Pre-clinical lung squamous cell carcinoma mouse models to identify novel biomarkers and therapeutic interventions

Primary lung carcinoma or lung cancer (LC) is classified into small-cell or non-small-cell (NSCLC) lung carcinoma. Lung squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) is the second most common subtype of NSCLC responsible for 30% of all LCs, and its survival remains low with only 24% of patients living for five years or longer post-diagnosis primarily due to the advanced stage of tumors at the time of diagnosis. The pathogenesis of LSCC is still poorly understood and has hampered the development of effective diagnostics and therapies. This review highlights the known risk factors, genetic and epigenetic alterations, miRNA biomarkers linked to the development and diagnosis of LSCC and the lack of therapeutic strategies to target specifically LSCC. We will also discuss existing animal models of LSCC including carcinogen induced, transgenic and xenograft mouse models, and their advantages and limitations along with the chemopreventive studies and molecular studies conducted using them. The importance of developing new and improved mouse models will also be discussed that will provide further insights into the initiation and progression of LSCC, and enable the identification of new biomarkers and therapeutic targets.

An overview on display systems (phage, bacterial, and yeast display) for production of anticancer antibodies; advantages and disadvantages

Antibodies as ideal therapeutic and diagnostic molecules are among the top-selling drugs providing considerable efficacy in disease treatment, especially in cancer therapy. Limitations of the hybridoma technology as routine antibody generation method in conjunction with numerous developments in molecular biology led to the development of alternative approaches for the streamlined identification of most effective antibodies. In this regard, display selection technologies such as phage display, bacterial display, and yeast display have been widely promoted over the past three decades as ideal alternatives to traditional methods. The display of antibodies on phages is probably the most widespread of these methods, although surface display on bacteria or yeast have been employed successfully, as well. These methods using various sizes of combinatorial antibody libraries and different selection strategies possessing benefits in screening potency, generating, and isolation of high affinity antibodies with low risk of immunogenicity. Knowing the basics of each method assists in the design and retrieval process of antibodies suitable for different diseases, including cancer. In this review, we aim to outline the basics of each library construction and its display method, screening and selection steps. The advantages and disadvantages in comparison to alternative methods, and their applications in antibody engineering will be explained. Finally, we will review approved or non-approved therapeutic antibodies developed by employing these methods, which may serve as therapeutic antibodies in cancer therapy.

