METHODS: EMPOWER-Lung 1 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. We enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed squamous or non-squamous advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of 50% or more. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to intravenous cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks for up to 108 weeks, or until disease progression, or investigator's choice of chemotherapy. Central randomisation scheme generated by an interactive web response system governed the randomisation process that was stratified by histology and geographical region. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression free survival, as assessed by a blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Patients with disease progression on cemiplimab could continue cemiplimab with the addition of up to four cycles of chemotherapy. We assessed response in these patients by BICR against a new baseline, defined as the last scan before chemotherapy initiation. The primary endpoints were assessed in all randomly assigned participants (ie, intention-to-treat population) and in those with a PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. We assessed adverse events in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540.
FINDINGS: Between May 29, 2017, and March 4, 2020, we recruited 712 patients (607 [85%] were male and 105 [15%] were female). We randomly assigned 357 (50%) to cemiplimab and 355 (50%) to chemotherapy. 284 (50%) patients assigned to cemiplimab and 281 (50%) assigned to chemotherapy had verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. At 35 months' follow-up, among those with a verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50% median overall survival in the cemiplimab group was 26·1 months (95% CI 22·1-31·8; 149 [52%] of 284 died) versus 13·3 months (10·5-16·2; 188 [67%] of 281 died) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·46-0·71; p<0·0001), median progression-free survival was 8·1 months (95% CI 6·2-8·8; 214 events occurred) in the cemiplimab group versus 5·3 months (4·3-6·1; 236 events occurred) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·51, 95% CI 0·42-0·62; p<0·0001). Continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy as second-line therapy (n=64) resulted in a median progression-free survival of 6·6 months (6·1-9·3) and overall survival of 15·1 months (11·3-18·7). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (15 [4%] of 356 patients in the cemiplimab group vs 60 [17%] of 343 in the control group), neutropenia (three [1%] vs 35 [10%]), and pneumonia (18 [5%] vs 13 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in ten (3%) of 356 patients treated with cemiplimab (due to autoimmune myocarditis, cardiac failure, cardio-respiratory arrest, cardiopulmonary failure, septic shock, tumour hyperprogression, nephritis, respiratory failure, [n=1 each] and general disorders or unknown [n=2]) and in seven (2%) of 343 patients treated with chemotherapy (due to pneumonia and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each], and cardiac arrest, lung abscess, and myocardial infarction [n=1 each]). The safety profile of cemiplimab at 35 months, and of continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy, was generally consistent with that previously observed for these treatments, with no new safety signals INTERPRETATION: At 35 months' follow-up, the survival benefit of cemiplimab for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer was at least as pronounced as at 1 year, affirming its use as first-line monotherapy for this population. Adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at progression might provide a new second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.
FUNDING: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two EGFR mutation tests, a tissue-based assay (cobas® v1) and a tissue- and blood-based assay (cobas® v2) were used to analyze matched biopsy and blood samples (897 paired samples) from three Asian studies of first-line erlotinib with similar intent-to-treat populations. ENSURE was a phase III comparison of erlotinib and gemcitabine/platinum, FASTACT-2 was a phase III study of gemcitabine/platinum plus erlotinib or placebo, and ASPIRATION was a single-arm phase II study of erlotinib. Agreement statistics were evaluated, based on sensitivity and specificity between the two assays in subgroups of patients with increasing tumor burden.
RESULTS: Patients with discordant EGFR (tissue+/plasma-) mutation status achieved longer progression-free and overall survival than those with concordant (tissue+/plasma+) mutation status. Tumor burden was significantly greater in patients with concordant versus discordant mutations. Pooled analyses of data from the three studies showed a sensitivity of 72.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 67.8-76.1) and a specificity of 97.9% (95% CI 96.0-99.0) for blood-based testing; sensitivity was greatest in patients with larger baseline tumors.
CONCLUSIONS: Blood-based EGFR mutation testing demonstrated high specificity and good sensitivity, and offers a convenient and easily accessible diagnostic method to complement tissue-based tests. Patients with a discordant mutation status in plasma and tissue, had improved survival outcomes compared with those with a concordant mutation status, which may be due to their lower tumor burden. These data help to inform the clinical utility of this blood-based assay for the detection of EGFR mutations.
METHODS: In this open-label phase III study (PROFILE 1029), patients were randomized 1:1 to receive orally administered crizotinib 250 mg twice daily continuously (3-week cycles) or intravenously administered chemotherapy (pemetrexed 500 mg/m2, plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2, or carboplatin [at a dose to produce area under the concentration-time curve of 5-6 mg·min/mL]) every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. PFS confirmed by independent radiology review was the primary end point.
