Florida Hospital Cancer Institute

BACKGROUND: Most patients with locally advanced, unresectable, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have disease progression despite definitive chemoradiotherapy (chemotherapy plus concurrent radiation therapy). This phase 3 study compared the anti-programmed death ligand 1 antibody durvalumab as consolidation therapy with placebo in patients with stage III NSCLC who did not have disease progression after two or more cycles of platinum-based chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive durvalumab (at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight intravenously) or placebo every 2 weeks for up to 12 months. The study drug was administered 1 to 42 days after the patients had received chemoradiotherapy. The coprimary end points were progression-free survival (as assessed by means of blinded independent central review) and overall survival (unplanned for the interim analysis). Secondary end points included 12-month and 18-month progression-free survival rates, the objective response rate, the duration of response, the time to death or distant metastasis, and safety. RESULTS: Of 713 patients who underwent randomization, 709 received consolidation therapy (473 received durvalumab and 236 received placebo). The median progression-free survival from randomization was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.0 to 18.1) with durvalumab versus 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.6 to 7.8) with placebo (stratified hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.65; P<0.001); the 12-month progression-free survival rate was 55.9% versus 35.3%, and the 18-month progression-free survival rate was 44.2% versus 27.0%. The response rate was higher with durvalumab than with placebo (28.4% vs. 16.0%; P<0.001), and the median duration of response was longer (72.8% vs. 46.8% of the patients had an ongoing response at 18 months). The median time to death or distant metastasis was longer with durvalumab than with placebo (23.2 months vs. 14.6 months; P<0.001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 29.9% of the patients who received durvalumab and 26.1% of those who received placebo; the most common adverse event of grade 3 or 4 was pneumonia (4.4% and 3.8%, respectively). A total of 15.4% of patients in the durvalumab group and 9.8% of those in the placebo group discontinued the study drug because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Progression-free survival was significantly longer with durvalumab than with placebo. The secondary end points also favored durvalumab, and safety was similar between the groups. (Funded by AstraZeneca; PACIFIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02125461 .).

BACKGROUND: The cancer-cell-killing property of atezolizumab may be enhanced by the blockade of vascular endothelial growth factor-mediated immunosuppression with bevacizumab. This open-label, phase 3 study evaluated atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had not previously received chemotherapy. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients to receive atezolizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (ACP), bevacizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (BCP), or atezolizumab plus BCP (ABCP) every 3 weeks for four or six cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with atezolizumab, bevacizumab, or both. The two primary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival both among patients in the intention-to-treat population who had a wild-type genotype (WT population; patients with EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were excluded) and among patients in the WT population who had high expression of an effector T-cell (Teff) gene signature in the tumor (Teff-high WT population) and overall survival in the WT population. The ABCP group was compared with the BCP group before the ACP group was compared with the BCP group. RESULTS: In the WT population, 356 patients were assigned to the ABCP group, and 336 to the BCP group. The median progression-free survival was longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group (8.3 months vs. 6.8 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.74; P<0.001); the corresponding values in the Teff-high WT population were 11.3 months and 6.8 months (hazard ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.68]; P<0.001). Progression-free survival was also longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group in the entire intention-to-treat population (including those with EGFR or ALK genetic alterations) and among patients with low or negative programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, those with low Teff gene-signature expression, and those with liver metastases. Median overall survival among the patients in the WT population was longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group (19.2 months vs. 14.7 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.96; P=0.02). The safety profile of ABCP was consistent with previously reported safety risks of the individual medicines. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of atezolizumab to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival among patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression and EGFR or ALK genetic alteration status. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; IMpower150 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02366143 .).