First-line treatment of advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation positive non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation positive (M+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is an important subtype of lung cancer comprising 10% to 15% of non-squamous tumours. This subtype is more common in women than men, is less associated with smoking, but occurs at a younger age than sporadic tumours.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness of single-agent or combination EGFR therapies used in the first-line treatment of people with locally advanced or metastatic EGFR M+ NSCLC compared with other cytotoxic chemotherapy (CTX) agents used alone or in combination, or best supportive care (BSC). The primary outcomes were overall survival and progression-free survival. Secondary outcomes included response rate, symptom palliation, toxicity, and health-related quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted electronic searches of the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2020, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1946 to 27th July 2020), Embase (1980 to 27th July 2020), and ISI Web of Science (1899 to 27th July 2020). We also searched the conference abstracts of the American Society for Clinical Oncology and the European Society for Medical Oncology (July 2020); Evidence Review Group submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; and the reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel-group randomised controlled trials comparing EGFR-targeted agents (alone or in combination with cytotoxic agents or BSC) with cytotoxic chemotherapy (single or doublet) or BSC in chemotherapy-naive patients with locally advanced or metastatic (stage IIIB or IV) EGFR M+ NSCLC unsuitable for treatment with curative intent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified articles, extracted data, and carried out the 'Risk of bias' assessment. We conducted meta-analyses using a fixed-effect model unless there was substantial heterogeneity, in which case we also performed a random-effects analysis as a sensitivity analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two trials met the inclusion criteria. Ten of these exclusively recruited people with EGFR M+ NSCLC; the remainder recruited a mixed population and reported results for people with EGFR M+ NSCLC as subgroup analyses. The number of participants with EGFR M+ tumours totalled 3023, of whom approximately 2563 were of Asian origin. Overall survival (OS) data showed inconsistent results between the included trials that compared EGFR-targeted treatments against cytotoxic chemotherapy or placebo. Erlotinib was used in eight trials, gefitinib in nine trials, afatinib in two trials, cetuximab in two trials, and icotinib in one trial. The findings of FASTACT 2 suggested a clinical benefit for OS for participants treated with erlotinib plus cytotoxic chemotherapy when compared to cytotoxic chemotherapy alone, as did the Han 2017 trial for gefitinib plus cytotoxic chemotherapy, but both results were based on a small number of participants (n = 97 and 122, respectively). For progression-free survival (PFS), a pooled analysis of four trials showed evidence of clinical benefit for erlotinib compared with cytotoxic chemotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.31; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.39 ; 583 participants ; high-certainty evidence). A pooled analysis of two trials of gefitinib versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin showed evidence of clinical benefit for PFS for gefitinib (HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.48 ; 491 participants high-certainty evidence), and a pooled analysis of two trials of gefitinib versus pemetrexed plus carboplatin with pemetrexed maintenance also showed evidence of clinical benefit for PFS for gefitinib (HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.74, 371 participants ; moderate-certainty evidence). Afatinib showed evidence of clinical benefit for PFS when compared with chemotherapy in a pooled analysis of two trials (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.53, 709 participants high-certainty evidence). All but one small trial showed a corresponding improvement in response rate with tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) compared to chemotherapy. Commonly reported grade 3/4 adverse events associated with afatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib and icotinib monotherapy were rash and diarrhoea. Myelosuppression was consistently worse in the chemotherapy arms; fatigue and anorexia were also associated with some chemotherapies. Seven trials reported on health-related quality of life and symptom improvement using different methodologies. For each of erlotinib, gefitinib, and afatinib, two trials showed improvement in one or more indices for the TKI compared to chemotherapy. The quality of evidence was high for the comparisons of erlotinib and gefitinib with cytotoxic chemotherapy and for the comparison of afatinib with cytotoxic chemotherapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib and icotinib are all active agents in EGFR M+ NSCLC patients, and demonstrate an increased tumour response rate and prolonged PFS compared to cytotoxic chemotherapy. We found a beneficial effect of the TKI compared to cytotoxic chemotherapy in adverse effect and health-related quality of life. We found limited evidence for increased OS for the TKI when compared with standard chemotherapy, but the majority of the included trials allowed participants to switch treatments on disease progression, which will have a confounding effect on any OS analysis. Single agent-TKI remains the standard of care and the benefit of combining a TKI and chemotherapy remains uncertain as the evidence is based on small patient numbers. Cytotoxic chemotherapy is less effective in EGFR M+ NSCLC than erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib or icotinib and is associated with greater toxicity. There are no data supporting the use of monoclonal antibody therapy. Icotinib is not available outside China.

Phage Display Derived Monoclonal Antibodies: From Bench to Bedside

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have become one of the most important classes of biopharmaceutical products, and they continue to dominate the universe of biopharmaceutical markets in terms of approval and sales. They are the most profitable single product class, where they represent six of the top ten selling drugs. At the beginning of the 1990s, an in vitro antibody selection technology known as antibody phage display was developed by John McCafferty and Sir. Gregory Winter that enabled the discovery of human antibodies for diverse applications, particularly antibody-based drugs. They created combinatorial antibody libraries on filamentous phage to be utilized for generating antigen specific antibodies in a matter of weeks. Since then, more than 70 phage–derived antibodies entered clinical studies and 14 of them have been approved. These antibodies are indicated for cancer, and non-cancer medical conditions, such as inflammatory, optical, infectious, or immunological diseases. This review will illustrate the utility of phage display as a powerful platform for therapeutic antibodies discovery and describe in detail all the approved mAbs derived from phage display.

Phage Display Derived Monoclonal Antibodies: From Bench to Bedside

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have become one of the most important classes of biopharmaceutical products, and they continue to dominate the universe of biopharmaceutical markets in terms of approval and sales. They are the most profitable single product class, where they represent six of the top ten selling drugs. At the beginning of the 1990s, an in vitro antibody selection technology known as antibody phage display was developed by John McCafferty and Sir. Gregory Winter that enabled the discovery of human antibodies for diverse applications, particularly antibody-based drugs. They created combinatorial antibody libraries on filamentous phage to be utilized for generating antigen specific antibodies in a matter of weeks. Since then, more than 70 phage-derived antibodies entered clinical studies and 14 of them have been approved. These antibodies are indicated for cancer, and non-cancer medical conditions, such as inflammatory, optical, infectious, or immunological diseases. This review will illustrate the utility of phage display as a powerful platform for therapeutic antibodies discovery and describe in detail all the approved mAbs derived from phage display.

