No abstract

Introduction: Immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) efficacy in patients with NSCLC harboring molecular alterations remains poorly elucidated. This study was undertaken to determine ICI efficacy against BRAF-, HER2-, MET-, and RET-NSCLC in a real-world setting.Methods: In this retrospective, multicenter study in ICItreated BRAF-, HER2-, MET-or RET-NSCLCs, we analyzed clinical characteristics and outcomes: ICI-treatment duration, progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, duration of response, and overall survival (OS).Results: There were 107 patients with NSCLC (mean age, 65.5 y) included from 21 centers: 37% were neversmokers, 54% were men, and 93% had adenocarcinoma. Among them, 44 had BRAF mutation (V600: 26), 23 had HER2 mutation, 30 had MET mutation, and nine had RET translocation. Programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status was known for 70 patients and was greater than or equal to 1% in 34 patients. Before ICI, patients had received a median of one treatment line. Median duration of response, PFS, and OS were 15.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.6-not reached [NR]) months, 4.7 (95% CI: 2.3-7.4) months, and 16.2 (95% CI: 12.0-24.0) months, respectively, for the entire cohort. The response rates for BRAF-V600, BRAF-non-V600, HER2, MET, and RET-altered NSCLC were 26%, 35%, 27%, 36%, and 38%, respectively. For patients who were PD-L1 negative and those who were PD-L1 positive, PFS was 3.0 (95% CI: 1.2-NR) and 4.3 (95% CI: 2.1-8.5) months, respectively, and OS was 11.7 (95% CI: 4.1-NR) and 35.8 (95% CI: 9.0-35.2) months, respectively. Toxicities were reported in 28 patients (26%), including 11 patients (10%) with a grade greater than or equal to three. Conclusions:In this real-world setting, ICI efficacy against patients with BRAF-, HER2-, MET-, or RET-NSCLC seemed close to that observed in unselected patients with NSCLC. Large prospective studies on these subsets of patients are needed.

Although impressive differences in median, 3-year, and 4-year survival were observed, they were not statistically significant, except for stage I and II disease.

Background: This multicenter, randomized, phase III study compared the efficacy, including progression-free survival (PFS), and safety of gemcitabine -docetaxel (GD) combination versus cisplatin-vinorelbine (CV) in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Results: A total of 311 patients were enrolled (155 GD and 156 CV). Neither PFS nor overall survival differed significantly between the two arms (median PFS 4.2 and 4 months; median survival 11.1 and 9.6 months; 1-year survival 46% and 42%, for GD and CV, respectively). For the GD arm compared with the CV arm, the hazard ratio for PFS was 1.04 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 -1.32], and for overall survival, it was 0.90 (95% CI 0.70 -1.16). Objective response rates did not differ significantly (31% for GD, 35.9% for CV). Myelosupression, emesis and frequency of febrile neutropenia were less pronounced on the GD arm, whereas fluid retention and pulmonary events were more pronounced. The CV arm experienced a higher number of serious adverse events and a lower compliance with the protocol. There was no quality of life (QoL) difference between arms. Median time to definite impairment of health-related QoL was 153 and 168 days in GD and CV arms, respectively. Conclusions: There was no advantage in PFS with GD compared with CV; however, the CV regimen had higher rate of toxic events, mainly myelosuppression. The herein, non-platinum-containing regimen could be considered as a rational alternative to the cisplatin-based doublet.

Treatment with thalidomide was not associated with a significant improvement in survival of SCLC patients. There was pronounced heterogeneity in survival outcomes between groups of patients. Some benefit was observed among patients with a PS of 1 or 2 (exploratory analyses), deserving further studies targeting angiogenesis in this disease.