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of the ALK inhibitor crizotinib as compared with standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, phase 3 trial comparing crizotinib with chemotherapy in 343 patients with advanced ALK-positive nonsquamous NSCLC who had received no previous systemic treatment for advanced disease. Patients were randomly assigned to receive oral crizotinib at a dose of 250 mg twice daily or to receive intravenous chemotherapy (pemetrexed, 500 mg per square meter of body-surface area, plus either cisplatin, 75 mg per square meter, or carboplatin, target area under the curve of 5 to 6 mg per milliliter per minute) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. Crossover to crizotinib treatment after disease progression was permitted for patients receiving chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by independent radiologic review. RESULTS: Progression-free survival was significantly longer with crizotinib than with chemotherapy (median, 10.9 months vs. 7.0 months; hazard ratio for progression or death with crizotinib, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.60; P<0.001). Objective response rates were 74% and 45%, respectively (P<0.001). Median overall survival was not reached in either group (hazard ratio for death with crizotinib, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54 to 1.26; P=0.36); the probability of 1-year survival was 84% with crizotinib and 79% with chemotherapy. The most common adverse events with crizotinib were vision disorders, diarrhea, nausea, and edema, and the most common events with chemotherapy were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, and decreased appetite. As compared with chemotherapy, crizotinib was associated with greater reduction in lung cancer symptoms and greater improvement in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Crizotinib was superior to standard first-line pemetrexed-plus-platinum chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. (Funded by Pfizer; PROFILE 1014 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01154140.).

BACKGROUND: An earlier analysis in this phase 3 trial showed that durvalumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival, as compared with placebo, among patients with stage III, unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who did not have disease progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Here we report the results for the second primary end point of overall survival. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive durvalumab intravenously, at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight, or matching placebo every 2 weeks for up to 12 months. Randomization occurred 1 to 42 days after the patients had received chemoradiotherapy and was stratified according to age, sex, and smoking history. The primary end points were progression-free survival (as assessed by blinded independent central review) and overall survival. Secondary end points included the time to death or distant metastasis, the time to second progression, and safety. RESULTS: Of the 713 patients who underwent randomization, 709 received the assigned intervention (473 patients received durvalumab and 236 received placebo). As of March 22, 2018, the median follow-up was 25.2 months. The 24-month overall survival rate was 66.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61.7 to 70.4) in the durvalumab group, as compared with 55.6% (95% CI, 48.9 to 61.8) in the placebo group (two-sided P=0.005). Durvalumab significantly prolonged overall survival, as compared with placebo (stratified hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 99.73% CI, 0.47 to 0.997; P=0.0025). Updated analyses regarding progression-free survival were similar to those previously reported, with a median duration of 17.2 months in the durvalumab group and 5.6 months in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.63). The median time to death or distant metastasis was 28.3 months in the durvalumab group and 16.2 months in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.68). A total of 30.5% of the patients in the durvalumab group and 26.1% of those in the placebo group had grade 3 or 4 adverse events of any cause; 15.4% and 9.8% of the patients, respectively, discontinued the trial regimen because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Durvalumab therapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than placebo. No new safety signals were identified. (Funded by AstraZeneca; PACIFIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02125461 .).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of three oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine regimens, with or without bevacizumab, as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically documented metastatic or recurrent CRC and no prior treatment for advanced disease were randomly assigned to mFOLFOX6 (bolus and infusion fluorouracil [FU] and leucovorin [LV] with oxaliplatin), bFOL (bolus FU and low-dose LV with oxaliplatin), or CapeOx (capecitabine with oxaliplatin), respectively (Three Regimens of Eloxatin Evaluation [TREE-1]). The study was later modified such that subsequent patients were randomized to the same regimens plus bevacizumab (TREE-2). RESULTS: A total of 150 and 223 patients were randomly assigned in the TREE-1 and TREE-2 cohorts, respectively. Incidence of grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events during the first 12 weeks of treatment were 59%, 36%, and 67% for mFOLFOX6, bFOL, and CapeOx, respectively, (TREE-1) and 59%, 51%, and 56% for the corresponding treatments plus bevacizumab (TREE-2; primary end point). CapeOx toxicity in TREE-1 included grade 3/4 diarrhea (31%) and dehydration (27%); capecitabine dose reduction to 1,700 mg/m(2)/d in TREE-2 resulted in improved tolerance. Overall response rates were 41%, 20%, and 27% (TREE-1) and 52%, 39%, and 46% (TREE-2); median overall survival (OS) was 19.2, 17.9, and 17.2 months (TREE-1) and 26.1, 20.4, and 24.6 months (TREE-2). For all treated patients, median OS was 18.2 months (95% CI, 14.5 to 21.6; TREE-1) and 23.7 months (95% CI, 21.3 to 26.8; TREE-2). CONCLUSION: The addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine regimens is well tolerated as first-line treatment of mCRC and does not markedly change overall toxicity. CapeOx tolerability and efficacy is improved with reduced-dose capecitabine. First-line oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine-based therapy plus bevacizumab resulted in a median OS of approximately 2 years.

