Lung Cancer

Key clinical point: Adagrasib shows favorable clinical efficacy without any new safety signals in patients with previously treated KRAS^G12C-mutated nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Among patients with measurable disease at baseline, 42.9% had a confirmed objective response. The median progression-free survival was 6.5 (95% CI 4.7-8.4) months. At a median follow-up of 15.6 months, the median overall survival was 12.6 (95% CI 9.2-19.2) months. The treatment-related adverse events of grade 1/2 and 3 occurred in 52.6% and 44.8% of patients, respectively.

Study details: This registrational phase 2 cohort study investigated adagrasib in 116 patients with KRAS^G12C-mutated NSCLC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy with or without anti-programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand 1 therapy.

Disclosures: The study was funded by Mirati Therapeutics. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including employment or stock options in Mirati Therapeutics.

Source: Jänne PA et al. Adagrasib in non–small-cell lung cancer harboring a KRAS^G12C mutation. N Engl J Med. 2022 (Jun 3). Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2204619

Key clinical point: Adagrasib shows favorable clinical efficacy without any new safety signals in patients with previously treated KRAS^G12C-mutated nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Among patients with measurable disease at baseline, 42.9% had a confirmed objective response. The median progression-free survival was 6.5 (95% CI 4.7-8.4) months. At a median follow-up of 15.6 months, the median overall survival was 12.6 (95% CI 9.2-19.2) months. The treatment-related adverse events of grade 1/2 and 3 occurred in 52.6% and 44.8% of patients, respectively.

Study details: This registrational phase 2 cohort study investigated adagrasib in 116 patients with KRAS^G12C-mutated NSCLC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy with or without anti-programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand 1 therapy.

Disclosures: The study was funded by Mirati Therapeutics. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including employment or stock options in Mirati Therapeutics.

Source: Jänne PA et al. Adagrasib in non–small-cell lung cancer harboring a KRAS^G12C mutation. N Engl J Med. 2022 (Jun 3). Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2204619

Key clinical point: Adagrasib shows favorable clinical efficacy without any new safety signals in patients with previously treated KRAS^G12C-mutated nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Among patients with measurable disease at baseline, 42.9% had a confirmed objective response. The median progression-free survival was 6.5 (95% CI 4.7-8.4) months. At a median follow-up of 15.6 months, the median overall survival was 12.6 (95% CI 9.2-19.2) months. The treatment-related adverse events of grade 1/2 and 3 occurred in 52.6% and 44.8% of patients, respectively.

Study details: This registrational phase 2 cohort study investigated adagrasib in 116 patients with KRAS^G12C-mutated NSCLC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy with or without anti-programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand 1 therapy.

Disclosures: The study was funded by Mirati Therapeutics. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including employment or stock options in Mirati Therapeutics.

Source: Jänne PA et al. Adagrasib in non–small-cell lung cancer harboring a KRAS^G12C mutation. N Engl J Med. 2022 (Jun 3). Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2204619

Key clinical point: Cemiplimab appears to have the most favorable benefit-risk ratio among the analyzed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for the treatment of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Cemiplimab was associated with the lowest hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) relative to chemotherapy (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0. 57-0.81), translating to the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 49.5%. Additionally, cemiplimab was associated with the lowest incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) relative to chemotherapy (odds ratio 0.17; 95% credible interval 0.06-0.45).

Study details: The data come from a network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials (n = 7795). The SUCRA values of all ICI (cemiplimab, avelumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) were determined for OS and TRAE.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Jiang M et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled studies. Front Oncol. 2022;12:827050 (May 10). Doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.827050

Key clinical point: Cemiplimab appears to have the most favorable benefit-risk ratio among the analyzed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for the treatment of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Cemiplimab was associated with the lowest hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) relative to chemotherapy (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0. 57-0.81), translating to the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 49.5%. Additionally, cemiplimab was associated with the lowest incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) relative to chemotherapy (odds ratio 0.17; 95% credible interval 0.06-0.45).

