Inflammatory meditated mechanisms of cisplatin resistance in non-small cell lung cancer

The majority of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients present with advanced stage disease, where chemotherapy is usually the most common treatment option. While somewhat effective, patients treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy will eventually develop resistance. Multiple pathways have been implicated in chemo-resistance, however the critical underlying mechanisms have yet to be elucidated. The aim of this project is to determine the role of inflammatory mediators in cisplatin resistance.

Afatinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (LUX-Lung 7): a phase 2B, open-label, randomised controlled trial

Background The irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib and the reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib are approved for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of afatinib and gefitinib in this setting. Methods This multicentre, international, open-label, exploratory, randomised controlled phase 2B trial (LUX-Lung 7) was done at 64 centres in 13 countries. Treatment-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a common EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or Leu858Arg) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or gefitinib (250 mg per day) until disease progression, or beyond if deemed beneficial by the investigator. Randomisation, stratified by EGFR mutation type and status of brain metastases, was done centrally using a validated number generating system implemented via an interactive voice or web-based response system with a block size of four. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival by independent central review, time-to-treatment failure, and overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01466660. Findings Between Dec 13, 2011, and Aug 8, 2013, 319 patients were randomly assigned (160 to afatinib and 159 to gefitinib). Median follow-up was 27·3 months (IQR 15·3–33·9). Progression-free survival (median 11·0 months [95% CI 10·6–12·9] with afatinib vs 10·9 months [9·1–11·5] with gefitinib; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·57–0·95], p=0·017) and time-to-treatment failure (median 13·7 months [95% CI 11·9–15·0] with afatinib vs 11·5 months [10·1–13·1] with gefitinib; HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·58–0·92], p=0·0073) were significantly longer with afatinib than with gefitinib. Overall survival data are not mature. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (20 [13%] of 160 patients given afatinib vs two [1%] of 159 given gefitinib) and rash or acne (15 [9%] patients given afatinib vs five [3%] of those given gefitinib) and liver enzyme elevations (no patients given afatinib vs 14 [9%] of those given gefitinib). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 17 (11%) patients in the afatinib group and seven (4%) in the gefitinib group. Ten (6%) patients in each group discontinued treatment due to drug-related adverse events. 15 (9%) fatal adverse events occurred in the afatinib group and ten (6%) in the gefitinib group. All but one of these deaths were considered unrelated to treatment; one patient in the gefitinib group died from drug-related hepatic and renal failure. Interpretation Afatinib significantly improved outcomes in treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC compared with gefitinib, with a manageable tolerability profile. These data are potentially important for clinical decision making in this patient population.

Clinician perspective on molecular profiling of non-small-cell lung cancer

The article by Meric-Bernstam et al1 that was recently published in Journal of Clinical Oncology raises important questions about the clinical application of large-scale genomic testing. We congratulate the authors for this ambitious study, which successfully profiled 2,000 consecutive patients with advanced cancer. The next-generation sequencing (NGS) platform was used for 1,749 of 2,000 patients (87.5%). Of 789 patients with potentially actionable mutations, 83 (11%, or 4% of screened population) were enrolled in a genomically matched clinical study. As the editorial2 accompanying the article by Meric-Bernstam et al1 pointed out, the 4% figure, albeit disappointing, may be an underestimate because cancers such as lung adenocarcinoma and melanoma, for which ≥ 50% of patients have actionable mutations, were under-represented. ...

Cilengitide combined with cetuximab and platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients: Results of an open-label, randomized, controlled phase II study (CERTO)

Background: This multicentre, open-label, randomized, controlled phase II study evaluated cilengitide in combination with cetuximab and platinum-based chemotherapy, compared with cetuximab and chemotherapy alone, as first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive cetuximab plus platinum-based chemotherapy alone (control), or combined with cilengitide 2000 mg 1×/week i.v. (CIL-once) or 2×/week i.v. (CIL-twice). A protocol amendment limited enrolment to patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) histoscore ≥200 and closed the CIL-twice arm for practical feasibility issues. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS; independent read); secondary end points included overall survival (OS), safety, and biomarker analyses. A comparison between the CIL-once and control arms is reported, both for the total cohorts, as well as for patients with EGFR histoscore ≥200. Results: There were 85 patients in the CIL-once group and 84 in the control group. The PFS (independent read) was 6.2 versus 5.0 months for CIL-once versus control [hazard ratio (HR) 0.72; P = 0.085]; for patients with EGFR histoscore ≥200, PFS was 6.8 versus 5.6 months, respectively (HR 0.57; P = 0.0446). Median OS was 13.6 for CIL-once versus 9.7 months for control (HR 0.81; P = 0.265). In patients with EGFR ≥200, OS was 13.2 versus 11.8 months, respectively (HR 0.95; P = 0.855). No major differences in adverse events between CIL-once and control were reported; nausea (59% versus 56%, respectively) and neutropenia (54% versus 46%, respectively) were the most frequent. There was no increased incidence of thromboembolic events or haemorrhage in cilengitide-treated patients. αvβ3 and αvβ5 expression was neither a predictive nor a prognostic indicator. Conclusions: The addition of cilengitide to cetuximab/chemotherapy indicated potential clinical activity, with a trend for PFS difference in the independent-read analysis. However, the observed inconsistencies across end points suggest additional investigations are required to substantiate a potential role of other integrin inhibitors in NSCLC treatment.