INTRODUCTION: Cytotoxic agents have immunomodulatory effects, providing a rationale for combining atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [anti-PD-L1]) with chemotherapy. The randomized phase III IMpower131 study (NCT02367794) evaluated atezolizumab with platinum-based chemotherapy in stage IV squamous NSCLC. METHODS: A total of 1021 patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive atezolizumab+carboplatin+paclitaxel (A+CP) (n = 338), atezolizumab+carboplatin+nab-paclitaxel (A+CnP) (n = 343), or carboplatin+nab-paclitaxel (CnP) (n = 340) for four or six 21-day cycles; patients randomized to the A+CP or A+CnP arms received atezolizumab maintenance therapy until progressive disease or loss of clinical benefit. The coprimary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. The secondary end points included PFS and OS in PD-L1 subgroups and safety. The primary PFS (January 22, 2018) and final OS (October 3, 2018) for A+CnP versus CnP are reported. RESULTS: PFS improvement with A+CnP versus CnP was seen in the ITT population (median, 6.3 versus 5.6 mo; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-0.85; p = 0.0001). Median OS in the ITT population was 14.2 and 13.5 months in the A+CnP and CnP arms (HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.73-1.05; p = 0.16), not reaching statistical significance. OS improvement with A+CnP versus CnP was observed in the PD-L1-high subgroup (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29-0.81), despite not being formally tested. Treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events and serious adverse events occurred in 68.0% and 47.9% (A+CnP) and 57.5% and 28.7% (CnP) of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adding atezolizumab to platinum-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in patients with first-line squamous NSCLC; OS was similar between the arms.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma frequently develop resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy, at which time treatment options become limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor niraparib combined with pembrolizumab in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The TOPACIO/KEYNOTE-162 (Niraparib in Combination With Pembrolizumab in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer or Ovarian Cancer) trial, an open-label, single-arm phases 1 and 2 study enrolled women with advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) or recurrent ovarian carcinoma, irrespective of BRCA mutation status. Median follow-up was 12.4 months (range, 1.2 to ≥23.0 months). Data were collected from April 15, 2016, through September 4, 2018, with September 4, 2018, as a data cutoff, and analyzed from September 4, 2018, through January 30, 2019. INTERVENTIONS: The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was 200 mg of oral niraparib once daily and 200 mg of intravenous pembrolizumab on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary objectives of phase 1 were to evaluate dose-limiting toxic effects and establish the RP2D and dosing schedule. The primary objective of phase 2 was to assess objective response rate (ORR; complete plus partial responses). Results from the phase 1 ovarian carcinoma and TNBC cohorts and phase 2 ovarian carcinoma cohort are reported. Because of the similarity in the phase 1 and 2 ovarian carcinoma populations, the data were pooled to perform an integrated efficacy analysis. RESULTS: Fourteen patients (9 with ovarian carcinoma and 5 with TNBC) in phase 1 and 53 patients with ovarian carcinoma in phase 2 were enrolled, for a pooled ovarian carcinoma cohort of 62 patients (median age, 60 years [range, 46-83 years]). In the integrated efficacy phases 1 and 2 ovarian carcinoma population (60 of 62 evaluable patients), ORR was 18% (90% CI, 11%-29%), with a disease control rate of 65% (90% CI, 54%-75%), including 3 (5%) with confirmed complete responses, 8 (13%) with confirmed partial responses, 28 (47%) with stable disease, and 20 (33%) with progressive disease. The ORRs were consistent across subgroups based on platinum-based chemotherapy sensitivity, previous bevacizumab treatment, or tumor BRCA or homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) biomarker status. Median duration of response was not reached (range, 4.2 to ≥14.5 months). At data cutoff, 2 patients with a response and 1 patient with stable disease continued to receive treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Niraparib in combination with pembrolizumab is tolerable, with promising antitumor activity for patients with ovarian carcinoma who have limited treatment options regardless of platinum status, biomarker status, or prior treatment with bevacizumab. Responses in patients without tumor BRCA mutations or non-HRD cancers were higher than expected with either agent as monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02657889.

