PURPOSE: Patients with pretreated estrogen receptor (ER)–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative advanced breast cancer have poor prognosis. Elacestrant is a novel, oral selective ER degrader that demonstrated activity in early studies. METHODS: This randomized, open-label, phase III trial enrolled patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had one-two lines of endocrine therapy, required pretreatment with a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, and ≤ 1 chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned to elacestrant 400 mg orally once daily or standard-of-care (SOC) endocrine monotherapy. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review in all patients and patients with detectable ESR1 mutations. RESULTS: Patients were randomly assigned to elacestrant (n = 239) or SOC (n = 238). ESR1 mutation was detected in 47.8% of patients, and 43.4% received two prior endocrine therapies. PFS was prolonged in all patients (hazard ratio = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.88; P = .002) and patients with ESR1 mutation (hazard ratio = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.77; P = .0005). Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 7.2% receiving elacestrant and 3.1% receiving SOC. Treatment-related adverse events leading to treatment discontinuations were 3.4% in the elacestrant arm versus 0.9% in SOC. Nausea of any grade occurred in 35.0% receiving elacestrant and 18.8% receiving SOC (grade 3/4, 2.5% and 0.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Elacestrant is the first oral selective ER degrader demonstrating a significant PFS improvement versus SOC both in the overall population and in patients with ESR1 mutations with manageable safety in a phase III trial for patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.

In the era of immuno-oncology, programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors have demonstrated a clear survival benefit as a single agent or in combination compared with standard chemotherapy in both treatment-naive patients^1-4 and patients previously treated^5-8 for advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, progression rates reported with single-agent PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors are in some cases equal to or higher than with conventional treatment, ranging from 33% to 44% in pretreated patients with NSCLC.^5-7 Recently, an acceleration of tumor growth during immunotherapy, defined as hyperprogressive disease (HPD), was reported in 9% of advanced cancers⁹ and in 29% of patients with head and neck cancer¹⁰ treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors.

Despite the relevant progress achieved in the last 20 years, vomiting and, especially, nausea, continue to be two of the most distressing side-effects of cancer chemotherapy. In the late 1990s several professional organizations published recommendations on the optimal antiemetic prophylaxis in patients submitted to chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

The potential predictive role of programmed death-ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression on tumor cells in the context of solid tumor treated with checkpoint inhibitors targeting the PD-1 pathway represents an issue for clinical research. Overall response rate (ORR) was extracted from phase I-III trials investigating nivolumab, pembrolizumab and MPDL3280A for advanced melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and genitourinary cancer, and cumulated by adopting a fixed and random-effect model with 95% confidence interval (CI). Interaction test according to tumor PD-L1 was accomplished. A sensitivity analysis according to adopted drug, tumor type, PD-L1 cut-off and treatment line was performed. Twenty trials (1,475 patients) were identified. A significant interaction (p<0.0001) according to tumor PD-L1 expression was found in the overall sample with an ORR of 34.1% (95% CI 27.6-41.3%) in the PD-L1 positive and 19.9% (95% CI 15.4-25.3%) in the PD-L1 negative population. ORR was significantly higher in PD-L1 positive in comparison to PD-L1 negative patients for nivolumab and pembrolizumab, with an absolute difference of 16.4% and 19.5%, respectively. A significant difference in activity of 22.8% and 8.7% according to PD-L1 was found for melanoma and NSCLC, respectively, with no significant difference for genitourinary cancer. Overall, the three antibodies provide a significant differential effect in terms of activity according to PD-L1 expression on tumor cells. The predictive value of PD-L1 on tumor cells seems to be more robust for anti-PD-1 antibody (nivolumab and pembrolizumab), and in the context of advanced melanoma and NSCLC.

