Virtual Library

 x 
My Library Virtual Library FAQ

Start Your Search

Lecia V Sequist

Moderator of

  • +

    GR 01 - What to Do at the Time of Progression on Targeted Therapy (ID 520)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Grand Rounds
    • Track: Chemotherapy/Targeted Therapy
    • Presentations: 6
    • +

      GR 01.01 - Case Study (ID 10949)

      11:00 - 11:05  |  Presenting Author(s): D. Kim

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Abstract not provided

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      GR 01.02 - Case Study (ID 10950)

      11:05 - 11:10  |  Presenting Author(s): Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Abstract not provided

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      GR 01.03 - First-Line Management of EGFR Mutant NSCLC (ID 7628)

      11:10 - 11:30  |  Presenting Author(s): Li Zhang

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Abstract:
      Lung cancer is still the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains the predominant form of the disease, with majority of patients being diagnosed at advanced stages. The survival benefit offered by chemotherapy regimens has reached a therapeutic plateau. Fortunately, mutation-specific targeted therapies directed against “actionable” genetic alterations have significantly improved the prognosis of advanced NSCLC. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation is the most common targetable genetic alteration in NSCLC. The prevalence of EGFR mutations range from 10% in Caucasians, to 60% in never-smoking, Asian, adenocarcinoma patients. This presentation will focus on the first-line management of EGFR mutant NSCLC. Overview of EGFR-TKIs Nine large randomised controlled studies have established the superiority of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) against chemotherapy as first-line treatment in NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and quality of life (QoL) (Table 1). Several studies suggest there is no significant difference in efficacy between gefitinib and erlotinib. LUX-lung 7 (afatinib) and ACHER 1050 (dacomitinib) are two randomised head-to head trials comparing second-generation EGFR-TKIs to gefitinib, respectively. Although PFS is significantly improved with second-generation TKIs, the increased rates of grade 3 or higher adverse events such as rash and diarrhea result in more dose modification with second-generation TKIs. FLAURA study, which assesses the efficacy of third-generation EGFR-TKI osimertinib versus first-generation EGFR-TKIs as first-line treatment, has been accomplished recently. This trial may establish the role of osimertinib as first-line treatment for EGFR mutant NSCLC. Management of uncommon mutations Exon 19 deletion and L858R mutation account for about 90% of all EGFR mutations. The remaining 10% of EGFR mutations (uncommon mutations) are a heterogeneous group of molecular alterations. Results of retrospective studies and case reports of first-generation EGFR-TKIs show inconsistent responses in this population. According to the post-hoc analysis of LUX-Lung 2, LUX-Lung 3, and LUX-Lung 6, objective responses to afatinib are observed in certain types of uncommon mutations such as G719X (77.8%), L861Q (56.3%), and S768I (100%). However, Patients with de-novo Thr790Met and exon 20 insertion mutations are insensitive to afatinib. Jonathan Riess and colleagues report that osimertinib has in vivo activity across multiple exon 20 insertion mutations in preclinical study. Thus osimertinib warrants further study in patients with exon 20 insertion mutations. Combination treatment strategies Combinations of EGFR-TKIs with chemotherapy, anti-angiogenetic therapy, and immunotherapy have been explored in clinical trials. JMIT study is a randomized phase II trial comparing addition of pemetrexed to gefitinib with gefitinib alone as first-line therapy in EGFR mutant NSCLC. PFS was significantly longer with pemetrexed+gefitinib than with gefitinib (15.8 months vs 10.9 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.96; P = 0.029). According to JO25567 study, combination of erlotinib with bevacizumab also significantly prolongs PFS than erlotinib. Several phase III trials evaluating combination of EGFR-TKIs with anti-angiogenetic therapy are ongoing. Attention should be paid to adverse events such as interstitial lung disease when EGFR-TKIs are used with immunotherapy. Management of brain metastases Brain metastases is a major challenge when managing EGFR mutant NSCLC as up to 40% of patients would develop central nervous system (CNS) metastases during the course of their disease. Novel EGFR-TKIs provide new strategies for brain metastases treatment. AZD3759 is a CNS penetrable and reversible EGFR-TKI. The phase I study (BLOOM) of AZD3759 in TKI naïve EGFR mutant NSCLC with CNS metastases is reported in 2017 ASCO annual meeting. Intracranial response is observed in 83% of patients with measurable brain metastases lesions at baseline. The extracranial anti-tumor efficacy of AZD3759 is also promising. 13 out of 18 patients with extracranial lesions have confirmed objective response. CNS response to osimertinib in patients with T790M-positive advanced NSCLC from AURA3 study is also presented in 2017 ASCO annual meeting. In 30 patients with more than one measurable CNS metastases, the intracranial response is 70%. The median CNS PFS with osimertinib is 11.7 months. Furthermore, osimertinib shows encouraging activity in patients with leptomeningeal metastases. Table 1. First-line treatment of EGFR mutant NSCLC: EGFR-TKIs vs. Chemotherapy

      Trial TKI PFS (month) OS
      TKI Chemo HR (95%CI) HR (95%CI)
      IPASS Gefitinib 9.5 6.3 0.48 (0.36-0.64) 0.78 (0.50-1.20)
      First Signal Gefitinib 8.4 6.7 0.61 (0.31-1.22) 0.82 (0.352-1.922)
      NEJ002 Gefitinib 10.8 5.4 0.322 (0.236-0.438) 0.88 (0.634-1.241)
      WJTOG3405 Gefitinib 9.6 6.6 0.52 (0.378-0.715) 1.185 (0.767-1.829)
      OPTIMAL Erlotinib 13.1 4.6 0.16 (0.10-0.26) 1.19 （0.83-1.71）
      ENSURE Erlotinib 11.0 5.5 0.34 (0.22-0.51) 0.91 （0.63-1.31）
      EURTAC Erlotinib 9.7 5.2 0.37 (0.25-0.54) 0.80 (0.47-1.37)
      Lux-lung 3 Afatinib 11.1 6.9 0.58 (0.43-0.78) 0.88 （0.66-1.17）
      Lux-lung 6 Afatinib 11.0 5.6 0.29 (0.20-0.33) 0.93 （0.72-1.22）


      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      GR 01.04 - EGFR-Positive NSCLC Cases Who Failed Previous EGFR-TKI (ID 7629)

      11:30 - 11:50  |  Presenting Author(s): Gregory J Riely

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Abstract not provided

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      GR 01.05 - First-Line Management of ALK Mutant NSCLC (ID 8119)