INTRODUCTION: We report the final overall survival (OS) analyses of atezolizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (ACP [experimental arm]) and OS data with approximately 39.8 months of median follow-up with atezolizumab-bevacizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (ABCP) versus bevacizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (BCP) in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC in the phase 3 IMpower150 study (NCT02366143). METHODS: In this randomized, open-label study (N = 1202), coprimary end points included investigator-assessed progression-free survival and OS in intention-to-treat (ITT) wild-type (WT; no EGFR or ALK alterations) patients. Secondary and exploratory end points included OS in ITT and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) subgroups defined by the VENTANA SP142 and SP263 immunohistochemistry assays. RESULTS: At the final analysis with ACP versus BCP (data cutoff: September 13, 2019; minimum follow-up: 32.4 mo), ACP had numerical, but not statistically significant, improvements in OS (ITT-WT: median OS = 19.0 versus 14.7 mo; hazard ratio = 0.84; 95% confidence interval: 0.71-1.00). OS benefit was sustained with ABCP versus BCP (ITT-WT: 19.5 versus 14.7 mo; hazard ratio = 0.80; 95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.95). Exploratory analyses in the SP142-defined PD-L1 subgroups revealed longer median OS with ABCP and ACP versus BCP in PD-L1-high and PD-L1-positive subgroups; in the PD-L1-negative subgroups, median OS was similar with ACP and ABCP versus BCP. Safety was consistent with that in earlier analyses (data cutoff: January 22, 2018). CONCLUSIONS: At the final IMpower150 OS analysis, ACP had numerical, but not statistically significant, OS improvement versus BCP. Updated data with an additional 20 months of follow-up revealed continued OS improvement with ABCP versus BCP in all patients.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is important for treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). Limited animal and human studies suggest a correlation between electrode-tissue contact and radiofrequency lesion generation. OBJECTIVES: The study sought to assess the safety and effectiveness of an irrigated, contact force (CF)-sensing catheter in the treatment of drug refractory symptomatic PAF. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter, nonrandomized study was conducted. Enrollment criteria included: ≥3 symptomatic episodes of PAF within 6 months of enrollment and failure of ≥1 antiarrhythmic drug (Class I to IV). Ablation included pulmonary vein isolation with confirmed entrance block as procedural endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 172 patients were enrolled at 21 sites, where 161 patients had a study catheter inserted and 160 patients underwent radiofrequency application. Procedural-related serious adverse events occurring within 7 days of the procedure included tamponade (n = 4), pericarditis (n = 3), heart block (n = 1, prior to radiofrequency application), and vascular access complications (n = 4). By Kaplan-Meier analyses, 12-month freedom from atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia recurrence was 72.5%. The average CF per procedure was 17.9 ± 9.4 g. When the CF employed was between investigator selected working ranges ≥80% of the time during therapy, outcomes were 4.25 times more likely to be successful (p = 0.0054; 95% confidence interval: 1.53 to 11.79). CONCLUSIONS: The SMART-AF trial demonstrated that this irrigated CF-sensing catheter is safe and effective for the treatment of drug refractory symptomatic PAF, with no unanticipated device-related adverse events. The increased percent of time within investigator-targeted CF ranges correlates with increased freedom from arrhythmia recurrence. Stable CF during radiofrequency application increases the likelihood of 12-month success. (THERMOCOOL® SMARTTOUCH® Catheter for Treatment of Symptomatic Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation; NCT01385202).