Next‐generation sequencing (NGS) was applied to 148 lung neuroendocrine tumours (LNETs) comprising the four World Health Organization classification categories: 53 typical carcinoid (TCs), 35 atypical carcinoid (ACs), 27 large‐cell neuroendocrine carcinomas, and 33 small‐cell lung carcinomas. A discovery screen was conducted on 46 samples by the use of whole‐exome sequencing and high‐coverage targeted sequencing of 418 genes. Eighty‐eight recurrently mutated genes from both the discovery screen and current literature were verified in the 46 cases of the discovery screen, and validated on additional 102 LNETs by targeted NGS; their prevalence was then evaluated on the whole series. Thirteen of these 88 genes were also evaluated for copy number alterations (CNAs). Carcinoids and carcinomas shared most of the altered genes but with different prevalence rates. When mutations and copy number changes were combined, MEN1 alterations were almost exclusive to carcinoids, whereas alterations of TP53 and RB1 cell cycle regulation genes and PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway genes were significantly enriched in carcinomas. Conversely, mutations in chromatin‐remodelling genes, including those encoding histone modifiers and members of SWI–SNF complexes, were found at similar rates in carcinoids (45.5%) and carcinomas (55.0%), suggesting a major role in LNET pathogenesis. One AC and one TC showed a hypermutated profile associated with a POLQ damaging mutation. There were fewer CNAs in carcinoids than in carcinomas; however ACs showed a hybrid pattern, whereby gains of TERT, SDHA, RICTOR, PIK3CA, MYCL and SRC were found at rates similar to those in carcinomas, whereas the MEN1 loss rate mirrored that of TCs. Multivariate survival analysis revealed RB1 mutation (p = 0.0005) and TERT copy gain (p = 0.016) as independent predictors of poorer prognosis. MEN1 mutation was associated with poor prognosis in AC (p = 0.0045), whereas KMT2D mutation correlated with longer survival in SCLC (p = 0.0022). In conclusion, molecular profiling may complement histology for better diagnostic definition and prognostic stratification of LNETs. © 2016 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

The predictive value of PIK3CA mutations in HER2 positive (HER2+) breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant anti-HER2 and chemotherapy has been reported, but the power for subgroup analyses was lacking. We combined individual patient data from five clinical trials evaluating PIK3CA mutations and associations with pathological complete response (pCR), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients received either trastuzumab (T), lapatinib (L) or the combination T/L in addition to a taxane-based chemotherapy. PIK3CA was genotyped in tumour biopsies taken before therapy. A total of 967 patients were included in this analysis; the median follow-up is 47 months. Overall, the pCR rate was significantly lower in the PIK3CA mutant compared with the wild-type group (16.2% versus 29.6%; P < 0.001). Within the hormone-receptor positive (HR+) subgroup, the PIK3CA mutant group had a pCR rate of only 7.6% compared with 24.2% in the wild-type group (P < 0.001). In contrast, in the HER2+/HR– group, there was no difference in pCR (27.2% versus 36.4%; P = 0.125) according to PIK3CA mutation status (interaction test P = 0.036). According to treatment arm, the pCR rate for mutant versus wild-type was 20.3% versus 27.1% for T (P = 0.343), 11.3% versus 16.9% for L (P = 0.369) and 16.7% versus 39.1% for T/L (P < 0.001). In the HR+ T/L group, the pCR rate was 5.5% versus 33.9% (interaction between HR and PIK3CA genotype P = 0.008). DFS and OS were not significantly different by mutation status, though the incidence rate of events was low. However, HR+/PIK3CA mutant patients seemed to have significantly worse DFS {hazard ratio (HR) 1.56 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00–2.45], P = 0.050; P_interaction = 0.021}. T/L tended to improve DFS compared with T in the wild-type cohort, especially in the HR– group [HR 0.72, 95% CI (0.41–1.25), P = 0.242]. Overall PIK3CA mutant/HER2+ tumours had significantly lower pCR rates compared with wild-type tumours, however mainly confined to the HR+/PIK3CA mutant population. No definite conclusions can be drawn regarding survival.