      11:50 - 12:10  |  Presenting Author(s): Silvia Novello  |  Author(s): C. Mecca

      • Abstract
      • Presentation

      Abstract:
      The identification of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements as an oncogenic driver in NSCLC has radically changed the treatment of a subset of patients harboring this molecular alteration. [1] ALK mutations occur in 3-7% of NSCLCs and are more frequently associated with never/light smoker, younger age and adenocarcinoma histology. Crizotinib, an oral small-molecule multitargeted ALK/c-MET /ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors, was the first-in-class agent approved from FDA for advanced, ALK-rearranged NSCLC. The accelerated approval in 2011 was granted on the basis of pronounced activity observed in early phase I and II clinical studies, coupled with a favorable toxicity-profile and concurrent development of a diagnostic test for ALK rearrangement. [2] More recently, the results from a front-line phase III trial in ALK-positive NSCLC, PROFILE 1014, revealed the superiority, in terms of progression free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR), of crizotinib versus standard pemetrexed-platinum chemotherapy.[3] Based on these data, crizotinib represents standard fist- line therapy in patients with advanced ALK mutant NSCLC. [4] Despite marked and durable initial responses to crizotinib, most patients develop progressive disease after a median of 11 months, with the brain as a common site of relapse. This can be explained by pharmacokinetic limitations rather than a biologic resistance. Several acquired resistance mechanisms have been characterized, including secondary mutations in the ALK kinase domain and/or ALK copy number alterations. ALK-independent resistance mechanisms can also occur through activation of alternative bypass signaling pathways, such as EGFR activation, KIT amplification, KRAS mutation and IGF-R1 activation.[5] This evidence has prompted the development of increasingly potent, selective and brain-penetrant ALK inhibitors, with differential spectrum of activity against the most common resistance mutations. [6] Several next-generation ALK inhibitors, such as ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib have demonstrated clinical benefit in patients with crizotinib-refractory NSCLC patients also at the central nervous system (CNS) level. This observation has supported the assessment of these drugs as frontline therapy in patients crizotinb-naïve with advanced ALK+ NSCLC.[7] Soria and colleagues have published the results of the ASCEND-4 trial, randomizing ALK+ treatment naïve patients to ceritinib or chemotherapy. Ceritinib treatment significantly has improved median PFS compared to chemotherapy (16.6 vs 8.1 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.55,P<0.00001). This molecule was also associated with a better control of the disease in the brain (PFS 10.7 vs 6.7 months, HR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.44–1.12). Dose-limiting gastrointestinal adverse events were common with ceritinib at the starting dose of 750 mg daily and 80% of cases required dose reduction or interruption. Although ceritinib has not been compared head-to-head with crizotinib, data confirm ALK inhibitor superior efficacy compared to standard chemotherapy in the ALK-rearranged NSCLC and suggest ceritinib as another option for the front line management. [8] First Line Head to Head trials are ongoing or recently completed. Findings from J-ALEX trial, involving untreated Japanese patients with ALK-rearranged advanced NSCLC, have shown that alectinib induces longer durations of response compared to crizotinib. Median PFS exceeded 2 years in the alectinib group, compared with just over 10 months in the crizotinib group. [9] Recently, Peters et al. have presented the results of global ALEX study. Data are consistent with previous Japanese analysis: PFS was significantly improved with alectinib as compared to crizotinib (25,7 5% vs 10,4%, HR 0.5, p<0.0001). In addition, 12% of patients in alectinib arm vs 45% in crizotinib arm has experienced brain progression (cause specific HR 0.16; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.28; P<0.001). Alectinib appeared to be better tolerated than crizotinib with grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurring in 41% vs 50% of patients, respectively.[10] Other studies with next-generation ALK inhibitors versus crizotinib—such as lorlatinib, brigatinib, are ongoing and they will help define optimal sequencing therapy for patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC. To improve outcomes in this patient population, some studies are also currently investigating several combination strategies, including immunotherapy, anti-angiogenetic agents or radiotherapy approach in association with ALK inhibitors as shown in Table 1. Table 1

      DRUGS (dose) Clinical trial (phase) Patient Number Comparator ORR (%) PFS (mo)
      Crizotinib (250 mg twice/day) PROFILE 1014 (III) 343 Pemetrexed+platinum 74 vs45 10.9 vs 7.0
      Ceritinib (750 mg/die) ASCEND 4 (III) 376 Pemetrexed+platinum pemetrexed±maintenance 72.7vs27.3 16.6 vs 8.1*
      Alectinib (300 mg twice/day) J-ALEX (III) 207 crizotinib (250 mg twice/day) 85vs70 NEvs10.2
      Alectinib (600 mg twice/day) ALEX (III) 303 crizotinib (250 mg twice/day) 82.9vs75.5 25.7vs10.4*
      Brigatinib (90 mg/die for 7 days, 180 mg/die) ALTA 1L (III) ongoing Crizotinib (250 mg twice/day) -
      Lorlatinib (150 mg/die) NCT03052608 (III) ongoing Crizotinib (250 mg twice/day) -
      Crizotinib+Bevacizumab (250 mg twice/day; 7.5 mg/kg every 3 wks) CAMAR01 (II) ongoing _ _ _
      Crizotinib+Pembrolizumab NCT02511184 (I) ongoing _ _ _
      ORR: overall response Rate, PFS Progression free survival, NE not evaluable, *independent review committee
      Treatment paradigms continue to evolve for patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC subsequently to rapid development of ALK inhibitors history. It is expected that one of the next generation of ALK inhibitors will be used as first-line. In this landscape it is necessary to define the impact of first-line choice on patterns of progression and mechanisms of resistance. [11] It is uncertain if a specific sequence of therapeutic agents influences the biology of the cancer and therefore the clinical course of the patient. The spectrum of ALK resistance mutations varies according to ALK inhibitor and it is unclear if the mechanisms of resistance to these agents as the first ALK inhibitor will be similar to the mechanisms of resistance identified when they are used after crizotinib. Future efforts should be focused on determining the best treatment sequence to maximize clinical outcomes. Key factors to guide the selection of therapies could be include: molecular characteristics of the patient's tumor, different toxicity profile of different ALK inhibitors, availability of combinations/ multimodal therapy. References 1. Identification of the transforming EML4-ALK fusion gene in non-small-cell lung cancer. Soda M et al. Nature 2007; 448:561–567 2. The continuum of care for ALK-positive NSCLC: from diagnosis to new treatment options-an overview Solomon & Soria, Ann Oncol Vol 27 Supp 3 2016 3. First-line crizotinib versus chemotherapy in ALK-positive lung cancer Solomon et al N Engl J Med 2014 Dec 4;371(23):2167-77 4. Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Novello S et al. Annals of Oncology 27 (Supplement 5): v1–v27, 2016 5. Crizotinib resistance: implications for therapeutic strategies. Dagogo-Jack & Shaw Ann Oncol Supp 3 2016 6. Molecular Mechanisms of Resistance to First- and Second-Generation ALK Inhibitors in ALK-Rearranged LungCancer. Gainor et al Cancer Discov2016Oct;6(10): 1118-1133. 7. Ascending role of next-generation ALK inhibitors. Costa. Lancet Oncol.2017 Jul; 18(7):837-839. 8. First-line ceritinib versus platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (ASCEND-4): a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study. Soria et al Lancet 2017; 389: 917–29 9. Alectinib versus crizotinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (J-ALEX): an open-label, randomized phase 3 trial Hida et al. Lancet 2017; 390: 29–39 10. Alectinib versus Crizotinib in Untreated ALK-Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Peters et al for for the ALEX Trial Investigators NEJM N Engl J Med. 2017 Jun 6. 11. First-line treatment options for ALK-rearranged lung cancer. Solomon. Lancet Oncology 2017 Mar 4; 389(10072): 884-886

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

    • +

      GR 01.06 - ALK-Positive NSCLC Cases who Failed Previous ALK Inhibitors (ID 7630)

      12:10 - 12:30  |  Presenting Author(s): Jürgen Wolf

      • Abstract
      • Presentation

      Abstract not provided

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

  • +

    OA 09 - EGFR TKI Resistance (ID 663)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Oral
    • Track: Advanced NSCLC
    • Presentations: 8
    • +

      OA 09.01 - Characterizing the Genomic Landscape of EGFR C797S in Lung Cancer Using ctDNA Next-Generation Sequencing (ID 10213)

      11:00 - 11:10  |  Presenting Author(s): Zofia Piotrowska  |  Author(s): R.J. Nagy, S. Fairclough, R.B. Lanman, N. Marcoux, Scott N. Gettinger, Taofeek K Owonikoko, Suresh S Ramalingam, Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Osimertinib is a third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) active in T790M-positive lung cancer. Acquired resistance to osimertinib is driven by EGFR C797S in ~20-30% of cases. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can be used to identify resistance mechanisms. The allelic configuration (cis vs. trans) of C797S with respect to T790M has therapeutic implications, but the relative frequency of each and other co-occurring genomic alterations are not well defined in clinical samples.

