Ambra Carnevale Schianca

Patients and methods: we retrospectively collected data of patients with HR+/HER2− advanced breast cancer (ABC) treated with endocrine therapy (ET) and a CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) aiming to describe the patterns of post-progression outcomes. Results: Among 452 evaluable patients 325 were treated in the first-line setting. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 22.8 months overall and 29.7 months in patients treated in first-line setting. Factors associated with outcomes in multivariate analysis were the line of CDK4/6i therapy, de novo vs recurrent disease, visceral vs bone-only metastases, and primary endocrine resistance. A total of 300 patients progressed and 250 overall and 156 in the first-line cohort received a subsequent treatment. Visceral progression and CDK4/6i duration <12 months were associated with a higher likelihood of receiving anthracycline or taxanes (AT) as compared to ET ±everolimus (EET). Post-progression PFS (PPFS) and post-progression OS (PPOS) were statistically significantly better with EET and capecitabine (C) over AT overall and in patients with visceral progression. Multivariate analysis confirmed a significant advantage for EET and C, while visceral progression retained a significant impact only on PPOS. After progression to the first post-CDK4/6i treatment C obtained a significant better PPOS as compared to other treatments. Conclusion: We showed in a large real-world series that most patients with HR+/HER2− ABC failing CDK4/6i and ET unselected for the occurrence of molecular mutations retain endocrine sensitivity and may benefit of a subsequent ET ± a targeted therapy delaying the need for chemotherapy regardless of site of progression and prior CDK4/6i therapy duration.

The ever-growing knowledge regarding NSCLC molecular biology has brought innovative therapies into clinical practice; however, the treatment situation in the non-metastatic setting is rapidly evolving. Indeed, immunotherapy-based perioperative treatments are currently considered the standard of care for patients with resectable NSCLC in the absence of EGFR mutations or ALK gene rearrangements. Recently, data have been presented on the use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in the adjuvant and locally advanced setting for patients with NSCLC harboring such driver gene alterations. The aim of the current work is to review the available evidence on the use of targeted treatments in the non-metastatic setting, together with a summary of the ongoing trials designed for actionable gene alterations other than EGFR and ALK. To date, 3-year adjuvant osimertinib treatment has been demonstrated to improve DFS and OS and to reduce CNS recurrence in resected EGFR-mutated NSCLC in stage IB–IIIA (TNM 7th edition). The use of osimertinib after chemo-radiation in stage III unresectable EGFR-mutated NSCLC showed the relevant PFS improvement. In the ALK-positive setting, 2-year alectinib treatment was shown to clearly improve DFS compared to adjuvant standard chemotherapy in resected NSCLC with stage IB (≥4 cm)–IIIA (TNM 7th edition). Several trials are ongoing to establish the optimal adjuvant TKI treatment duration, as well as neoadjuvant TKI strategies in EGFR- and ALK-positive disease, and (neo)adjuvant targeted treatments in patients with actionable gene alterations other than EGFR or ALK. In conclusion, our review depicts how the current treatment scenario is expected to rapidly change in the context of non-metastatic NSCLC with actionable gene alterations, hence appropriate molecular testing from the early stages has become crucial to establish the most adequate approaches both in the perioperative and the locally advanced disease.

Background: Actionable driver mutations account for 40–50% of NSCLC cases, and their identification clearly affects treatment choices and outcomes. Conversely, non-actionable mutations are genetic alterations that do not currently have established treatment implications. Among co-occurring alterations, the identification of concurrent actionable genomic alterations is a rare event, potentially impacting prognosis and treatment outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the prevalence and patterns of concurrent driver genomic alterations in a large series of NSCLCs to investigate their association with clinicopathological characteristics, to assess the prognosis of patients whose tumor harbors concurrent alterations in the genes of interest and to explore their potential therapeutic implications. Results: Co-occurring driver alterations were identified in 26 out of 1520 patients with at least one gene alteration (1.7%). Within these cases, the incidence of concurrent actionable gene alterations was 39% (0.7% of the overall cohort). Among compound actionable gene mutations, EGFR was the most frequently involved gene (70%). The most frequent association was EGFR mutations with ROS1 rearrangement. Front-line targeted treatments were the preferred approach in patients with compound actionable mutations, with dismal median PFS observed (6 months). Conclusions: Advances in genomic profiling technologies are facilitating the identification of concurrent mutations. In patients with concurrent actionable gene alterations, integrated molecular and clinical data should be used to guide treatment decisions, always considering rebiopsy at the moment of disease progression.

