Several predictive factors of immune checkpoint inhibitor response have been reported, but there has not been sufficient exploration of which patients benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge. We report the case of a patient with non-small cell lung cancer who had 6 years of complete response with initial nivolumab treatment. After relapse, however, rechallenge with nivolumab did not result in tumour shrinkage or long-term response. Even in patients who had an exceptional response to the initial immune checkpoint inhibitor, long-term efficacy may not be achieved by immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge. Thorough investigation of biomarkers that predict efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge is warranted.

ROS1 gene fusions are an established oncogenic driver comprising 1%-2% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Successful targeting of ROS1 fusion oncoprotein with oral small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has revolutionized the treatment landscape of metastatic ROS1 fusion-positive (ROS1+) NSCLC and transformed outcomes for patients. The preferred Food and Drug Administration-approved first-line therapies include crizotinib, entrectinib, and repotrectinib, and currently, selection amongst these options requires consideration of the systemic and CNS efficacy, tolerability, and access to therapy. Of note, resistance to ROS1 TKIs invariably develops, limiting the clinical benefit of these agents and leading to disease relapse. Progress in understanding the molecular mechanisms of resistance has enabled the development of numerous next-generation ROS1 TKIs, which achieve broader coverage of ROS1 resistance mutations and superior CNS penetration than first-generation TKIs, as well as other therapeutic strategies to address TKI resistance. The approach to subsequent therapy depends on the pace and pattern of progressive disease on the initial ROS1 TKI and, if known, the mechanisms of TKI resistance. Herein, we describe a practical approach for the selection of initial and subsequent therapies for metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC based on these clinical considerations. Additionally, we explore the evolving evidence for the optimal treatment of earlier-stage, non-metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC, while, in parallel, highlighting future research directions with the goal of continuing to build on the tremendous progress in the management of ROS1+ NSCLC and ultimately improving the longevity and well-being of people living with this disease.

BACKGROUND: Bazedoxifene is a third-generation selective estrogen receptor modulator that inhibits the IL6/IL6R/GP130 signaling pathway by inhibiting IL6-induced homodimerization of GP130. Considering that the IL6/IL6R/GP130 signaling pathway is important in tumorigenesis and metastasis, bazedoxifene is thought to have an antitumor effect, which has been proven preliminarily in breast cancer and pancreatic cancer but has not yet been studied in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study is aimed at evaluating the antitumor effect of bazedoxifene in NSCLC.
METHODS: A549 and H1299 NSCLC cell lines were employed and exposed to various concentrations of bazedoxifene, paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and their combinations for cell viability, colony formation, and wound healing assays to demonstrate the antitumor effect of bazedoxifene with or without paclitaxel or gemcitabine.
RESULTS: MTT cell viability, colony formation, and wound healing assays showed that bazedoxifene was capable of inhibiting cell viability, colony formation, and cell migration in a dose-dependent manner. In addition, bazedoxifene was capable of working with paclitaxel or gemcitabine synergistically to inhibit cell viability, colony formation, and cell migration.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the potential antitumor effect of bazedoxifene and its ability to improve the treatment efficacy of paclitaxel and gemcitabine.