      Method:
      We queried the Guardant Health database for lung adenocarcinoma patients and an EGFR C797S mutation. All patients had comprehensive ctDNA testing using the Guardant360 NGS assay between June 2015 and June 2017. Cis/trans configuration for T790M and C797S was determined using Integrated Genomics Viewer software.

      Result:
      We identified 50 unique patients with a total of 66 samples which were C797S positive. All had a co-existent EGFR activating mutation (del19 74%, L858R 24%, other 2%). 60/66 (91%) C797S+ samples were also T790M+. In the 6 samples with C797S but without T790M in ctDNA, 4 were from patients who were T790M+ on a prior Guardant360 assay, 1 never had T790M in blood or tissue and developed C797S while on 1[st]-line afatinib, and 1 had no further clinical details available. T790M and C797S were on the same allele (cis configuration) in 44/46 evaluable patients (98%); 1 (2%) was in trans. One sample had two different C797S mutations, one cis and one trans to T790M. 13 C797S+/T790M+ samples (22%) had multiple C797X mutations detected and 12 samples carried other mutations in or adjacent to the EGFR ATP-binding pocket (e.g. L792, F795, G796, etc). The most common non-EGFR mutations co-occurring with C797S were BRAF amplification/mutation (20%), MET amplification (17%), PIK3CA mutation/amplification (15%), CCNE1 amplification 14% and MYC amplification (14%).

      Conclusion:
      Understanding EGFR TKI resistance mechanisms is critical to developing more effective therapies. ctDNA offers a non-invasive method to characterize the resistance landscape. Our data suggests C797S most commonly occurs with T790M in cis (98%), a state associated with resistance to all currently available EGFR TKIs. The trans configuration, which may respond to combined 1[st]/3[rd]-gen EGFR TKIs, is rare (2%). Moreover, C797S is frequently detected along with other resistance mechanisms in ctDNA, underscoring the heterogeneity of resistant cancers. New treatments targeting C797S/T790M are needed, as is a deeper understanding of therapeutic targeting of heterogeneity in resistant cancers.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      OA 09.02 - Osimertinib Resistance Mediated by Loss of EGFR T790M Is Associated with Early Resistance and Competing Resistance Mechanisms (ID 9000)

      11:10 - 11:20  |  Presenting Author(s): Geoffrey R. Oxnard  |  Author(s): Y. Hu, K.F. Mileham, P. Tracy, N. Feeney, L.M. Sholl, C.P. Paweletz, K.S. Thress, Pasi A Jänne

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Osimertinib is a third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) active in EGFR-mutant NSCLC with resistance to prior TKI. Improved understanding of the clinical and molecular characteristics of acquired resistance to osimertinib is needed.

      Method:
      We initially studied resistance biopsies and plasma specimens from an institutional cohort of 119 patients treated with osimertinib for T790M-positive NSCLC with resistance to prior TKI. For validation, we studied plasma from 157 patients treated with osimertinib on the AURA trial (NCT01802632).

      Result:
      45 of 119 patients underwent a resistance biopsy and 33 had resistance tumor genotyping available. 11 patients maintained T790M at resistance: 7 acquired EGFR C797S, 1 had a PIK3CA mutation. 22 patients had loss of T790M at resistance: 14 harbored a competing resistance mechanism, including histologic transformation to SCLC, MET amplification, mutations in BRAF, PIK3CA, or KRAS, or fusions in RET or FGFR. Median time to treatment failure (TTF) on osimertinib was 3 months in patients with loss of T790M and 15 months in patients with maintained T790M. In the validation cohort, 110 of 157 patients had detectable tumor DNA in plasma and were eligible for analysis. 58 patients (53%) maintained T790M at resistance; 24 (22%) also acquired a C797S mutation. 52 patients (47%) had loss of T790M at resistance and no C797S. Median TTF was shorter in patients with loss of T790M than in those with maintained T790M at resistance (5.7 vs 12.5 months). 50 patients had both pre- and post-osimertinib plasma genotyping. Studying the relative allelic fraction (AF) of T790M compared to driver EGFR mutation, patients with T790M loss had only slightly lower relative T790M AF pretreatment (29% vs. 38% median, p = 0.06). The ability of plasma response to predict subsequent resistance was studied in 19 patients from the initial cohort with baseline and follow-up plasma genotyping after 1-3 weeks on osimertinib. Studying the difference between the relative change in plasma levels of T790M and the EGFR driver, patients with T790M loss at time of resistance consistently had a greater T790M response than driver response (median difference 16%), suggesting incomplete suppression of the driver due to competing resistance mechanisms.

      Conclusion:
      In patients with acquired resistance to osimertinib, repeat testing for T790M could offer key insights into disease biology. Patients with early resistance on osimertinib are at risk of T790M loss with emergence of a complex variety of competing resistance mechanisms, and represent intuitive candidates for combination approaches such as combined EGFR & MET inhibition.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      OA 09.03 - TATTON Ph Ib Expansion Cohort: Osimertinib plus Savolitinib for Pts with EGFR-Mutant MET-Amplified NSCLC after Progression on Prior EGFR-TKI (ID 8985)

      11:20 - 11:30  |  Presenting Author(s): Myung-Ju Ahn  |  Author(s): Ji-Youn Han, Lecia V Sequist, Byoung Chul Cho, J.S. Lee, Sang-We Kim, W. Su, C. Tsai, James Chih-Hsin Yang, Helena Yu, L. Horn, K. Lee, V. Haddad, M.M. Frigault, G. Ahmed, L. Yang, D. Ghiorghiu, Geoffrey R. Oxnard

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      MET amplification is a well described mechanism of acquired resistance to EGFR inhibition in EGFR-mutant NSCLC, making combined MET/EGFR inhibition a compelling therapeutic approach. We previously reported tolerability of the oral, CNS active, third-generation EGFR-TKI osimertinib, which is selective for both EGFR-TKI sensitizing and EGFR T790M resistance mutations, combined with the highly selective MET-TKI savolitinib (volitinib, HMPL-504, AZD6094). Here we assess safety and preliminary activity of this combination in a cohort of patients (pts) with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and MET-positive acquired resistance in the multi-arm, Phase Ib TATTON study (NCT02143466).

