Background Enhancing tumor-specific T-cell immunity by inhibiting programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)–programmed death 1 (PD-1) signaling has shown promise in the treatment of extensive-stag...

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa1809064

First-Line Atezolizumab plus Chemotherapy in Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer deaths worldwide. The two broad histological subtypes of lung cancer are small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), which is the cause of 15% of cases, and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), which accounts for 85% of cases and includes adenocarcinoma, squamous-cell carcinoma, and large-cell carcinoma. Although NSCLC and SCLC are commonly thought to be different diseases owing to their distinct biology and genomic abnormalities, the idea that these malignant disorders might share common cells of origin has been gaining support. This idea has been supported by the unexpected findings that a subset of NSCLCs with mutated EGFR return as SCLC when resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors develops. Additionally, other case reports have described the coexistence of NSCLC and SCLC, further challenging the commonly accepted view of their distinct lineages. Here, we summarise the published clinical observations and biology underlying tumours with combined SCLC and NSCLC histology and cancers that transform from adenocarcinoma to SCLC. We also discuss pre-clinical studies pointing to common potential cells of origin, and speculate how the distinct paths of differentiation are determined by the genomics of each disease.

/pdf/transformation-from-non-small-cell-lung-cancer-to-small-cell-5b9ioduls4.pdf

Transformation from non-small-cell lung cancer to small-cell lung cancer: molecular drivers and cells of origin

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare tumour but with increasing incidence and a poor prognosis. In 2008, the European Respiratory Society/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons Task Force brought together experts to propose practical and up-to-dated guidelines on the management of MPM.
To obtain an earlier and reliable diagnosis of MPM, the experts recommend performing thoracoscopy, except in cases of pre-operative contraindication or pleural symphysis. The standard staining procedures are insufficient in similar to 10% of cases. Therefore, we propose using specific immunohistochemistry markers on pleural biopsies. In the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advice use of the most recent TNM based classification, and propose a three step pre-treatment assessment. Patient's performance status and histological subtype are currently the only prognostic factors of clinical importance in the management of MPM. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. MPM exhibits a high resistance to chemotherapy and only a few patients are candidates for radical surgery. New therapies and strategies have been reviewed.

Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasise that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach should be included in a prospective trial at a specialised centre.

/pdf/guidelines-of-the-european-respiratory-society-and-the-1iaue8zr1p.pdf

Guidelines of the European Respiratory Society and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a deadly disease that occurs in 2,000 to 3,000 people each year in the United States. Although MPM is an extremely difficult disease to treat, with the median overall survival ranging between 9 and 17 months regardless of stage, there has been significant progress over the last few years that has reshaped the clinical landscape. This article will provide a comprehensive discussion of the latest developments in the treatment of MPM. We will provide an update of the major clinical trials that impact mesothelioma treatment in the resectable and unresectable settings, discuss the impact of novel therapeutics, and provide perspective on where the clinical research in mesothelioma is moving. In addition, there are controversial issues, such as the role of extrapleural pneumonectomy, adjuvant radiotherapy, and use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus hemithoracic therapy that will also be addressed in this manuscript.

/pdf/malignant-pleural-mesothelioma-3q3fseypjk.pdf

Malignant pleural mesothelioma

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive malignancy distinct from non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in its metastatic potential and treatment response. Using an integrative proteomic and transcriptomic analysis, we investigated molecular differences contributing to the distinct clinical behavior of SCLCs and NSCLCs. SCLCs showed lower levels of several receptor tyrosine kinases and decreased activation of phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) and Ras/mitogen-activated protein (MAP)/extracellular signal–regulated kinase (ERK) kinase (MEK) pathways but significantly increased levels of E2F1-regulated factors including enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2), thymidylate synthase, apoptosis mediators, and DNA repair proteins. In addition, PARP1, a DNA repair protein and E2F1 co-activator, was highly expressed at the mRNA and protein levels in SCLCs. SCLC growth was inhibited by PARP1 and EZH2 knockdown. Furthermore, SCLC was significantly more sensitive to PARP inhibitors than were NSCLCs, and PARP inhibition downregulated key components of the DNA repair machinery and enhanced the efficacy of chemotherapy.

Significance: SCLC is a highly lethal cancer with a 5-year survival rate of less than 10%. To date, no molecularly targeted agents have prolonged survival in patients with SCLCs. As a step toward identifying new targets, we systematically profiled SCLCs with a focus on therapeutically relevant signaling pathways. Our data reveal fundamental differences in the patterns of pathway activation in SCLCs and NSCLCs and identify several potential therapeutic targets for SCLCs, including PARP1 and EZH2. On the basis of these results, clinical studies evaluating PARP and EZH2 inhibition, together with chemotherapy or other agents, warrant further investigation. Cancer Discov; 2(9); 798–811. ©2012 AACR .

Read the Commentary on this article by Rosell and Wannesson, [p. 769][1].

This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, [p. 753][2].

 [1]: /lookup/volpage/2/769?iss=9
 [2]: /lookup/volpage/2/753?iss=9

https://cancerdiscovery.aacrjournals.org/content/candisc/2/9/798.full.pdf

Proteomic Profiling Identifies Dysregulated Pathways in Small Cell Lung Cancer and Novel Therapeutic Targets Including PARP1

Purpose This multicenter, phase III study compared overall survival (OS) of second-line pemetrexed plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone in patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Secondary end points included response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), time to tumor progression (TTP), time to treatment failure (TTF), and toxicity. Patients and Methods Patients with relapsed MPM after first-line chemotherapy were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 plus BSC (P+BSC) every 21 days or BSC alone. Results The study enrolled 243 patients (123 on P+BSC arm and 120 on BSC arm). Median OS time was not significantly different between the arms (8.4 months for P+BSC and 9.7 months for BSC; P = .74). Cox regression modeling suggested a trending survival benefit for patients who responded to first-line therapy. Time-to-event measures significantly favored P+BSC (median PFS, TTP, and TTF). Partial response was achieved in 18.7% and 1.7% of patients in P+BSC and BSC arms,...

https://ascopubs.org/doi/pdf/10.1200/JCO.2006.09.9887

Phase III trial of pemetrexed plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care in previously treated patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Purpose Following a phase II trial in which pemetrexed-platinum demonstrated similar activity to that of historical etoposide-platinum controls, a phase III study was conducted to compare pemetrexed-carboplatin with etoposide-carboplatin for the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naive patients with ES-SCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of zero to 2 were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed-carboplatin (pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 on day 1; carboplatin at area under the serum concentration-time curve [AUC] 5 on day 1) or etoposide-carboplatin (etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1 through 3; carboplatin AUC 5 on day 1) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. The primary objective of the study was noninferiority of pemetrexed-carboplatin overall survival with a 15% margin. Results Accrual was terminated with 908 of 1,820 patients enrolled after results of a planned interim analysis. In the final analysis, pemetrexed-carboplatin wa...

https://ascopubs.org/doi/pdf/10.1200/JCO.2009.23.1548

Phase III Study of Pemetrexed Plus Carboplatin Compared With Etoposide Plus Carboplatin in Chemotherapy-Naive Patients With Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Shengyan Hong

Papers

Phase III trial of pemetrexed plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care in previously treated patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Phase III Study of Pemetrexed Plus Carboplatin Compared With Etoposide Plus Carboplatin in Chemotherapy-Naive Patients With Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer