Background: With introduction of immunotherapy (IT) into the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a need for predictive biomarker became apparent. Programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) protein expression is most widely explored predictive marker for response to IT. We assessed PD-L1 expression in tumor cells (TC) and immune cells (IC) of squamous-cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (AC) patients.Patients and methods: We obtained 54 surgically resected tumor specimens and assessed PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemistry after staining them with antibody SP142 (Ventana, USA). Clinicopathological characteristics were acquired from the hospital registry database. Results were analyzed according to cut-off values of ≥ 5% and ≥ 10% of PD-L1 expression on either TC or IC.Results: 29 (54%) samples were AC and 25 (46%) were SCC. PD-L1 expression was significantly higher in TC of SCC compared to AC at both cut-off values (52% vs. 17%, p = 0.016 and 52% vs. 14%, p = 0.007, respectively) no difference in PD-L1 expression in IC of SCC and AC was found. In AC alone, PD-L1 expression was significantly higher in IC compared to TC at both cut-off values (72% vs. 17%, p < 0.001 and 41% vs. 14%, p = 0.008, respectively), while no significant difference between IC and TC PD-L1 expression was revealed in SCC.Conclusions: Our results suggest a significantly higher PD-L1 expression in TC of SCC compared to AC, regardless of the cut-off value. PD-L1 expression in IC is high in both histological subtypes of NSCLC, and adds significantly to the overall positivity of AC but not SCC.

Objectives: Timely access to novel anticancer drugs is challenging and value frameworks such as the European Society of Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) could assist in drug prioritization. We assessed the overall time to access to novel anticancer drugs in Slovenia and its correlation with ESMO-MCBS scores. Methods: Anticancer drugs with European Medicines Agency marketing authorization (EMA MA), applying for national reimbursement approval (NRA) in the period 2008–2018 with assigned ESMO-MCBS score, were included. Publically available data from EMA and the Slovenian National Health Insurance Institute were used for time calculations. Results: Among 53 studied drugs; a majority (47) of them obtained reimbursement approval within the observed time. The median time to EMA MA was 397 (range 98–615) days with the NRA requiring additional 422 (range 154–892) days. Neither time to EMA MA nor NRA correlated with ESMO-MCBS substantial clinical benefit (p = 0.332 and p = 0.965, respectively). Conclusions: In Slovenia, time to access to novel anticancer drugs exceeds two years and, more importantly, is equally long for drugs with or without substantial clinical benefit. Integration of the ESMO-MCBS into reimbursement deliberations could improve access to drugs with substantial clinical benefit.

EGFR exon 20 (EGFR Ex20) insertion mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are insensitive to traditional EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Mobocertinib is the only approved TKI specifically designed to target EGFR Ex20. We performed an international, real-world safety and efficacy analysis on patients with EGFR Ex20-positive NSCLC enrolled in a mobocertinib early access program. We explored the mechanisms of resistance by analyzing postprogression biopsies, as well as cross-resistance to amivantamab. Data from 86 patients with a median age of 67 years and a median of two prior lines of treatment were analyzed. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 95% of patients. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were reported in 38% of patients and included diarrhea (22%) and rash (8%). In 17% of patients, therapy was permanently discontinued, and two patients died due to TRAEs. Women were seven times more likely to discontinue treatment than men. In the overall cohort, the objective response rate to mobocertinib was 34% (95% CI, 24–45). The response rate in treatment-naïve patients was 27% (95% CI, 8–58). The median progression-free and overall survival was 5 months (95% CI, 3.5–6.5) and 12 months (95% CI, 6.8–17.2), respectively. The intracranial response rate was limited (13%), and one-third of disease progression cases involved the brain. Mobocertinib also showed antitumor activity following EGFR Ex20-specific therapy and vice versa. Potential mechanisms of resistance to mobocertinib included amplifications in MET, PIK3CA, and NRAS. Mobocertinib demonstrated meaningful efficacy in a real-world setting but was associated with considerable gastrointestinal and cutaneous toxicity.

Background: The recommended booster third dose of vaccination against COVID-19 in cancer patients seems reasonable to protect them against a severe disease course. A prospective study was designed to assess the immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in this cohort. Methods: Patients with solid malignancies on active treatment were followed up after the primary course and booster third dose of vaccination to assess their anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG levels, efficacy in the case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and safety. Results: Out of 125 patients receiving the primary course of vaccination, 66 patients received a booster third dose of mRNA vaccine, with a 20-fold increase in median anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG levels compared to Ab levels six months post-primary course of vaccination (p < 0.0001). After the booster third dose, anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG levels were comparable to healthy controls (p = 0.113). There was a decline in Ab levels 3 (p = 0.0003) and 6 months (p < 0.0001) post-third booster dose. No patients had either a severe disease course or a lethal outcome in the case of SARS-CoV-2 infection after the third booster dose. Conclusion: The third booster vaccination dose against COVID-19 in solid cancer patients triggers substantial immunogenicity and is safe and effective for preventing a severe COVID-19 disease course.

Introduction: Elderly patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are underrepresented in clinical trials evaluating immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). This study assesses the efficacy of first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC aged ≥70 years with a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 50%. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 381 patients with metastatic NSCLC without oncogenic driver mutations treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy between 2017 and 2023 at three academic centers in Central and Southeastern Europe. Clinical outcomes, including median time on treatment (mToT) and overall survival (mOS), were compared between patients aged ≥70 and <70 years. Results: Of 381 patients, 149 (39.1%) were aged ≥70. No significant differences in mToT (12.7 vs. 14.3 months; p = 0.125) or mOS (18.2 vs. 27.4 months; p = 0.124) were observed between older and younger groups. Good ECOG PS (0–1) was independently associated with longer mToT and mOS in older patients. Additionally, a history of smoking was linked to improved outcomes compared to never-smokers, suggesting potential immunogenic effects. Older patients were significantly less likely to receive second-line therapy after progression (p = 0.04). Conclusions: First-line pembrolizumab monotherapy is effective across all age groups and provides similar treatment efficacy in patients with metastatic NSCLC and a PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50%. Patients older than 70 with a smoking history and ECOG PS 0–1 derive the most benefit from this treatment modality. The adaptation of this treatment strategy for elderly patients is especially important, since only a minority of them are capable of receiving second-line therapy.

BRAF and cMET exon 14 skipping are rare mutations of NSCLC. The treatment sequence in these cases for the first and second line is not clear. An international registry was created for patients with advanced NSCLC harboring BRAF or cMET exon 14 skipping mutations, diagnosed from January 2017 to June 2022. Clinicopathological and molecular data and treatment patterns were recorded. Data on 58 patients, from eight centers across five countries, were included in the final analysis. We found that 40 patients had the cMET exon 14 skipping mutation and 18 had the BRAF V600E mutation. In total, 53 and 28 patients received first- and second-line treatments, respectively, among which 52.8% received targeted therapy (TT) in the first line and 53.5% in the second line. The overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) for first-line treatment with TT vs. other treatment such as immune checkpoint inhibitors ± chemotherapy (IO ± CT) were 55.6% vs. 21.7% (p = 0.0084) and 66.7% vs. 39.1% (p = 0.04), respectively. The type of treatment in first-line TT vs. other affected time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) was 11.6 m vs. 4.6 m (p= 0.006). The overall survival for the whole group was 15.4 m and was not statistically affected by the type of treatment (19.2 m vs. 13.5 m; p = 0.83).