      Method:
      Eligible pts were aged ≥18 years (WHO performance status 0/1) with locally advanced or metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC who progressed on at least one prior EGFR-TKI with centrally confirmed MET-amplification (fluorescence in-situ hybridisation, MET gene copy ≥5 or MET/CEP7 ratio ≥2). Pts received osimertinib 80 mg QD plus savolitinib 600 mg QD. Primary objective was safety and tolerability; secondary objectives included preliminary assessment of anti-tumour activity and pharmacokinetics.

      Result:
      As of data-cut off (15 April 2017), 45 pts with centrally confirmed MET-amplification (FISH) were enrolled and received treatment, including 25 pts previously treated with a third-generation EGFR-TKI and 20 without prior third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment (T790M negative n=13; T790M positive n=7). At baseline, median age was 58 years (range 38–76), 24 (53%) were female, 36 (80%) were Asian. The most frequent adverse events (AEs) were nausea (n=21, 47%), decreased appetite (n=15, 33%), fatigue (n=13, 29%) vomiting (n=13, 29%), rash (n=11, 24%), myalgia (n=8, 18%), pyrexia (n=7, 16%), ALT/AST increased (n=6, 13%), and WBC decreased (n=6, 13%), consistent with the known safety profiles. Serious AEs were reported in 15 (33%) pts; events reported in >1 patient were pneumonia, dyspnoea, acute kidney injury and pyrexia (all n=2). Four pts died due to AEs, none were considered related to study drugs. At data cut-off, confirmed partial responses were reported in 5/25 (20%) pts previously treated with a third-generation EGFR-TKI; 5/12 (42%) T790M negative pts without prior third-generation EGFR-TKI and 3/7 (43%) T790M positive pts without prior third-generation EGFR‑TKI. Twenty-eight (62%) pts are ongoing treatment. Preliminary steady-state exposures and pharmacokinetic parameters of savolitinib and osimertinib were consistent with historical data.

      Conclusion:
      These findings demonstrate promising safety, tolerability, and preliminary activity of osimertinib plus savolitinib and support further investigation of this combination for the treatment of pts with locally advanced or metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC and MET-amplification. Updated data will be presented.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      OA 09.04 - Discussant - OA 09.01, OA 09.02, OA 09.03 (ID 10797)

      11:30 - 11:45  |  Presenting Author(s): Hatim Husain

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Abstract not provided

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      OA 09.05 - Identification of Novel Potentially Targetable Genomic Alterations in Paired Tumors with Acquired EGFR TKI Resistance by NGS (ID 9088)

      11:45 - 11:55  |  Presenting Author(s): Jacqulyne Ponville Robichaux  |  Author(s): Y.Y. Elamin, Jianjun Zhang, A. Futreal, E. Roarty, W. Rinsurongkawong, J. Lewis, H.T. Tran, Stephen Swisher, John V Heymach

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      While previous reports have established MET and HER2 amplification as two mechanisms of non-T790M driven EGFR TKI resistance in EGFR mutant NSCLC, resistance occurs in the absence of these modifications in a significant number of patients. Therefore, there exists an unmet need to define additional mechanisms of resistance to EGFR TKIs. We hypothesized that targeted next-generation sequencing could detect additional targetable activating mutations in paired tumor samples from patients with acquired resistance to first or second generation EGFR TKIs.

      Method:
      We conducted an analysis of clinical and molecular data prospectively collected from 285 EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients enrolled into the MD Anderson Lung Cancer GEMINI database. Of 157 patients treated with first-line therapy (erlotinib, gefitinib, or afatinib), we identified 75 patients with TKI-acquired resistance with matched pre/post-TKI tumor samples. Matched tumor samples were analyzed with targeted gene sequencing. Recurrent alterations were defined as an alteration occurring more than 2 times. Recurrent acquired mutations were expressed in Ba/F3 and EGFR mutant (T790M+/-) NSCLC cells. Mutation expressing Ba/F3 cell lines were assayed for IL-3 independence, and mutation expressing NSCLC cell were screened against combination targeted TKIs.

      Result:
      EGFR mutant NSCLC patients treated with first-line therapy had a median PFS of 14 months; and, of the patients with pre/post-TKI tumor molecular data, 47% of patients were T790M negative. There were 30 recurrent acquired alterations identified in 13 different genes. Genes included ARAF, BRAF, EGFR, FGFR, GNAS, JAK2, MCL1, PDGFRα, PIK3CA, RAF1, RB1, SMAD4, and TP53. Of the alterations identified, most occurred in 1 of 4 targetable genes: BRAF (N=3), FGFR (N=5), PDGFRα (N=3), or PIK3CA (N=2). Both previously reported and novel mutations were identified, and preliminary screening of mutant expressing Ba/F3 cell lines found that of the mutations tested (BRAF WT & G469H, FGFR2 A371G, PDGFRα WT & L682F, and PIK3Ca E545K) all grew independent of IL-3. HCC827 and H1975 cell lines expressing acquired mutations in BRAF, FGFR, PDGFRα, or PIK3CA were more sensitive to combination targeted therapy compared to EGFR TKIs or mutation specific TKIs alone unlike control cell lines, supporting the possibility that targeting these mutations would be of therapeutic benefit.

      Conclusion:
      Analysis of patient data identified 30 recurrent genomic alterations in 13 different genes including novel alterations in BRAF, EGFR, FGFR, PDGFRα, RB1, and SMAD4, many of which were found to be activating mutations. Our analysis identified potentially targetable mutations of BRAF, FGFR, PDGFRα, and PIK3CA which merits further pre-clinical and clinical investigation.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      OA 09.06 - A Phase Ib Trial of Savolitinib plus Gefitinib for Chinese Patients with EGFR-Mutant MET-Amplified Advanced NSCLC (ID 8995)

      11:55 - 12:05  |  Presenting Author(s): Jin -Ji Yang  |  Author(s): Jian Fang, Y. Shu, J. Chang, G. Chen, J. He, W. Li, X. Liu, N. Yang, Caicun Zhou, J. Huang, L. Yang, A.A. Handzel, M.M. Frigault, G. Ahmed, C. Egile, S. Morgan, Yi-Long Wu

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment failure has been attributed to innate and/or acquired MET-amplification in patients with advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Savolitinib (volitinib, HMPL-504, AZD6094), a highly selective small molecule MET-TKI, demonstrated greater efficacy combined with gefitinib than either compound alone in preclinical EGFR-mutant NSCLC models (D’Cruz et al. AACR, 2015).

      Method:
      This open-label, multi-centre, Phase Ib study (NCT02374645) assessed savolitinib plus gefitinib in patients enrolled in China with EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC who progressed on prior EGFR-TKI. Primary objective was safety, tolerability, and identification of recommended Phase II dose (RP2D). Secondary objectives included preliminary anti-tumour activity (RECIST 1.1), pharmacokinetics, and ctDNA analysis for EGFR T790M mutation status. Eligible patients (≥18 years) had measurable disease, radiological disease progression on treatment, ECOG performance status 0/1, and adequate organ function. Patients had central evaluation of EGFR mutation (plasma based BEAMing digital PCR) and central screening for MET-amplification (MET/CEP7 ratio ≥2 or MET gene number ≥5, defined by tumour tissue FISH). Patients received gefitinib 250 mg once daily (QD) plus savolitinib 600 mg QD.

