Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology 2019-08-01
Immune checkpoint inhibitors for patients with advanced lung cancer and oncogenic driver alterations: results from the IMMUNOTARGET registry.
Abstract
Background
Anti-PD1/PD-L1 directed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are widely used to treat patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The activity of ICI across NSCLC harboring oncogenic alterations is poorly characterized. The aim of our study was to address the efficacy of ICI in the context of oncogenic addiction.
Patients and methods
We conducted a retrospective study for patients receiving ICI monotherapy for advanced NSCLC with at least one oncogenic driver alteration. Anonymized data were evaluated for clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes for ICI therapy: best response (RECIST 1.1), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) from ICI initiation. The primary end point was PFS under ICI. Secondary end points were best response (RECIST 1.1) and OS from ICI initiation.
Results
We studied 551 patients treated in 24 centers from 10 countries. The molecular alterations involved KRAS (n = 271), EGFR (n = 125), BRAF (n = 43), MET (n = 36), HER2 (n = 29), ALK (n = 23), RET (n = 16), ROS1 (n = 7), and multiple drivers (n = 1). Median age was 60 years, gender ratio was 1 : 1, never/former/current smokers were 28%/51%/21%, respectively, and the majority of tumors were adenocarcinoma. The objective response rate by driver alteration was: KRAS = 26%, BRAF = 24%, ROS1 = 17%, MET = 16%, EGFR = 12%, HER2 = 7%, RET = 6%, and ALK = 0%. In the entire cohort, median PFS was 2.8 months, OS 13.3 months, and the best response rate 19%. In a subgroup analysis, median PFS (in months) was 2.1 for EGFR, 3.2 for KRAS, 2.5 for ALK, 3.1 for BRAF, 2.5 for HER2, 2.1 for RET, and 3.4 for MET. In certain subgroups, PFS was positively associated with PD-L1 expression (KRAS, EGFR) and with smoking status (BRAF, HER2).
Conclusions
: ICI induced regression in some tumors with actionable driver alterations, but clinical activity was lower compared with the KRAS group and the lack of response in the ALK group was notable. Patients with actionable tumor alterations should receive targeted therapies and chemotherapy before considering immunotherapy as a single agent.
Related Questions
In patients with EGFR mutant L858R stage III NSCLC who are unresectable due to multistation N2 disease, would you consider upfront osimertinib over definitive intent CCRT?
This is a very complex question that is common among our thoracic tumor board discussions. I'll answer the latter question first. In this case, I would not offer consolidative durvalumab.There are data that immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have minimal to no benefit in the metastatic setting base...
What adjuvant therapy would you offer following adjuvant chemotherapy for a patient with Stage III lung adenocarcinoma with an atypical EGFR mutation such as EGFR L861R?
Mutations at position 861 (most commonly L861Q) have been described, occurring in approximately 2% of all EGFR-mutant patients [Mitsudomi and Yatabe, PMID 19922469]. These mutations are considered partially sensitizing to afatinib based on a post-hoc analysis of LUX-Lung 2, LUX-Lung 3, and LUX-Lung ...
How would you approach treatment of a patient with metastatic NSCLC with PD-L1>1% and HER2-mutation?
No, I do not believe that this changes anything for that population. The immunotherapy trials excluded patients with EGFR and ALK, but did not necessarily exclude patients with HER–2 mutations. Given the impressive survival outcomes seen with immunotherapy and chemoimmunotherapy, personally, I would...
How do you approach patients with driver mutation positive, Stage IV NSCLC who don't benefit from upfront first-line TKI?
It depends on the mutation. EGFR mutants after Osimertinib:- If oligometastatic disease: an option is radiation to the oligometastatic spots and continue osimertinib. It is important to re-biopsy as well due to the possibility of small cell transformation. If transformed to small cell, in general, c...
Do you avoid immunotherapy in patients with Stage IV NSCLC with atypical EGFR mutations such as G719S or S768I?
This is a difficult situation, but typically I would try to treat patients with an EGFR TKI (ideally in the context of a clinical trial) or with afatinib. Pooled data from the LUX-Lung studies [Yang et al., PMID 26051236] demonstrated an ORR of 71%, PFS 10.7 months, and OS of 19.4 months for Group 1...
Are you treating patients with RET-fusion+ metastatic NSCLC with RET inhibitors as the first line of therapy regardless of PD-L1 expression?
Yes, I do treat with RET inhibitors regardless of PD-L1 status given the response rates on the order of 70-85% in treatment naive patients with selpercatinib and pralsetinib. If we look to the data of immunotherapy in other actionable oncogene driven subsets of lung cancer like EGFR mt NSCLC, the re...
How would you approach frontline treatment of a patient with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC with ERBB2 amplification and PD-L1 > 50%?
This interesting case brings up how to separate in our work fact from fiction. We are presented with a case of a patient with metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer with a PD-L1 TPS score of 55% and ERBB2 amplification by Foundation One testing.What is the right approach? Standard chemo/...