INTRODUCTION: We report the final results of the phase 3 IMpower132 study evaluating atezolizumab plus carboplatin or cisplatin plus pemetrexed (APP) in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were randomized in a one-to-one ratio to receive four or six cycles of carboplatin or cisplatin plus pemetrexed (PP) or APP every 3 weeks, followed by maintenance therapy with atezolizumab plus pemetrexed or pemetrexed alone. Co-primary end points were overall survival (OS) and investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 578 patients (APP, n = 292; PP, n = 286). At the primary PFS analysis (May 22, 2018; median follow-up, 14.8 mo), APP exhibited significant PFS improvement versus PP (median = 7.6 versus 5.2 mo, stratified hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-0.72, p < 0.0001). OS for the APP group was numerically better but not statistically significant at the interim (May 22, 2018; median = 18.1 versus 13.6 mo, stratified HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.64-1.03, p = 0.0797) and final analyses (July 18, 2019; median = 17.5 versus 13.6 mo; stratified HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.71-1.06, p = 0.1546). The OS and PFS results favored APP versus PP across subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 54.6% (APP) and 40.1% (PP) of patients; grade 5 treatment-related events occurred in 3.8% and 2.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: IMpower132 met its co-primary PFS end point but not its co-primary OS end point, with numerical improvement for OS in the APP arm. APP had a manageable safety profile, with no new or unexpected safety signals identified.

Of all the gynecologic tumors, ovarian cancer (OC) is known to be the deadliest. Advanced-stages of OC are linked with high morbidity and low survival rates despite the immense amount of research in the field. Shortage of promising screening tools for early-stage detection is one of the major challenges linked with the poor survival rate for patients with OC. In OC, therapeutic management is used with multidisciplinary approaches that includes debulking surgery, chemotherapy, and (rarely) radiotherapy. Recently, there is an increasing interest in using immunomodulation for treating OC. Relapse rates are high in this malignancy and averages around every 2-years. Further treatments after the relapse are more intense, increasing the toxicity, resistance to chemotherapy drugs, and financial burden to patients with poor quality-of-life. A procedure that has been studied to help reduce the morbidity rate involves pre-sensitizing cancer cells with standard therapy in order to produce optimal results with minimum dosage. Utilizing such an approach, platinum-based agents are effective due to their increased response to platinum-based chemotherapy in relapsed cases. These chemo-drugs also help address the issue of drug resistance. After conducting an extensive search with available literature and the resources for clinical trials, information is precisely documented on current research, biomarkers, options for treatment and clinical trials. Several schemes for enhancing the therapeutic responses for OC are discussed systematically in this review with an attempt in summarizing the recent developments in this exciting field of translational/clinical research.

BACKGROUND: The Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Sorafenib (ARCCS) program made sorafenib available to patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) before regulatory approval. METHODS: In this nonrandomized, open-label expanded access program, 2504 patients from the United States and Canada were treated with oral sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Safety and efficacy were explored overall and in subgroups of patients including those with no prior therapy, nonclear cell (nonclear cell) RCC, brain metastases, prior bevacizumab treatment, and elderly patients. Sorafenib was approved for RCC 6 months after study initiation, at which time patients with no prior therapy or with nonclear cell RCC could enroll in an extension protocol for continued assessment for a period of 6 months. RESULTS: The most common grade > or =2 drug-related adverse events were hand-foot skin reaction (18%), rash (14%), hypertension (12%), and fatigue (11%). In the 1891 patients evaluable for response, complete response was observed in 1 patient, partial response in 67 patients (4%), and stable disease for at least 8 weeks in 1511 patients (80%). Median progression-free survival in the extension population was 36 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI], 33-45 weeks; censorship rate, 56%); median overall survival in the entire population was 50 weeks (95% CI, 46-52 weeks; censorship rate, 63%). The efficacy and safety results were similar across the subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib 400 mg twice daily demonstrated activity and a clinically acceptable toxicity profile in all patient subsets enrolled in the ARCCS expanded access program (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00111020).

Abstract Mobocertinib, an oral epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor targeting EGFR gene mutations, including exon 20 insertions (EGFRex20ins), in non–small cell lung cancer, was evaluated in a phase I/II dose-escalation/expansion trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02716116). Dose escalation identified 160 mg/d as the recommended phase 2 dose and maximum tolerated dose. Among 136 patients treated with 160 mg/d, the most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAE; &amp;gt;25%) were diarrhea (83%), nausea (43%), rash (33%), and vomiting (26%), with diarrhea (21%) the only grade ≥3 TRAE &amp;gt;5%. Among 28 EGFRex20ins patients treated at 160 mg/d, the investigator-assessed confirmed response rate was 43% (12/28; 95% confidence interval, 24%–63%) with median duration of response of 14 months (5.0–not reached) and median progression-free survival of 7.3 months (4.4–15.6). Mobocertinib demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with diverse EGFRex20ins variants with a safety profile consistent with other EGFR inhibitors. Significance: No oral EGFR-targeted therapies are currently approved for patients with EGFRex20ins NSCLC. Mobocertinib demonstrated antitumor activity with manageable toxicity in patients with advanced EGFRex20ins NSCLC in this study, supporting additional development of mobocertinib in this patient population. See related commentary by Pacheco, p. 1617. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1601