      Result:
      As of data-cut off (March 2017), 44 patients received study treatment. Median age was 61 years, 64% of patients were female; 6 patients were EGFR T790M positive and 5 were T790M negative (interim readout). The most common (≥20% patients) all causality adverse events (AEs), were vomiting (n=18, 41%), nausea (n=17, 39%), rash (n=16, 36%), increased ALT (n=14, 32%), increased AST (n=13, 30%), hypoalbuminaemia and gamma‑glutamyl transpeptidase increase (both n=11, 25%), and increased blood alkaline phosphatase (n=9, 21%). Grade ≥3 all causality AEs were reported in 14 (32%) patients; increased AST and increased ALT (both n=3, 7%) were most frequent. Three (7%) patients died due to an AE (respiratory failure [n=1], lung neoplasm [n=2]); none were considered treatment related. Anti-tumour activity was observed; confirmed partial responses were reported in 11/44 (25%) patients and a further 4 patients are awaiting confirmation of response (confirmed and unconfirmed response rate 15/44 [34%]). At the time of the scheduled 12 week study assessment, 20 (46%) patients remained on study treatment. Preliminary steady-state exposures and pharmacokinetic parameters of savolitinib and gefitinib were consistent with historical data.

      Conclusion:
      These encouraging findings warrant further assessment of savolitinib plus gefitinib for patients with EGFR-mutant, MET-amplified NSCLC who progressed on prior EGFR-TKI. The RP2D was confirmed as savolitinib 600 mg QD plus gefitinib 250 mg QD. This study is ongoing; updated safety and efficacy including anti-tumour activity by T790M status will be presented.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      OA 09.07 - Clonality of c-MET Copy Number Gain as a Determinant of Primary TKI Resistance in EGFR-Mutant NSCLC (ID 8887)

      12:05 - 12:15  |  Presenting Author(s): Gillianne Lai  |  Author(s): R. Nahar, T. Lim, X. Kwang, P.J.R. Liew, J. Lim, Z.W. Aung, A. Takano, Wan-Teck Lim, D.P. Lau, Wan Ling Tan, M. Ang, C.K. Toh, B.S. Tan, A. Devanand, C.W. Too, A. Gogna, B.H. Ong, Tina Koh, R. Kanesvaran, Q.S. Ng, A. Jain, J. Yuan, T.K. Lim, A.S. Lim, A. Hillmer, W. Zhai, G. Iyer, E.H. Tan, W. Tam, Daniel SW Tan

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      cMET activation is a valid mechanism of secondary TKI resistance in EGFR mutation-positive (EGFR-M+) NSCLC. However, its role in the treatment-naïve setting remains unclear. We sought to ascertain the prevalence and clinical impact of co-existing cMET copy number gain(CNG) in TKI-naïve early-stage and metastatic EGFR-M+ NSCLC.

      Method:
      Multi-region SNP array analysis (n=59 sectors) was performed on 13 early-stage resected EGFR-M+ NSCLC. cMET FISH was performed in a separate cohort of 206 metastatic treatment-naïve EGFR-M+ patients, all of whom were treated with first-line EGFR TKIs. We defined cMET-high as CNG≥5 copies, with an additional criteria of MET:CEP7 ratio >2.0 for amplification. Time-to-treatment failure(TTF) in patients cMET-high/low was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank test. A cell line from a cMET-high patient exhibiting primary TKI resistance was established.

      Result:
      Relative to median ploidy across sectors, 7/13(53.8%) early-stage EGFR-M+ tumors showed cMET CNG in at least one sector, with majority displaying(n=6/7) copy number intra-tumor heterogeneity. In the metastatic cohort, 55/206 patients (26.7%) were found to be cMET-high at diagnosis: 6(10.9%) had MET amplification, 49(89.1%) MET polysomy, with the following distribution: 5-6 copies(n=11), 6-8 copies(n=32), and >8 copies(n=12). We next evaluated clinical outcomes stratified by MET-high v low: median TTF was 14.7m(12.2–NE) vs 14.6m(12.7–16.5), p=0.985 respectively, with no significant difference in response rates(RR) to EGFR TKI (66.7%v73.7%; p=0.940). Further stratification by level of CNG did not reveal any differences in RR (5-6 copies:75.0%, 6-8 copies:63.0%, >8 copies:71.4%; p=0.868). In MET-high amplified group, only 2/6 (33.3%) had a partial response to EGFR TKI. In the cohort with suboptimal TKI response (PFS<6m, n=22), we did not observe significant enrichment for MET-high, relative to rest of the cohort (36.4%v25.5%, p=0.278). Finally, in 6 patients with progressive disease within 4 weeks of initiating EGFR TKI, 2/6(33.3%) were MET-high. In a cell line model derived from a MET-high patient (L858R, cMET:7.3 copies) genomic profiling of cell colonies revealed clonal cMET CNG and subclonal EGFR, with the patient demonstrating clinical response to crizotinib.

      Conclusion:
      Although up to 26% of TKI-naïve EGFR-M+ NSCLC harbor high cMET CNG by FISH, this occurs on the background of a highly variegated copy number landscape. cMET CNG alone does not significantly impact clinical outcomes to EGFR TKI, with the exception of one patient with a clonal cMET-driven tumor. Our data challenges the utility of arbitrary copy number thresholds to define clinically relevant MET pathway dysregulation and underscores the importance of targeting dominant truncal drivers.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      OA 09.08 - Discussant - OA 09.05, OA 09.06, OA 09.07 (ID 10798)

      12:15 - 12:30  |  Presenting Author(s): Howard L West

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Abstract not provided

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.



Author of

  • +

    GR 01 - What to Do at the Time of Progression on Targeted Therapy (ID 520)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Grand Rounds
    • Track: Chemotherapy/Targeted Therapy
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      GR 01.02 - Case Study (ID 10950)

      11:05 - 11:10  |  Presenting Author(s): Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Abstract not provided

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    OA 07 - Biomarker for Lung Cancer (ID 659)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Oral
    • Track: Biology/Pathology
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      OA 07.05 - Serial Biopsies in Patients with EGFR-Mutant NSCLC Highlight the Spatial and Temporal Heterogeneity of Resistance Mechanisms (ID 10181)

      16:40 - 16:50  |  Author(s): Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) limits treatment outcomes among patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Resistance mechanisms have previously been conceptualized as binary “positive/negative” variables, but emerging evidence suggests resistant cancers are heterogeneous, and subclones may be appreciated through multiple biopsies.

      Method:
      We retrospectively analyzed 221 EGFR mutant pts at MGH who had >1 biopsy after progression on their initial EGFR inhibitor. Data on acquired resistance (AR) mechanisms observed at each biopsy, adverse events, and treatment were collected.

