LayerRx Mapping ID
968
Slot System
Featured Buckets
Featured Buckets Admin
Reverse Chronological Sort
Allow Teaser Image
Medscape Lead Concept
5000186

NSCLC: Are immune checkpoint inhibitors effective against brain metastases?

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/01/2022 - 13:29

Key clinical point: A meta-analysis suggests that immune checkpoint inhibitors are not very effective against brain metastases (BM) in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), except in patients with a programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) of 50%.

Major finding: In PD-L1 unselected patients with any BM, the pooled intracranial objective response rate (icORR) was 13% and intracranial disease control rate (icDCR) was 50%. In patients with PD-L1 TPS of 50%, the pooled icORR and icDCR increased to 68% and 82%, respectively.

Study details: The data come from a meta-analysis of 33 cohort studies involving 12,154 patients with NSCLC and 2744 patients with NSCLC and BM.

Disclosures: The study was partially funded by the China National Major Project for New Drug Innovation. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Chen H et al. Brain metastases and immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2022 Jun 1. Doi: 10.1007/s00262-022-03224-2

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: A meta-analysis suggests that immune checkpoint inhibitors are not very effective against brain metastases (BM) in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), except in patients with a programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) of 50%.

Major finding: In PD-L1 unselected patients with any BM, the pooled intracranial objective response rate (icORR) was 13% and intracranial disease control rate (icDCR) was 50%. In patients with PD-L1 TPS of 50%, the pooled icORR and icDCR increased to 68% and 82%, respectively.

Study details: The data come from a meta-analysis of 33 cohort studies involving 12,154 patients with NSCLC and 2744 patients with NSCLC and BM.

Disclosures: The study was partially funded by the China National Major Project for New Drug Innovation. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Chen H et al. Brain metastases and immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2022 Jun 1. Doi: 10.1007/s00262-022-03224-2

Key clinical point: A meta-analysis suggests that immune checkpoint inhibitors are not very effective against brain metastases (BM) in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), except in patients with a programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) of 50%.

Major finding: In PD-L1 unselected patients with any BM, the pooled intracranial objective response rate (icORR) was 13% and intracranial disease control rate (icDCR) was 50%. In patients with PD-L1 TPS of 50%, the pooled icORR and icDCR increased to 68% and 82%, respectively.

Study details: The data come from a meta-analysis of 33 cohort studies involving 12,154 patients with NSCLC and 2744 patients with NSCLC and BM.

Disclosures: The study was partially funded by the China National Major Project for New Drug Innovation. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Chen H et al. Brain metastases and immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2022 Jun 1. Doi: 10.1007/s00262-022-03224-2

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan; Lung Cancer, July 2022
Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Extensive stage SCLC: Adebrelimab plus chemotherapy extends survival

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/01/2022 - 13:29

Key clinical point: Adebrelimab plus chemotherapy improves overall survival (OS) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).

Major finding: The adebrelimab vs. placebo group demonstrated a longer median OS (15.3 vs. 12.8 months; hazard ratio 0.72; one-sided P = .0017). The frequency of treatment-related serious adverse events was 39% in the adebrelimab group vs. 28% in the placebo group.

Study details: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 CAPSTONE-1 trial included patients with ES-SCLC who were randomly assigned to receive the first-line adebrelimab (n = 230) or placebo (n = 232) on day 1 of each cycle plus chemotherapy (carboplatin and etoposide).

Disclosures: The study was funded by Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. C Zhou reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies. B Zhang, W Shi, and X Zhang are employees of Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. The other authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Wang J et al. Adebrelimab or placebo plus carboplatin and etoposide as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CAPSTONE-1): A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(6):739-747 (May 13). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00224-8

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Adebrelimab plus chemotherapy improves overall survival (OS) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).

Major finding: The adebrelimab vs. placebo group demonstrated a longer median OS (15.3 vs. 12.8 months; hazard ratio 0.72; one-sided P = .0017). The frequency of treatment-related serious adverse events was 39% in the adebrelimab group vs. 28% in the placebo group.

Study details: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 CAPSTONE-1 trial included patients with ES-SCLC who were randomly assigned to receive the first-line adebrelimab (n = 230) or placebo (n = 232) on day 1 of each cycle plus chemotherapy (carboplatin and etoposide).

