Treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer after progression on nivolumab or pembrolizumab

Prognostic value of the Scottish Inflammatory prognostic Score in patients with NSCLC expressing PD-L1 ≥ 50 % progressing on first-line pembrolizumab

BACKGROUND

Most patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy will experience progressive disease (PD). Only a minority will go on to receive subsequent systemic anticancer therapy for which outcomes are guarded. We investigated the prognostic significance of biomarkers of systemic inflammation following failure of first-line pembrolizumab for NSCLC to aid subsequent management decisions.

METHODS

Patients with radiological and/or clinical evidence of PD on first-line pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC at a regional Scottish cancer centre were identified. Inflammatory biomarkers at the time of PD, including serum albumin, neutrophil count and the Scottish Inflammatory Prognostic Score (SIPS; combing albumin and neutrophils), and clinicopathological factors, including age, sex, histology, PDL1 expression and time to PD were recorded. The relationship between these and post-progression overall survival (ppOS) were examined.

RESULTS

Data were available for 211 patients. Median ppOS was 2.1 months. Only SIPS was predictive of ppOS on multivariate analysis (HR2.54 (95 %CI 1.81-3.56) (<0.001)), stratifying ppOS from 0.8 months (SIPS2), to 1.8 months (SIPS1), to 8.1 months (SIPS0) (p < 0.001). Thirty (14 %) patients received second-line systemic anticancer therapy with median ppOS 8.7 months. These patients had lower levels of systemic inflammation, as defined by albumin (p < 0.001), neutrophil count (p = 0.002), and SIPS (p = 0.004)), than all other patients.

CONCLUSIONS

SIPS, a simple biomarker of systemic inflammation, predicts ppOS after first-line pembrolizumab and may be useful alongside routine assessments of patient fitness to inform individualised discussions about subsequent treatment. We highlight poor outcomes in this patient group and a role for SIPS in signposting transition to best supportive care and early referral to palliative care. It may also help identify a small group of patients most likely to benefit from further lines of therapy.

Radiation-Associated Angiosarcoma as a Presentation of Disease Progression in a Patient on Immunotherapy for Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the dominant form of lung cancer, comprising around 85% of cases. Stage 4 NSCLC has a grim prognosis; however, immunotherapy and radiation therapy have become vital treatments for advanced-stage NSCLC, despite the risk of inducing a second primary malignancy. This case report focuses on a 45-year-old female diagnosed with NSCLC and metastasis to the 11th thoracic vertebral body. After various treatments, including radiation, a potential radiation-associated secondary malignancy, epithelial angiosarcoma, was discovered. Following treatment modification, the patient achieved complete metabolic remission, highlighting the importance of clinicians being cautious about secondary primary cancers in NSCLC patients with a history of radiation therapy. Accurate diagnosis through biopsy and continuous surveillance are essential in managing NSCLC patients effectively.

Efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel monotherapy after immune checkpoint inhibitor administration for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A multicenter Phase 2 clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Whether immunotherapy improves the efficacy or worsens adverse events of subsequent chemotherapy remains unclear. We performed a Phase 2 study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) as a treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after treatment with programmed cell death 1 or programmed death ligand 1 [PD-(L)1] inhibitor failure.

METHODS

Nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m² ) was administered on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle to patients with advanced NSCLC within 12 weeks after the failure of PD-(L)1 inhibitor treatment. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) in all patients; the secondary endpoints were disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

Thirty cases were registered, and 29 cases were included in the analysis. The ORR was 55.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 28.1%-79.6%) and the DCR was 86.2% (95% CI: 65.9%-97.0%). The median PFS was 5.6 months (95% CI: 4.4-6.7 months), and PFS rates at 1- and 2-year timepoints were 34.5% and 13.3%, respectively. The median OS was 11.9 months (95% CI: 0.8-23.0 months). Good performance status and responder of previous PD-(L)1 inhibitor therapy were independent predictors of PFS. Grade 3 or higher toxicities included leukopenia (27.6%), neutropenia (31.0%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (6.9%), increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels (3.4%), and interstitial lung disease (3.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Nab-paclitaxel therapy improved ORR after PD-(L)1 inhibitor treatment failure with a durable response of 13% and acceptable toxicities in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Immunotherapy in Advanced NSCLC Without Driver Mutations: Available Therapeutic Alternatives After Progression and Future Treatment Options

The treatment paradigm of non-small-cell lung cancer without oncogenic drivers has varied dramatically in recent years and is constantly evolving. Immune- checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated unprecedented durable efficacy in a subset of these patients, so these drugs have become the standard of care in most cases. There are different ways to deliver these agents, such as monotherapy and combinations of immunotherapy or chemotherapy plus immunotherapy. Treatment selection is complicated by an absence of head-to-head comparisons in randomized trials because these agents have gained approval by demonstrating superiority to platinum-doublet chemotherapy alone. Unfortunately, most patients will progress and die from their disease despite advances. Furthermore, after progression on these agents, there is a lack of randomized controlled data to support further management, constituting an unmet need. This review discusses the therapeutic alternatives after progression, summarizes mechanisms of resistance and progression patterns, and describes the main approaches under clinical investigation in the field.