Study details: The data come from a network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials (n = 7795). The SUCRA values of all ICI (cemiplimab, avelumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) were determined for OS and TRAE.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Jiang M et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled studies. Front Oncol. 2022;12:827050 (May 10). Doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.827050

Key clinical point: Cemiplimab appears to have the most favorable benefit-risk ratio among the analyzed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for the treatment of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Cemiplimab was associated with the lowest hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) relative to chemotherapy (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0. 57-0.81), translating to the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 49.5%. Additionally, cemiplimab was associated with the lowest incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) relative to chemotherapy (odds ratio 0.17; 95% credible interval 0.06-0.45).

Study details: The data come from a network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials (n = 7795). The SUCRA values of all ICI (cemiplimab, avelumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) were determined for OS and TRAE.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Jiang M et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled studies. Front Oncol. 2022;12:827050 (May 10). Doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.827050

Key clinical point: Adagrasib shows favorable clinical efficacy without any new safety signals in patients with previously treated KRAS^G12C-mutated nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Among patients with measurable disease at baseline, 42.9% had a confirmed objective response. The median progression-free survival was 6.5 (95% CI 4.7-8.4) months. At a median follow-up of 15.6 months, the median overall survival was 12.6 (95% CI 9.2-19.2) months. The treatment-related adverse events of grade 1/2 and 3 occurred in 52.6% and 44.8% of patients, respectively.

Study details: This registrational phase 2 cohort study investigated adagrasib in 116 patients with KRAS^G12C-mutated NSCLC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy with or without anti-programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand 1 therapy.

Disclosures: The study was funded by Mirati Therapeutics. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including employment or stock options in Mirati Therapeutics.

Source: Jänne PA et al. Adagrasib in non–small-cell lung cancer harboring a KRAS^G12C mutation. N Engl J Med. 2022 (Jun 3). Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2204619

Key clinical point: Adagrasib shows favorable clinical efficacy without any new safety signals in patients with previously treated KRAS^G12C-mutated nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Among patients with measurable disease at baseline, 42.9% had a confirmed objective response. The median progression-free survival was 6.5 (95% CI 4.7-8.4) months. At a median follow-up of 15.6 months, the median overall survival was 12.6 (95% CI 9.2-19.2) months. The treatment-related adverse events of grade 1/2 and 3 occurred in 52.6% and 44.8% of patients, respectively.

Study details: This registrational phase 2 cohort study investigated adagrasib in 116 patients with KRAS^G12C-mutated NSCLC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy with or without anti-programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand 1 therapy.

Disclosures: The study was funded by Mirati Therapeutics. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including employment or stock options in Mirati Therapeutics.

Source: Jänne PA et al. Adagrasib in non–small-cell lung cancer harboring a KRAS^G12C mutation. N Engl J Med. 2022 (Jun 3). Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2204619

Key clinical point: Adagrasib shows favorable clinical efficacy without any new safety signals in patients with previously treated KRAS^G12C-mutated nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Among patients with measurable disease at baseline, 42.9% had a confirmed objective response. The median progression-free survival was 6.5 (95% CI 4.7-8.4) months. At a median follow-up of 15.6 months, the median overall survival was 12.6 (95% CI 9.2-19.2) months. The treatment-related adverse events of grade 1/2 and 3 occurred in 52.6% and 44.8% of patients, respectively.

Study details: This registrational phase 2 cohort study investigated adagrasib in 116 patients with KRAS^G12C-mutated NSCLC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy with or without anti-programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand 1 therapy.

Disclosures: The study was funded by Mirati Therapeutics. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies, including employment or stock options in Mirati Therapeutics.

Source: Jänne PA et al. Adagrasib in non–small-cell lung cancer harboring a KRAS^G12C mutation. N Engl J Med. 2022 (Jun 3). Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2204619

Key clinical point: A modeling study suggests that the low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening of high-risk adults is likely to be cost saving by shifting lung cancer diagnosis to earlier stages.

Major finding: LDCT screening would lead to a stage shift toward earlier diagnosis, with 43% more patients being identified at stage I or II. The estimated screening costs, at $35.6 million, avoid $42 million in treating later stages of the disease, resulting in a cost saving of $6.65 million.

