Maintenance therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: switch versus continuation

Maintenance Pembrolizumab Therapy in Patients with Metastatic HER2-negative Breast Cancer with Prior Response to Chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Accumulating toxicities hinder indefinite chemotherapy for many patients with metastatic/recurrent HER2-negative breast cancer. We conducted a phase II trial of pembrolizumab monotherapy following induction chemotherapy to determine the efficacy of maintenance immunotherapy in patients with metastatic HER2-negative inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) and non-IBC triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and a biomarker study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with a complete response, partial response, or stable disease (SD) after at least three cycles of chemotherapy for HER2-negative breast cancer received pembrolizumab, regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 expression. Pembrolizumab (200 mg) was administered every 3 weeks until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or 2 years of pembrolizumab exposure. The endpoints included the 4-month disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and response biomarkers in the blood.

RESULTS

Of 43 treated patients, 11 had metastatic IBC and 32 non-IBC TNBC. The 4-month DCR was 58.1% [95% confidence interval (CI), 43.4-72.9]. For all patients, the median PFS was 4.8 months (95% CI, 3.0-7.1 months). The toxicity profile was similar to the previous pembrolizumab monotherapy study. Patients with high T-cell clonality at baseline had a longer PFS with pembrolizumab treatment than did those with low T-cell clonality (10.4 vs. 3.6 months, P = 0.04). Patients who achieved SD also demonstrated a significant increase in T-cell clonality during therapy compared with those who did not achieve SD (20% vs. 5.9% mean increase, respectively; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Pembrolizumab monotherapy achieved durable treatment responses. Patients with a high baseline T-cell clonality had prolonged disease control with pembrolizumab.

Molecular Targeted Drugs and Biomarkers in NSCLC, the Evolving Role of Individualized Therapy

Lung cancer first line treatment has been directed from the non-specific cytotoxic doublet chemotherapy to the molecular targeted. The major limitation of the targeted therapies still remains the small number of patients positive to gene mutations. Furthermore, the differentiation between second line and maintenance therapy has not been fully clarified and differs in the clinical practice between cancer centers. The authors present a segregation between maintenance treatment and second line and present a possible definition for the term “maintenance” treatment. In addition, cancer cell evolution induces mutations and therefore either targeted therapies or non-specific chemotherapy drugs in many patients become ineffective. In the present work pathways such as epidermal growth factor, anaplastic lymphoma kinase, met proto-oncogene and PI3K are extensively presented and correlated with current chemotherapy treatment. Future, perspectives for targeted treatment are presented based on the current publications and ongoing clinical trials.

Isolated central nervous system progression on Crizotinib: an Achilles heel of non-small cell lung cancer with EML4-ALK translocation?

Advanced non-small lung cancer (NSCLC) remains almost uniformly lethal with marginal long-term survival despite efforts to target specific oncogenic addiction pathways that may drive these tumors with small molecularly targeted agents and biologics. The EML4-ALK fusion gene encodes a chimeric tyrosine kinase that activates the Ras signaling pathway, and this fusion protein is found in approximately 5% of NSCLC. Targeting EML4-ALK with Crizotinib in this subset of NSCLC has documented therapeutic efficacy, but the vast majority of patients eventually develop recurrent disease that is often refractory to further treatments. We present the clinicopathologic features of three patients with metastatic NSCLC harboring the EML4-ALK translocation that developed isolated central nervous system (CNS) metastases in the presence of good disease control elsewhere in the body. These cases suggest a differential response of NSCLC to Crizotinib in the brain in comparison to other sites of disease, and are consistent with a previous report of poor CNS penetration of Crizotinib. Results of ongoing clinical trials will clarify whether the CNS is a major sanctuary site for EML4-ALK positive NSCLC being treated with Crizotinib. While understanding molecular mechanisms of resistance is critical to overcome therapeutic resistance, understanding physiologic mechanisms of resistance through analyzing anatomic patterns of failure may be equally crucial to improve long-term survival for patients with EML4-ALK translocation positive NSCLC.