Lung Cancer最新文献

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a dramatic increase of chest CT scanning in Wuhan. This was partly a COVID effect: some private and public employers required employees to have CT examinations to confirm they were healthy before going back to work. But it also likely reflects the growing enthusiasm for low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening. This investigation examines the resulting impact in the under 40 population.

Methods

The relevant de-identified information of the patients under age 40 who had also received thoracic surgery from 2018 to 2022 was analyzed using the medical record information system of Tongji Hospital in Wuhan.

Results

The volume of thoracic surgeries increased continuously in young patients under the age of 40, from 219 in 2018 to 732 in 2022. The number of surgeries for pulmonary nodules or masses in this group increased over 6-fold, from 91 to 576. The number of surgeries leading to a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the lung increased more than 15-fold, from 26 to 415. The median adenocarcinoma size fell in half (from 15 mm to 7 mm) and the most common stage changed from Stage I invasive (46 % of adenocarcinomas in 2018) to microinvasive (60 % of adenocarcinomas in 2022). 70 % of lung adenocarcinomas were found in females.

Conclusions

There had been an explosion of thoracic surgery for adenocarcinomas among the under-40 population in Wuhan. The decrease in tumor size and the increase in microinvasive and in situ lesions in this young age group suggest considerable overdiagnosis. We should be vigilant about the risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment especially in young women.

This paper highlights developments in diagnostic and nonsurgical local treatment modalities that have changed the management of early-stage lung cancer. These innovations aim to enhance diagnostic accuracy, minimize invasiveness, and improve patient outcomes.

Liquid biopsies are emerging as promising tools for non-invasive diagnosis and monitoring, enabling earlier intervention without being standardized yet as well as not yet anchored in the guidelines. Endobronchial navigation has emerged as an innovative tool. By combining electromagnetic or GPS-like technology with 3D imaging and a steerable catheter, it enables accurate biopsy of small, peripheral lesions that were once challenging to sample, with a very low pneumothorax rate.

Regarding nonsurgical treatments, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) continues to shine as a non-invasive local treatment modality for early-stage lung cancer and is the guideline-recommended standard-of-care for inoperable patients and patients refusing the risk of surgical resection. The low toxicity and excellent local control has made it an attractive alternative to surgery even in fitter patients. Percutaneous ablative techniques utilising energies such as microwave or pulse-field electroporation are options for patients who are not candidates for surgery or SBRT. Bronchoscopic ablation delivers the same energies but with a very lower pneumothorax rate and it is therefore also open to patients with multiple and bilateral lesions.

Background

High and increasing expenses on pembrolizumab ask for more cost-effective and sustainable treatment strategies to improve affordability of healthcare. Therefore, a part of the Dutch hospitals implemented an alternative, partially lower, weight-based dosing protocol for pembrolizumab. This provided the unique opportunity to compare the overall survival (OS) of the alternative pembrolizumab dosing protocol to standard dosing using a nationwide registry in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study with a non-inferiority primary objective. Forty hospitals in the Dutch Medication Audit and Dutch Lung Cancer Audit treated 1966 patients with NSCLC with first line pembrolizumab (mono- or combination therapy) between Jan 1st 2021, and Mar 31st, 2023. Alternative weight-based pembrolizumab dosing (100/150/200 mg Q3W or 200/300/400 mg Q6W) was administered to 604 patients, and 1362 patients received standard pembrolizumab dosing (200 mg Q3W or 400 mg Q6W). A Cox proportional hazard model with selected covariates was used to compare the OS between alternative and standard dosing protocols. The non-inferiority margin was set at a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.2 for OS. Non-inferiority is established by showing that the upper limit of the 95 % confidence interval (CI) of the HR of OS is smaller or equal to 1.2.

Results

Distribution of age (66.7 years +/-9.4), sex (45 % female) and treatment combinations were similar for both groups, comorbidity score was higher in the standard group. Median daily dose in the alternative dosing group was 22 % lower compared to the standard dosing group, 7.14 mg/day (interquartile range (IQR):5.48–8.04 mg/day) vs. 9.15 mg/day (IQR:8.33–9.52 mg/day), respectively. Alternative dosing was non-inferior to standard dosing regarding overall survival (adjusted HR 0.83, 95 %CI:0.69–1.003).

Conclusion

This large, retrospective real-world analysis supports the hypothesis that the alternative, partially lower pembrolizumab dosing protocol in NSCLC maintains treatment effectiveness while reducing treatment costs.

Background

Pralsetinib, a selective RET targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has been approved for treating locally advanced or metastatic RET fusion-positive NSCLC in adults who have previously received platinum-based chemotherapy in China.

