PURPOSE: Aumolertinib (formerly almonertinib; HS-10296) is a novel third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved in China. This double-blind phase III trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of aumolertinib compared with gefitinib as a first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic EGFR-mutated non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03849768 ). METHODS: Patients at 53 sites in China were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either aumolertinib (110 mg) or gefitinib (250 mg) once daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator assessment. RESULTS: A total of 429 patients who were naïve to treatment for locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC were enrolled. PFS was significantly longer with aumolertinib compared with gefitinib (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.60; P < .0001). The median PFS with aumolertinib was 19.3 months (95% CI, 17.8 to 20.8) versus 9.9 months with gefitinib (95% CI, 8.3 to 12.6). Objective response rate and disease control rate were similar in the aumolertinib and gefitinib groups (objective response rate, 73.8% and 72.1%, respectively; disease control rate, 93.0% and 96.7%, respectively). The median duration of response was 18.1 months (95% CI, 15.2 to not applicable) with aumolertinib versus 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.9 to 11.1) with gefitinib. Adverse events of grade ≥ 3 severity (any cause) were observed in 36.4% and 35.8% of patients in the aumolertinib and gefitinib groups, respectively. Rash and diarrhea (any grade) were observed in 23.4% and 16.4% of patients who received aumolertinib compared with 41.4% and 35.8% of those who received gefitinib, respectively. CONCLUSION: Aumolertinib is a well-tolerated third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that could serve as a treatment option for EGFR-mutant NSCLC in the first-line setting.

The high primary resistance incidence and unavoidable secondary resistance are the major clinical obstacle to lasting long-term benefits in Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with immunotherapy. The mechanisms of immunotherapy resistance in NSCLC are complex, mainly involving tumor cells and tumor microenvironment (TME) infiltrating immune cells, including TAMs, B cells, NK cells, and T cells. The selection of clinical strategies for NSCLC progression after immunotherapy resistance should depend on the progressive mode. The progression pattern of NSCLC patients after immunotherapy resistance can be divided into oligo-progression and systemic/multiple progression, which should be considered for further treatment selection. In the future, it needs to explore how to optimize the combined therapy and explore strategies to reprogram infiltrating immune cells under various genetic backgrounds of tumor cells and timely reshape TME during antitumor treatments.

Immunotherapies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells, have revolutionized the treatment of patients with advanced and metastatic tumors resistant to traditional therapies. However, the immunosuppressed tumor microenvironment (TME) results in a weak response to immunotherapy. Therefore, to realize the full potential of immunotherapy and obstacle barriers, it is essential to explore how to convert cold TME to hot TME. Autophagy is a crucial cellular process that preserves cellular stability in the cellular components of the TME, contributing to the characterization of the immunosuppressive TME. Targeted autophagy ignites immunosuppressive TME by influencing antigen release, antigen presentation, antigen recognition, and immune cell trafficking, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of cancer immunotherapy and overcoming resistance to immunotherapy. In this review, we summarize the characteristics and components of TME, explore the mechanisms and functions of autophagy in the characterization and regulation of TME, and discuss autophagy-based therapies as adjuvant enhancers of immunotherapy to improve the effectiveness of immunotherapy.