RESULTS: Crizotinib significantly prolonged PFS (hazard ratio, 0.402; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.286-0.565; p < 0.001). The median PFS was 11.1 months with crizotinib and 6.8 months with chemotherapy. The objective response rate was 87.5% (95% CI: 79.6-93.2%) with crizotinib versus 45.6% (95% CI: 35.8-55.7%) with chemotherapy (p < 0.001). The most common adverse events were increased transaminase levels, diarrhea, and vision disorders with crizotinib and leukopenia, neutropenia, and anemia with chemotherapy. Significantly greater improvements from baseline in patient-reported outcomes were seen in crizotinib-treated versus chemotherapy-treated patients.
CONCLUSIONS: First-line crizotinib significantly improved PFS, objective response rate, and patient-reported outcomes compared with standard platinum-based chemotherapy in East Asian patients with ALK-positive advanced NSCLC, which is similar to the results from PROFILE 1014. The safety profiles of crizotinib and chemotherapy were consistent with those previously published.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study using computed tomography (CT) scans from 3 hospitals. Inclusion criteria were scans with 1-5 nodules of diameter ≥5 mm; exclusion criteria were poor-quality scans or those with nodules measuring <5mm in diameter. In the lesion detection phase, 2,147 nodules from 219 scans were used to develop and train the deep learning 3D-CNN to detect lesions. The 3D-CNN was validated with 235 scans (354 lesions) for sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis. In the path planning phase, Bayesian optimization was used to propose possible needle trajectories for lesion biopsy while avoiding vital structures. Software-proposed needle trajectories were compared with actual biopsy path trajectories from intraprocedural CT scans in 150 patients, with a match defined as an angular deviation of <5° between the 2 trajectories.
RESULTS: The model achieved an overall AUC of 97.4% (95% CI, 96.3%-98.2%) for lesion detection, with mean sensitivity of 93.5% and mean specificity of 93.2%. Among the software-proposed needle trajectories, 85.3% were feasible, with 82% matching actual paths and similar performance between supine and prone/oblique patient orientations (P = .311). The mean angular deviation between matching trajectories was 2.30° (SD ± 1.22); the mean path deviation was 2.94 mm (SD ± 1.60).
CONCLUSIONS: Segmentation, lesion detection, and path planning for CT-guided lung biopsy using an AI-guided software showed promising results. Future integration with automated robotic systems may pave the way toward fully automated biopsy procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The case records of 125 patients with NSCLC and brain metastases consecutively treated with radiotherapy at two tertiary centres from January 2006 to June 2012 were analysed for patient, tumour and treatment-related prognostic factors. Patients receiving SRS/SRT were treated using Cyberknife. Variables were examined in univariate and multivariate testing.
RESULTS: Overall median survival was 3.4 months (95%CI: 1.7-5.1). Median survival for patients with multiple metastases receiving WBRT was 1.5 months, 1-3 metastases receiving WBRT was 3.6 months and 1-3 metastases receiving surgery or SRS/SRT was 8.9 months. ECOG score (≤2 vs >2, p=0.001), presence of seizure (yes versus no, p=0.031), treatment modality according to number of brain metastases (1-3 metastases+surgery or SRS/SRT±WBRT vs 1-3 metastases+WBRT only vs multiple metastases+WBRT only, p=0.007) and the use of post-therapy systemic treatment (yes versus no, p=0.001) emerged as significant on univariate analysis. All four factors remained statistically significant on multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: ECOG ≤2, presence of seizures, oligometastatic disease treated with aggressive local therapy (surgery or SRS/SRT) and the use of post-therapy systemic treatment are favourable prognostic factors in NSCLC patients with brain metastases.
METHODS: A total of 24 seven-week-old female Balb/C mice were randomly categorised into four groups, including two control groups comprising the N-nitroso-trischloroethylurea (NTCU)-induced lung SCC and vehicle control (VC) groups and two treatment groups comprising the 10mg/kg PS (PS10) and 50mg/kg PS (PS50) groups. All lung organs were harvested at week 26 for histopathological analysis.
RESULTS: All PS treatment groups showed chemopreventive activity by inhibiting the progression of lung SCC formation with PS10, resulting in mild hyperplasia, and PS50 was completely reversed in the normal bronchial epithelium layer compared with the VC group. PS treatment also reduced the expression of cytokeratin 5/6 in the bronchial epithelium layer. Both PS10 and PS50 significantly reduced the epithelium thickness compared to the NTCU group (p<0.05). PS is a potential chemopreventive agent against lung SCC growth by suppressing the progression of pre-malignant lesions and reducing the thickness of the bronchial epithelium.
CONCLUSIONS: The underlying molecular mechanisms of PS in lung SCC should be further studied.