Indirect Treatment Comparison of Larotrectinib versus Entrectinib in Treating Patients with TRK Gene Fusion Cancers

Signaling pathways involved in colorectal cancer: pathogenesis and targeted therapy

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Its complexity is influenced by various signal transduction networks that govern cellular proliferation, survival, differentiation, and apoptosis. The pathogenesis of CRC is a testament to the dysregulation of these signaling cascades, which culminates in the malignant transformation of colonic epithelium. This review aims to dissect the foundational signaling mechanisms implicated in CRC, to elucidate the generalized principles underpinning neoplastic evolution and progression. We discuss the molecular hallmarks of CRC, including the genomic, epigenomic and microbial features of CRC to highlight the role of signal transduction in the orchestration of the tumorigenic process. Concurrently, we review the advent of targeted and immune therapies in CRC, assessing their impact on the current clinical landscape. The development of these therapies has been informed by a deepening understanding of oncogenic signaling, leading to the identification of key nodes within these networks that can be exploited pharmacologically. Furthermore, we explore the potential of integrating AI to enhance the precision of therapeutic targeting and patient stratification, emphasizing their role in personalized medicine. In summary, our review captures the dynamic interplay between aberrant signaling in CRC pathogenesis and the concerted efforts to counteract these changes through targeted therapeutic strategies, ultimately aiming to pave the way for improved prognosis and personalized treatment modalities in colorectal cancer.

Personalized treatment using predictive biomarkers in solid organ malignancies: A review

In recent years, the influence of specific biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of solid organ malignancies has been increasingly prominent. The relevance of the use of predictive biomarkers, which predict cancer response to specific forms of treatment provided, is playing a more significant role than ever before, as it affects diagnosis and initiation of treatment, monitoring for efficacy and side effects of treatment, and adjustment in treatment regimen in the long term. In the current review, we explored the use of predictive biomarkers in the treatment of solid organ malignancies, including common cancers such as colorectal cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, prostate cancer, and cancers associated with high mortalities, such as pancreatic cancer, liver cancer, kidney cancer and cancers of the central nervous system. We additionally analyzed the goals and types of personalized treatment using predictive biomarkers, and the management of various types of solid organ malignancies using predictive biomarkers and their relative efficacies so far in the clinical settings.

Single-Institution Experience of Larotrectinib Therapy for Patients With NTRK Fusion-Positive Thyroid Carcinoma

Context

The real world efficacy and tolerabiltiy of NTRK inhibitor larotrectinib has not yet been reported in the literature although trial data has shown promising results.

Objective

We report a retrospective analysis of patients with thyroid cancer harboring NTRK fusions who underwent treatment with larotrectinib.

Methods

A single-institution, retrospective case series of patients with NTRK fusion-positive thyroid cancers treated with neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) inhibitors from January 1, 2007, to January 1, 2023, was performed. This study was conducted at a single academic tertiary referral center. Patients with confirmed NTRK-fusion thyroid cancer who received larotrectinib were included. Larotrectinib was administered in accordance with clinical judgment from oncology providers. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

Eight patients with NTRK fusion-positive thyroid cancer treated with larotrectinib were identified: 4 with papillary thyroid cancer (PTC) (50%), 3 with poorly differentiated thyroid cancer (PDTC) (38%), and 1 with anaplastic thyroid cancer (ATC) (12%). The median PFS (mPFS) for all patients was 24.7 months (95% CI, 11.3-38.1). mPFS in PTC was higher than PDTC (34.6 months [24.7-48.7 months] vs 17.5 [7.1-21.1 months]; P = .017). The median overall survival (OS) was 43.8 months (29.8-56.8 months) overall. The single patient with ATC had a PFS and OS of 23 months. Two patients remained on treatment/alive at data cutoff, with a duration of response of 33.5 months and a median follow-up of 52 months. Patients achieved 1 complete response (12%), 6 partial responses (75%), and 1 stable disease (12%).