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have potential as diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarkers in solid tumors. Despite Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of CTC devices in various cancers, the rarity and heterogeneity of CTCs in lung cancer make them technically challenging to isolate and analyze, hindering their clinical integration. Establishing a consensus through comparative analysis of different CTC systems is warranted. This study aimed to evaluate seven different CTC enrichment methods across five technologies using a standardized spike-in protocol: the CellMag™ (EpCAM-dependent enrichment), EasySep™ and RosetteSep™ (blood cell depletion), and the Parsortix® PR1 and the new design Parsortix® Prototype (PP) (size- and deformability-based enrichment). The Parsortix® systems were also evaluated for any differences in recovery rates between cell harvest versus in-cassette staining. Healthy donor blood (5 mL) was spiked with 100 fluorescently labeled EpCAMhigh H1975 cells, processed through each system, and the isolation efficiency was calculated. The CellMag™ had the highest recovery rate (70 ± 14%), followed by Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining, while the EasySep™ had the lowest recovery (18 ± 8%). Additional spike-in experiments were performed with EpCAMmoderate A549 and EpCAMlow H1299 cells using the CellMag™ and Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining. The recovery rate of CellMag™ significantly reduced to 35 ± 14% with A549 cells and 1 ± 1% with H1299 cells. However, the Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining showed cell phenotype-independent and consistent recovery rates among all lung cancer cell lines: H1975 (49 ± 2%), A549 (47 ± 10%), and H1299 (52 ± 10%). Furthermore, we demonstrated that the Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining method is capable of isolating heterogeneous single CTCs and cell clusters from patient samples. The Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining, capable of isolating different phenotypes of CTCs as either single cells or cell clusters with consistent recovery rates, is considered optimal for CTC enrichment for lung cancer, albeit needing further optimization and validation.

UNASSIGNED: This study validated real-world pharmacokinetic (PK) data using an established population PK (PopPK) model for atezolizumab in Japanese patients with NSCLC and explored the relationship between PK parameters, effectiveness, and adverse events (AEs) for the 1200 mg once every three weeks regimen.
UNASSIGNED: A subgroup of 262 of 1039 patients from J-TAIL consented to this exploratory research for PK evaluation of atezolizumab monotherapy for unresectable advanced/recurrent NSCLC (August 2018 to October 2019; 197 institutions). We evaluated plasma concentrations before the start of the third cycle of atezolizumab infusion classified into quartiles 1 to 4, their association with effectiveness, and the association between atezolizumab maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax) calculated using the existing PopPK model and AEs of special interest (AESIs).
UNASSIGNED: Overall, 175 of 262 patients were included; baseline characteristics were similar to those of patients enrolled in J-TAIL (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2, 12.0%; age ≥ 75 y, 28.9%; atezolizumab as more than or equal to third-line treatment, 57.5%). Atezolizumab plasma concentrations were similar to previously reported data among Japanese/non-Japanese patients. The overall survival was significantly shorter in patients with lower atezolizumab plasma concentrations in Q1 versus Q2 to Q4, although progression-free survival remained the same. The PK data adequately fit the PopPK model, with the frequency of AESIs increasing as the calculated Cmax at cycle 1 increased.
UNASSIGNED: In real-world Japanese patients with unresectable advanced/recurrent NSCLC, PKs were similar to previous reports. Certain patient populations had shorter overall survival, and atezolizumab plasma concentrations in cycle 3 were lower in this population. Elevated Cmax at cycle 1 may be associated with an increased frequency of AESIs.

Neurocognitive adverse events (NAEs) have been reported in up to 60% of patients on lorlatinib, a potent central nervous system-active ALK inhibitor. Manifestations may include psychotic, mood, speech, and cognitive symptoms. Current guidance recommends permanent discontinuation of lorlatinib in cases of grade IV NAEs. Here, we report a case of successful rechallenge of dose-reduced lorlatinib after recovery of grade IV psychosis in a patient with ALK-positive NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has firmly established its role in stage I NSCLC. Clinical trial results may not fully apply to real-world scenarios. This study aimed to uncover the real-world incidence of acute toxicity and 90-day mortality in patients with SBRT-treated stage I NSCLC and develop prediction models for these outcomes.
METHODS: Prospective data from the Dutch Lung Cancer Audit for Radiotherapy (DLCA-R) were collected nationally. Patients with stage I NSCLC (cT1-2aN0M0) treated with SBRT in 2017 to 2021 were included. Acute toxicity was assessed, defined as grade greater than or equal to 2 radiation pneumonitis or grade greater than or equal to 3 non-hematologic toxicity less than or equal to 90 days after SBRT. Prediction models for acute toxicity and 90-day mortality were developed and internally validated.
RESULTS: Among 7279 patients, the mean age was 72.5 years, with 21.6% being above 80 years. Most were male (50.7%), had WHO scores 0 to 1 (73.3%), and had cT1a-b tumors (64.6%), predominantly in the upper lobes (65.2%). Acute toxicity was observed in 280 (3.8%) of patients and 90-day mortality in 122 (1.7%). Predictors for acute toxicity included WHO greater than or equal to 2, lower forced expiratory volume in 1 second and diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide, no pathology confirmation, middle or lower lobe tumor location, cT1c-cT2a stage, and higher mean lung dose (c-statistic 0.68). Male sex, WHO greater than or equal to 2, and acute toxicity predicted higher 90-day mortality (c-statistic 0.73).
CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide study revealed a low rate of acute toxicity and an acceptable 90-day mortality rate in patients with SBRT-treated stage I NSCLC. Notably, advanced age did not increase acute toxicity or mortality risk. Our predictive models, with satisfactory performance, offer valuable tools for identifying high-risk patients.

