Introduction: This randomized phase II trial aimed at evaluating the engineered programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody atezolizumab in SCLC progressing after first-line platinum-etoposide chemotherapy. Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxicity, or conventional chemotherapy (up to 6 cycles of topotecan or re-induction of initial chemotherapy). Patients were not selected based on PD-L1 tissue expression. The primary endpoint was objective response rate at 6 weeks. A two-stage design with 2:1 randomization and O'Brien-Fleming stopping rules was used. The null hypothesis was rejected if more than 12 of 45 patients were responders. Results: Overall, 73 patients were randomized (atezolizumab n ¼ 49; chemotherapy n ¼ 24). At 6 weeks, 1 of 43 eligible atezolizumab patients achieved an objective response (2.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0-6.8), whereas 8 others had stable disease (20.9% disease control rate; 95% CI: 8.8-33.1). Among eligible chemotherapy patients (n ¼ 20), 10% achieved an objective response (65% disease control rate). Median progression-free survival was 1.4 months (95% CI: 1.2-1.5) with atezolizumab and 4.3 months (95% CI: 1.5-5.9) with chemotherapy. Overall survival did not significantly differ between groups. Median overall survival was 9.5 months versus 8.7 months for the atezolizumab and the chemotherapy group, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio atezolizumab : 0.84, 95% CI: 0.45-1.58; p ¼ 0.60). Two atezolizumab patients (4.2%) experienced grade 3 fatigue, and two others grade 1 dysthyroidism. Among 53 evaluable specimens, only 1 (2%) had positive immunohistochemical PD-L1 staining (SP142 clone). Conclusions: Atezolizumab monotherapy in relapsed SCLC failed to show significant efficacy. No unexpected safety concerns were observed.

@ERSpublications Total cell-free DNA is not associated with chemotherapy response in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer http://ow.ly/Qpqyx ABSTRACT Plasma circulating cell-free (cf)DNA is of interest in oncology because it has been shown to contain tumour DNA and may thus be used as liquid biopsy. In nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), cfDNA quantification has been proposed for the monitoring and follow-up of patients. However, available studies are limited and need to be confirmed by studies with larger sample sizes and including patients who receive more homogenous treatments. Our objective was to assess the predictive and prognostic value of plasma cfDNA concentration in a large series of patients with NSCLC and treated with a standard chemotherapy regimen.We included samples from lung cancer patients recruited into the Pharmacogenoscan study. The cfDNA of 218 patients was extracted and quantified by fluorometry before and after two or three cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy. The association between baseline and post-chemotherapy concentrations and treatment response, assessed by RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumours) or patient survival was analysed.Patients with high cfDNA concentrations (highest tertile) at baseline had a significantly worse disease-free and overall survival than those with lower concentrations (lowest and middle tertiles) (median overall survival 10 months (95% CI 10.7-13.9) versus 14.2 months (95% CI 12.6-15.8), respectively; p=0.001). In multivariate analysis, increased baseline concentration of cfDNA was an independent prognostic factor. However, we did not find any association between cfDNA concentration and response to treatment.cfDNA may be a biomarker for the assessment of prognosis in NSCLC. However, total concentration of cfDNA does not appear to predict chemotherapy response.

CfDNA samples from colon (mCRC) and non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) (CIRCAN cohort) were compared using three platforms: droplet digital PCR (ddPCR, Biorad); BEAMing/OncoBEAM™-RAS-CRC (Sysmex Inostics); next-generation sequencing (NGS, Illumina), utilizing the 56G oncology panel (Swift Biosciences). Tissue biopsy and time matched cfDNA samples were collected at diagnosis in the mCRC cohort and during 1st progression in the NSCLC cohort. Excellent matches between cfDNA/FFPE mutation profiles were observed. Detection thresholds were between 0.5–1% for cfDNA samples examined using ddPCR and NGS, and 0.03% with BEAMing. This high level of sensitivity enabled the detection of KRAS mutations in 5/19 CRC patients with negative FFPE profiles. In the mCRC cohort, comparison of mutation results obtained by testing FFPE to those obtained by testing cfDNA by ddPCR resulted in 47% sensitivity, 77% specificity, 70% positive predictive value (PPV) and 55% negative predictive value (NPV). For BEAMing, we observed 93% sensitivity, 69% specificity, 78% PPV and 90% NPV. Finally, sensitivity of NGS was 73%, specificity was 77%, PPV 79% and NPV 71%.Our study highlights the complementarity of different diagnostic approaches and variability of results between OncoBEAM™-RAS-CRC and NGS assays. While the NGS assay provided a larger breadth of coverage of the major targetable alterations of 56 genes in one run, its performance for specific alterations was frequently confirmed by ddPCR results.