VEGF-mediated cell survival in non-small-cell lung cancer: implications for epigenetic targeting of VEGF receptors as a therapeutic approach

Aims: To evaluate the potential therapeutic utility of histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) in targeting VEGF receptors in non-small-cell lung cancer. Materials & methods: Non-small-cell lung cancer cells were screened for the VEGF receptors at the mRNA and protein levels, while cellular responses to various HDACi were examined. Results: Significant effects on the regulation of the VEGF receptors were observed in response to HDACi. These were associated with decreased secretion of VEGF, decreased cellular proliferation and increased apoptosis which could not be rescued by addition of exogenous recombinant VEGF. Direct remodeling of the VEGFR1 and VEGFR2 promoters was observed. In contrast, HDACi treatments resulted in significant downregulation of the Neuropilin receptors. Conclusion: Epigenetic targeting of the Neuropilin receptors may offer an effective treatment for lung cancer patients in the clinical setting.

Mutational analysis of the insulin‑like growth factor 1 receptor tyrosine kinase domain in non-small cell lung cancer patients

The insulin‑like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF1R) pathway plays an important role in the pathogenesis of non‑small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and also provides a mechanism of resistance to targeted therapies. IGF1R is therefore an ideal therapeutic target and several inhibitors have entered clinical trials. However, thus far the response to these inhibitors has been poor, highlighting the importance of predictive biomarkers to identify patient cohorts who will benefit from these targeted agents. It is well‑documented that mutations and/or deletions in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase (TK) domain predict sensitivity of NSCLC patients to EGFR TK inhibitors. Single‑nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the IGF pathway have been associated with disease, including breast and prostate cancer. The aim of the present study was to elucidate whether the IGF1R TK domain harbours SNPs, somatic mutations or deletions in NSCLC patients and correlates the mutation status to patient clinicopathological data and prognosis. Initially 100 NSCLC patients were screened for mutations/deletions in the IGF1R TK domain (exons 16‑21) by sequencing analysis. Following the identification of SNP rs2229765, a further 98 NSCLC patients and 866 healthy disease‑free control patients were genotyped using an SNP assay. The synonymous SNP (rs2229765) was the only aberrant base change identified in the IGF1R TK domain of 100 NSCLC patients initially analysed. SNP rs2229765 was detected in exon 16 and was found to have no significant association between IGF1R expression and survival. The GA genotype was identified in 53.5 and 49.4% of NSCLC patients and control individuals, respectively. No significant difference was found in the genotype (P=0.5487) or allele (P=0.9082) frequencies between the case and control group. The present findings indicate that in contrast to the EGFR TK domain, the IGF1R TK domain is not frequently mutated in NSCLC patients. The synonymous SNP (rs2229765) had no significant association between IGF1R expression and survival in the cohort of NSCLC patients.

2nd ESMO Consensus Conference in Lung Cancer: Locally advanced stage III non-small-cell lung cancer

To complement the existing treatment guidelines for all tumour types, ESMO organises consensus conferences to focus on specific issues in each type of tumour. The 2nd ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer was held on 11–12 May 2013 in Lugano. A total of 35 experts met to address several questions on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in each of four areas: pathology and molecular biomarkers, first-line/second and further lines of treatment in advanced disease, early-stage disease and locally advanced disease. For each question, recommendations were made including reference to the grade of recommendation and level of evidence. This consensus paper focuses on locally advanced disease.

Survival in 176 patients with inoperable non small cell lung cancer treated initially with chemotherapy in a district general hospital

In advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) platinum based chemotherapy with second generation drugs improves median survival (MS) to 8 months and 29% and 10% at 1 and 2 years. Platinum with a third generation drug can improve survival further (BMJ 1995;311: 899) (Spiro et al. Thorax 2004;59:828 Big Lung Trial; N Engl J Med 2003;346:92 ECOG study). NICE now recommends chemotherapy with platinum and a third generation drug for inoperable NSCLC as the first treatment modality. Methods: We audited survival of 176/461 consecutive patients referred for at least 3 courses of platinum and either gemcitabine or vinorelbine from July 2001 to December 2005. Minimal follow up 17 months. Chemotherapy was given on site. Radical radiotherapy for stage IIIA, palliative radiotherapy and second line drugs were given as felt appropriate. Results: 64% were male. 30 (17%) were <55 years ; 66 (37.5%) age 55–65 years; 63 (35.8%) aged 66–75 and 16 (9.1%) >75 years. 5 (2.8%) were stage II; 46 (26%) stage IIIA; 68 (38%) stage IIIB and 55 (30.8%) stage IV. 68 (38%) had 0– 2 courses; 63 (36%) 3 courses and 44 (25%) had 4 or more.

The impact of virtual simulation in palliative radiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer.

Background and purpose: Radiotherapy is widely used to palliate local symptoms in non-small-cell lung cancer. Using conventional X-ray simulation, it is often difficult to accurately localize the extent of the tumour. We report a randomized, double blind trial comparing target localization with conventional and virtual simulation.Methods: Eighty-six patients underwent both conventional and virtual simulation. The conventional simulator films were compared with digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) produced from the computed tomography (CT) data. The treatment fields defined by the clinicians using each modality were compared in terms of field area, position and the implications for target coverage.Results: Comparing fields defined by each study arm, there was a major mis-match in coverage between fields in 66.2% of cases, and a complete match in only 5.2% of cases. In 82.4% of cases, conventional simulator fields were larger (mean 24.5+/-5.1% (95% confidence interval)) than CT-localized fields, potentially contributing to a mean target under-coverage of 16.4+/-3.5% and normal tissue over-coverage of 25.4+/-4.2%.Conclusions: CT localization and virtual simulation allow more accurate definition of the target volume. This could enable a reduction in geographical misses, while also reducing treatment-related toxicity.

Generation of a non-small cell lung cancer transcriptome microarray

Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. At present no reliable biomarkers are available to guide the management of this condition. Microarray technology may allow appropriate biomarkers to be identified but present platforms are lacking disease focus and are thus likely to miss potentially vital information contained in patient tissue samples.