UNASSIGNED: The JAVELIN Lung 101 phase 1b/2 trial evaluated avelumab (immune checkpoint inhibitor) combined with lorlatinib or crizotinib (tyrosine kinase inhibitors) in ALK-positive or ALK-negative advanced NSCLC, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: Starting doses of lorlatinib 100 mg once daily or crizotinib 250 mg twice daily were administered with avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Primary objectives were assessment of maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose in phase 1 and objective response rate in phase 2. Primary end points were dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and confirmed objective response per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1.
UNASSIGNED: In the avelumab plus lorlatinib group (ALK-positive; n = 31; 28 in phase 1b; three in phase 2), two of 28 assessable patients (7%) had DLT, and the MTD and recommended phase 2 dose was avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus lorlatinib 100 mg once daily. In the avelumab plus crizotinib group (ALK-negative; n = 12; all phase 1b), five of 12 assessable patients (42%) had DLT, and the MTD was exceeded with avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus crizotinib 250 mg twice daily; alternative crizotinib doses were not assessed. Objective response rate was 52% (95% confidence interval, 33%-70%) with avelumab plus lorlatinib (complete response, 3%; partial response, 48%) and 25% (95% confidence interval, 6%-57%) with avelumab plus crizotinib (all partial responses).
UNASSIGNED: Avelumab plus lorlatinib treatment in ALK-positive NSCLC was feasible, but avelumab plus crizotinib treatment in ALK-negative NSCLC could not be administered at the doses tested. No evidence of increased antitumor activity was observed in either group.
UNASSIGNED: NCT02584634.

This study aimed to evaluate the measurement and prognostic ability of the SUVmax of whole-body tumors (SUVmaxwb) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, comparing high-definition (HD) PET imaging with standard-definition (SD) PET imaging. Methods: The study included 242 consecutive NSCLC patients who underwent baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT from April 2018 to January 2021. Two imaging techniques were used: HD PET (using ordered-subsets expectation maximization with point-spread function modeling and time-of-flight techniques and smaller voxels) and SD PET (with ordered-subsets expectation maximization and time-of-flight techniques). SUVmaxwb was determined by measuring all the tumor lesions in the whole body, and tumor-to-background ratio (TBR) was calculated using the background SUVmean of various body parts. Results: The patient cohort had an average age of 68.3 y, with 59.1% being female. During a median follow-up of 29.6 mo, 83 deaths occurred. SUVmaxwb was significantly higher in HD PET than SD PET, with respective medians of 17.4 and 11.8. The TBR of 1,125 tumoral lesions was also higher in HD PET. Univariate Cox regression analysis showed that SUVmaxwb from both HD and SD PET were significantly associated with overall survival. However, after adjusting for TNM (tumor, node, metastasis) stage, only SUVmaxwb from SD PET remained significantly associated with survival. Conclusion: HD PET imaging in NSCLC patients yields higher SUVmaxwb and TBR, enhancing tumor visibility. Despite this, its prognostic value is less significant than SD PET after adjusting clinical TNM stage. Thus, consideration should be given to using HD PET reconstruction to increase tumor visibility, and SD PET is recommended for NSCLC patient prognostication and therapeutic evaluation, as well as for the classification of lung nodules.

暂无摘要。