Disclosures: The study was funded by Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. C Zhou reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies. B Zhang, W Shi, and X Zhang are employees of Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. The other authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Wang J et al. Adebrelimab or placebo plus carboplatin and etoposide as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CAPSTONE-1): A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(6):739-747 (May 13). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00224-8

Key clinical point: Adebrelimab plus chemotherapy improves overall survival (OS) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).

Major finding: The adebrelimab vs. placebo group demonstrated a longer median OS (15.3 vs. 12.8 months; hazard ratio 0.72; one-sided P = .0017). The frequency of treatment-related serious adverse events was 39% in the adebrelimab group vs. 28% in the placebo group.

Study details: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 CAPSTONE-1 trial included patients with ES-SCLC who were randomly assigned to receive the first-line adebrelimab (n = 230) or placebo (n = 232) on day 1 of each cycle plus chemotherapy (carboplatin and etoposide).

Disclosures: The study was funded by Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. C Zhou reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies. B Zhang, W Shi, and X Zhang are employees of Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. The other authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Wang J et al. Adebrelimab or placebo plus carboplatin and etoposide as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CAPSTONE-1): A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(6):739-747 (May 13). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00224-8

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan; Lung Cancer, July 2022
Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

ALK+ advanced NSCLC with brain mets: Lorlatinib boosts PFS, reduces CNS progression

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:27

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Advanced NSCLC: Pembrolizumab-treated never-smokers have a shorter survival than ever-smokers

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/01/2022 - 13:29

Key clinical point: Ever-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a significantly longer overall survival (OS) compared with never-smokers.

Major finding: Ever-smokers vs. never-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC had a 31% longer median OS (12.8 vs. 6.5 months; hazard ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.50-0.95) after adjusting for covariates.

Study details: The data come from a real-world retrospective cohort study of 1166 patients with advanced NSCLC (91 never-smokers and 1075 current or former smokers [ever-smokers]) treated with the first-line pembrolizumab in the U.S.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies or research organizations.

Source: Popat S et al. Association between smoking history and overall survival in patients receiving pembrolizumab for first-line treatment of advanced non–small cell lung cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(5):e2214046 (May 25). Doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.14046

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Ever-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a significantly longer overall survival (OS) compared with never-smokers.

Major finding: Ever-smokers vs. never-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC had a 31% longer median OS (12.8 vs. 6.5 months; hazard ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.50-0.95) after adjusting for covariates.

Study details: The data come from a real-world retrospective cohort study of 1166 patients with advanced NSCLC (91 never-smokers and 1075 current or former smokers [ever-smokers]) treated with the first-line pembrolizumab in the U.S.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies or research organizations.

Source: Popat S et al. Association between smoking history and overall survival in patients receiving pembrolizumab for first-line treatment of advanced non–small cell lung cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(5):e2214046 (May 25). Doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.14046

Key clinical point: Ever-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a significantly longer overall survival (OS) compared with never-smokers.

Major finding: Ever-smokers vs. never-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC had a 31% longer median OS (12.8 vs. 6.5 months; hazard ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.50-0.95) after adjusting for covariates.

Study details: The data come from a real-world retrospective cohort study of 1166 patients with advanced NSCLC (91 never-smokers and 1075 current or former smokers [ever-smokers]) treated with the first-line pembrolizumab in the U.S.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies or research organizations.

Source: Popat S et al. Association between smoking history and overall survival in patients receiving pembrolizumab for first-line treatment of advanced non–small cell lung cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(5):e2214046 (May 25). Doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.14046

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan; Lung Cancer, July 2022
Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

ALK+ advanced NSCLC with brain mets: Lorlatinib boosts PFS, reduces CNS progression

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/01/2022 - 13:29

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan; Lung Cancer, July 2022
Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

EGFR-mutated NSCLC: Aumolertinib vs. gefitinib extends PFS

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/01/2022 - 13:29

Key clinical point: Aumolertinib vs. gefitinib as the first-line therapy significantly improves progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation (i.e., exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation).

Major finding: The aumolertinib vs. gefitinib group had a significantly longer median PFS (19.3 vs. 9.9 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.46; P < .0001). The PFS advantage of aumolertinib over gefitinib was substantial in the subgroup of patients with central nervous system metastases (15.3 vs. 8.2 months; HR 0.38; P < .0001).

