therapy. In the monotherapy subgroup, there was no statistical difference between the use of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 for OS and PFS. With regard to ORR and toxicity, in the ICI-chemotherapy combination subgroup, we observed a trend of better ORR (p = 0.12) with the use of anti-PD1 therapy and less frequent grade 3-5 AEs compared to the use of anti-PD-L1 therapy (p = 0.0302). In the monotherapy subgroup, there was no statistical difference between the use of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 regarding ORR and toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that PD-1 drug plus chemotherapy is superior to anti-PD-L1 plus chemotherapy for NSCLC; nevertheless, as monotherapy, both strategies appear to be similar.

Is hyperprogressive disease a specific phenomenom of immunotherapy?

Hyperprogressive disease (HPD) is a novel pattern of response during immunotherapy treatment. Several retrospective studies have evaluated its prevalence among various cancer types and, in particular, in non-small cell lung cancer patients, based on different definition criteria. If HPD is a just a typical phenomenon of immunotherapy is still an unsolved concern. This paper summarized the available data about HPD in other cancer treatments.

Low-dose carboplatin reprograms tumor immune microenvironment through STING signaling pathway and synergizes with PD-1 inhibitors in lung cancer

Although the combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy is a hot topic in lung cancer, little is understood regarding the possible mechanisms behind their synergy. Moreover, safety is a major concern for clinicians while performing chemotherapy. Therefore, it is important to determine the appropriate dose and period of chemotherapy for combining it with immunotherapy, and investigate the underlying synergistic mechanism. Here, we showed that carboplatin can induce DNA damage and activate the canonical STING/TBK1/IRF3 pathway and non-canonical STING-NF-κB signaling complex. Further, low-dose carboplatin changed the "cold" tumor into a "hot" tumor via the signaling hub STING, augmenting CD8⁺ T-cell infiltration, increasing PD-L1 expression, and hence potentiating the anti-tumor effect of PD-1 inhibitors; importantly, there were no adverse effects. Furthermore, knocking down STING in tumor cells effectively reversed PD-L1 upregulation and STING pathway activation, and reduced the anti-tumor effect of low-dose carboplatin and carboplatin-PD-1 inhibitor combination. Our findings collectively reported a previously unexplored role of low-dose carboplatin targeting in the STING pathway and provided an economical, useful and safe option for improving the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors in lung cancer.

Atezolizumab for First-Line Treatment of PD-L1-Selected Patients with NSCLC

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of the anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody atezolizumab, as compared with those of platinum-based chemotherapy, as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with PD-L1 expression are not known.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial involving patients with metastatic nonsquamous or squamous NSCLC who had not previously received chemotherapy and who had PD-L1 expression on at least 1% of tumor cells or at least 1% of tumor-infiltrating immune cells as assessed by the SP142 immunohistochemical assay. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive atezolizumab or chemotherapy. Overall survival (primary end point) was tested hierarchically according to PD-L1 expression status among patients in the intention-to-treat population whose tumors were wild-type with respect to EGFR mutations or ALK translocations. Within the population with EGFR and ALK wild-type tumors, overall survival and progression-free survival were also prospectively assessed in subgroups defined according to findings on two PD-L1 assays as well as by blood-based tumor mutational burden.

RESULTS

Overall, 572 patients were enrolled. In the subgroup of patients with EGFR and ALK wild-type tumors who had the highest expression of PD-L1 (205 patients), the median overall survival was longer by 7.1 months in the atezolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (20.2 months vs. 13.1 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.59; P = 0.01). Among all the patients who could be evaluated for safety, adverse events occurred in 90.2% of the patients in the atezolizumab group and in 94.7% of those in the chemotherapy group; grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 30.1% and 52.5% of the patients in the respective groups. Overall and progression-free survival favored atezolizumab in the subgroups with a high blood-based tumor mutational burden.

CONCLUSIONS

Atezolizumab treatment resulted in significantly longer overall survival than platinum-based chemotherapy among patients with NSCLC with high PD-L1 expression, regardless of histologic type. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; IMpower110 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02409342.).