Conclusion

In this single-institution cohort of patients with NTRK fusion-positive thyroid cancer, NTRK inhibition led to an mPFS of 25 months, with survival surpassing historic benchmarks for ATC and PDTC.

Agnostic drug development revisited

The advent of molecular profiling and the generalization of next generation sequencing in oncology has enabled the identification of patients who could benefit from targeted agents. Since the tumor-agnostic approval of pembrolizumab for patients with MSI-High tumors in 2017, different molecularly-guided therapeutics have been awarded approvals and progressively incorporated in the treatment landscape across multiple tumor types. As the number of tumor-agnostic targets considered druggable expands in the clinic, novel challenges will reshape the drug development field involving all the stakeholders in oncology. In this review, we provide an overview of current tumor-agnostic approvals and discuss promising candidate therapeutics for tumor-agnostic designation and challenges for their broad implementation.

Projecting long-term clinical outcomes with larotrectinib compared with immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer and differentiated thyroid cancer

BACKGROUND

Larotrectinib is approved for patients with advanced NTRK gene fusion-positive solid tumors. Prior studies demonstrated promising results with larotrectinib compared with other systemic therapy. However, comparisons to checkpoint inhibitors, such as nivolumab or pembrolizumab, have not been done.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate and compare expected life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) for patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) eligible for larotrectinib vs patients with unknown NTRK gene fusion status on nivolumab or pembrolizumab. We also assessed patients with metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC), as pembrolizumab may be considered in certain circumstances.

METHODS

We developed partitioned survival models to project long-term comparative effectiveness of larotrectinib vs nivolumab or pembrolizumab. Larotrectinib survival data were derived from an updated July 2021 analysis of 21 adult patients (≥18 years of age) with metastatic NTRK gene fusion-positive NSCLC and 21 with DTC. Survival inputs for nivolumab and pembrolizumab were obtained from published articles. Progression-free and overall survival were estimated using survival distributions (Exponential, Weibull, Log-logistic, and Log-normal). Exponential fits were chosen based on goodness-of-fit and clinical plausibility.

RESULTS

In NSCLC, larotrectinib resulted in gains of 5.87 and 5.91 LYs compared to nivolumab and pembrolizumab, respectively, which translated to gains of 3.53 and 3.56 QALYs. In DTC, larotrectinib resulted in a gain of 5.23 LYs and 4.24 QALYs compared to pembrolizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

In metastatic NSCLC and DTC, larotrectinib may produce substantial life expectancy and QALY gains compared to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Additional data with longer follow-up will further inform this comparison.

Agnostic Administration of Targeted Anticancer Drugs: Looking for a Balance between Hype and Caution

Many tumors have well-defined vulnerabilities, thus potentially allowing highly specific and effective treatment. There is a spectrum of actionable genetic alterations which are shared across various tumor types and, therefore, can be targeted by a given drug irrespective of tumor histology. Several agnostic drug-target matches have already been approved for clinical use, e.g., immune therapy for tumors with microsatellite instability (MSI) and/or high tumor mutation burden (TMB), NTRK1-3 and RET inhibitors for cancers carrying rearrangements in these kinases, and dabrafenib plus trametinib for BRAF V600E mutated malignancies. Multiple lines of evidence suggest that this histology-independent approach is also reasonable for tumors carrying ALK and ROS1 translocations, biallelic BRCA1/2 inactivation and/or homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), strong HER2 amplification/overexpression coupled with the absence of other MAPK pathway-activating mutations, etc. On the other hand, some well-known targets are not agnostic: for example, PD-L1 expression is predictive for the efficacy of PD-L1/PD1 inhibitors only in some but not all cancer types. Unfortunately, the individual probability of finding a druggable target in a given tumor is relatively low, even with the use of comprehensive next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays. Nevertheless, the rapidly growing utilization of NGS will significantly increase the number of patients with highly unusual or exceptionally rare tumor-target combinations. Clinical trials may provide only a framework for treatment attitudes, while the decisions for individual patients usually require case-by-case consideration of the probability of deriving benefit from agnostic versus standard therapy, drug availability, associated costs, and other circumstances. The existing format of data dissemination may not be optimal for agnostic cancer medicine, as conventional scientific journals are understandably biased towards the publication of positive findings and usually discourage the submission of case reports. Despite all the limitations and concerns, histology-independent drug-target matching is certainly feasible and, therefore, will be increasingly utilized in the future.