Study details: This randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase 3 AENEAS trial included 429 patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC who were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either the first-line aumolertinib or gefitinib once daily orally.

Disclosures: The study was funded by Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co, Ltd. Many authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including Hansoh Pharma.

Source: Lu S et al. AENEAS: A randomized phase III trial of aumolertinib versus gefitinib as first-line therapy for locally advanced or metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer with EGFR exon 19 deletion or L858R mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 17). Doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.02641

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Aumolertinib vs. gefitinib as the first-line therapy significantly improves progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation (i.e., exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation).

Major finding: The aumolertinib vs. gefitinib group had a significantly longer median PFS (19.3 vs. 9.9 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.46; P < .0001). The PFS advantage of aumolertinib over gefitinib was substantial in the subgroup of patients with central nervous system metastases (15.3 vs. 8.2 months; HR 0.38; P < .0001).

Study details: This randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase 3 AENEAS trial included 429 patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC who were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either the first-line aumolertinib or gefitinib once daily orally.

Disclosures: The study was funded by Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co, Ltd. Many authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including Hansoh Pharma.

Source: Lu S et al. AENEAS: A randomized phase III trial of aumolertinib versus gefitinib as first-line therapy for locally advanced or metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer with EGFR exon 19 deletion or L858R mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 17). Doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.02641

Key clinical point: Aumolertinib vs. gefitinib as the first-line therapy significantly improves progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation (i.e., exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation).

Major finding: The aumolertinib vs. gefitinib group had a significantly longer median PFS (19.3 vs. 9.9 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.46; P < .0001). The PFS advantage of aumolertinib over gefitinib was substantial in the subgroup of patients with central nervous system metastases (15.3 vs. 8.2 months; HR 0.38; P < .0001).

Study details: This randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase 3 AENEAS trial included 429 patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC who were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either the first-line aumolertinib or gefitinib once daily orally.

Disclosures: The study was funded by Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co, Ltd. Many authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including Hansoh Pharma.

Source: Lu S et al. AENEAS: A randomized phase III trial of aumolertinib versus gefitinib as first-line therapy for locally advanced or metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer with EGFR exon 19 deletion or L858R mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 17). Doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.02641

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan; Lung Cancer, July 2022
Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Recurrent or metastatic NSCLC: Tiragolumab plus atezolizumab combo shows promise

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/01/2022 - 13:29

Key clinical point: First-line tiragolumab plus atezolizumab vs. placebo plus atezolizumab is associated with a better objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive, recurrent, or metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: The tiragolumab vs. placebo group demonstrated a superior ORR (31.3% vs. 16.2%; P = .031) and median PFS (5.4 vs. 3.6 months; stratified hazard ratio 0.57; P = .015). The rates of serious treatment-related adverse events in the tiragolumab and placebo groups were 21% and 18%, respectively.

Study details: This phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled CITYSCAPE trial included chemotherapy-naive patients with PD-L1-positive recurrent or metastatic NSCLC (with no EGFR or ALK alterations) who were randomly assigned to receive either tiragolumab plus atezolizumab (n = 67) or placebo plus atezolizumab (n = 68) once every 3 weeks.

Disclosures: The study was funded by F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech. M Cobo, N Secen, and X Yang declared no competing interests. The other authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including employment or stock options in the funding companies.

Source: Cho BC et al. Tiragolumab plus atezolizumab versus placebo plus atezolizumab as a first-line treatment for PD-L1-selected non-small-cell lung cancer (CITYSCAPE): Primary and follow-up analyses of a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(6):781-792 (May 13). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00226-1

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: First-line tiragolumab plus atezolizumab vs. placebo plus atezolizumab is associated with a better objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive, recurrent, or metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: The tiragolumab vs. placebo group demonstrated a superior ORR (31.3% vs. 16.2%; P = .031) and median PFS (5.4 vs. 3.6 months; stratified hazard ratio 0.57; P = .015). The rates of serious treatment-related adverse events in the tiragolumab and placebo groups were 21% and 18%, respectively.

Study details: This phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled CITYSCAPE trial included chemotherapy-naive patients with PD-L1-positive recurrent or metastatic NSCLC (with no EGFR or ALK alterations) who were randomly assigned to receive either tiragolumab plus atezolizumab (n = 67) or placebo plus atezolizumab (n = 68) once every 3 weeks.

