Clinical factors and major pathological response after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in potentially resectable lung squamous cell carcinoma

Objective

Major pathological response (MPR) helps evaluate the prognosis of patients with lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC). However, the clinical factors that affect the achievement of MPR after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (NCIO) in patients with LUSC remain unclear. This study aimed to explore the clinical factors affecting the MPR after NCIO in patients with potentially resectable LUSC.

Methods

This retrospective study included patients with stage IIB-IIIC LUSC who underwent surgical resection after receiving NCIO at a center between March 2020 and November 2022. In addition to the postoperative pathological remission rate, sex, age, body mass index (BMI), smoking history, TNM stage, hematological and imaging test results, and other indicators were examined before NCIO. According to the pathological response rate of the surgically removed tumor tissue, the patients were split into MPR and non-MPR groups.

Results

In total, 91 LUSC patients who met the study's eligibility criteria were enrolled: 32 (35%) patients in the non-MPR group and 59 (65%) in the MPR group, which included 43 cases of pathological complete remission (pCR). Pre-treatment lymphocyte level (LY) (odds ratio [OR] =5.997), tumor burden (OR=0.958), N classification (OR=15.915), radiographic response (OR=11.590), pulmonary atelectasis (OR=5.413), and PD-L1 expression (OR=1.028) were independently associated with MPR (all P < 0.05). Based on these six independent predictors, we developed a nomogram model of prediction having an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.914 that is simple to apply clinically to predict the MPR. The MPR group showed greater disease-free survival (DFS) than the non-MPR group, according to the survival analysis (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

The MPR rate of NCIO for potentially resectable LUSC was 65%. LY, tumor burden, N classification, radiographic response, pulmonary atelectasis, and PD-L1 expression in patients with LUSC before NCIO were the independent and ideal predictors of MPR. The developed nomogram demonstrated a good degree of accuracy and resilience in predicting the MPR following NCIO, indicating that it is a useful tool for assuring customized therapy for patients with possibly resectable LUSC.

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy protocols and cycles for non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

This study evaluated the use of different neoadjuvant immunotherapy cycles and regimens for non-small cell lung cancer.

Materials and methods

Databases were searched for articles published up until December 2023. Data on the major pathologic response (MPR), complete pathologic response (pCR), radiological response, treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), surgical resection, surgical complications, R0 resection, and conversion to thoracotomy were collected. A subgroup analysis was performed according to the treatment regimens and cycles. Stata/MP software was used for statistical analyses.

Results

In total, 2430 individuals were assessed from 44 studies. Compared with those following neoadjuvant immunotherapy alone (MPR/pCR/TRAEs/SAEs: ES=0.26/0.07/0.43/0.08, 95% CI: 0.18-0.34/0.04-0.10/0.28-0.58/0.04-0.14), the MPR and pCR rates, incidence of TRAEs and SAEs following neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy increased significantly (MPR/pCR/TRAEs/SAEs: ES=0.55/0.34/0.81/0.22, 95% CI: 0.48-0.63/0.28-0.41/0.69-0.90/0.13-0.33, P=0.001/0.002/0.009/0.034). No significant differences were found in the surgical resection, surgical complications, R0 resection, or conversion to thoracotomy. In the chemoimmunotherapy group, no statistically significant differences were found in the MPR and pCR rates, incidence of TRAEs and SAEs in the two-cycle, three-cycle and four-cycle groups (MPR/pCR/TRAEs/SAEs: ES=0.50;0.70;0.36/0.32;0.49;0.18/0.95;0.85;0.95/0.34;0.27;0.37, P=0.255/0.215/0.253/0.848). In the ICIs group, there was little change in the MPR and pCR rates, incidence of TRAEs and SAEs in the two-cycle group compared to the three-cycle group. (MPR/pCR/TRAEs/SAEs: ES=0.28;0.20/0.06;0.08/0.45;0.35/0.10;0.02, P=0.696/0.993/0.436/0.638). The neoadjuvant treatment cycle had no significant effect on surgical resection, surgical complications, R0 resection, or conversion to thoracotomy in both regimens.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy significantly increased the rate of tumor pathological remission compared to neoadjuvant immunotherapy alone but also increased the incidence of TRAEs and SAEs. The efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy are found to be favorable when administered for a duration of three cycles, in comparison to both two and four cycles.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier CRD42023407415.

