Background: Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has improved pathological responses and survival rates compared with chemotherapy alone, leading to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of nivolumab plus chemotherapy for resectable stage IB-IIIA NSCLC (AJCC 7th edition) without ALK or EGFR alterations. Unfortunately, a considerable percentage of tumors do not completely respond to therapy, which has been associated with early disease progression. So far, it is impossible to predict these events due to lack of knowledge. In this study, we characterized the gene expression profile of tumor samples to identify new biomarkers and mechanisms behind tumor responses to neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and disease recurrence after surgery. Methods: Tumor bulk RNA sequencing was performed in 16 pretreatment and 36 post-treatment tissue samples from 41 patients with resectable stage IIIA NSCLC treated with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy from NADIM trial. A panel targeting 395 genes related to immunological processes was used. Tumors were classified as complete pathological response (CPR) and non-CPR, based on the total absence of viable tumor cells in tumor bed and lymph nodes tested at surgery. Differential-expressed genes between groups and pathway enrichment analysis were assessed using DESeq2 and gene set enrichment analysis. CIBERSORTx was used to estimate the proportions of immune cell subtypes. Results: CPR tumors had a stronger pre-established immune infiltrate at baseline than non-CPR, characterized by higher levels of IFNG, GZMB, NKG7, and M1 macrophages, all with a significant area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) >0.9 for CPR prediction. A greater effect of neoadjuvant therapy was also seen in CPR tumors with a reduction of tumor markers and IFNγ signaling after treatment. Additionally, the higher expression of several genes, including AKT1, BST2, OAS3, or CD8B; or higher dendritic cells and neutrophils proportions in post-treatment non-CPR samples, were associated with relapse after surgery. Also, high pretreatment PD-L1 and tumor mutational burden levels influenced the post-treatment immune landscape with the downregulation of proliferation markers and type I interferon signaling molecules in surgery samples. Conclusions: Our results reinforce the differences between CPR and non-CPR responses, describing possible response and relapse immune mechanisms, opening the possibility of therapy personalization of immunotherapy-based regimens in the neoadjuvant setting of NSCLC.

Pain is a highly prevalent symptom in patients with cancer. Despite therapeutic advances and well-accepted treatment guidelines, a percentage of patients with pain are under-treated. Currently, it has been recognized that several barriers in pain management still exist and, in addition, there are new challenges surrounding complex subtypes of pain, such as breakthrough and neuropathic pain, requiring further reviews and recommendations. This is an update of the guide our society previously published and represents the continued commitment of SEOM to move forward and improve supportive care of cancer patients.

Purpose: Characterization of the T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire may be a promising source for predictive biomarkers of pathologic response to immunotherapy in locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Experimental Design: In this study, next-generation TCR sequencing was performed in peripheral blood and tissue samples of 40 patients with NSCLC, before and after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (NADIM clinical trial, NCT03081689), considering their complete pathologic response (CPR) or non-CPR. Beyond TCR metrics, tissue clones were ranked by their frequency and spatiotemporal evolution of top 1% clones was determined. Results: We have found a positive association between an uneven TCR repertoire in tissue samples at diagnosis and CPR at surgery. Moreover, TCR most frequently ranked clones (top 1%) present in diagnostic biopsies occupied greater frequency in the total clonal space of CPR patients, achieving an AUC ROC to identify CPR patients of 0.967 (95% confidence interval, 0.897–1.000; P = 0.001), and improving the results of PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS; AUC = 0.767; P = 0.026) or tumor mutational burden (TMB; AUC = 0.550; P = 0.687). Furthermore, tumors with high pretreatment top 1% clonal space showed similar immune cell populations but a higher immune reactive gene expression profile. Finally, the selective expansion of pretreatment tissue top 1% clones in peripheral blood of CPR patients suggests also a peripheral immunosurveillance, which could explain the high survival rate of these patients. Conclusions: We have identified two parameters derived from TCR repertoire analysis that could outperform PD-L1 TPS and TMB as predictive biomarkers of CPR after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy, and unraveled possible mechanisms of CPR involving enhanced tumor immunogenicity and peripheral immunosurveillance.

Background: Immunotherapy is being tested in early‐stage non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and achieving higher rates of complete pathological responses (CPR) as compared to standard of care. Early identification of CPR patients has vital clinical implications. In this study, we focused on basal peripheral immune cells and their treatment‐related changes to find biomarkers associated to CPR. Methods: Blood from 29 stage IIIA NSCLC patients participating in the NADIM trial (NCT03081689) was collected at diagnosis and post neoadjuvant treatment. More than 400 parameters of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) phenotype and plasma soluble factors were analyzed. Results: Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy altered more than 150 immune parameters. At diagnosis, 11 biomarkers associated to CPR were described, with an area under the ROC curve >0.70 and p ‐value <.05. CPR patients had significantly higher levels of CD4 ⁺ PD‐1 ⁺ cells, NKG2D, and CD56 expression on T CD56 cells, intensity of CD25 expression on CD4 ⁺ CD25hi ⁺ cells and CD69 expression on intermediate monocytes; but lower levels of CD3 ⁺ CD56 ^– CTLA‐4 ⁺ cells, CD14 ⁺⁺ CD16 ⁺ CTLA‐4 ⁺ cells, CTLA‐4 expression on T CD56 cells and lower levels of b‐NGF, NT‐3, and VEGF‐D in plasma compared to non‐CPR. Post treatment, CPR patients had significantly higher levels of CD19 expression on B cells, BCMA, 4‐1BB, MCSF, and PARC and lower levels of MPIF‐1 and Flt‐3L in plasma compared to non‐CPR. Conclusions: Patients achieving CPR seem to have a distinctive peripheral blood immune status at diagnosis, even showing different immune response to treatment. These results reinforce the different biology behind CPR and non‐CPR responses.

PURPOSE: Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors plus endocrine therapy (ET) represents the standard first-line treatment for patients with hormone receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2-negative) advanced breast cancer (ABC). However, there is no definitive consensus on the preferred second-line treatment option. The PALMIRA trial investigated whether palbociclib rechallenge with an alternative ET would improve the antitumor activity in patients progressing after a first-line palbociclib-containing regimen. METHODS: This international, randomized, open-label, phase II study enrolled 198 patients with hormone receptor–positive/HER2-negative ABC with disease progression after first-line palbociclib plus ET (aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant). Patients were eligible if they showed clinical benefit to the previous regimen (response or stable disease ≥24 weeks) or had progressed on a palbociclib-based therapy in the adjuvant setting. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to either palbociclib rechallenge plus second-line ET (fulvestrant or letrozole) or second-line ET alone. Stratification factors were previous ET and visceral involvement. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Between April 2019 and October 2022, 136 and 62 patients were randomly assigned to palbociclib plus ET or ET alone, respectively. Median investigator-assessed PFS was 4.9 months (95% CI, 3.6 to 6.1) with palbociclib plus ET versus 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 4.2) with ET alone (hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.66 to 1.07]; P = .149). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were higher with palbociclib plus ET (47.4% v 10.0%), without new safety signals. CONCLUSION: Palbociclib rechallenge plus an alternative ET did not significantly improve PFS compared with ET alone in patients with hormone receptor–positive/HER2-negative ABC progressing on a first-line palbociclib-based ET regimen.