      Result:
      Among 221 pts with a total of 355 post-AR tissue biopsies, median age was 59 (range, 28-88), 69% were female, 64% had EGFR del19, 33% L858R and 3% other activating mutations. Median number of biopsies per patient was 1 (range, 1-4). Biopsies at first resistance to EGFR TKI showed 61% T790M, 5% MET amplification (amp), 3% SCLC transformation, 2% acquired PIK3CA and 1% acquired BRAF mutations. 83 pts had two biopsies during their post-resistance course; 43/83 (52%) had heterogeneity between biopsy 1 and 2. In particular, 20% “lost” T790M, while 11% “gained” T790M. Among 17 pts who lost T790M, 3 gained a separate resistance mechanism, including MET amp and BRAF V600E. In some cases, synchronous biopsies identified spatial heterogeneity. For example, an osimertinib-resistant patient had a T790M/C797S lung nodule, while a concurrent mediastinal lymph node was wild-type at both loci (both sites retained the activating EGFR mutation). Similarly, another osimertinib-resistant patient with MET amp in a pleural effusion cell block had a lung nodule biopsy which lacked MET amp; the patient was treated with combination EGFR and MET inhibitors with a partial response. Additional details regarding concurrent liquid biopsies, treatment histories and clinical outcomes will be presented.

      Conclusion:
      In this large cohort of EGFR mutant NSCLC patients, we frequently observed variations in resistance mechanisms in patients with > 1 post-AR biopsy. Our data highlights the heterogeneity of resistant cancers and the limitations of a single biopsy in fully capturing the spectrum of resistance mechanisms in each patient. Serial biopsies or non-invasive methods may be required to characterize resistance and identify potential therapeutic targets.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    OA 09 - EGFR TKI Resistance (ID 663)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Oral
    • Track: Advanced NSCLC
    • Presentations: 2
    • +

      OA 09.01 - Characterizing the Genomic Landscape of EGFR C797S in Lung Cancer Using ctDNA Next-Generation Sequencing (ID 10213)

      11:00 - 11:10  |  Author(s): Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Osimertinib is a third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) active in T790M-positive lung cancer. Acquired resistance to osimertinib is driven by EGFR C797S in ~20-30% of cases. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can be used to identify resistance mechanisms. The allelic configuration (cis vs. trans) of C797S with respect to T790M has therapeutic implications, but the relative frequency of each and other co-occurring genomic alterations are not well defined in clinical samples.

      Method:
      We queried the Guardant Health database for lung adenocarcinoma patients and an EGFR C797S mutation. All patients had comprehensive ctDNA testing using the Guardant360 NGS assay between June 2015 and June 2017. Cis/trans configuration for T790M and C797S was determined using Integrated Genomics Viewer software.

      Result:
      We identified 50 unique patients with a total of 66 samples which were C797S positive. All had a co-existent EGFR activating mutation (del19 74%, L858R 24%, other 2%). 60/66 (91%) C797S+ samples were also T790M+. In the 6 samples with C797S but without T790M in ctDNA, 4 were from patients who were T790M+ on a prior Guardant360 assay, 1 never had T790M in blood or tissue and developed C797S while on 1[st]-line afatinib, and 1 had no further clinical details available. T790M and C797S were on the same allele (cis configuration) in 44/46 evaluable patients (98%); 1 (2%) was in trans. One sample had two different C797S mutations, one cis and one trans to T790M. 13 C797S+/T790M+ samples (22%) had multiple C797X mutations detected and 12 samples carried other mutations in or adjacent to the EGFR ATP-binding pocket (e.g. L792, F795, G796, etc). The most common non-EGFR mutations co-occurring with C797S were BRAF amplification/mutation (20%), MET amplification (17%), PIK3CA mutation/amplification (15%), CCNE1 amplification 14% and MYC amplification (14%).

      Conclusion:
      Understanding EGFR TKI resistance mechanisms is critical to developing more effective therapies. ctDNA offers a non-invasive method to characterize the resistance landscape. Our data suggests C797S most commonly occurs with T790M in cis (98%), a state associated with resistance to all currently available EGFR TKIs. The trans configuration, which may respond to combined 1[st]/3[rd]-gen EGFR TKIs, is rare (2%). Moreover, C797S is frequently detected along with other resistance mechanisms in ctDNA, underscoring the heterogeneity of resistant cancers. New treatments targeting C797S/T790M are needed, as is a deeper understanding of therapeutic targeting of heterogeneity in resistant cancers.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      OA 09.03 - TATTON Ph Ib Expansion Cohort: Osimertinib plus Savolitinib for Pts with EGFR-Mutant MET-Amplified NSCLC after Progression on Prior EGFR-TKI (ID 8985)

      11:20 - 11:30  |  Author(s): Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      MET amplification is a well described mechanism of acquired resistance to EGFR inhibition in EGFR-mutant NSCLC, making combined MET/EGFR inhibition a compelling therapeutic approach. We previously reported tolerability of the oral, CNS active, third-generation EGFR-TKI osimertinib, which is selective for both EGFR-TKI sensitizing and EGFR T790M resistance mutations, combined with the highly selective MET-TKI savolitinib (volitinib, HMPL-504, AZD6094). Here we assess safety and preliminary activity of this combination in a cohort of patients (pts) with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and MET-positive acquired resistance in the multi-arm, Phase Ib TATTON study (NCT02143466).

      Method:
      Eligible pts were aged ≥18 years (WHO performance status 0/1) with locally advanced or metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC who progressed on at least one prior EGFR-TKI with centrally confirmed MET-amplification (fluorescence in-situ hybridisation, MET gene copy ≥5 or MET/CEP7 ratio ≥2). Pts received osimertinib 80 mg QD plus savolitinib 600 mg QD. Primary objective was safety and tolerability; secondary objectives included preliminary assessment of anti-tumour activity and pharmacokinetics.

      Result:
      As of data-cut off (15 April 2017), 45 pts with centrally confirmed MET-amplification (FISH) were enrolled and received treatment, including 25 pts previously treated with a third-generation EGFR-TKI and 20 without prior third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment (T790M negative n=13; T790M positive n=7). At baseline, median age was 58 years (range 38–76), 24 (53%) were female, 36 (80%) were Asian. The most frequent adverse events (AEs) were nausea (n=21, 47%), decreased appetite (n=15, 33%), fatigue (n=13, 29%) vomiting (n=13, 29%), rash (n=11, 24%), myalgia (n=8, 18%), pyrexia (n=7, 16%), ALT/AST increased (n=6, 13%), and WBC decreased (n=6, 13%), consistent with the known safety profiles. Serious AEs were reported in 15 (33%) pts; events reported in >1 patient were pneumonia, dyspnoea, acute kidney injury and pyrexia (all n=2). Four pts died due to AEs, none were considered related to study drugs. At data cut-off, confirmed partial responses were reported in 5/25 (20%) pts previously treated with a third-generation EGFR-TKI; 5/12 (42%) T790M negative pts without prior third-generation EGFR-TKI and 3/7 (43%) T790M positive pts without prior third-generation EGFR‑TKI. Twenty-eight (62%) pts are ongoing treatment. Preliminary steady-state exposures and pharmacokinetic parameters of savolitinib and osimertinib were consistent with historical data.