Disclosures: The study was funded by F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech. M Cobo, N Secen, and X Yang declared no competing interests. The other authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including employment or stock options in the funding companies.

Source: Cho BC et al. Tiragolumab plus atezolizumab versus placebo plus atezolizumab as a first-line treatment for PD-L1-selected non-small-cell lung cancer (CITYSCAPE): Primary and follow-up analyses of a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(6):781-792 (May 13). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00226-1

Key clinical point: First-line tiragolumab plus atezolizumab vs. placebo plus atezolizumab is associated with a better objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive, recurrent, or metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: The tiragolumab vs. placebo group demonstrated a superior ORR (31.3% vs. 16.2%; P = .031) and median PFS (5.4 vs. 3.6 months; stratified hazard ratio 0.57; P = .015). The rates of serious treatment-related adverse events in the tiragolumab and placebo groups were 21% and 18%, respectively.

Study details: This phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled CITYSCAPE trial included chemotherapy-naive patients with PD-L1-positive recurrent or metastatic NSCLC (with no EGFR or ALK alterations) who were randomly assigned to receive either tiragolumab plus atezolizumab (n = 67) or placebo plus atezolizumab (n = 68) once every 3 weeks.

Disclosures: The study was funded by F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech. M Cobo, N Secen, and X Yang declared no competing interests. The other authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including employment or stock options in the funding companies.

Source: Cho BC et al. Tiragolumab plus atezolizumab versus placebo plus atezolizumab as a first-line treatment for PD-L1-selected non-small-cell lung cancer (CITYSCAPE): Primary and follow-up analyses of a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(6):781-792 (May 13). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00226-1

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan; Lung Cancer, July 2022
Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Severity of diabetes tied to lung cancer prognosis

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/01/2022 - 13:29

Key clinical point: Patients with squamous cell lung carcinoma (SqCLC) and moderate-to-severe diabetes may have a higher risk for all-cause mortality than those with SqCLC and mild diabetes.

Major finding: Patients with SqCLC and moderate to severe diabetes had a 17% higher risk for all-cause death than those with SqCLC and mild diabetes (adjusted hazard ratio 1.17; P = .0005).

Study details: The data come from a retrospective cohort study including patients with both SqCLC and diabetes (n = 5742) from the Taiwan Cancer Registry database.

Disclosures: The study was funded by grants from Lo-Hsu Medical Foundation, LotungPoh-Ai Hospital, and Fu Jen Catholic University. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Su C-H et al. Association of diabetes severity and mortality with lung squamous cell carcinoma. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(10):2553 (May 22). Doi: 10.3390/cancers14102553

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Patients with squamous cell lung carcinoma (SqCLC) and moderate-to-severe diabetes may have a higher risk for all-cause mortality than those with SqCLC and mild diabetes.

Major finding: Patients with SqCLC and moderate to severe diabetes had a 17% higher risk for all-cause death than those with SqCLC and mild diabetes (adjusted hazard ratio 1.17; P = .0005).

Study details: The data come from a retrospective cohort study including patients with both SqCLC and diabetes (n = 5742) from the Taiwan Cancer Registry database.

Disclosures: The study was funded by grants from Lo-Hsu Medical Foundation, LotungPoh-Ai Hospital, and Fu Jen Catholic University. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Su C-H et al. Association of diabetes severity and mortality with lung squamous cell carcinoma. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(10):2553 (May 22). Doi: 10.3390/cancers14102553

Key clinical point: Patients with squamous cell lung carcinoma (SqCLC) and moderate-to-severe diabetes may have a higher risk for all-cause mortality than those with SqCLC and mild diabetes.

Major finding: Patients with SqCLC and moderate to severe diabetes had a 17% higher risk for all-cause death than those with SqCLC and mild diabetes (adjusted hazard ratio 1.17; P = .0005).

Study details: The data come from a retrospective cohort study including patients with both SqCLC and diabetes (n = 5742) from the Taiwan Cancer Registry database.