Management of Dermatologic Complications of Lung Cancer Therapies

OPINION STATEMENT

In recent years, oncogene-directed targeted agents and immunotherapies have expanded the treatment armamentarium for advanced lung cancer and, in particular, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Along with extended survival, these agents are accompanied by a host of cutaneous complications that affect the skin, hair, and nails. These skin complications range from the well-characterized papulopustular (acneiform) eruption of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors to the emerging characterization of lichenoid skin eruptions seen during treatment with antibodies targeting the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death protein 1 ligand (PD-L1). When promptly recognized and accurately diagnosed, most cutaneous adverse events can be managed with supportive treatments, avoiding the need to interrupt antitumor therapy. Furthermore, preemptive management of skin problems can lead to significantly decreased severity of many cutaneous complications of these therapies. We encourage close collaboration between dermatologists and oncologists to better characterize cutaneous toxicity, select appropriate management, and avoid unnecessary dose reduction or discontinuation while simultaneously improving patient quality of life.

First-line treatment of advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation positive non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation positive (M+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is emerging as an important subtype of lung cancer comprising 10% to 15% of non-squamous tumours. This subtype is more common in women than men and is less associated with smoking.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness of single -agent or combination EGFR therapies used in the first-line treatment of people with locally advanced or metastatic EGFR M+ NSCLC compared with other cytotoxic chemotherapy (CTX) agents used alone or in combination, or best supportive care (BSC). The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival, response rate, toxicity, and quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted electronic searches of the the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1946 to 1 June 2015), EMBASE (1980 to 1 June 2015), and ISI Web of Science (1899 to 1 June 2015). We also searched the conference abstracts of the American Society for Clinical Oncology and the European Society for Medical Oncology (1 June 2015); Evidence Review Group submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; and the reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel randomised controlled trials comparing EGFR-targeted agents (alone or in combination with cytotoxic agents or BSC) with cytotoxic chemotherapy (single or doublet) or BSC in chemotherapy-naive patients with locally advanced or metastatic (stage IIIB or IV) EGFR M+ NSCLC unsuitable for treatment with curative intent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified articles, extracted data, and carried out the 'Risk of bias' assessment. We conducted meta-analyses using a fixed-effect model unless there was substantial heterogeneity, in which case we also performed a random-effects analysis as a sensitivity analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen trials met the inclusion criteria. Seven of these exclusively recruited people with EGFR M+ NSCLC; the remainder recruited a mixed population and reported results for people with EGFR M+ NSCLC as subgroup analyses. The number of participants with EGFR M+ tumours totalled 2317, of whom 1700 were of Asian origin.Overall survival (OS) data showed inconsistent results between the included trials that compared EGFR-targeted treatments against cytotoxic chemotherapy or placebo.Erlotinib was the intervention treatment used in eight trials, gefitinib in seven trials, afatinib in two trials, and cetuximab in two trials. The findings of one trial (FASTACT 2) did report a statistically significant OS gain for participants treated with erlotinib plus cytotoxic chemotherapy when compared to cytotoxic chemotherapy alone, but this result was based on a small number of participants (n = 97). For progression-free survival (PFS), a pooled analysis of 3 trials (n = 378) demonstrated a statistically significant benefit for erlotinib compared with cytotoxic chemotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24 to 0.38).In a pooled analysis with 491 participants administered gefitinib, 2 trials (IPASS and NEJSG) demonstrated a statistically significant PFS benefit of gefitinib compared with cytotoxic chemotherapy (HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.48).Afatinib (n = 709) showed a statistically significant PFS benefit when compared with chemotherapy in a pooled analysis of 2 trials (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.53).Commonly reported grade 3/4 adverse events for afatinib, erlotinib, and gefitinib monotherapy were rash and diarrhoea. Myelosuppression was consistently worse in the chemotherapy arms, fatigue and anorexia were also associated with some chemotherapies.No statistically significant PFS or OS benefit for cetuximab plus cytotoxic chemotherapy (n = 81) compared to chemotherapy alone was reported in either of the two trials.Six trials reported on quality of life and symptom improvement using different methodologies. For each of erlotinib, gefitinib, and afatinib, 2 trials showed improvement in one or more indices for the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) compared to chemotherapy.The quality of evidence was high for the comparisons of erlotinib and gefitinib with cytotoxic chemotherapy and for the comparison of afatinib with cytotoxic chemotherapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Erlotinib, gefitinib, and afatinib are all active agents in EGFR M+ NSCLC patients, and demonstrate an increased tumour response rate and prolonged progression-free survival compared to cytotoxic chemotherapy. We also found a beneficial effect of the TKI compared to cytotoxic chemotherapy. However, we found no increase in overall survival for the TKI when compared with standard chemotherapy. Cytotoxic chemotherapy is less effective in EGFR M+ NSCLC than erlotinib, gefitinib, or afatinib and is associated with greater toxicity. There were no data supporting the use of monoclonal antibody therapy.