Toward Best Practices for Economic Evaluations of Tumor-Agnostic Therapies: A Review of Current Barriers and Solutions

OBJECTIVES

Cancer therapies targeting tumor-agnostic biomarkers are challenging traditional health technology assessment (HTA) frameworks. The high prevalence of nonrandomized single-arm trials, heterogeneity, and small benefiting populations are driving outcomes uncertainty, challenging healthcare decision making. We conducted a structured literature review to identify barriers and prioritize solutions to generating economic evidence for tumor-agnostic therapies.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and Embase for English-language studies conducting economic evaluations of tumor-agnostic treatments or exploring related challenges and solutions. We included studies published by December 2022 and supplemented our review with Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence technical reports for approved tumor-agnostic therapies. Three reviewers abstracted and summarized key methodological and empirical study characteristics. Challenges and solutions were identified through authors' statements and categorized using directed content analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies met our inclusion criteria. Studies spanned economic evaluations (n = 5), reimbursement reviews (n = 4), qualitative research (n = 1), methods validations (n = 3), and commentaries or literature reviews (n = 13). Challenges encountered related to (1) the treatment setting and clinical trial designs, (2) a lack of data or low-quality data on clinical and cost parameters, and (3) an inability to produce evidence that meets HTA guidelines. Although attempted solutions centered on analytic approaches for managing missing data, proposed solutions highlighted the need for real-world evidence combined with life-cycle HTA to reduce future evidentiary uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

Therapeutic innovation outpaces HTA evidence generation and the methods that support it. Existing HTA frameworks must be adapted for tumor-agnostic treatments to support future economic evaluations enabling timely patient access.

The significance of tissue-agnostic biomarkers in solid tumors: the more the merrier?

INTRODUCTION

To date, several emerging biomarkers have gained considerable interest in the field of predictive molecular oncology. The advent of precision medicine has led to the development of innovative drugs targeting rare molecular pathways independently from histology, defined as tissue-agnostic drugs.

AREAS COVERED

Although there is a lot of promise for this new tissue-agnostic model in the oncological scenario, crucial issues from both the diagnostic and therapeutic standpoint are emerging. This review aims to critically examine the role of tissue-agnostic biomarkers in different solid tumors, focusing on the prevalence and methods of detection of agnostic biomarkers together with drug approvals to guide clinicians in this evolving landscape.

EXPERT OPINION

To strengthen the framework for tissue-agnostic approvals, the dialogue between regulatory, industrial, and academic parties should be intensified. Critical questions include the development of an efficient network system that can overcome the heterogeneity of patients' inclusion criteria along with the increasingly difficult interpretation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) profiling technologies. Cost-effectiveness and risk-benefit studies are needed in the national context considering the modalities of access to diagnostic tests and reimbursement of treatments.

New therapeutic strategies based on molecularly targeted therapy in glioblastoma – a case report and review of the literature

Glioblastomas are the most common and most lethal forms of malignant primary brain tumor. We present a case report of a patient with III-grade glioma who achieved stable disease (SD) and clinical improvement after trametinib administration. We also report a review of the literature to Current Treatment Guidelines of Glioblastoma and new therapeutic strategies based on molecularly targeted therapy. Traditional treatments, including surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, have many limitations concerning the prognosis of patients with glioblastomas. Unfortunately, these tumors’recur after primary resection in the majority of cases. There is no standard therapy for recurrence of GBM. Targeted therapy offers a promising new treatment strategy. Regardless of those outstanding results much more can be done in the field of therapeutic options. Most urgent concerns include potent combining molecular targeted therapy with other types of treatments, selecting a group of patients for whom they turn out to be the most beneficial, and addressing adverse events of these molecules.