Study details: Canadian researchers used a decision analytic modeling technique to compare the benefits of earlier diagnosis of lung cancer with the costs of screening in current and former smokers aged 55-74 years.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any funding. A Tremblay and D Steward reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies or health organizations. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Thanh NX et al. Expected cost savings from low dose computed tomography scan screening for lung cancer in Alberta, Canada. JTO Clin Res Rep. 2022 (Jun 2). Doi: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2022.100350

Key clinical point: A modeling study suggests that the low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening of high-risk adults is likely to be cost saving by shifting lung cancer diagnosis to earlier stages.

Major finding: LDCT screening would lead to a stage shift toward earlier diagnosis, with 43% more patients being identified at stage I or II. The estimated screening costs, at $35.6 million, avoid $42 million in treating later stages of the disease, resulting in a cost saving of $6.65 million.

Study details: Canadian researchers used a decision analytic modeling technique to compare the benefits of earlier diagnosis of lung cancer with the costs of screening in current and former smokers aged 55-74 years.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any funding. A Tremblay and D Steward reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies or health organizations. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Thanh NX et al. Expected cost savings from low dose computed tomography scan screening for lung cancer in Alberta, Canada. JTO Clin Res Rep. 2022 (Jun 2). Doi: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2022.100350

Key clinical point: A modeling study suggests that the low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening of high-risk adults is likely to be cost saving by shifting lung cancer diagnosis to earlier stages.

Major finding: LDCT screening would lead to a stage shift toward earlier diagnosis, with 43% more patients being identified at stage I or II. The estimated screening costs, at $35.6 million, avoid $42 million in treating later stages of the disease, resulting in a cost saving of $6.65 million.

Study details: Canadian researchers used a decision analytic modeling technique to compare the benefits of earlier diagnosis of lung cancer with the costs of screening in current and former smokers aged 55-74 years.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any funding. A Tremblay and D Steward reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies or health organizations. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Thanh NX et al. Expected cost savings from low dose computed tomography scan screening for lung cancer in Alberta, Canada. JTO Clin Res Rep. 2022 (Jun 2). Doi: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2022.100350

Key clinical point: Cemiplimab appears to have the most favorable benefit-risk ratio among the analyzed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for the treatment of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Cemiplimab was associated with the lowest hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) relative to chemotherapy (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0. 57-0.81), translating to the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 49.5%. Additionally, cemiplimab was associated with the lowest incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) relative to chemotherapy (odds ratio 0.17; 95% credible interval 0.06-0.45).

Study details: The data come from a network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials (n = 7795). The SUCRA values of all ICI (cemiplimab, avelumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) were determined for OS and TRAE.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Jiang M et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled studies. Front Oncol. 2022;12:827050 (May 10). Doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.827050

Key clinical point: Cemiplimab appears to have the most favorable benefit-risk ratio among the analyzed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for the treatment of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Cemiplimab was associated with the lowest hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) relative to chemotherapy (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0. 57-0.81), translating to the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 49.5%. Additionally, cemiplimab was associated with the lowest incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) relative to chemotherapy (odds ratio 0.17; 95% credible interval 0.06-0.45).

Study details: The data come from a network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials (n = 7795). The SUCRA values of all ICI (cemiplimab, avelumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) were determined for OS and TRAE.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Jiang M et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled studies. Front Oncol. 2022;12:827050 (May 10). Doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.827050

Key clinical point: Cemiplimab appears to have the most favorable benefit-risk ratio among the analyzed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for the treatment of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Major finding: Cemiplimab was associated with the lowest hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) relative to chemotherapy (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0. 57-0.81), translating to the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 49.5%. Additionally, cemiplimab was associated with the lowest incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) relative to chemotherapy (odds ratio 0.17; 95% credible interval 0.06-0.45).

