Richard D. Hall

PURPOSE The randomized, open-label, global phase III TROPION-Lung01 study compared the efficacy and safety of datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) versus docetaxel in patients with pretreated advanced/metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS Patients received Dato-DXd 6 mg/kg or docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 once every 3 weeks. Dual primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Objective response rate, duration of response, and safety were secondary end points. RESULTS In total, 299 and 305 patients were randomly assigned to receive Dato-DXd or docetaxel, respectively. The median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 4.2 to 5.6) with Dato-DXd and 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 4.2) with docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.91]; P = .004). The median OS was 12.9 months (95% CI, 11.0 to 13.9) and 11.8 months (95% CI, 10.1 to 12.8), respectively (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.14]; P = .530). In the prespecified nonsquamous histology subgroup, the median PFS was 5.5 versus 3.6 months (HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.79]) and the median OS was 14.6 versus 12.3 months (HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.05]). In the squamous histology subgroup, the median PFS was 2.8 versus 3.9 months (HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.95 to 2.08]) and the median OS was 7.6 versus 9.4 months (HR, 1.32 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.92]). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 25.6% and 42.1% of patients, and any-grade adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease/pneumonitis occurred in 8.8% and 4.1% of patients, in the Dato-DXd and docetaxel groups, respectively. CONCLUSION Dato-DXd significantly improved PFS versus docetaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC, driven by patients with nonsquamous histology. OS showed a numerical benefit but did not reach statistical significance. No unexpected safety signals were observed.

In many cancers, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), tumor angiogenesis pathways have been identified as important therapeutic targets. Angiogenesis is essential in the process of primary tumor growth, proliferation and metastasis. One of the best characterized group of protein factors for angiogenesis include the members of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family, consisting of VEGF-(A-D), and placenta growth factor (PIGF). Targeting tumor angiogenesis has been approached through two primary methods, monoclonal antibodies that block VEGF-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) binding or small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that inhibit the downstream VEGFR mediated signaling. Many TKIs inhibit multiple pro-angiogenic and pro-proliferative pathways such as the mitogen activated protein (MAP) kinase pathway. Bevacizumab and ramucirumab, monoclonal antibodies targeting VEGF and the VEGFR, respectively, have each led to improvements in overall survival (OS) for NSCLC when added to standard first and second line chemotherapy, respectively. Small incremental gains seen with both bevacizumab and ramucirumab may be further improved upon by incorporating novel agents and treatment strategies, and many additional trials are ongoing.

BACKGROUND: Mutations in BRAF were first reported in 2002. Since that time, the molecular basis for oncogenic signaling has been elucidated in multiple malignancies. The development of v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF) inhibitors has helped improve clinical outcomes in malignant melanoma and is suggested by case reports in other malignancies. METHODS: A review of pertinent articles examining the mechanisms of BRAF signaling in various cancer types and an update on clinical trials of BRAF inhibitions are presented. RESULTS: Clinical response to BRAF inhibition varies by malignancy. In melanoma, single-agent vemurafenib or dabrafenib prolongs overall survival compared with chemotherapy, but both are limited by the development of acquired resistance in many patients. Results of early-phase clinical trials and case reports demonstrate responses in V600E-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer, thyroid cancer, and hairy cell leukemia. However, no significant difference in progression-free survival was seen in colorectal cancer with single-agent vemurafenib. Overcoming resistance to BRAF inhibition with combination therapy is an active area of research. CONCLUSIONS: The detection of BRAF mutations represents an advance in delivering molecularly targeted therapies to patients with a variety of cancers. Acquired resistance limits the ability of BRAF inhibitors to produce long-term remissions; however, combining BRAF inhibitors with the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway and/or other pathway inhibitors represents a promising method to improve long-term outcomes.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have been identified as breakthrough treatment in melanoma given its dramatic response to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. This is likely to extend to many other cancers as hundreds of clinical trials are being conducted or proposed using this exciting modality of therapy in a variety of malignancies. While immune checkpoint inhibitors have been extensively studied in melanoma and more recently in lung cancer, little is known regarding immune checkpoint blockade in other cancers. This review will focus on the tumor immune microenvironment, the expression of PD-1/PD-L1 and the effect of immune modulation using PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with head and neck, prostate, urothelial, renal, breast, gastrointestinal and lung cancers.