Osimertinib after Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III EGFR-Mutated NSCLC
Osimertinib in adjuvant, now after chemotherapy and radiation, next… Neoadjuvant??? Trials are ongoing.
This is here till progression.
Repotrectinib in ROS1 Fusion–Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Author(s): Alexander Drilon, M.D., D. Ross Camidge, M.D., Ph.D., Jessica J. Lin, M.D., Sang-We Kim, M.D., Ph.D., Benjamin J. Solomon, M.B., B.S., Ph.D., Rafal Dziadziuszko, M.D., Ph.D., Benjamin Besse, M.D., Ph.D., Koichi Goto, M.D., Ph.D., Adrianus Johannes de Langen, M.D., Ph.D., Jürgen Wolf, M.D., Ki Hyeong Lee, M.D., Ph.D., Sanjay Popat, M.B., B.S., Ph.D., Christoph Springfeld, M.D., Ph.D., Misako Nagasaka, M.D., Ph.D., Enriqueta Felip, M.D., Ph.D., Nong Yang, M.D., Vamsidhar Velcheti, M.D., Shun Lu, M.D., Ph.D., Steven Kao, M.B., Ch.B., Ph.D., Christophe Dooms, M.D., Ph.D., Matthew G. Krebs, M.D., Ph.D., Wenxiu Yao, Ph.D., Muhammad Shaalan Beg, M.S., M.D., Xiufeng Hu, M.D., Denis Moro-Sibilot, M.D., Parneet Cheema, M.D., Shanna Stopatschinskaja, M.D., Minal Mehta, M.B., B.S., Denise Trone, M.S., Armin Graber, Ph.D., Gregory Sims, Ph.D., Yong Yuan, Ph.D., and Byoung Chul Cho, M.D., Ph.D. for the TRIDENT-1 Investigators*
Source: N Engl J Med 2024; 390:118-131 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2302299
Dr. Anjan Patel's Thoughts
The old cliche of more agents than patients seems to be true in the small group of ROS1+ NSCLC. Repotrectinib is one of the newer ones out there and worthy of our consideration.
BACKGROUND
The early-generation ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that are approved for the treatment of ROS1 fusion–positive non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have antitumor activity, but resistance develops in tumors, and intracranial activity is suboptimal. Repotrectinib is a next-generation ROS1 TKI with preclinical activity against ROS1 fusion–positive cancers, including those with resistance mutations such as ROS1 G2032R.
METHODS
In this registrational phase 1–2 trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of repotrectinib in patients with advanced solid tumors, including ROS1 fusion–positive NSCLC. The primary efficacy end point in the phase 2 trial was confirmed objective response; efficacy analyses included patients from phase 1 and phase 2. Duration of response, progression-free survival, and safety were secondary end points in phase 2.
RESULTS
On the basis of results from the phase 1 trial, the recommended phase 2 dose of repotrectinib was 160 mg daily for 14 days, followed by 160 mg twice daily. Response occurred in 56 of the 71 patients (79%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 68 to 88) with ROS1 fusion–positive NSCLC who had not previously received a ROS1 TKI; the median duration of response was 34.1 months (95% CI, 25.6 to could not be estimated), and median progression-free survival was 35.7 months (95% CI, 27.4 to could not be estimated). Response occurred in 21 of the 56 patients (38%; 95% CI, 25 to 52) with ROS1 fusion–positive NSCLC who had previously received one ROS1 TKI and had never received chemotherapy; the median duration of response was 14.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to could not be estimated), and median progression-free survival was 9.0 months (95% CI, 6.8 to 19.6). Ten of the 17 patients (59%; 95% CI, 33 to 82) with the ROS1 G2032R mutation had a response. A total of 426 patients received the phase 2 dose; the most common treatment-related adverse events were dizziness (in 58% of the patients), dysgeusia (in 50%), and paresthesia (in 30%), and 3% discontinued repotrectinib owing to treatment-related adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
Repotrectinib had durable clinical activity in patients with ROS1 fusion–positive NSCLC, regardless of whether they had previously received a ROS1 TKI. Adverse events were mainly of low grade and compatible with long-term administration. (Funded by Turning Point Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Bristol Myers Squibb; TRIDENT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03093116. opens in new tab.)
Author Affiliations
From Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College (A.D.) and the NYU Perlmutter Cancer Center (V.V.) — all in New York; the University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora (D.R.C.); Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston (J.J.L.); Asan Medical Center (S.-W.K.) and Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine (B.C.C.), Seoul, and Chungbuk National University Hospital, Cheongju-si (K.H.L.) — all in South Korea; the Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC (B.J.S.), and the Chris O’Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, NSW (S.K.) — both in Australia; the Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy and Early Clinical Trials Center, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland (R.D.); Paris-Saclay University, Gustave Roussy Cancer Center, Villejuif (B.B.), and Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble–Alpes, La Tronche (D.M.-S.) — both in France; National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan (K.G.); the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam (A.J.L.); the Center for Integrated Oncology, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne (J.W.), and the Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg (C.S.) — both in Germany; the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and the Institute of Cancer Research, London (S.P.), and the University of Manchester and the Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester (M.G.K.) — all in the United Kingdom; the University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange (M.N.), and Turning Point Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Bristol Myers Squibb, San Diego (S.S., M.M., D.T., A.G., G.S.) — both in California; Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology, Barcelona (E.F.); Hunan Cancer Hospital, Hunan (N.Y.), the Department of Oncology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai (S.L.), Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Institute, Chengdu (W.Y.), and Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou (X.H.) — all in China; the Respiratory Oncology Unit, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium (C.D.); UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas (M.S.B.); William Osler Health System, University of Toronto, Toronto (P.C.); and Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ (Y.Y.).Related Articles
Amivantamab plus Lazertinib in Previously Untreated EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC
Another possible option for first line NSCLC EGFR mutated (non-exon 20) is Osimertinib (osi). Osi and chemotherapy had less brain metastases. And with Amivantamab and Lazertinib (EGFR inhibitor), the combination had better PFS and OS (HR0.8). Higher toxicity though with 10% discontinuation vs 3% for Osimertinib. This is interim analysis, toxicity was EGFR related mostly.
Osimertinib after Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III EGFR-Mutated NSCLC
Osimertinib resulted in a significant progression-free survival benefit as compared with placebo: the median progression-free survival was 39.1 months with osimertinib versus 5.6 months with placebo in the EGFR mutated patients. Osmiertinib shows efficacy in patients with EGFR mutation who underwent curative surgery or chemoradiotherapy.
Perioperative Nivolumab in Resectable Lung Cancer
Perioperative nivolumab (Nivo) showed a 20% 18-month EFPS improvement. This is another option to consider for your patients with stage IIA-IIIB NSCLC. Of note, the study arm received chemo + Nivo x 4 cycles preoperatively, then 12 months of Nivo therapy, and toxicities were as expected.
Plasma Proteome–Based Test for First-Line Treatment Selection in Metastatic Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer
FCS medical oncologist and hematologist Ernesto Bustinza-Linares, MD has co-authored an abstract published in the American Society of Clinical Oncology Journal, JCO Precision Oncology, that uncovers a new testing method to determine personalized care options for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The abstract’s authors address the limitations of existing guidelines that recommend checkpoint immunotherapy, sometimes in combination with chemotherapy, for treating NSCLC, which often discounts patient variability and immune factors. The findings from the study show that by incorporating additional plasma proteome-based testing, combined with the standard protein inhibitor testing, clear differences in patient outcomes were observed after applying targeted treatments based on the testing results.