Methods

In this retrospective analysis conducted at Hunan Cancer Hospital in China, we examined 36 patients with advanced NSCLC with RET fusion, who were treated with pralsetinib between January 2021 and December 2023. The study focused on assessing the efficacy (Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)) and safety profile of pralsetinib in these patients. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 20.0, with a significance level set at p < 0.05.

Results

The results revealed that pralsetinib exhibited significant activity in this patient cohort. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis indicated a median PFS of 10.7 months and a median OS of 21.2 months. The overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) was 55.6 % and 72.2 %, respectively. Pralsetinib was generally well tolerated, with most adverse events being mild to moderate (grades 1–2). The most common serious adverse events (≥grade 3) observed were lymphopenia (13.9 %), hypertension (11.1 %), leukopenia (8.3 %), neutropenia (8.3 %), and creatine kinase elevation (8.3 %).

Conclusion

Pralsetinib demonstrated promising activity in patients with advanced NSCLC harboring RET fusion with a favorable safety profile.

Background

Capmatinib is a selective MET inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy in a phase II study of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring METex14 mutations. However, the real-world outcomes of capmatinib are largely unknown. From June 2019, the French Early Access Program (EAP) provided capmatinib to METex14 NSCLC patients who were ineligible for or for whom first-line standard therapies had failed.

Methods

IFCT-2104 CAPMATU was a multicenter study that included all METex14 NSCLC patients who received capmatinib as part of the EAP until August 2021. The primary endpoints were time to treatment failure (TTF), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR).

Results

A total of 146 patients were included. The median age was 74.9 years, 56.6 % were never-smokers, and 32.4 % had brain metastases. The median TTF, median PFS and median OS from capmatinib initiation were 5.1 months (95 % CI 4.2–6.0), 4.8 months (95 % CI 4.0–6.0) and 10.4 months (95 % CI 8.3–13.2), respectively. Evaluation of the best response to capmatinib was available for 134 patients and resulted in an ORR of 55.3 % (95 % CI 46.8 %-63.6 %). The median PFS was 7.7 months for treatment-naïve patients and 6.0 and 4.1 months for patients who had received one or 2 + prior lines of treatment, respectively. For patients with brain metastases, the median PFS was 3.0 months. Capmatinib had a known and manageable safety profile, with grade 3 to 4 adverse events, mostly peripheral edema (8.2 %), occurring in 17.8 % of patients.

Conclusion

In this large real-world study of METex14 NSCLC patients, the efficacy of capmatinib was confirmed, with a manageable safety profile, even in patients with brain metastases and in those who received several lines of treatment. This study reinforces the key role of capmatinib for these patients.

Objectives

Non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with exon 20 insertion mutations (ex20ins) of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) were resistant to monotherapy of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). However, recent reports have shown that the combination of ICI and chemotherapy (ICI-combined regimen) exhibited certain efficacy for NSCLC with EGFR ex20ins. The mechanisms behind this phenomenon have not been thoroughly clarified. Hence, we conducted this study to find correlations between the tumor immune microenvironment of EGFR ex20ins and the efficacy of ICI-combined regimen.

Methods

We performed single-cell transcriptome sequencing and multiplex immunofluorescence staining (mIF) to investigate the immune microenvironment of NSCLC patients with EGFR ex20ins, L858R, and EGFR wild-type. We analyzed 15 treatment-naïve NSCLC samples utilizing single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq). Another 30 cases of EGFR L858R and 4 cases of wild-type were recruited to compare the immune microenvironment with that of EGFR ex20ins (28 cases) by mIF.

Results

We observed that cell components, function and interactions varied between EGFR ex20ins, L858R, and wild-type NSCLC. We discovered similar T cell and CD8+ T cell distributions among groups but found noninferior or even better T cell activation in ex20ins patients. Infiltrating CD8+ FOXP3- T cells were significantly lower in the tumor region of EGFR ex20ins compared to wild-type. T cells from the ex20ins group had a greater tendency to promote cancer cell inflammation and epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) compared to wild-type group. For macrophages, there were more M2-like macrophages in ex20ins patients. M1-like macrophages in ex20ins group produced fewer antitumor cytokines than in other groups.

Conclusions

The immune microenvironment of EGFR ex20ins is more suppressive than that of L858R and wild-type, suggesting that ICI monotherapy may not be sufficient for these patients. ICI-combined regimen might be a treatment option for EGFR ex20ins due to tumor-promoting inflammation and noninferior T cell functions in the immune microenvironment.

Background

Plinabulin is a GEF-H1 releasing agent with an immune-enhancing function. We report results from a multicenter Phase I/II study (NCT03575793) assessing plinabulin in combination with nivolumab and ipilimumab for the treatment of recurrent SCLC.