Various next-generation ALK TKIs are available as first-line options for ALK-positive NSCLC, with alectinib and lorlatinib being commonly preferred. However, no direct comparison between them has been conducted, making it impossible to pick a winner. We performed an analytic, ‘non-comparative’ assessment of the two phase 3 pivotal clinical trials showing superiority of alectinib (ALEX) and lorlatinib (CROWN) in comparison to crizotinib. Overall, the two studies were very similar in the study design and patient characteristics, with the exception of the selection and evaluation of brain metastases. PFS hazard ratios numerically favored lorlatinib, both according to the investigator and to BICR. Notably, the 3-year PFS rate was numerically higher with lorlatinib (64%) than with alectinib (46.4%). Despite similar response rates and overall intracranial response, the rate of complete intracranial response was higher with lorlatinib, with a cumulative incidence risk of CNS disease progression at 12 months of 9.4% with alectinib and 2.8% with lorlatinib. The peculiar toxicities of lorlatinib were related to lipidic profile alterations, peripheral oedema and cognitive effects, with no impact on cardiovascular risk nor impairment in quality of life versus crizotinib. Furthermore, the rate of permanent treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was numerically higher with alectinib (26%) than with lorlatinib (7%). In conclusion, despite the immature OS data for both drugs, the efficacy of lorlatinib appears higher than alectinib while maintaining a manageable toxicity profile.

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive neuroendocrine carcinoma accounting for 15% of lung cancers with dismal survival outcomes. Minimal changes in therapy and prognosis have occurred in SCLC for the past four decades. Recent progress in the treatment of extensive-stage disease (ES-SCLC) has been marked by incorporating immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) into platinum-based chemotherapy, leading to modest improvements. Moreover, few second-line-and-beyond treatment options are currently available. The main limitation for the molecular study of SCLC has been the scarcity of samples, because only very early diseases are treated with surgery and biopsies are not performed when the disease progresses. Despite all these difficulties, in recent years we have come to understand that SCLC is not a homogeneous disease. At the molecular level, in addition to the universal loss of retinoblastoma (RB) and TP53 genes, a recent large molecular study has identified other mutations that could serve as targets for therapy development or patient selection. In recent years, there has also been the identification of new genetic subtypes which have shown us how intertumor heterogeneity exists. Moreover, SCLC can also develop intratumoral heterogeneity linked mainly to the concept of cellular plasticity, mostly due to the development of resistance to therapies. The aim of this review is to quickly present the current standard of care of ES-SCLC, to focus on the molecular landscapes and subtypes of SCLC, subsequently present the most promising therapeutic strategies under investigation, and finally recap the future directions of ongoing clinical trials for this aggressive disease which still remains a challenge.

Approximately 15% of breast cancers are classified as HER2-positive, with an amplification of the ERBB2 gene and/or an overexpression of the HER2 protein. Up to 30% of HER2-positive breast cancers shows heterogeneity in HER2 expression and different patterns of spatial distribution, i.e., the variability in the distribution and expression of the HER2 protein within a single tumour. Spatial heterogeneity may potentially affect treatment, response, assessment of HER2 status and consequently, may impact on the best treatment strategy. Understanding this feature can help clinicians to predict response to HER2-targeted therapies and patient outcomes, and to fine tune treatment decisions. This review summarizes the available evidence on HER2 heterogeneity and spatial distribution and how this may affect current available treatment choices, exploring possible opportunities for overcoming this issue, such as novel pharmacological agents, belonging to the group of antibody–drug conjugates.