LBA9000 Background: Atezolizumab (atezo; anti–PD-L1) demonstrated OS benefit vs docetaxel in 2L+ NSCLC regardless of PD-L1 status or tumor histology. Because cytotoxic agents can exhibit positive immunomodulatory effects, combining atezo with chemotherapy may further improve outcomes. IMpower131 (NCT02367794) was designed to evaluate atezo + carboplatin (carbo) + paclitaxel (pac) or nab-paclitaxel (nab-pac) in 1L stage IV squamous NSCLC. Methods: Patients (pts) were randomized 1:1:1 to Arm A (atezo 1200 mg q3w + carbo AUC 6 q3w + pac 200 mg/m 2 q3w), Arm B (atezo + carbo + nab-pac 100 mg/m 2 weekly) or Arm C (carbo + nab-pac). Pts received chemotherapy for 4 or 6 cycles and atezo until loss of clinical benefit. We present the primary analysis of investigator (INV)-assessed PFS per RECIST v1.1 in the ITT population for Arm B vs Arm C. Data cutoff: 22 January 2018. Results: 338 pts (Arm A), 343 pts (Arm B) and 340 pts (Arm C) were enrolled. Minimum follow-up was 9.8 mo. INV-assessed median PFS was 6.3 mo in Arm B vs 5.6 mo in Arm C (HR, 0.715; 95% CI: 0.603, 0.848; P = 0.0001). PFS benefit was enriched in all PD-L1–positive IHC subgroups and was most pronounced in TC3 or IC3. AEs related to any treatment (TRAEs) were 91.3% (Arm A), 94.6% (Arm B) and 90.7% (Arm C); Grade 3-4 TRAEs were 42.8% (Arm A), 68.0% (Arm B) and 56.9% (Arm C); serious TRAEs were 22.3% (Arm A), 20.4% (Arm B) and 10.5% (Arm C). Preliminary OS data will be presented. Conclusions: IMpower131 met its co-primary endpoint of INV-assessed PFS in the ITT population in Arm B vs Arm C. The safety profile of atezo + carbo + nab-pac or pac was consistent with the known risks of the individual treatment components; no new safety signals were identified. Clinical trial information: NCT02367794. [Table: see text]

PURPOSE: To assess oregovomab as consolidation treatment of advanced ovarian cancer and refine the immunotherapeutic strategy for subsequent study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage III/IV ovarian cancer who had a complete clinical response to primary treatment were randomly assigned to oregovomab or placebo administered at weeks 0, 4, and 8, and every 12 weeks up to 2 years or until recurrence. The primary end-point was time to relapse (TTR). RESULTS: One hundred forty-five patients were treated with oregovomab (n = 73) or placebo (n = 72). For the population overall, median TTR was not different between treatments at 13.3 months for oregovomab and 10.3 months for placebo (P =.71). Immune responses were induced in most actively treated patients. This was associated with prolonged TTR. Quality of life was not adversely impacted by treatment. Adverse events were reported with similar frequency in oregovomab and placebo groups, indicating a benign safety profile. A long-term survival follow-up is ongoing. Cox analysis of relapse data identified significant factors: performance status, CA-125 before third cycle, and baseline CA-125. Further evaluation identified a subpopulation with favorable prognostic indicators designated as the successful front-line therapy (SFLT) population. For the SFLT population, TTR was 24.0 months in the oregovomab group compared with 10.8 months for placebo (unadjusted hazard ratio of 0.543 [95% CI, 0.287 to 1.025]), a hypothesis-generating observation. CONCLUSION: Consolidation therapy with oregovomab did not significantly improve TTR overall. A set of confirmatory phase III studies has been initiated to determine whether the SFLT population derives benefit from oregovomab treatment.