To investigate the clinical benefits of combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and best combination regimen for people with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and to explore the predictive performance of tumour mutation burden (TMB). We conducted a systematic literature search to identify clinical trials. Meta-analysis and subgroup analyses were performed to estimate the benefits of combination regimens with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for patients with advanced HCC and compare the effectiveness of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and sorafenib as first-line therapy. Individualized analysis and Kaplan-Meier were used to assess the prognostic value of TMB. A total of 29 studies with 5396 patients were included. ICIs' combination therapy had higher ORR (26 % vs 15 %) and DCR (73 % vs 55 %), longer PFS (5.5 vs 3.1 months) and OS (15.9 vs 12.6 months) compared to monotherapy. Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents provided improved ORR, DCR, PFS and OS compared to sorafenib. The overall ORs of ORR and DCR in subgroup analysis were 3.49 (95 % CI 2.36-5.17, p < 0.01) and 1.60 (95 % CI 1.15-2.21, p < 0.01). The overall HRs of PFS and OS were 0.68 (95 % CI 0.48-0.96, p = 0.03) and 0.73 (95 % CI 0.62-0.85, p < 0.01). PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus anti-VEGF agents had an advantage in DCR (0.80 vs 0.48, meta-regression = - 0.32, P < 0.001), but an equal ORR (0.29 vs 0.26) compared to dual immune checkpoint inhibitors. The total OS in Dua-ICIs were 16.5 months (95 % CI 14.2-18.7), yet not reached in the major studies of ICI plus anti-VEGF regimen. In individualized analysis, the 1-year OS was superior for patients who had high-TMB (>10, mutations/Mb) than moderate-TMB (1-10, mutations/Mb; 28 % vs 15 %, P = 0.025). Immune checkpoint inhibitors' combination therapy improved clinical outcomes in the management of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. However, the overall objective response rate still did not exceed 30%. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus anti-angiogenic agents and dual immunotherapy provided significantly increased survival over sorafenib, which also pose new challenges for future research, and more appropriate and guided control regimens are required. Also, TMB may be a promising prognostic biomarker for immunotherapy in HCC. However, the validation of prospective and large sample studies is needed.

IDO1-mediated immune escape can lead to the malignant progression of tumors. However, the precise mechanism of IDO1 remains unclear. This study showed that IDO1 can bind to GBP1 and increase the extracellular secretion of IDO1 with the assistance of GBP1, thereby promoting the malignant proliferation and metastasis of lung cancer. In vitro study showed that the high expression levels of IDO1 and GBP1 in lung cancer cells promoted cell invasion and migration. In vivo study revealed that knock-down of IDO1 and GBP1 inhibited tumor growth and metastasis. In addition, Astragaloside IV reduces the extracellular secretion of IDO1 by blocking the interaction of IDO1 and GBP1, thereby reducing T cell exhaustion and inhibiting tumor progression. These results suggest that blocking the extracellular secretion of IDO1 may prevent T cell exhaustion and thereby enhance the effect of PD-1 inhibitors on cancer treatment.

Tumor and anatomical changes during radiotherapy have been observed in stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from many previous studies. We hypothesized that a routinely scheduled adaptive radiotherapy would have clinical important dose benefits to lower the risk of toxicities, without increasing the tumor recurrences. We retrospectively reviewed 92 consecutive patients with inoperable stage III NSCLC between November 2017 and March 2019. All eligible patients should received simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). A mid-treatment CT simulation and a new adapted plan were routinely given after the first 20 fractions. The organs at risk (OARs) were delineated per RTOG 1106 atlas. Dose-volume histograms were quantitatively compared between the initial and composite adaptive plans. Logistic regression was applied to analyze the dose-response relationship. Clinical endpoints included acute symptomatic radiation pneumonitis (RP2) and esophagitis (RE2), local and regional tumor control, and progression-free survival (PFS). Sixty-four eligible patients received adaptive SIB-IMRT were consecutively included. The GTVs reduced by a median of -38.2% after 42 to 44 Gy in 20 fractions of radiotherapy. By adapting to tumor and anatomical changes, dosimetric parameters of OARs decreased significantly. The mean lung dose decreased by an average of -74.8 cGy, and mean esophagus dose was lower by 183.1 cGy. We found grade 2 or higher acute RP in 11 patients (17.2%), and RE2 in 28 patients (43.8%). Commonly used lung and esophagus dose metrics were significantly associated with RP2 and RE2. The adaptation could reduce RP2 probability by 3%, and RE2 risk by 5%. Subgroups with higher OARs dose or larger tumor shrinkage may get more dose and toxicities benefits. The estimated median PFS was 12.5 months from the start of radiotherapy. We demonstrated that the routinely adaptive SIB-IMRT strategy could significantly reduce the dose to surrounding normal tissues, potentially lower the associated acute RP and RE, without increasing the risk of tumor recurrences.