Study details: The data come from a network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials (n = 7795). The SUCRA values of all ICI (cemiplimab, avelumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) were determined for OS and TRAE.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Jiang M et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled studies. Front Oncol. 2022;12:827050 (May 10). Doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.827050

Key clinical point: A meta-analysis suggests that immune checkpoint inhibitors are not very effective against brain metastases (BM) in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), except in patients with a programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) of ≥50%.

Major finding: In PD-L1 unselected patients with any BM, the pooled intracranial objective response rate (icORR) was 13% and intracranial disease control rate (icDCR) was 50%. In patients with PD-L1 TPS of ≥50%, the pooled icORR and icDCR increased to 68% and 82%, respectively.

Study details: The data come from a meta-analysis of 33 cohort studies involving 12,154 patients with NSCLC and 2744 patients with NSCLC and BM.

Disclosures: The study was partially funded by the China National Major Project for New Drug Innovation. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Chen H et al. Brain metastases and immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2022 Jun 1. Doi: 10.1007/s00262-022-03224-2

Key clinical point: A meta-analysis suggests that immune checkpoint inhibitors are not very effective against brain metastases (BM) in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), except in patients with a programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) of ≥50%.

Major finding: In PD-L1 unselected patients with any BM, the pooled intracranial objective response rate (icORR) was 13% and intracranial disease control rate (icDCR) was 50%. In patients with PD-L1 TPS of ≥50%, the pooled icORR and icDCR increased to 68% and 82%, respectively.

Study details: The data come from a meta-analysis of 33 cohort studies involving 12,154 patients with NSCLC and 2744 patients with NSCLC and BM.

Disclosures: The study was partially funded by the China National Major Project for New Drug Innovation. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Chen H et al. Brain metastases and immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2022 Jun 1. Doi: 10.1007/s00262-022-03224-2

Key clinical point: A meta-analysis suggests that immune checkpoint inhibitors are not very effective against brain metastases (BM) in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), except in patients with a programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) of ≥50%.

Major finding: In PD-L1 unselected patients with any BM, the pooled intracranial objective response rate (icORR) was 13% and intracranial disease control rate (icDCR) was 50%. In patients with PD-L1 TPS of ≥50%, the pooled icORR and icDCR increased to 68% and 82%, respectively.

Study details: The data come from a meta-analysis of 33 cohort studies involving 12,154 patients with NSCLC and 2744 patients with NSCLC and BM.

Disclosures: The study was partially funded by the China National Major Project for New Drug Innovation. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Chen H et al. Brain metastases and immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2022 Jun 1. Doi: 10.1007/s00262-022-03224-2

Key clinical point: Adebrelimab plus chemotherapy improves overall survival (OS) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).

Major finding: The adebrelimab vs. placebo group demonstrated a longer median OS (15.3 vs. 12.8 months; hazard ratio 0.72; one-sided P = .0017). The frequency of treatment-related serious adverse events was 39% in the adebrelimab group vs. 28% in the placebo group.

Study details: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 CAPSTONE-1 trial included patients with ES-SCLC who were randomly assigned to receive the first-line adebrelimab (n = 230) or placebo (n = 232) on day 1 of each cycle plus chemotherapy (carboplatin and etoposide).

Disclosures: The study was funded by Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. C Zhou reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies. B Zhang, W Shi, and X Zhang are employees of Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. The other authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Wang J et al. Adebrelimab or placebo plus carboplatin and etoposide as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CAPSTONE-1): A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(6):739-747 (May 13). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00224-8

Key clinical point: Adebrelimab plus chemotherapy improves overall survival (OS) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).

Major finding: The adebrelimab vs. placebo group demonstrated a longer median OS (15.3 vs. 12.8 months; hazard ratio 0.72; one-sided P = .0017). The frequency of treatment-related serious adverse events was 39% in the adebrelimab group vs. 28% in the placebo group.

Study details: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 CAPSTONE-1 trial included patients with ES-SCLC who were randomly assigned to receive the first-line adebrelimab (n = 230) or placebo (n = 232) on day 1 of each cycle plus chemotherapy (carboplatin and etoposide).