Disclosures: The study was funded by grants from Lo-Hsu Medical Foundation, LotungPoh-Ai Hospital, and Fu Jen Catholic University. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Su C-H et al. Association of diabetes severity and mortality with lung squamous cell carcinoma. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(10):2553 (May 22). Doi: 10.3390/cancers14102553

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan; Lung Cancer, July 2022
Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 06/22/2022 - 12:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

NSCLC Treatment Basics

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 03/29/2023 - 14:43

Publications
Topics
Sections

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Mon, 06/13/2022 - 14:30
Un-Gate On Date
Mon, 06/13/2022 - 14:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Mon, 06/13/2022 - 14:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Promising treatment option for incurable lung cancer described as ‘significant’

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 06/13/2022 - 14:52

 

The combination of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with immunotherapy led to significant improvements in survival for patients with resectable stage IIIA-B non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), according to researchers reporting earlier this month in Chicago at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Advanced stage IIIA NSCLC is incurable in most patients with lung cancer, and with existing treatments only 30% of patients will live up to 5 years. In this study, neoadjuvant chemotherapy with nivolumab significantly increased the pathological complete response rate in 36.2% of patients, compared with 6.8% who received chemo alone, said study author Mariano Provencio-Pulla, MD, PhD, Instituto Investigacion Sanitaria Puerta de Hierro-Segovia de Arana, Spain. The major pathologic response (MPR) – which accounts for residual viable tumor of less than or equal to 10 – was better in the treatment group as compared with patients who received chemotherapy alone (52% vs 14%). The objective response rate (ORR) – or, the percentage of patients who had a partial or complete response to treatment – was 74% in the treatment group, compared with 48% among patients who received chemotherapy.

“In our opinion this should be the standard of care for patients,” Dr. Provencio-Pulla said during his presentation.

The ASCO treatment guidelines for stage III NSCLC, specify that some patients can receive immunotherapy for up to a year, but for resectable stage III disease, this therapy is still under investigation.

In this study, called NADIM II (NCT03838159), investigators enrolled 87 patients with resectable clinical stage IIIA disease between February 2019 and November 2021. NADIM II is an open-label, randomized, two-arm, phase 2, multicenter clinical trial. Patients had ECOG scores of 0-1 and no known EGFR/ALK alterations. Patients received either nivolumab 360 mg with paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC5 for three cycles every 21 days as treatment before or after surgery. Patients who received a resection that left no microscopic tumor in the primary tumor bed, received adjuvant nivolumab between weeks 3 and 8 after surgery for 6 months.

At 91%, almost all patients who received the immunotherapy and chemotherapy treatment underwent surgery, compared with 69% of patients in the chemotherapy treatment group. In the treatment group, patients with pathological complete response (pCR) had higher PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) scores (median 70%).

The primary endpoint was pathological complete response of 0% viable tumor cells in resected lung and lymph nodes. The major pathological response was no more than 10% viable tumor remaining. The secondary endpoints included overall response rate, toxicity profile, and potential predictive biomarkers.

The addition of neoadjuvant nivolumab to chemotherapy significantly improved pCR (odds ratio, 7.88). The safety profile was “tolerable” with a moderate increase in grade 3-4 toxicity; plus no surgery was delayed because of problems with the treatment, Dr. Provencio-Pulla said.

This study was funded by Fundación GECP. Dr. Provencio-Pulla has received funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb, the maker of Opdivo (nivolumab).

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

The combination of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with immunotherapy led to significant improvements in survival for patients with resectable stage IIIA-B non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), according to researchers reporting earlier this month in Chicago at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Advanced stage IIIA NSCLC is incurable in most patients with lung cancer, and with existing treatments only 30% of patients will live up to 5 years. In this study, neoadjuvant chemotherapy with nivolumab significantly increased the pathological complete response rate in 36.2% of patients, compared with 6.8% who received chemo alone, said study author Mariano Provencio-Pulla, MD, PhD, Instituto Investigacion Sanitaria Puerta de Hierro-Segovia de Arana, Spain. The major pathologic response (MPR) – which accounts for residual viable tumor of less than or equal to 10 – was better in the treatment group as compared with patients who received chemotherapy alone (52% vs 14%). The objective response rate (ORR) – or, the percentage of patients who had a partial or complete response to treatment – was 74% in the treatment group, compared with 48% among patients who received chemotherapy.

“In our opinion this should be the standard of care for patients,” Dr. Provencio-Pulla said during his presentation.