Real-world relationship of early end points to survival end points in patients with resectable non-small-cell lung cancer

Aim: Pathologic response has been shown to be a promising surrogate for survival in non-small-cell lung cancer. We examined the real-world relationship between these end  points in patients with resectable stage IB-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiotherapy (CT/CRT). Methods: Electronic health records/medical charts were analyzed. Overall and event-free survival (OS/EFS) were assessed by Kaplan-Meier stratified by pathologic response. Associations between the end  points were assessed by Cox analyses. Results: A total of 425 patients were selected for the study; 147 and 278 received CT and CRT, respectively. Pathologic complete response (pCR) was associated with longer OS (adjusted HR = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.29-0.85) and EFS (adjusted HR = 0.44; 95% CI: 0.28-0.68) versus no pCR, and EFS was associated with OS (HR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.38, 0.69). Conclusion: In patients receiving neoadjuvant CT/CRT, pCR and EFS were associated with improved survival in this real-world dataset.

Case Report: Complete pathologic response to neoadjuvant selpercatinib in a patient with resectable early-stage RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer

The LIBRETTO-001 trial demonstrated the activity of the selective rearrangement during transfection (RET) inhibitor selpercatinib in advanced RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and resulted in the drug's approval for this indication. A cohort that included neoadjuvant and adjuvant selpercatinib was opened on LIBRETTO-001 for early-stage RET fusion-positive NSCLC with the primary endpoint of major pathologic response. A patient with a stage IB (cT2aN0M0) KIF5B-RET fusion-positive NSCLC received 8 weeks of neoadjuvant selpercatinib at 160 mg twice daily followed by surgery. While moderate regression in the primary tumor (stable disease, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines version 1.1) was observed radiologically, assessment via an Independent Pathologic Review Committee revealed a pathologic complete response (0% viable tumor). This consensus assessment by three independent pathologists was aided by RET fluorescence in situ hybridization testing of a reactive pneumocyte proliferation showing no rearrangement. Neoadjuvant selpercatinib was well-tolerated with only low-grade treatment-emergent adverse events. The activity of prospective preoperative selpercatinib in this case establishes proof of concept of the potential utility of RET inhibitor therapy in early-stage RET fusion-positive NSCLC.

Efficacy, Safety, and Biomarker Analysis of Neoadjuvant Camrelizumab and Apatinib in Patients with Resectable Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase 2 Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Camrelizumab (an anti-PD-1 antibody) combined with apatinib (an antiangiogenic agent) have conferred benefits for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the activity and safety of neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus apatinib in resectable NSCLC patients.

METHODS

In this phase 2 trial, patients with histologically confirmed resectable stage IIA-IIIB NSCLC (stage IIIB, T3N2 only) received intravenous camrelizumab (200 mg) every 2 weeks for three cycles and oral apatinib (250 mg) once daily for 5 days followed by 2 days off for 6 weeks. Surgery was planned 3-4 weeks after apatinib discontinuation. The primary endpoint was major pathologic response (MPR) rate, assessed in patients who received at least one dose of neoadjuvant treatment and underwent surgery.

RESULTS

Between November 9, 2020 and February 16, 2022, 78 patients were treated and 65 (83%) underwent surgery. All 65 patients achieved an R0 surgical resection. Among 65 patients, 37 (57%, 95% CI 44%-69%) patients had an MPR, of whom 15 (23%, 95% CI 14%-35%) had a pathologic complete response (pCR). Pathologic responses observed in squamous-cell NSCLC were superior to adenocarcinoma (MPR: 64% vs. 25%; pCR: 23% vs. 0%). The radiographic objective response rate was 52% (95% CI 40%-65%). Among all the 78 enrolled patients, 37 (47%, 95% CI 36%-59%) patients had an MPR, of whom 15 (19%, 95% CI 11%-30%) had a pCR. Four (5%) of 78 patients had grade 3 neoadjuvant treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). No grade 4 or 5 TRAEs occurred. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed a significant correlation between the maximum reduction of standard uptake values and pathologic response (R = 0.619, P < 0.0001). Additionally, baseline PD-L1 expression, HOXA9 and SEPT9 methylation levels, and ctDNA status before surgery were associated with pathologic responses.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus apatinib showed promising activity and manageable toxicity in patients with resectable stage IIA-IIIB NSCLC, which might be a potential therapeutic option in neoadjuvant setting.

