Lou, Yanyan

RET fusions appear in 1%-2% of non–small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). The results from the ARROW study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03037385 ) supported US Food and Drug Administration approval of pralsetinib, an oral selective RET inhibitor, for metastatic RET -altered NSCLC and RET fusion–positive thyroid cancers. ARROW was a phase I/II open-label study of pralsetinib 400 mg once daily in RET fusion–positive NSCLCs. Coprimary end points were overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Key secondary end points included duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). At data lock (May 20, 2024), 281 patients initiated pralsetinib (median treatment duration, 15.0 months). ORR (measurable disease patients; n = 259) was 78% (95% CI, 69 to 86) for treatment-naïve patients and 63% (95% CI, 54 to 71) for prior platinum-based chemotherapy patients. Median OS was 44.3 months (95% CI, 30.9 to 53.1), 50.1 months (95% CI, 28.3 to not reached) in treatment-naïve patients, and 39.7 months (95% CI, 27.8 to 53.2) in prior platinum patients. Common grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events were anemia (21%), hypertension (15%), and decreased neutrophils (13%). Three treatment-related deaths occurred (pneumonia, n = 2; interstitial lung disease and rhabdomyolysis, n = 1 each). Safety was consistent with previous ARROW reports; no hypersensitivity was reported in patients receiving prior immunotherapies. Pralsetinib produced robust, durable responses with manageable safety in treatment-naïve and previously treated patients with RET fusion–positive NSCLCs, confirming previous findings with longer follow-up.

PURPOSE Current guidelines for the management of metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without driver mutations recommend checkpoint immunotherapy with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, either alone or in combination with chemotherapy. This approach fails to account for individual patient variability and host immune factors and often results in less-than-ideal outcomes. To address the limitations of the current guidelines, we developed and subsequently blindly validated a machine learning algorithm using pretreatment plasma proteomic profiles for personalized treatment decisions. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a multicenter observational trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04056247 ) of patients undergoing PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor–based therapy (n = 540) and an additional patient cohort receiving chemotherapy (n = 85) who consented to pretreatment plasma and clinical data collection. Plasma proteome profiling was performed using SomaScan Assay v4.1. RESULTS Our test demonstrates a strong association between model output and clinical benefit (CB) from PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor–based treatments, evidenced by high concordance between predicted and observed CB ( R 2 = 0.98, P < .001). The test categorizes patients as either PROphet-positive or PROphet-negative and further stratifies patient outcomes beyond PD-L1 expression levels. The test successfully differentiates between PROphet-negative patients exhibiting high tumor PD-L1 levels (≥50%) who have enhanced overall survival when treated with a combination of immunotherapy and chemotherapy compared with immunotherapy alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.23 [95% CI, 0.1 to 0.51], P = .0003). By contrast, PROphet-positive patients show comparable outcomes when treated with immunotherapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.42 to 1.44], P = .424). CONCLUSION Plasma proteome–based testing of individual patients, in combination with standard PD-L1 testing, distinguishes patient subsets with distinct differences in outcomes from PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor–based therapies. These data suggest that this approach can improve the precision of first-line treatment for metastatic NSCLC.

AbstractBackgroundClinical trials are an essential part of advancing care for cancer patients. Historically, however, racial minorities and females have been underrepresented in these trials. Efforts like the National Institute of Health Revitalization Act attempted to mitigate these disparities, but despite these efforts, they continue to exist. These disparities can subsequently lead to minorities and females receiving suboptimal care.AimsThe purpose of our study was to understand the changing trends in reporting of participant race and sex as a demographic variable in phase III lung cancer clinical trials published over the last 35 years given these consequences of poor representation.Methods and resultsA total of 426 articles reporting the results of phase III lung cancer clinical trials published from 1984 to 2019 were identified in PubMed. From these articles, data on participant sex and race were collected from the demographic tables to construct the database for this study. This database was subsequently used to determine the rate of reporting of demographic factors like race and sex and the participation trends over the time of minority and female participation in lung cancer phase III clinical trials. The SciPy Stats package for Python was used to calculate descriptive statistics, 95% confidence intervals, two sample t‐test, one‐way analysis of variance test, and Pearson's correlation coefficients. The Matplotlib package for Python was used for figure generation. Only 137 (32.2%) of the 426 studies analyzed reported the race of participants. Among those studies, we found that the mean participation rate of White participants was significantly higher (82.65%; p < .001). We found a decrease in African American participants and an increase in Asian participants over time. When looking at sex, we found that although the rate of male participation (69.02%) was significantly higher than that of female participation (30.98%), female participation has improved with time at a rate of 0.65% per year.ConclusionWe found that the reporting and participation of minority races continue to lag that of other demographic factors like sex in phase III clinical trials in lung cancer. Based on our analysis, we note a decline in participation of African Americans in lung cancer phase III clinical trials despite the rising incidence of lung cancer.

Abstract Purpose: The aim of the study was to determine safety, antitumor activity, and pharmacodynamic profile of mogamulizumab, an anti-CCR4 monoclonal antibody targeting effector regulatory T cells (Treg) in combination with the checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors. Patients and Methods: This was a multicenter, dose-finding (phase I), and dose expansion (phase II) study (NCT02705105) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors. There were no dose-limiting toxicities in phase I with mogamulizumab 1 mg/kg every week for cycle 1 followed by 1 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks intravenously, and cohort expansion occurred at this dose level. Results: All 114 patients treated with mogamulizumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 240 mg in phases I (n = 4) and II (n = 110) were assessed for safety and efficacy. Mogamulizumab plus nivolumab showed acceptable safety and tolerability. Objective response rate was 10.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 5.6–17.7; 3 complete and 9 partial responses]. Disease control rate was 36.8%. Median duration of response was 14.4 months. Median progression-free survival was 2.6 (95% CI, 2.3–3.1) months, and median overall survival was 9.5 (95% CI, 5.9–13.5) months. Conclusions: Combination of mogamulizumab with nivolumab for treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors did not result in enhanced efficacy. Tolerability of mogamulizumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 240 mg was acceptable.