PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based recommendations updating the 2017 ASCO guideline on systemic therapy for patients with stage IV non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with driver alterations. A guideline update for systemic therapy for patients with stage IV NSCLC without driver alterations was published separately. METHODS: The American Society of Clinical Oncology and Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) NSCLC Expert Panel updated recommendations based on a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from December 2015 to January 2020 and meeting abstracts from ASCO 2020. RESULTS: This guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous update. Twenty-seven RCTs, 26 observational studies, and one meta-analysis provide the evidence base (total 54). Outcomes of interest included efficacy and safety. Additional literature suggested by the Expert Panel is discussed. RECOMMENDATIONS: All patients with nonsquamous NSCLC should have the results of testing for potentially targetable mutations (alterations) before implementing therapy for advanced lung cancer, regardless of smoking status recommendations, when possible, following other existing high-quality testing guidelines. Most patients should receive targeted therapy for these alterations: Targeted therapies against ROS-1 fusions, BRAF V600e mutations, RET fusions, MET exon 14 skipping mutations, and NTRK fusions should be offered to patients, either as initial or second-line therapy when not given in the first-line setting. New or revised recommendations include the following: Osimertinib is the optimal first-line treatment for patients with activating epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (exon 19 deletion, exon 21 L858R, and exon 20 T790M); alectinib or brigatinib is the optimal first-line treatment for patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase fusions. For the first time, to our knowledge, the guideline includes recommendations regarding RET, MET, and NTRK alterations. Chemotherapy is still an option at most stages. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines .

Background: Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) may be induced by oncogenic signals or can be upregulated via interferon gamma (IFN-γ). We have explored whether the expression of IFNG, the gene encoding IFN-γ, is associated with clinical response to the immune checkpoint blockade in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and melanoma patients. The role of inflammation-associated transcription factors STAT3, IKBKE, STAT1 and other associated genes has also been examined. Methods: Total RNA from 17 NSCLC and 21 melanoma patients was analyzed by quantitative reverse transcription PCR. STAT3 and Rantes, YAP1 and CXCL5, DNMT1, RIG1 and TET1, EOMES, IFNG, PD-L1 and CTLA4, IKBKE and NFATC1 mRNA were examined. PD-L1 protein expression in tumor and immune cells and stromal infiltration of CD8⁺ T-cells were also evaluated. Progression-free survival and overall survival were estimated. Results: A total of 17 NSCLC patients received nivolumab and 21 melanoma patients received pembrolizumab. Progression-free survival with nivolumab was significantly longer in NSCLC patients with high versus low IFNG expression (5.1 months versus 2 months, p = 0.0124). Progression-free survival with pembrolizumab was significantly longer in melanoma patients with high versus low IFNG expression (5.0 months versus 1.9 months, p = 0.0099). Significantly longer overall survival was observed for melanoma patients with high versus low IFNG expression (not reached versus 10.2 months p = 0.0183). There was a trend for longer overall survival for NSCLC patients with high versus low IFNG expression. Conclusions: IFN-γ is an important marker for prediction of response to immune checkpoint blockade. Further research is warranted in order to validate whether IFNG is more accurate than PD-L1.

Purpose: Advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations (deletion in exon 19 or L858R) show an impressive progression-free survival of 14 months when treated with erlotinib. However, the presence of EGFR mutations can only imperfectly predict outcome. We hypothesized that progression-free survival could be influenced both by the pretreatment EGFR T790M mutation and by components of DNA repair pathways. Experimental Design: We assessed the T790M mutation in pretreatment diagnostic specimens from 129 erlotinib-treated advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations. The expression of eight genes and two proteins involved in DNA repair and four receptor tyrosine kinases was also examined. Results: The EGFR T790M mutation was observed in 45 of 129 patients (35%). Progression-free survival was 12 months in patients with and 18 months in patients without the T790M mutation (P = 0.05). Progression-free survival was 27 months in patients with low BRCA1 mRNA levels, 18 months in those with intermediate levels, and 10 months in those with high levels (P = 0.02). In the multivariate analysis, the presence of the T790M mutation (HR, 4.35; P = 0.001), intermediate BRCA1 levels (HR, 8.19; P < 0.0001), and high BRCA1 levels (HR, 8.46; P < 0.0001) emerged as markers of shorter progression-free survival. Conclusions: Low BRCA1 levels neutralized the negative effect of the T790M mutation and were associated with longer progression-free survival to erlotinib. We advocate baseline assessment of the T790M mutation and BRCA1 expression to predict outcome and provide alternative individualized treatment to patients based on T790M mutations and BRCA1 expression. Clin Cancer Res; 17(5); 1–9. ©2011 AACR.

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a transmembrane protein that transduces growth factor signaling from the extracellular milieu to the cell.¹ Oncogenic EGFR (OMIM 131550) mutations—either a deletion in exon 19 or an amino acid substitution at codon 858 in exon 21 (L858R)^2,3—induce constant phosphorylation of EGFR and activation of downstream signals that induce carcinogenesis.¹ Mutations in EGFR—present in 16.6% of Spanish patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)⁴—confer sensitivity to the EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) gefitinib and erlotinib hydrochloride.^5-7 In 2 randomized trials based on clinical—but not molecular—selection of patients, comparing chemotherapy with gefitinib, a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) with gefitinib therapy was observed in patients harboring EGFR mutations.^8,9 Several randomized clinical trials of patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC comparing chemotherapy with gefitinib,^10,11 erlotinib,^12,13 or afatinib dimaleate (a second-generation EGFR TKI)^14,15 also identified a significant improvement in PFS with EGFR TKI therapy. However, no differences in overall survival (OS) were observed, likely due to crossover at the time of progression. We had previously reported no differences in PFS with erlotinib as first-line or second-line therapy in patients with EGFR mutations.⁴