High-dose irradiation in combination with non-ablative low-dose radiation to treat metastatic disease after progression on immunotherapy: Results of a phase II trial

AIM

To report early findings from a phase II trial of high-dose radiotherapy (HD-RT) with or without low-dose RT (LD-RT) for metastatic cancer.

METHODS

Eligible patients had metastatic disease that progressed on immunotherapy within 6 months. Patients were given either HD-RT (20-70 Gy total; 3-12.5 Gy/f), or HD-RT + LD-RT (0.5-2 Gy/f up to 1-10 Gy total) to separate lesions, with continued immunotherapy. Radiographic response was assessed per RECIST 1.1 and Immune-Related Response Criteria (irRC). Primary endpoints: (1) 4-month disease control (DCR, complete/partial response [CR/PR] or stable disease [SD]) or an overall response (ORR, CR/PR) at any point in ≥10% of patients, per RECIST 1.1; (2) dose-limiting toxicity within 3 months not exceeding 30%. Secondary endpoint was lesion-specific response.

RESULTS

Seventy-four patients (NSCLC, n = 38; melanoma n = 21) were analyzed (39 HD-RT and 35 HD-RT + LD-RT). The median follow-up time was 13.6 months. The primary endpoint was met for 72 evaluable patients, with a 4-month DCR of 42% (47% [16/34] vs. 37% [14/38] in HD-RT + LD-RT vs. HD-RT, P = 0.38), and 19% ORR at any time (26% [9/34] vs. 13% [5/38] in HD-RT + LD-RT vs. HD-RT, P = 0.27). Three patients had toxicity ≥grade 3. LD-RT lesion response (53%) was improved compared to nonirradiated lesions in HD-RT + LD-RT (23%, P = 0.002) and HD-RT (11%, P < 0.001). T- and NK cell infiltration was enhanced in lesions treated with LD-RT.

CONCLUSIONS

HD-RT plus LD-RT safely improved lesion-specific response in patients with immune resistant solid tumors by promoting infiltration of effector immune cells into the tumor microenvironment.

Post-progression outcomes of NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50% receiving first-line single-agent pembrolizumab in a large multicentre real-world study

BACKGROUND

Treatment sequencing with first-line immunotherapy, followed by second-line chemotherapy, is still a viable option for NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%.

METHODS

We evaluated post-progression treatment pathways in a large real-world cohort of metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50% treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy.

RESULTS

Overall, 974 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 22.7 months (95%CI: 21.6-38.2), the median overall survival (OS) of the entire population was 15.8 months (95%CI: 13.5-17.5; 548 events). At the data cutoff, among the 678 patients who experienced disease progression, 379 (55.9%) had not received any further treatment, and 359 patients (52.9%) had died. Patients who did not receive post-progression therapies were older (p = 0.0011), with a worse ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and were on corticosteroids prior to pembrolizumab (p = 0.0024). At disease progression, 198 patients (29.2%) received a switched approach and 101 (14.9%) received pembrolizumab ByPD either alone (64 [9.4%]) or in combination with local ablative treatments (37 [5.5%]) (LATs). After a random-case control matching according to ECOG-PS, CNS metastases, bone metastases, and (previous) best response to pembrolizumab, patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD plus LATs were confirmed to have a significantly longer post-progression OS compared to patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD alone 13.9 months versus 7.8 months (p = 0.0179) 241 patients (35.5%) among the 678 who had experienced PD, received a second-line systemic treatment (regardless of previous treatment beyond PD). As compared to first-line treatment commencement, patients' features at the moment of second-line initiation showed a significantly higher proportion of patients aged under 70 years (p = 0.0244), with a poorer ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and having CNS (p = 0.0001), bone (p = 0.0266) and liver metastases (p = 0.0148).

CONCLUSIONS

In the real-world scenario NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% treated with first-line single-agent pembrolizumab achieve worse outcomes as compared to the Keynote-024 trial. Poor post-progression outcomes are major determinants of the global results that should be considered when counselling patients for first-line treatment choices.

Molecular mechanisms underlining the role of metformin as a therapeutic agent in lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Metformin, a first-line therapeutic for type 2 diabetes, has been studied for its potential use in cancer treatment following a number of epidemiological studies that have demonstrated reduced cancer incidence and mortality rates among patients treated with the drug. As yet, however, there remains significant uncertainty about the molecular mechanisms by which metformin exerts its anti-cancer effects. Herein, we summarize the evidence surrounding the anti-lung cancer effects of metformin.

CONCLUSIONS

Specifically, we explore protein targets of metformin, including AMPK, PP2A, IRF-1/YAP and HGF and we outline the proposed mechanisms of action for metformin in lung cancer, with particular attention given to apoptosis and autophagy. We also closely examine the synergistic activity of metformin with existing cancer treatment regimens, such as TKI's, platinum-based agents and immune therapeutics. In addition to considering preclinical and clinical studies, we also dissect and contextualize the limitations and inconsistencies of the current literature, especially those of epidemiological studies. Finally, we offer a potential trajectory for future research in this rapidly evolving area of basic and clinical oncology.