Tumor regression rate, PD-L1 expression, pembrolizumab/nab-paclitaxel-based regimens, squamous cell carcinoma, and comorbidities were independently associated with efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer

Background

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (NCIO) is more effective than neoadjuvant immunotherapy alone for pathological response in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, but the processes for determining patient suitability for its implementation are not clear. We aimed to identify the most relevant factors and build a convenient model to select NSCLC patients who would benefit most from NCIO.

Methods

 We retrospectively collected the clinical data of patients with locally advanced NSCLC who received NCIO followed by surgery at our institution between January 2019 and July 2022.

Results

A total of 101 eligible stage IIB-IIIC NSCLC patients were included. After NCIO, all patients successfully underwent surgical resection. A total of 46.53% (47/101) of patients achieved pathological complete response (pCR), and 70.30% (71/101) achieved major pathologic response (MPR). Tumor regression rate (adjusted odds ratio OR = 12.33), PD-L1 expression (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 9.66), pembrolizumab/nab-paclitaxel-based regimens (adjusted OR = 4.92), and comorbidities (adjusted OR = 0.16) were independently associated with pCR rate (all P < 0.05). Tumor regression rate (adjusted OR = 8.45), PD-L1 expression (adjusted OR = 5.35), and presence of squamous cell carcinoma (adjusted OR = 7.02) were independently associated with MPR rate (all P < 0.05). We established and validated an easy-to-use clinical model to predict pCR (with an area under the curve [AUC] of 0.848) and MPR (with an AUC of 0.847). Of note, the present study showed that CD4⁺ T-cell count/rate and total cholesterol (TC) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels in the peripheral blood of pre-NCIO patients were also significantly correlated with pathological response in univariate analyses.

Conclusions

The tumor regression rate, PD-L1 expression, pembrolizumab/nab-paclitaxel-based regimens, presence of squamous cell carcinoma, and comorbidities were the main influential factors for incidence of pCR/MPR in patients with stage IIB-IIIC NSCLC in the present study. Through predictive models, we can predict who will benefit most from NCIO prior to the emergence of clinical outcomes in locally advanced NSCLC.

The IASLC grading system for invasive pulmonary adenocarcinoma: a potential prognosticator for patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy

Background

Grading system for resected invasive pulmonary adenocarcinoma proposed by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) was validated as a strong prognostic indicator. Nonetheless, the efficacy of utilizing such grading system in prognostic assessment of patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy still needs elucidating.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted including patients with resected adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy or targeted therapy from August 2012 to December 2020 in Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital. All the surgical specimens were re-evaluated and graded. The prognostic value of the grading system was further validated.

Results

Ultimately, a total of 198 patients were enrolled in this study, and subdivided into three cohorts according to the grading system. There were 13 (6.6%), 37 (18.7%), and 148 (74.7%) patients belonging to Grades 1, 2, and 3, respectively. IASLC grading system demonstrated significant power in prognosis differentiation of the entire cohort [recurrence-free survival (RFS), p < 0.001; overall survival (OS), p < 0.001] and the neoadjuvant chemotherapy and targeted therapy cohorts separately, and was further verified as a significant prognostic indicator for RFS and OS in multivariable Cox analysis. Since the majority of the patients (84.8%) did not achieve major pathologic response (MPR), representing a wide spectrum of survival, the prognostic value of grading system in non-MPR cohort was further evaluated. Similar results were also obtained that IASLC grading system was assessed significant in univariable analysis of RFS (p < 0.001) and univariable analysis of OS (p = 0.001).