Methods

In Phase I, patients were enrolled using a 3 + 3 design to determine dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D). Patients received nivolumab (1 mg/kg), ipilimumab (3 mg/kg), and plinabulin (in escalating doses) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle for 4 cycles followed by maintenance with plinabulin and nivolumab. In phase II, patients with recurrent PD(L)1 inhibitor resistant SCLC were enrolled. The primary objective was median progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

Between 9/2018 and 2/2023, 39 patients were enrolled, and 36 patients received study treatment and were evaluable for safety (16 in Phase I; 20 in Phase II). In the phase I dose-escalation, there were 2 DLTs; grade 3 altered mental status lasting <24 h and grade 3 infusion reaction. The Plinabulin RP2D was determined to be 30 mg/m². Common TRAEs were vomiting (44 %), nausea (42 %), and infusion reaction (36 %); 6 % of patients had a ≥grade 3 TRAE. Five patients (14 %) had ≥grade 3 irAEs; there were no cases of immune-related pneumonitis. In the efficacy analysis in 27 patients, the median PFS was 1.6 months (95 % CI 1.2 to 2.7) and the trial did not meet the pre-specified target median PFS of 3.5 months. Four patients treated at 30 mg/m² had PR (confirmed 1, unconfirmed 3); 5 patients had SD with a CBR of 33 %. Two of 8 patients treated in phase I at the lower 20 mg/m² dose had confirmed PR, with 1 patient on the drug regimen for >90 cycles. The median OS and follow-up time were 5.5 months and 2.5 months respectively.

Conclusions

Plinabulin in combination with nivolumab and ipilimumab was tolerable at the dose of 30 mg/m². While the clinical responses in PD-1 resistant SCLC were limited, some patients had a long duration of response. The number of ≥grade 3 irAE with the combination were lower than expected.

Objectives

Surgical resection remains the primary treatment for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with lobectomy considered the standard approach. However, recent evidence suggests that sublobar resection may be an alternative option for select patients.

Materials and Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) cohort studies comparing lobectomy and sublobar resection in NSCLC patients were included. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and secondary outcomes included disease-free survival (DFS), 30-day mortality, and cancer recurrence rates. Individual patient data (IPD) were reconstructed from Kaplan-Meier curves, and one-stage and two-stage meta-analyses were performed.

Results

A total of 18 studies involving 6,075 NSCLC patients (3,119 undergoing lobectomy, 2,956 undergoing sublobar resection) were included. Lobectomy was associated with significantly better OS compared to sublobar resection (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.68–0.89, p < 0.001). However, when sublobar resection was further divided into segmentectomy and wedge resection, no significant difference in OS was observed between lobectomy and segmentectomy (HR:0.92, 95 %CI: 0.75–1.14, p = 0.464) whereas lobar resection was associated with better OS compared to wedge resection (HR:0.52, 95 %CI: 0.41–0.67, p < 0.001). DFS outcomes were similar between lobectomy and sublobar resection (HR:0.98, 95 %CI: 0.84–1.14, p = 0.778).

Conclusion

Lobectomy is associated with better overall survival compared to sublobar resection in NSCLC patients. However, when sublobar resection is subdivided, segmentectomy shows comparable outcomes to lobectomy, while wedge resection is inferior. These findings support the consideration of segmentectomy as the surgical option of choice for Stage IA NSCLC patients.

Purpose

The mesothelin-targeting antibody-drug conjugate anetumab ravtansine was evaluated in combination with the programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitor pembrolizumab based on the common expression of mesothelin and reports of activity in mesothelioma.

Patients and methods

A phase 1 safety run-in of the combination of anetumab ravtansine (6.5 mg/kg iv q3weeks) and pembrolizumab (200 mg, IV q3weeks) was conducted, followed by a phase 2 randomization to the combination or pembrolizumab alone at medical centers across the United States and Canada in the National Cancer Institute’s Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network. Patients with pleural mesothelioma that expressed mesothelin and had previously received platinum-based therapy were eligible.

Results

In phase 1 (n = 12) only one dose limiting toxicity was observed and the rules for dose reduction were not met. In phase 2, there was no difference in the confirmed response rates between the combination group (n = 18, 2 partial responses [PR], 11 %) and the pembrolizumab group (n = 17, 1 PR, 6 %; z = -0.5523, p = 0.29116). The median PFS was 12.2 months (95 % CI 5.1–not evaluable [NE]) for the combination, and 3.9 months for pembrolizumab (95 % CI 2.1-NE)(HR=0.55, p = 0.20). Patients with high baseline levels of soluble mesothelin who received anetumab ravtansine had a median PFS of 5 months.

Conclusions

The numeric difference in PFS between treatment groups was not statistically significant, likely related to a smaller than planned sample size. High levels of soluble mesothelin should potentially be considered to select against the use of mesothelin-targeting therapies in development that are neutralized by soluble mesothelin.