At the recent <em>20th Annual </em>International Lung Cancer Congress® in Huntington Beach, California, a number of very prominent contributors to the lung cancer translational and clinical field provided updates regarding novel strategies to address unmet needs.
Robert l.Ferris, MD, PhD
Robert l. Ferris, MD, PhD
The transformation in cancertherapy between progress in genomic subclassification based on targetable alterations in oncogenic signaling pathways versus induction of neoantigens permitting successful cancer immunotherapy is perhaps nowhere more relevant and prevalent than in both nonsmall cell and small cell lung cancer (SCLC). At the recent20th AnnualInternational Lung Cancer Congress® in Huntington Beach, California, a number of very prominent contributors to the lung cancer translational and clinical field provided updates regarding novel strategies to address unmet needs. David R. Gandara, MD, reminded us that predictive, biomarker-driven trials will only be developed for both tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), as well as immune check- point inhibitors, if we can design clinical trials with integrated statistically robust biomarker companion assays. He indicated that 3 prerequisites for a more personalized approach would facilitate this development: tissue or blood-based profiling, linkage of predictive genomic biomarkers with targeted agents, and clinical trial designs with robust statistics to define the activity of a subset of individuals for the drug hitting its target. Some similarly designed trials include the Lung Cancer Master Protocol (Lung-MAP), an umbrella design study with substudies based on a genomic profile. There are proliferating and large prevalence cancers such as nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that are well suited to drive patient selection and drug combinations. Certainly, acquired resistance may occur and sequential personalized, genomically-driven biomarker-oriented studies need to be designed.
Gandara also pointed out that combination therapies for lung cancer, particularly unless they are biomarker driven to detect smaller-effect sizes in the general population or greatereffect sizes in smaller subsets based on robust clinical trials, may lead to recruitment fatigue. Some PD-1/PD-L1 trials have seen decline in recruitment with these all-comer phase III designs that are not efficiently optimizing the benefit for selected populations. He strongly recommended that designing the trials to build in predictive biomarkers will advance the field of immunotherapy, much as the genomic biomarker-driven precision oncology field has done forALK- orEGFR-driven NSCLC. Indeed, new markers and alterations such asKRASare creating opportunities, which has long been difficult to target. Furthermore, the mutational burden subgroup may have immunotherapy combinations as well.
Jhaveri Compares Safety and Duration of Adjuvant CDK4/6 Inhibitors in HR+ Breast Cancer
December 22nd 2024During a Case-Based Roundtable® event, Komal Jhaveri, MD, FACP, discussed dosing and toxicity concerns with the approved CDK4/6 inhibitor regimens used in the adjuvant setting for patients with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer.
Read More
Ilson Examines Chemoimmunotherapy Regimens for Metastatic Gastroesophageal Cancers
December 20th 2024During a Case-Based Roundtable® event, David H. Ilson, MD, PhD, discussed the outcomes of the CheckMate 649, CheckMate 648, and KEYNOTE-859 trials of chemoimmunotherapy regimens in patients with upper GI cancers.
Read More
Participants Discuss Frontline Immunotherapy Followed by ADC for Metastatic Cervical Cancer
December 19th 2024During a Case-Based Roundtable® event, Ramez N. Eskander, MD, and participants discussed first and second-line therapy decisions for a patient with PD-L1–positive cervical cancer in the frontline metastatic setting.
Read More