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most frequent and incurable type of brain tumor of adults. Hypoxia has been shown to direct GBM toward a more aggressive and malignant state. Here we show that hypoxia increases Notch1 activation, which in turn induces the expression of transient receptor potential 6 (TRPC6) in primary samples and cell lines derived from GBM. TRPC6 is required for the development of the aggressive phenotype because knockdown of TRPC6 expression inhibits glioma growth, invasion, and angiogenesis. Functionally, TRPC6 causes a sustained elevation of intracellular calcium that is coupled to the activation of the calcineurin-nuclear factor of activated T-cell (NFAT) pathway. Pharmacologic inhibition of the calcineurin-NFAT pathway substantially reduces the development of the malignant GBM phenotypes under hypoxia. Clinically, expression of TRPC6 was elevated in GBM specimens in comparison with normal tissues. Collectively, our studies indicate that TRPC6 is a key mediator of tumor growth of GBM in vitro and in vivo and that TRPC6 may be a promising therapeutic target in the treatment of human GBM.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of letrozole plus lapatinib versus letrozole plus placebo in women with hormone receptor (HR)(+) human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)-2(+) tumors receiving first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postmenopausal women (n = 1,286) with HR(+) MBC were randomized to daily oral treatment with letrozole (2.5 mg) plus lapatinib (1,500 mg) versus letrozole (2.5 mg) plus placebo. Of the 1,286 patients enrolled in the phase III study, 219 had HER-2(+) tumors. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in HER-2(+) patients. RESULTS: Results in the HR(+) HER-2(+) population (n = 219) are presented. The addition of lapatinib to letrozole resulted in a significantly lower risk for disease progression than with letrozole alone (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.96). The PFS time was 8.2 months, versus 3.0 months. The objective response rate (ORR) (28% versus 15%) and clinical benefit rate (CBR) (48% versus 29%) were also significantly greater in lapatinib-treated women. The most common adverse events in the lapatinib group were diarrhea (68%) and rash (46%), primarily grade 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of lapatinib to letrozole is well tolerated and leads to a significantly greater PFS time, ORR, and CBR than with letrozole alone in women with MBC who coexpress HR and HER-2.

Background: Ambulatory hemodynamic monitoring with an implantable pulmonary artery (PA) sensor is approved for patients with New York Heart Association Class III heart failure (HF) and a prior HF hospitalization (HFH) within 12 months. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of PA pressure-guided therapy in routine clinical practice with special focus on subgroups defined by sex, race, and ejection fraction. Methods: This multi-center, prospective, open-label, observational, single-arm trial of 1200 patients across 104 centers within the United States with New York Heart Association class III HF and a prior HFH within 12 months evaluated patients undergoing PA pressure sensor implantation between September 1, 2014, and October 11, 2017. The primary efficacy outcome was the difference between rates of adjudicated HFH 1 year after compared with the 1 year before sensor implantation. Safety end points were freedom from device- or system-related complications at 2 years and freedom from pressure sensor failure at 2 years. Results: Mean age for the population was 69 years, 37.7% were women, 17.2% were non-White, and 46.8% had preserved ejection fraction. During the year after sensor implantation, the mean rate of daily pressure transmission was 76±24% and PA pressures declined significantly. The rate of HFH was significantly lower at 1 year compared with the year before implantation (0.54 versus 1.25 events/patient-years, hazard ratio 0.43 [95% CI, 0.39–0.47], P &lt;0.0001). The rate of all-cause hospitalization was also lower following sensor implantation (1.67 versus 2.28 events/patient-years, hazard ratio 0.73 [95% CI, 0.68–0.78], P &lt;0.0001). Results were consistent across subgroups defined by ejection fraction, sex, race, cause of cardiomyopathy, presence/absence of implantable cardiac defibrillator or cardiac resynchronization therapy and ejection fraction. Freedom from device- or system-related complications was 99.6%, and freedom from pressure sensor failure was 99.9% at 1 year. Conclusions: In routine clinical practice as in clinical trials, PA pressure-guided therapy for HF was associated with lower PA pressures, lower rates of HFH and all-cause hospitalization, and low rates of adverse events across a broad range of patients with symptomatic HF and prior HFH. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02279888.