Disclosures: The study was funded by Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. C Zhou reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies. B Zhang, W Shi, and X Zhang are employees of Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. The other authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Wang J et al. Adebrelimab or placebo plus carboplatin and etoposide as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CAPSTONE-1): A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(6):739-747 (May 13). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00224-8

Key clinical point: Adebrelimab plus chemotherapy improves overall survival (OS) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).

Major finding: The adebrelimab vs. placebo group demonstrated a longer median OS (15.3 vs. 12.8 months; hazard ratio 0.72; one-sided P = .0017). The frequency of treatment-related serious adverse events was 39% in the adebrelimab group vs. 28% in the placebo group.

Study details: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 CAPSTONE-1 trial included patients with ES-SCLC who were randomly assigned to receive the first-line adebrelimab (n = 230) or placebo (n = 232) on day 1 of each cycle plus chemotherapy (carboplatin and etoposide).

Disclosures: The study was funded by Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. C Zhou reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies. B Zhang, W Shi, and X Zhang are employees of Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. The other authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Wang J et al. Adebrelimab or placebo plus carboplatin and etoposide as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CAPSTONE-1): A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(6):739-747 (May 13). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00224-8

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Key clinical point: Ever-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a significantly longer overall survival (OS) compared with never-smokers.

Major finding: Ever-smokers vs. never-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC had a 31% longer median OS (12.8 vs. 6.5 months; hazard ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.50-0.95) after adjusting for covariates.

Study details: The data come from a real-world retrospective cohort study of 1166 patients with advanced NSCLC (91 never-smokers and 1075 current or former smokers [ever-smokers]) treated with the first-line pembrolizumab in the U.S.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies or research organizations.

Source: Popat S et al. Association between smoking history and overall survival in patients receiving pembrolizumab for first-line treatment of advanced non–small cell lung cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(5):e2214046 (May 25). Doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.14046

Key clinical point: Ever-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a significantly longer overall survival (OS) compared with never-smokers.

Major finding: Ever-smokers vs. never-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC had a 31% longer median OS (12.8 vs. 6.5 months; hazard ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.50-0.95) after adjusting for covariates.

Study details: The data come from a real-world retrospective cohort study of 1166 patients with advanced NSCLC (91 never-smokers and 1075 current or former smokers [ever-smokers]) treated with the first-line pembrolizumab in the U.S.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies or research organizations.

Source: Popat S et al. Association between smoking history and overall survival in patients receiving pembrolizumab for first-line treatment of advanced non–small cell lung cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(5):e2214046 (May 25). Doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.14046

Key clinical point: Ever-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a significantly longer overall survival (OS) compared with never-smokers.

Major finding: Ever-smokers vs. never-smokers treated with the first-line pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC had a 31% longer median OS (12.8 vs. 6.5 months; hazard ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.50-0.95) after adjusting for covariates.

Study details: The data come from a real-world retrospective cohort study of 1166 patients with advanced NSCLC (91 never-smokers and 1075 current or former smokers [ever-smokers]) treated with the first-line pembrolizumab in the U.S.

Disclosures: No funding source was identified. The authors reported ties with one or more pharmaceutical companies or research organizations.

Source: Popat S et al. Association between smoking history and overall survival in patients receiving pembrolizumab for first-line treatment of advanced non–small cell lung cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(5):e2214046 (May 25). Doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.14046

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278

Key clinical point: Lorlatinib extends progression-free survival (PFS) and reduces central nervous system (CNS) progression compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with or without brain metastases at baseline.

Major finding: In patients with and without baseline brain metastasis, lorlatinib vs. crizotinib improved the 12-month PFS (78% vs. 22% and 78% vs. 45%, respectively) and 12-month cumulative incidence of CNS progression (7% vs. 72% and 1% vs. 18%, respectively).

Study details: The data come from a post hoc analysis of the CROWN trial including patients with ALK+ NSCLC and with (n = 78) or without (n = 218) brain metastasis at baseline.

Disclosures: The CROWN trial was funded by Pfizer. Many authors reported ties with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Source: Solomon BJ et al. Post hoc analysis of lorlatinib intracranial efficacy and safety in patients with ALK-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (May 23). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02278