The ASCO treatment guidelines for stage III NSCLC, specify that some patients can receive immunotherapy for up to a year, but for resectable stage III disease, this therapy is still under investigation.

In this study, called NADIM II (NCT03838159), investigators enrolled 87 patients with resectable clinical stage IIIA disease between February 2019 and November 2021. NADIM II is an open-label, randomized, two-arm, phase 2, multicenter clinical trial. Patients had ECOG scores of 0-1 and no known EGFR/ALK alterations. Patients received either nivolumab 360 mg with paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC5 for three cycles every 21 days as treatment before or after surgery. Patients who received a resection that left no microscopic tumor in the primary tumor bed, received adjuvant nivolumab between weeks 3 and 8 after surgery for 6 months.

At 91%, almost all patients who received the immunotherapy and chemotherapy treatment underwent surgery, compared with 69% of patients in the chemotherapy treatment group. In the treatment group, patients with pathological complete response (pCR) had higher PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) scores (median 70%).

The primary endpoint was pathological complete response of 0% viable tumor cells in resected lung and lymph nodes. The major pathological response was no more than 10% viable tumor remaining. The secondary endpoints included overall response rate, toxicity profile, and potential predictive biomarkers.

The addition of neoadjuvant nivolumab to chemotherapy significantly improved pCR (odds ratio, 7.88). The safety profile was “tolerable” with a moderate increase in grade 3-4 toxicity; plus no surgery was delayed because of problems with the treatment, Dr. Provencio-Pulla said.

This study was funded by Fundación GECP. Dr. Provencio-Pulla has received funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb, the maker of Opdivo (nivolumab).

 

The combination of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with immunotherapy led to significant improvements in survival for patients with resectable stage IIIA-B non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), according to researchers reporting earlier this month in Chicago at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Advanced stage IIIA NSCLC is incurable in most patients with lung cancer, and with existing treatments only 30% of patients will live up to 5 years. In this study, neoadjuvant chemotherapy with nivolumab significantly increased the pathological complete response rate in 36.2% of patients, compared with 6.8% who received chemo alone, said study author Mariano Provencio-Pulla, MD, PhD, Instituto Investigacion Sanitaria Puerta de Hierro-Segovia de Arana, Spain. The major pathologic response (MPR) – which accounts for residual viable tumor of less than or equal to 10 – was better in the treatment group as compared with patients who received chemotherapy alone (52% vs 14%). The objective response rate (ORR) – or, the percentage of patients who had a partial or complete response to treatment – was 74% in the treatment group, compared with 48% among patients who received chemotherapy.

“In our opinion this should be the standard of care for patients,” Dr. Provencio-Pulla said during his presentation.

The ASCO treatment guidelines for stage III NSCLC, specify that some patients can receive immunotherapy for up to a year, but for resectable stage III disease, this therapy is still under investigation.

In this study, called NADIM II (NCT03838159), investigators enrolled 87 patients with resectable clinical stage IIIA disease between February 2019 and November 2021. NADIM II is an open-label, randomized, two-arm, phase 2, multicenter clinical trial. Patients had ECOG scores of 0-1 and no known EGFR/ALK alterations. Patients received either nivolumab 360 mg with paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC5 for three cycles every 21 days as treatment before or after surgery. Patients who received a resection that left no microscopic tumor in the primary tumor bed, received adjuvant nivolumab between weeks 3 and 8 after surgery for 6 months.

At 91%, almost all patients who received the immunotherapy and chemotherapy treatment underwent surgery, compared with 69% of patients in the chemotherapy treatment group. In the treatment group, patients with pathological complete response (pCR) had higher PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) scores (median 70%).

The primary endpoint was pathological complete response of 0% viable tumor cells in resected lung and lymph nodes. The major pathological response was no more than 10% viable tumor remaining. The secondary endpoints included overall response rate, toxicity profile, and potential predictive biomarkers.

The addition of neoadjuvant nivolumab to chemotherapy significantly improved pCR (odds ratio, 7.88). The safety profile was “tolerable” with a moderate increase in grade 3-4 toxicity; plus no surgery was delayed because of problems with the treatment, Dr. Provencio-Pulla said.

This study was funded by Fundación GECP. Dr. Provencio-Pulla has received funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb, the maker of Opdivo (nivolumab).

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM ASCO 2022

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article