      Conclusion:
      These findings demonstrate promising safety, tolerability, and preliminary activity of osimertinib plus savolitinib and support further investigation of this combination for the treatment of pts with locally advanced or metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC and MET-amplification. Updated data will be presented.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    OA 12 - Emerging Genomic Targets (ID 679)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Oral
    • Track: Advanced NSCLC
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      OA 12.02 - Final Results of a Phase 2 Study of the hsp90 Inhibitor Luminespib (AUY922) in NSCLC Patients Harboring EGFR Exon 20 Insertions (ID 10182)

      11:10 - 11:20  |  Author(s): Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      EGFR exon 20 insertions (ins20) comprise 4-10% of EGFR mutations in NSCLC and are refractory to 1[st]/2[nd] generation EGFR TKIs. No effective targeted therapies exist for patients with EGFR ins20. EGFR is a client protein of the molecular chaperone Heat Shock Protein 90 (hsp90). Here, we present the final results of a phase II investigator-initiated trial to assess the activity of the Hsp90 inhibitor luminespib (AUY922) in NSCLC patients with EGFR ins20 (NCT01854034).

      Method:
      Between 8/2013 and 10/2016, the study enrolled 29 patients with stage IV NSCLC, EGFR ins20 identified on local testing, ECOG PS 0-2, at least one prior line of therapy and no untreated brain metastases. The study was closed on 2/28/17 when the available drug supply was exhausted. Luminespib was given at 70mg/m2 IV weekly. Response was assessed by RECIST 1.1 every 6 weeks; treatment beyond progression was allowed. Dose interruptions and dose reductions were allowed as needed for toxicity management. Primary endpoint was ORR with a target disease control rate (DCR; PR/CR plus SD lasting > 3 mos) of > 20%. Secondary endpoints were PFS, OS, safety and response by EGFR ins20 subtype.

      Result:
      29 patients (18 female/11 male, median age 60 (range, 31-79)) were enrolled. Median number of prior therapies = 1 (range, 1-5.) 4/29 achieved PR and 1 CR (ORR 5/29; 17%). 15 patients had SD and 9 had PD as their best response. mPFS was 2.9 mos (95% CI, 1.4-5.6,) mOS was 13 mos (95% CI, 4.9-19.5.) DCR was 11/29 (38%). Among 19 patients with baseline PS 0-1 and < 2 prior therapies, ORR = 21% and mPFS = 5.1 mos (95% CI, 2.1-11.8.) The most common luminespib-related toxicities were visual changes (22/29; 76%) diarrhea (21/29; 72%) and fatigue (13/29; 45%). Treatment-related grade 3 toxicities included ocular toxicity (1/29; 3%), hypertension (3/29; 10%) and hypophosphatemia (1/29; 3%). All study treatment was stopped on 2/28/17 due to lack of drug availability; 3 patients were on treatment without progression at study termination.

      Conclusion:
      The study met its primary endpoint and suggests that luminespib may be an active therapy for advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR ins20. Luminespib is generally well-tolerated, though reversible low-grade ocular toxicity is common. Further study of luminespib and other Hsp90 inhibitors in this population is warranted, as are novel systems to continue drug supply for benefitting patients when availability of experimental compounds is limited.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    OA 17 - Immunotherapy II (ID 683)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Oral
    • Track: Immunology and Immunotherapy
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      OA 17.01 - Pemetrexed-Carboplatin Plus Pembrolizumab as First-Line Therapy for Advanced Nonsquamous NSCLC: KEYNOTE-021 Cohort G Update (ID 9059)

      14:30 - 14:40  |  Author(s): Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Cohort G of the multicenter, open-label, phase 1/2 KEYNOTE-021 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02039674) evaluated efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab + pemetrexed and carboplatin (PC) compared with PC alone as first-line therapy for patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. At the primary analysis of cohort G (minimum follow up, 6 months; median, 10.6 months), pembrolizumab significantly improved ORR (estimated treatment difference, 26%; P=0.0016) and PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; P=0.010). The HR for OS was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.42‒1.91). In a subsequent analysis (median follow-up, 14.5 months), the HR for OS was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.36‒1.31). We present results from the May 31, 2017 data cutoff.

      Method:
      Patients with stage IIIB/IV nonsquamous NSCLC, no prior systemic therapy, and no EGFR mutation or ALK translocation were randomized 1:1 (stratified by PD-L1 TPS ≥1% versus <1%) to receive 4 cycles of carboplatin AUC 5 + pemetrexed 500 mg/m[2] Q3W with or without pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W. Pembrolizumab treatment continued for up to 2 years; maintenance pemetrexed was permitted in both arms. Eligible patients in the PC arm with radiologic progression could cross over to pembrolizumab monotherapy. Response was assessed by blinded, independent central review per RECIST v1.1. All P values are nominal (one-sided P<0.025).

      Result:
      123 patients were randomized. Median follow-up was 18.7 months (range, 0.8‒29.0 months). 40 of 53 (75%) patients in the PC arm who discontinued received subsequent anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 therapy (including 25 who received pembrolizumab in the on-study cross over). ORR was 57% with pembrolizumab + PC versus 32% with PC (estimated difference, 25%; 95% CI, 7%‒41%; P=0.0029). PFS was significantly improved with pembrolizumab + PC versus PC (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33‒0.88; P=0.0067) with median (95% CI) PFS of 19.0 (8.5‒NR) months versus 8.9 (6.2‒11.8) months. The HR for OS was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.34‒1.05; P=0.0344). Median (95% CI) OS was not reached (22.8‒NR) months for pembrolizumab + PC and 20.9 (14.9‒NR) months for PC alone; 18-month OS rates were 70% and 56%, respectively. Grade 3–5 treatment-related AEs occurred in 41% of patients in the pembrolizumab + PC arm versus 29% in the PC arm.

      Conclusion:
      Over the course of the 3 analyses, the HR for OS continues to improve for pembrolizumab + PC versus PC (HR: 0.90 to 0.69 to 0.59). The significant improvements in PFS and ORR with pembrolizumab + PC versus PC first observed in the primary analysis have been maintained with longer follow-up (median, 18.7 months).

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    P3.01 - Advanced NSCLC (ID 621)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Poster Session with Presenters Present
    • Track: Advanced NSCLC
    • Presentations: 2
    • +

      P3.01-026 - Analysis of Long-Term Response to First-Line Afatinib in the LUX-Lung 3, 6 and 7 Trials in Advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC (ID 9051)

      09:30 - 09:30  |  Author(s): Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Slides

      Background:
      In patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm+) NSCLC, first-line afatinib significantly improved PFS and objective response rate (ORR) versus platinum-doublet chemotherapy in the phase III LUX-Lung (LL) 3 and LL6 studies, and PFS, time-to-treatment failure (TTF) and ORR versus gefitinib in the phase IIb LL7 study. Here, we present post-hoc analyses of efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in afatinib long-term responders (LTRs) in LL3/6/7.

      Method:
      Treatment-naïve patients with stage IIIb/IV EGFRm+ NSCLC who were randomized to 40mg/day afatinib in LL3/6/7 and remained on treatment for ≥3 years were defined as LTRs. In these patients, we assessed efficacy and safety outcomes, as well as PROs measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire and the EQ-5D™ health status self-assessment questionnaire; these included scores on the EORTC Global Health [GH]/QoL scale (0–100), EORTC Performance Functioning scale (PF; 0–100), EQ Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 0–100) and EQ-5D UK utility scale (EQ UK utility; 0–1).