Abstract KRAS is the most commonly mutated oncogene in NSCLC and development of direct KRAS inhibitors has renewed interest in this molecular variant. Different KRAS mutations may represent a unique biologic context with different prognostic and therapeutic impact. We sought to characterize genomic landscapes of advanced, KRAS-mutated non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a large national cohort to help guide future therapeutic development. Molecular profiles of 17,095 NSCLC specimens were obtained using DNA next-generation sequencing of 592 genes (Caris Life Sciences) and classified on the basis of presence and subtype of KRAS mutations. Co-occurring genomic alterations, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and PD-L1 expression [22C3, tumor proportion score (TPS) score] were analyzed by KRAS mutation type. Across the cohort, 4,706 (27.5%) samples harbored a KRAS mutation. The most common subtype was G12C (40%), followed by G12V (19%) and G12D (15%). The prevalence of KRAS mutations was 37.2% among adenocarcinomas and 4.4% in squamous cell carcinomas. Rates of high TMB (≥10 mutations/Mb) and PD-L1 expression varied across KRAS mutation subtypes. KRAS G12C was the most likely to be PD-L1 positive (65.5% TPS ≥ 1%) and PD-L1 high (41.3% TPS ≥ 50%). STK11 was mutated in 8.6% of KRAS wild-type NSCLC but more frequent in KRAS-mutant NSCLC, with the highest rate in G13 (36.2%). TP53 mutations were more frequent in KRAS wild-type NSCLC (73.6%). KRAS mutation subtypes have different co-occurring mutations and a distinct genomic landscape. The clinical relevance of these differences in the context of specific therapeutic interventions warrants investigation.

Importance: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) arising from immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) cancer therapy may potentially predict improved outcomes. Objective: To evaluate the association between irAEs and atezolizumab efficacy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using pooled data from 3 phase 3 ICI studies. Design, Setting, and Participants: IMpower130, IMpower132, and IMpower150 were phase 3, multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of chemoimmunotherapy combinations involving atezolizumab. Participants were chemotherapy-naive adults with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC. These post hoc analyses were conducted during February 2022. Interventions: Eligible patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive atezolizumab with carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel, or chemotherapy alone (IMpower130); 1:1 to receive atezolizumab with carboplatin or cisplatin plus pemetrexed, or chemotherapy alone (IMpower132); and 1:1:1 to receive atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel, atezolizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel, or bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (IMpower150). Main Outcomes and Measures: Pooled data from IMpower130 (cutoff: March 15, 2018), IMpower132 (cutoff: May 22, 2018), and IMpower150 (cutoff: September 13, 2019) were analyzed by treatment (atezolizumab-containing vs control), irAE status (with vs without), and highest irAE grade (1-2 vs 3-5). To account for immortal bias, a time-dependent Cox model and landmark analyses of irAE occurrence at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months from baseline were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of overall survival (OS). Results: Of 2503 randomized patients, 1577 were in the atezolizumab-containing arm and 926 were in the control arm. The mean (SD) age of patients was 63.1 (9.4) years and 63.0 (9.3) years, and 950 (60.2%) and 569 (61.4%) were male, respectively, in the atezolizumab arm and the control arm. Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between patients with irAEs (atezolizumab, n = 753; control, n = 289) and without (atezolizumab, n = 824; control, n = 637). In the atezolizumab arm, OS HRs (95% CI) in patients with grade 1 to 2 irAEs and grade 3 to 5 irAEs (each vs those without irAEs) in the 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month subgroups were 0.78 (0.65-0.94) and 1.25 (0.90-1.72), 0.74 (0.63-0.87) and 1.23 (0.93-1.64), 0.77 (0.65-0.90) and 1.1 (0.81-1.42), and 0.72 (0.59-0.89) and 0.87 (0.61-1.25), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this pooled analysis of 3 randomized clinical trials, longer OS was observed in patients with vs without mild to moderate irAEs in both arms and across landmarks. These findings further support the use of first-line atezolizumab-containing regimens for advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02367781, NCT02657434, and NCT02366143.