CCR 20th Anniversary commentary: in search of cetuximab's first indication-combination therapy with irinotecan in colorectal cancer

The research article by Prewett and colleagues, published in the May 1, 2002, issue of Clinical Cancer Research, provided important translational data that extended earlier preclinical and clinical studies with the human-murine chimeric anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody C225. Subsequent clinical trials with C225 led to the demonstration of its efficacy in combination with irinotecan and regulatory approval for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.

Targeted Therapies for Lung Cancer

Targeted therapies have become standard therapies for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A phase III trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel with and without bevacizumab in patients with advanced NSCLC with non-squamous histology demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in efficacy. In patients with NSCLC with an activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation (defined as exon 19 deletion and exon 21 L858R point mutation), phase III trials of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) compared to platinum-based chemotherapy have demonstrated superior efficacy in the first-line setting. In patients with NSCLC with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements, phase III trials of crizotinib have demonstrated superior efficacy compared to platinum-pemetrexed in the first-line setting and standard chemotherapy in the second-line setting. A second-generation ALK inhibitor, ceritinib, is available for patients who have progressed after or were intolerant of crizotinib. Crizotinib has also demonstrated activity on patients with ROS1 rearrangements, and BRAF inhibitors (dabrafenib, vemurafenib) have demonstrated activity in patients with NSCLC with BRAF V600E mutation. The oncogenic mutations that are susceptible to targeted therapy are mainly found in non-squamous NSCLC. The development of targeted therapy in patients with squamous NSCLC has been more challenging due to the genomic complexity observed in the squamous histology and the low prevalence of EGFR, ALK, and ROS1 molecular alterations. A phase III trial of cisplatin and gemcitabine with and without necitumumab in patients with advanced NSCLC with squamous histology demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in progression-free and overall survival.

Second-line combination therapies in nonsmall cell lung cancer without known driver mutations

In advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, platinum-based combination chemotherapy is standard treatment in the first-line setting; however, the large majority of patients ultimately progress. For more than a decade, single-agent therapy with docetaxel, pemetrexed or erlotinib has been the standard of care after failure with platinum salts, showing some benefit over best supportive care. Nonetheless, prognosis remains poor and new second-line strategies are urgently needed. Combinations of cytotoxic agents, including rechallenge with platinum salts, do not offer clear benefit over single-agent therapy for the majority of patients. In patients without a known tumoural oncogenic driver mutation, regimens based on combinations of targeted agents have shown promising results; however, a clear role in therapeutic management is yet to be established. Some success has been reported in recent research combining a cytotoxic agent with targeted therapies.In this review, we summarise published data for the various strategies evaluated over the past decade in second-line treatment of NSCLC patients without a known driver mutation. We focus on combination treatments and consider future perspectives, including the need to identify predictive markers to support personalised therapeutic strategies.

What is the best strategy for targeting EGF receptors in non-small-cell lung cancer?

EGF receptors (EGFRs) are often overexpressed or constitutively activated in non-small-cell lung cancer, and are an important therapeutic target. EGFR signaling can be blocked with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and anti-EGFR antibodies. Three EGFR-TKIs are approved as initial monotherapies in patients with EGFR-activating mutations, and erlotinib has a role as maintenance and second-line therapy. Investigational anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies plus standard first-line therapy improve survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, especially in tumors with high EGFR expression. Anti-EGFR antibodies inhibit EGFR signaling and have the potential to stimulate antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. Multikinase TKIs are investigational as first- and second-line therapies, as monotherapies and in combination with chemotherapy. This article summarizes the available clinical data for EGFR-targeted therapies.

Update in Lung Cancer 2014

In the past 2 years, lung cancer research and clinical care have advanced significantly. Advancements in the field have improved outcomes and promise to lead to further reductions in deaths from lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer death worldwide. These advances include identification of new molecular targets for personalized targeted therapy, validation of molecular signatures of lung cancer risk in smokers, progress in lung tumor immunotherapy, and implementation of population-based lung cancer screening with chest computed tomography in the United States. In this review, we highlight recent research in these areas and challenges for the future.