Impact of Age on the Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Based Combination Therapy for Non-small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Despite the acknowledged benefits of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combination therapy (either with other checkpoint inhibitors, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or radiotherapy), little is known about the impact of age on the efficacy of ICI -based combination therapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the differences in the benefits of ICI-based combination therapy for NSCLC by age (cut-off age, 65 years). Methods: We systematically searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ICI plus other therapies including other ICIs, chemotherapies, targeted therapies, or radiotherapies, in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases with available hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for death and disease progression according to patient age. The search deadline was May 25, 2020. First, we calculated the pooled HRs of younger and older patients based on the HRs from each trial. Second, we assessed the pooled ratio of HRs reported in older patients to the HRs reported in younger patients for progression or death by the random-effects model. An estimated pooled HR ratio was lower than 1 indicating a better effect in older patients and higher than 1 indicating a better effect in younger patients. Results: A total of 10 eligible RCTs were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled HR for overall survival (OS) comparing ICI combined with other therapies to non-ICI regimens was 0.67 (95%CI 0.58-0.78) for younger patients and 0.79 (95%CI 0.70-0.90) for older patients. The pooled HRs ratio for OS reported in older patients compared to younger patients was 1.16 (95%CI 0.99-1.34), indicating no statistically significant difference between younger and older patients. Consistent with the findings related to OS, the analysis also demonstrated that ICI-based immunotherapy could significantly prolong progression-free survival (PFS) in younger and older patients (HR = 0.55; 95% CI 0.47-0.66, and HR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.57-0.71). The same results could also be observed in the pooled HRs ratio for PFS (HR = 1.15, 95%CI 0.91-1.46) indicating comparable efficacy of ICI-based combination therapy in younger and older patients with NSCLC. Conclusion: ICI-based combination therapy vs. non-ICI treatment had comparable efficacy in younger and older NSCLC patients with a cut-off age of 65 years.

Immunotherapy in older patients with non-small cell lung cancer: Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology position paper

Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors against programmed cell death receptor (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand (PD-L1) has been implemented in the treatment pathway of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from locally advanced disease to the metastatic setting. This approach has resulted in improved survival and a more favourable toxicity profile when compared with chemotherapy. Following the successful introduction of single-agent immunotherapy, current clinical trials are focusing on combination treatments with chemotherapy or radiotherapy or even other immunotherapeutic agents. However, most of the data available from these trials are derived from, and therefore might be more applicable to younger and fitter patients rather than older and often frail lung cancer real-world patients. This article provides a detailed review of these immunotherapy agents with a focus on the data available regarding older NSCLC patients and makes recommendations to fill evidence gaps in this patient population.

Systemic Therapy of Common Tumours in Older Patients: Challenges and Opportunities. A Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology Review Paper

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Decision-making for systemic treatments in older patients with cancer is difficult because of concerns for decreased organ function, risk of toxicity, limited life expectancy due to comorbidities and the lack of evidence available to guide its management in this population. Here, we review the data on the role of systemic agents for the treatment of common malignancies in this age group.

RECENT FINDINGS

Evidence on the use of systemic treatments for older patients with cancer is increasing, especially for newer options including immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted agents that provide comparable benefit in older and younger patients. Nonetheless, the risks for short- and long-term toxicities need to be considered. More research is warranted and represents a unique opportunity to increase the knowledge on cancer treatment for older adults. Healthy, older individuals should be considered for standard systemic treatment options, whereas those at risk based on geriatric assessments require adjusted plans. Geriatric assessments are key for decision-making.

Clinical features affecting survival in metastatic NSCLC treated with immunotherapy: A critical review of published data

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent one of the main steps forward for the treatment of advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), without oncogenic driver alterations. Despite this recent progress, only a minority of patients achieve a broad and durable benefit and another proportion report poor survival and sometimes fast disease progression, confirming the need to optimise the patient's selection. To date, several issues are unsolved about how to personalise the immunotherapy treatment for individual patients. In this review, analysing data from pivotal randomised clinical trials (RCTs), we discuss patient baseline clinical and demographic features, including sex, age, ECOG performance status, smoking habit and specific site of metastases (liver, bone and brain) that may influence the efficacy outcomes in patients treated with ICIs. The high performance of the ICIs blurred the vision on different efficacy-limiting factors, which require extensive evaluation to improve the understanding ofthe tumour-specificimmune response, in which clinical drivers could be useful for better patient stratification.