Conclusions

The prognostic efficacy of pathological evaluation of the residual proportion of pulmonary adenocarcinoma post-neoadjuvant therapy using IASLC grading system was preliminarily verified. Such grading system might assist prognostic evaluation of neoadjuvant cohort other than traditional pathological parameters.

Short-term outcome of neoadjuvant immunotherapy and chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Previously reported results have shown promising efficacy of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for resectable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, no randomized control trials comparing neoadjuvant immunotherapy with chemotherapy have yet been reported. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the superiority of neoadjuvant immunotherapy compared with standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in resectable NSCLC in terms of short-term clinical outcomes and surgical outcomes.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the ClinicalTrials.gov database, Web of Science, and abstracts derived from multiple major cancer meetings up to March 1, 2020. Short-term clinical outcomes (including objective response rate [ORR], major pathologic response, and pathologic complete response [pCR]) and surgical outcomes (including surgical resection rate and R0 resection rate) were reported. Data were summarized as the estimated pooled value of each evaluated index. The risk of bias of included studies was assessed using standard methods.

Results

This systematic review and meta-analysis of 21 trials on neoadjuvant immunotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for NSCLC included 1795 patients. Patients who received Programmed death ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors (NeoIO) alone (13.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.0%-19.3%) had the lowest ORR compared with those who received NeoIO plus chemotherapy (CT) (62.5%; 95% CI, 54.4%-70.0%) or CT alone (41.6%; 95% CI, 36.8%-46.7%) (NeoIO vs CT, P < .001; NeoIO + CT vs CT, P < .001). Receipt of NeoIO + CT (36.2%; 95% CI, 19.2%-57.6%) was associated with an elevated pCR rate compared with receipt of NeoIO alone (10.6%; 95% CI, 6.5%-16.9%; P < .001) or standard CT (7.5%; 95% CI, 5.7%-9.8%; P < .001). Neoadjuvant CT (87.2%; 95% CI, 74.9%-94.0%) was associated with a lower R0 resection rate compared with NeoIO alone (92.7%; 95% CI, 83.4%-97.0%; P = .360) or NeoIO + CT (91.6%; 95% CI, 84.3%-95.7%; P = .409). Meta-regression showed that a higher proportion of stage III patients was correlated with decreased surgical resection and R0 resection rates, whereas no impact was observed with neoadjuvant immunotherapy.

Conclusions

Current data suggest that compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, immunotherapy-based regimens may provide superior pathological response along with a higher rate of complete resection. Immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy in neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be a more favorable clinical option. Further randomized controlled trials are warranted to provide long-term results of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for localized NSCLC and help guide clinical practice.

Is major pathologic response sufficient to predict survival in resectable nonsmall-cell lung cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy?

Background

Major pathologic response (MPR) is mainly focused on residual viable tumor in the tumor bed regardless of lymph node. Herein, we investigated the predictive value of MPR and node status on survival in nonsmall‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and surgery.

Methods

A total of 194 eligible cases were included. Tumor pathologic response and node status were assessed. Based on these evaluations, patients were divided into the MPR group and the non‐MPR group, the nodal downstaging (ND) group and non‐ND group. Furthermore, patients were assigned into four subgroups (MPR + ND, MPR + non‐ND, non‐MPR + ND, and non‐MPR + non‐ND). Overall survival (OS) and disease‐free survival (DFS) were compared between groups. Multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors.

Results

MPR was identified in 32 patients and ND was present in 108 patients. OS and DFS were better in the MPR group than in the non‐MPR group, but with no statistical significance (OS, p = 0.158; DFS, p = 0.126). The ND group had better OS than the non‐ND group (p = 0.031). However, the DFS between these two groups was comparable (p = 0.103). Further analyses suggested that both OS and DFS were better in the MPR + ND group than in the non‐MPR + non‐ND group (OS, p = 0.017; DFS, p = 0.029). Multivariate analyses confirmed that MPR + ND was an independent favorable predictor.

Conclusions

MPR combined with ND could improve the predictive value on survival in NSCLC patients receiving NAC.