Squamous cell lung cancer: from tumor genomics to cancer therapeutics

Squamous cell lung cancer (SCC) represents an area of unmet need in lung cancer research. For the past several years, therapeutic progress in SCC has lagged behind the now more common non-small cell lung cancer histologic subtype of adenocarcinoma. However, recent efforts to define the complex biology underlying SCC have begun to bear fruit in a multitude of ways, including characterization of previously unknown genomic and signaling pathways, delineation of new, potentially actionable molecular targets, and subsequent development of a large number of agents directed against unique SCC-associated molecular abnormalities. For the first time, SCC-specific prognostic gene signatures and predictive biomarkers of new therapeutic agents are emerging. In addition, recent and ongoing clinical trials, including the Lung-MAP master protocol, have been designed to facilitate approval of targeted therapy-biomarker combinations. In this comprehensive review, we describe the current status of SCC therapeutics, recent advances in the understanding of SCC biology and prognostic gene signatures, and the development of innovative new clinical trials, all of which offer new hope for patients with advanced SCC.

Refining the treatment of NSCLC according to histological and molecular subtypes

In the past decade, the characterization of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) into subtypes based on genotype and histology has resulted in dramatic improvements in disease outcome in select patient subgroups. In particular, molecularly targeted agents that inhibit EGFR or ALK are approved for the treatment of NSCLC harbouring genetic alterations in the genes encoding these proteins. Although acquired resistance usually limits the duration of response to these therapies, a number of new agents have proven effective at tackling specific resistance mechanisms to first-generation inhibitors. Large initiatives are starting to address the role of biomarker-driven targeted therapy in squamous lung cancers, and in the adjuvant setting. Immunotherapy undeniably holds great promise and our understanding of subsets of NSCLC based on patterns of immune response is continuing to evolve. In addition, efforts are underway to identify rare genomic subsets through genomic screening, functional studies, and molecular characterization of exceptional responders. This Review provides an overview of the key developments in the treatment of NSCLC, and discusses potential strategies to further optimize therapy by targeting disease subtypes.

Best practice in the treatment of advanced squamous cell lung cancer

The management of advanced stage nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been altered by the recognition of histology-based treatment and the use of targeted therapy. Whilst outcomes have improved with adenocarcinoma, treatment options are still limited in advanced stage squamous cell lung cancer. With advances in the molecular characterization of squamous cell cancers (SCCs), new potential targets have been identified. In this review, we discuss the role of histology in the treatment of NSCLC, cytotoxic chemotherapy, existing targeted therapies, the new molecular subsets and novel inhibitors in squamous cell lung carcinoma, and the emerging role of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Based on the results of two recent studies, nivolumab, a programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitor, has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the treatment of squamous cell NSCLC in the second-line setting. Well-designed biomarker driven studies are needed to accelerate the development and approval of novel therapies for patients with lung SCC.

Complex decisions for first-line and maintenance treatment of advanced wild-type non-small cell lung cancer

Until recently, the first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) required minimal clinical decision making. Patients who were eligible for chemotherapy received a platinum-based doublet, and 5-year survival rates were poor. With the advent of molecularly targeted agents and better tolerated chemotherapies--namely, bevacizumab, erlotinib, and pemetrexed--new therapeutic opportunities have emerged. Some of the strategies that have proven to be successful for the treatment of patients with NSCLC are targeting of the vascular endothelial growth factor, use of maintenance chemotherapy for patients without progression of disease after initial therapy, and tailoring of cytotoxic agents specific to the histology of an individual patient's cancer. Each approach has been independently shown to improve overall survival, but integrating the data from a number of complicated trials into the "best" approach for patients remains challenging. This review attempts to address three fundamental questions clinicians face in choosing first-line and maintenance treatment for advanced NSCLC, particularly nonsquamous histology: Is pemetrexed or a taxane agent better for combination with platinum therapy? Should bevacizumab be used, and is it beneficial when added to pemetrexed chemotherapy? When is maintenance therapy indicated, and which agent is best?

Necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin as first-line therapy in patients with stage IV non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (INSPIRE): an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Necitumumab is a second-generation recombinant human immunoglobulin G1 EGFR monoclonal antibody that competitively inhibits ligand binding. We aimed to compare necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin with pemetrexed and cisplatin alone in patients with previously untreated, stage IV, non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

We did this randomised, open-label, controlled phase 3 study at 103 sites in 20 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 and adequate organ function, were randomly assigned 1:1 to treatment with a block randomisation scheme (block size of four) via a telephone-based interactive voice-response system or interactive web-response system. Patients received either cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) and pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 1 of a 3-week cycle for a maximum of six cycles alone, or with necitumumab 800 mg on days 1 and 8. Necitumumab was continued after the end of chemotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. Randomisation was stratified by smoking history, ECOG performance status, disease histology, and geographical region. Patients and study investigators were not masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00982111.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 11, 2009, and Feb 2, 2011, we randomly assigned 633 patients to receive either necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin (n=315) or pemetrexed and cisplatin alone (n=318). Enrolment was stopped on Feb 2, 2011, after a recommendation from the independent data monitoring committee. There was no significant difference in overall survival between treatment groups, with a median overall survival of 11·3 months (95% CI 9·5-13·4) in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group versus 11·5 months (10·1-13·1) in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group (hazard ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·84-1·21]; p=0·96). The incidence of grade 3 or worse adverse events, including deaths, was higher in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group than in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group; in particular, deaths regarded as related to study drug were reported in 15 (5%) of 304 patients in the necitumumab group versus nine (3%) of 312 patients in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group. Serious adverse events were likewise more frequent in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group than in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group (155 [51%] of 304 vs 127 [41%] of 312 patients). Patients in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group had more grade 3-4 rash (45 [15%] of 304 vs one [<1%] of 312 patients in the pemetrexed and cisplatin alone group), hypomagnesaemia (23 [8%] vs seven [2%] patients), and grade 3 or higher venous thromboembolic events (23 [8%] vs 11 [4%] patients) than did those in the pemetrexed and cisplatin alone group.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings show no evidence to suggest that the addition of necitumumab to pemetrexed and cisplatin increases survival of previously untreated patients with stage IV non-squamous NSCLC. Unless future studies identify potentially useful predictive biomarkers, necitumumab is unlikely to provide benefit in this patient population when combined with pemetrexed and cisplatin.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

Emerging drugs for squamous cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

The management of advanced NSCLC has been shifted by histology-driven treatment and molecularly targeted therapy, especially in lung adenocarcinoma. However, as the second most common histology in NSCLC, the treatment options for squamous cell lung cancer (SQCLC) remain very limited.

AREAS COVERED

The review first discusses the role of histology in management of NSCLC and new cytotoxic agents in SQCLC, and then addresses genomic characterization and potential molecular targets in SQCLC. The article then provides an overview for several major categories of novel molecularly targeted therapies and immune-based strategies with particular attention to ongoing SQCLC trials.

EXPERT OPINION

The key challenges in drug development are to uncover novel actionable targets and to identify predictive biomarkers. Progress in genomic analysis has identified some promising targetable genes and oncogenic pathways in SQCLC with a wave of targeted agents being tested in clinical trials. Immunotherapy has also raised great interest in management of SQCLC, especially agents targeting immune check points, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4, programmed death-1 receptor and its ligands. Better understanding of tumor biology and development of novel targeted therapies will help to facilitate more effective personalized therapy for patients with this devastating illness.

Beyond adenocarcinoma: current treatments and future directions for squamous, small cell, and rare lung cancer histologies

Lung cancer encompasses a diverse spectrum of histologic subtypes. Until recently, the majority of therapeutic advances were limited to the minority of patients with adenocarcinoma. With the advent of comprehensive genomic profiling of squamous and small cell lung cancers, new therapeutic targets have emerged. For squamous tumors, the most promising of these include fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR), the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway, discoidin domain receptor 2 (DDR2), and G1/S checkpoint regulators. In 2014, the antiangiogenic agent ramucirumab was approved for all non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) histologies, including squamous tumors. Immunotherapeutic approaches also appear to be promising for these cases. Genomic analysis of small cell lung cancer has revealed a high mutation burden, but relatively few druggable driver oncogenic alterations. Current treatment strategies under investigation are focusing on targeting mitotic, cell cycle, and DNA repair regulation, as well as immunotherapy. Pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors represent a diverse spectrum of diseases that may be treated with somatostatin analogs, cytotoxic agents, and molecularly targeted therapies. Radiolabeled somatostatin analogs and combinations with mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors also show potential. Large cell neuroendocrine tumors share numerous clinical, pathologic, and molecular features with small cell lung cancer; however, whether they should be treated similarly or according to a NSCLC paradigm remains a matter of debate.