Atezolizumab First-Line Combination Therapy: A Review in Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC

Atezolizumab (Tecentriq^®), a humanized, anti-programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody, in combination with bevacizumab, carboplatin and paclitaxel (ABCP) or with carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel (ACnP) has been approved as first-line treatment for metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, based on results from the randomized IMpower150 and IMpower130 studies in chemotherapy-naïve patients with nonsquamous metastatic NSCLC. In IMpower150, ABCP prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) relative to BCP, regardless of EGFR or ALK status, liver metastases at baseline or PD-L1 expression levels. In IMpower130, ACnP prolonged PFS and OS relative to CnP in patients without EGFR or ALK genetic aberrations. ABCP and ACnP had manageable tolerability profiles, which were consistent with the profile of the individual components of the regimen. Immune-related adverse events with ABCP and ACnP were largely mild or moderate in severity, and most were reversible with interruption of atezolizumab and initiation of appropriate treatment. Current evidence indicates that ABCP and ACnP are valuable emerging first-line treatment options for metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC.

Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Non-small-cell Lung Cancer Patients With Different Metastatic Sites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Organ-specific response patterns reported in previous studies indicate different response toward immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with different metastatic sites. This study aims to compare the efficacy of ICIs with conventional therapy in NSCLC patients with bone, brain or liver metastases. Materials and Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for studies comparing ICIs with conventional therapy in NSCLC patients with bone, brain or liver metastases. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) among included studies was analyzed using the random effects model. Results: Eight studies consisting of 988 NSCLC patients were included, 259 with brain metastases and 729 with liver metastases. No available study with bone metastases information was identified. For patients with brain metastases, ICIs significantly improved their OS (HR, 0.57; P = 0.007). For patients with liver metastases, both OS (HR, 0.72; P = 0.006), and PFS (HR, 0.72; P = 0.004) improvements were observed in the ICI treatment arm. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on target of ICIs and treatment regimen. PD-1 inhibitors could benefit patients with liver or brain metastases on OS and PFS (brain metastases: OS, HR, 0.43; P < 0.001; liver metastases: PFS, HR, 0.52; P = 0.003; OS, HR, 0.66; P = 0.001), while PD-L1 inhibitors could not. Patients with brain metastases could only gain OS improvement from ICIs combined with chemotherapy (HR, 0.41; P = 0.001), but for patients with liver metastases, the benefit was detected using ICIs single agent (HR, 0.68; P = 0.012) or ICIs combined with chemotherapy plus anti-VEGF therapy (HR, 0.52; P = 0.005). Conclusion: ICIs could significantly improve OS in NSCLC patients with brain or liver metastases compared with conventional therapy. Patients with brain metastases could only gain OS benefit from ICIs combined with chemotherapy, while those with liver metastases obtained superior OS from ICIs single agent or ICIs combined with chemotherapy plus anti-VEGF therapy.

PD-(L)1 Inhibitors in Combination with Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Pairwise Meta-Analysis

The combination of programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors with chemotherapy has emerged as a promising therapeutic option for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of the combined strategy in this setting. For this purpose, we performed a literature search of randomized controlled trials comparing PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus platinum-based chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in stage IV NSCLC patients. Seven clinical trials with 4562 patients were included. In the intention-to-treat wildtype population, PD-(L)1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy was significantly associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) (Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57-0.65, p < 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.67-0.86; p < 0.001) compared to chemotherapy. A significantly higher overall response rate (ORR) was also observed with the combined strategy (Odds ratio (OR) = 2.12, 95% CI: 1.70-2.63, p < 0.001). Furthermore, in all the analyzed subgroups, addition of PD-(L)1 inhibitors to chemotherapy significantly improved efficacy endpoints. Specifically, stratification according to PD-L1 expression revealed a benefit across all patients, regardless of their PFS status. In conclusion, PD-(L)1 blockade added to standard platinum-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS, OS, and ORR in the up-front treatment of advanced NSCLC.

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.

Immunotherapy in Lung Cancer: From a Minor God to the Olympus

Over the last decade, we have witnessed a paradigm shift in cancer treatment, with the advent of novel therapeutic approaches that target or manipulate the immune system, also known as immunotherapy. Blocking immune checkpoints has emerged as an effective strategy with unprecedented results in several solid tumors, including lung cancer. Since 2012 when PD(L)-1 inhibitors showed first clinical signals of activity in lung cancer, immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has emerged as a novel effective therapeutic strategy in different settings, determining a dramatic change in the therapeutic landscape of both non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and, more recently, small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Although the benefit from this novel therapeutic approach is undeniable, several open questions still remain unanswered. Herein, we summarize the major breakthroughs in the immunotherapy journey in lung cancer and how it is changing our clinical practice.

Atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab, paclitaxel and carboplatin for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer, including patients with EGFR mutations

Introduction: Cancer immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, specific patient groups (e.g. patients with activating epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR] mutations) do not appear to derive benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapy. Combining ICIs, such as atezolizumab, with chemotherapy and/or targeted therapies may help to address this unmet need.Areas covered: Atezolizumab is an anti-programmed death-ligand 1 therapy for several tumor types. We review its clinical efficacy and safety in the treatment of advanced or metastatic NSCLC, with a specific focus on the combination of atezolizumab with bevacizumab, carboplatin, and paclitaxel (ABCP). Data from IMpower150 show that the ABCP regimen provided clinical benefit to patients with non-squamous NSCLC, including those with EGFR mutations.Expert opinion: Combining ICIs with chemotherapy has proven to be superior to chemotherapy alone. However, tumor resistance to ICIs will likely increase as these drugs enter earlier lines of therapy, underscoring a need for effective treatments when immunotherapy fails. Data suggest that the ABCP regimen may circumvent ICI resistance mechanisms. Continued investigation into the regimen's mechanisms, improved patient profiling/selection, and treatment personalization will drive further development/discoveries.

Achievements and futures of immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been threatening human health for years. Cytotoxicity-based chemotherapy seems to reach plateau in NSCLC treatment. Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) against programmed cell death 1 (PD-1/L1) axis are to provide long-term survival benefits for wild-type advanced NSCLC patients with acceptable adverse effects. Though beneficiary population is limited from monotherapy, combination strategies are expanding indicators. Retrospective evidences suggested ICIs are also potentially useful for brain metastasis. Furthermore, the combination of ICIs and surgery are to prolong progression free survival time for local advanced patients. Additionally, novel agents targeting in immune checkpoints other than PD-1/L1 demonstrated potential values in anticancer immunity. Herein, we summarize the novel therapies of checkpoint inhibitors in NSCLC treatment and some other potential immunotherapy to provide a conspectus for novel immunotherapy in NSCLC and perspective for the future in anti-cancer treatment.

Efficacy and safety of first-line carboplatin-versus cisplatin-based chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Platinum-based chemotherapy is the mainstay of first-line (1L) therapy for advanced non-small cell cancer (NSCLC). The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of carboplatin- versus cisplatin-based chemotherapy in 1L NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A meta-analysis by the Cochrane group (2013) was updated. Systematic searches of CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences database, clinicaltrials.gov and conference proceedings were conducted to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2013-January 2018 which compared carboplatin and cisplatin combined with: gemcitabine, vinorelbine, docetaxel, paclitaxel, irinotecan, or pemetrexed. Endpoints included overall survival (OS), one-year OS, objective response rate (ORR), grade 3/4 drug-related toxicities, and HRQoL.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs (2,048 patients) were identified from 4,139 records for inclusion in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in OS (hazards ratio [HR]: 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96, 1.21) and one-year OS (relative risk [RR]: 0.97, CI: 0.89, 1.07) between carboplatin- and cisplatin-based chemotherapy. A small effect on ORR favouring cisplatin was detected (RR = 0.88; CI: 0.78, 0.99). Differences in drug-related toxicities were observed between carboplatin- and cisplatin-based chemotherapy for thrombocytopenia, anaemia, neurotoxicity, and the risk of nausea/vomiting. Three RCTs comparing HRQoL between carboplatin- and cisplatin-based chemotherapy found no significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated evidence base corroborates findings of previous meta-analyses showing no difference in OS between carboplatin- and cisplatin-based chemotherapy, despite a slight benefit in ORR for cisplatin. Toxicity profiles should be considered alongside patients' comorbidities in the choice of therapy.

Treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: 2018 guidelines of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM)

The treatment landscape of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has dramatically evolved in recent years, since the recognition of several clinical-biological entities requiring personalized treatment approaches, leading to significant improvements in patients' survival outcomes. In particular, targeted therapies acting against EGFR, ALK, and ROS1, and immunotherapeutic agents modulating the PD-1/PD-L1 axis, represent new milestones in the treatment of advanced disease, supporting a chemotherapy backbone within a multidisciplinary model. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) has developed evidence-based guidelines for the management of lung tumors. Given the epidemiologic relevance, this report is dedicated to the treatment of advanced/metastatic NSCLC. These guidelines serve as a practical tool for oncologists, physicians, and other healthcare professionals to easily embrace the updated key points of NSCLC treatment strategies. Considering the upcoming introduction of potential new standards of care in several disease settings, these guidelines represent a benchmark from which to move forward.