      Result:
      In LL3/6/7, there were 24/229 (10%)/ 23/239 (10%)/ 19/160 (12%) afatinib-treated LTRs; 6/9/14 remained on treatment at time of analysis. Baseline characteristics were similar to the overall study populations, except for the proportion of women (LL3/6 only [LTRs versus overall]: 92/78% vs 64/64%) and Del19+ patients (LL3/6/7: 63–79% vs 49–58%). In LL3/6/7, 4–11% of LTRs had brain metastases at enrolment. Median (range) duration of treatment in LL3/6/7 LTRs was 50 (41–73)/56 (37–68)/42 (37–50) months. Due to few deaths, median OS could not be estimated. Median follow-up for OS in LL3/6/7 was 64.6/57.0/42.1 months. ORR among LTRs in LL3/6/7 was 70.8% (complete response: 4.2%; n=1)/78.3% (13.0%; n=3)/89.5% (5.3%; n=1). The frequency of afatinib dose reductions due to treatment-related AEs, and the frequency/duration of subsequent treatments were similar to the overall LL3/6/7 populations. In afatinib-treated LTRs in LL3/6/7, PROs appeared stable between ~Week 24 to ~Week 160, with slight improvements after ~3 years afatinib treatment versus scores at the start of treatment.

      Conclusion:
      In LL3/6/7, 10%–12% of afatinib-treated patients were LTRs. Afatinib was well tolerated among these patients. Long-term treatment was independent of tolerability-guided dose adjustment or presence of brain metastases at time of enrolment, and had no detrimental impact on subsequent treatment. In afatinib-treated LTRs, PROs were not negatively affected by long-term treatment, and were slightly improved after ~3 years of treatment versus scores at treatment initiation.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      P3.01-075 - Afatinib Dose Adjustment: Effect on Safety, Efficacy and Patient-Reported Outcomes in the LUX-Lung 3/6 Trials in EGFRm+ NSCLC (ID 9365)

      09:30 - 09:30  |  Author(s): Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Slides

      Background:
      Afatinib 40mg/day is approved globally for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm+) NSCLC. Afatinib is available in several tablet strengths (20/30/40/50mg), and tolerability-guided dose adjustment schemes are well established. Here, we evaluate the impact of afatinib dose reduction on safety (AEs), pharmacokinetics, PFS and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the Phase III LUX-Lung (LL) 3 and 6 trials.

      Method:
      Treatment-naïve patients with stage IIIB/IV EGFRm+ NSCLC in LL3/6 received either 40mg/day afatinib or chemotherapy. In case of any treatment-related grade ≥3 AEs or selected prolonged grade 2 AEs, afatinib dose was reduced by 10mg decrements (minimum dose 20mg/day). In this post-hoc analysis of all afatinib-treated patients in LL3/6 (n=229/n=239), we compared incidence and severity of common AEs before and after dose reduction, afatinib plasma concentrations in patients who reduced to 30mg versus those remaining on 40mg, and PFS in patients with/without dose reductions in the first 6 months of treatment. PROs were measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire and the EQ-5D™ health status self-assessment questionnaire, and pooled data from both trials were assessed before/after dose reduction; these included scores on the EORTC Global Health/Quality of Life scale (GH/QoL; 0–100), EORTC Performance Functioning scale (PF; 0–100), EQ Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 0–100) and EQ-5D UK utility scale (EQ UK utility; 0–1).

      Result:
      Dose reductions occurred in 122/229 (53.3%) patients in LL3 and 67/239 (28.0%) in LL6; >80% of dose reductions occurred in the first 6 months of treatment. Dose reductions decreased the incidence of treatment-related AEs (grade ≥3 AEs before/after dose reduction: LL3, 73%/20%; LL6, 81%/12%), and were more likely among patients who had higher afatinib plasma concentrations prior to subsequent dose reduction (Day 22). On Day 43, geometric mean afatinib plasma concentrations were comparable between patients who had dose reduced (n=59; 23.3ng/mL) and patients who remained on 40mg (n=284; 22.8ng/mL). Median PFS was comparable between patients with or without dose reductions in the first 6 months (LL3: 11.3 versus 11.0 months; HR [95% CI] 1.25 [0.91–1.72]; p=0.175; LL6: 12.3 versus 11.0 months; 1.00 [0.69–1.46]; p=0.982). There were no clinically meaningful changes in PROs following afatinib dose reduction: GH (40/30mg: 59.1/66.9; n=136); PF (79.4/83.0; n=136); EQ VAS (70.1/75.1; n=135); EQ UK utility (0.70/0.78; n=135).

      Conclusion:
      Tolerability-guided dose adjustments effectively reduced afatinib-related AEs without negatively affecting therapeutic efficacy and PROs.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    P3.03 - Chemotherapy/Targeted Therapy (ID 719)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Poster Session with Presenters Present
    • Track: Chemotherapy/Targeted Therapy
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      P3.03-007 - LCMC2: Expanded Profiling of Lung Adenocarcinomas Identifies ROS1 and RET Rearrangements and TP53 Mutations as a Negative Prognostic Factor (ID 8338)

      09:30 - 09:30  |  Author(s): Lecia V Sequist

      • Abstract
      • Slides

      Background:
      The Lung Cancers Mutation Consortium (LCMC) is a multi-institutional effort where 16 sites identify oncogenic drivers and pool data to assess the impact of targeted therapies in patients with lung adenocarcinomas. We now report the results of the second patient cohort (LCMC2) with an expanded multiplex molecular panel to include RET and ROS1 and tumor suppressors.

      Method:
      904 patients with centrally confirmed stage IV lung adenocarcinomas who were candidates for therapy had at least one of 14 oncogenic drivers assessed in a CLIA-compliant laboratory using genotyping, FISH, massively parallel sequencing (NGS), and immunohistochemistry (IHC) analyses.

      Result:
      Among 423 patients tested for all 14 targets, we found a driver in 65%. Mutated KRAS was found in 31%, sensitizing EGFR in 14%, MET amplification in 5%, ALK rearrangements in 4%, BRAF V600E in 3%, and HER2 in 3%. Rearrangements in RET and ROS1 were each found in 2% (CI 1 to 3%). Using IHC, PTEN loss was found in 8% (CI 6 to 11%) and MET expression in 58% (CI 55 to 61%). Use of targeted therapies in patients with EGFR, HER2, or BRAF mutations, ALK, ROS1, or RET rearrangements, and MET amplification was associated with a gain in overall survival of 1.5 years relative to those with the same drivers not receiving targeted therapy and a gain of 1 year relative to those without an actionable driver. Current and former cigarette smokers derived a survival benefit from targeted therapies similar to never smokers (p=0.975). Among 154 patients who had all drivers assessed and NGS testing in addition, any TP53 mutation was associated with poorer survival among those with EGFR, ALK, or ROS1 (p=0.014). STK11 was detected in 11%, all in patients with KRAS mutations.

      Conclusion:
      Using an expanded testing panel, LCMC2 demonstrates the survival benefit of matching targeted treatments to oncogenic drivers in patients with lung adenocarcinomas, identifies additional prognostic factors, and supports the performance of multiplex molecular testing on specimens from all individuals with lung adenocarcinomas irrespective of clinical characteristics. We detected either MET amplifications or HER2 mutations in 7%, together more than the 4% with ALK. A targeted drug is available in the United States for 35% of patients with lung adenocarcinomas. The routine use of massively parallel sequencing (NGS) detects both targetable drivers and tumor suppressor genes that have significance for therapy selection and prognosis. Supported by Free to Breathe

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.