Aim: The treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer has changed after the development of the immune checkpoint inhibitors. Although the most studied biomarker is PD-L1 expression, its clinical significance is still debatable. In this article, we show the updated survival analysis of all published data. Methods: We searched in network and conference data sources for relevant clinical studies of immunotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer that assessed the PD-L1 expression even as an exploratory analysis. The updated survival hazard ratios (HR) were included in the analysis. Results: 14 studies with 2857 patients were included (2019 treated with immunotherapy). The response rate was as higher among PD-L1-positive patients (RR: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.63–2.94). PD-L1 expression was also related to better progression-free survival (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.57–0.85) and better overall survival (HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67–0.89). Conclusion: PD-L1 overexpression predicts activity as well as better survival for patients treated wit...

Background: Tumor programmed death ligand one (PD-L1) expression has been studied in several trials in non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods: We assessed the potential role of PD-L1 expression according to Cochrane Collaboration's Guidelines. Results: 13 studies with 1979 patients were included. Among 915 PD-L1 negative patients this rate was 13% (RR 2.08; 95% CI: 1.49–2.91; p < 0.01). The response rate has increased concurrent to the PD-L1 expression (Pearson's correlation, r = 0.43). PD-L1 expression was also related to better 24-weeks progression-free rate (RR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.71–0.89) and a trend toward better 1-year overall survival rate (RR 0.96; 95% CI: 0.87–1.06). Conclusion: Taking this data in account, PD-L1 overexpression could not be currently considered a robust biomarker to tailor the immune checkpoint inhibitors treatment.

MicroRNAs in lung cancer MicroRNAs in lung cancer

Immuno checkpoint inhibitors have ushered in a new era with respect to the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Many patients are not suitable for treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (eg, gefitinib, erlotinib, and afatinib) or with anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors (eg, crizotinib and ceritinib). As a result, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors may play a novel role in the improvement of outcomes in a metastatic setting. The regulation of immune surveillance, immunoediting, and immunoescape mechanisms may play an interesting role in this regard either alone or in combination with current drugs. Here, we discuss advances in immunotherapy for the treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer as well as future perspectives within this framework.

Introduction: Lung cancer (LC) is the most common neoplasm worldwide, and 85% of these tumors are classified as non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). LC treatment was initially restricted to cytotoxic chemotherapy—platinum compounds associated with 3rd generation cytotoxic agents (paclitaxel, gemcitabine, pemetrexed) and, more recently, with monoclonal antibodies (bevacizumab, ramucirumab). Advancements in treatment are correlated with prolonged overall survival (OS). Current advances are focused on target therapies. Target agents: Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy consists of 1st and 2nd generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs such as erlotinib, afatinib). In 60% of cases, resistance to these TKIs occurs due to T790M mutation in EGFR, which is overcome 3rd generation drugs (osimertinib). Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) is the target for drugs such as crizotinib, alectinib, ceritinib. Programmed death 1 (PD-1) and its ligand serve as targets for immunotherapy agents such as pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab. Discussion: Challenges in NSCLC treatment include resistance to 3rd generation TKIs, the high cost of ALK inhibitors, and the need for further research on new drugs.

The use of cetuximab in combination with platinum (P) plus 5-fluorouracil (F) has previously been demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of metastatic squamous cell cancer of head and neck (SCCHN). We investigated the efficacy and outcome of this protocol as a first-line treatment for patients with recurrent or metastatic disease. We evaluated overall-survival (OS), progression-free-survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and the treatment toxicity profile in a retrospective cohort. This study enrolled 121 patients with untreated recurrent or metastatic SCCHN. The patients received PF+ cetuximab every 3 weeks for a maximum of 6 cycles. Patients with stable disease who received PF+ cetuximab continued to receive cetuximab until disease progressed or unacceptable toxic effects were experienced, whichever occurred first. The median patient age was 53 (37–78) years. The patient cohort was 86.8% male. The addition of cetuximab to PF in the recurrent or metastatic setting provided an OS of 11 months (Confidential Interval, CI, 95%, 8.684–13.316) and PFS of 8 months (CI 95%, 6.051–9.949). The disease control rate was 48.9%, and the ORR was 23.91%. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the PF+ cetuximab regimen were febrile neutropenia (5.7%), skin rash (3.8%) and mucosistis (3.8%). The results of this study suggest that cetuximab plus platinum–fluorouracil chemotherapy is a good option for systemic treatment in advanced SSCHN patients. This regimen has a well-tolerated toxicity profile.