Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a serious complication in patients with cancers and HBV infection undergoing immunosuppressant treatment or chemotherapy. However, the safety of anti-programmed cell death (PD) -1 and anti-programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapy in these patients is unknown because they were excluded from clinical trials of immunotherapy. This retrospective cohort study involved consecutive hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) -positive cancer patients who were referred to Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center and received an anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibody between January 1, 2015 and July 31, 2018. The primary end point was the rate of the occurrence of HBV reactivation. In total, 114 eligible patients were included, among whom 90 (79%) were male, and the median (range) age was 46 (16–76) years. Six patients (5.3%) developed HBV reactivation, occurring at a median of 18 weeks (range, 3–35 weeks) from the commencement of immunotherapy. Among these patients, all of them had undetectable baseline HBV DNA; one had prophylactic antiviral therapy while five did not; four were positive for Hepatitis B e antigen while the other two were negative. At reactivation, the median HBV DNA level was 3.89 × 104 IU/mL (range, 1.80 × 103–6.00 × 107 IU/mL); five had HBV-related hepatitis and one exhibited increasing HBV DNA level without alanine transaminase elevation. No HBV-related fatal events occurred. The lack of antiviral prophylaxis was the only significant risk factor for HBV reactivation (odds ratio, 17.50 [95% CI, 1.95–157.07], P = .004). HBV reactivation occurs in a subset of HBsAg-positive cancer patients undergoing anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy. Regular monitoring of HBV DNA and antiviral prophylaxis are advised to prevent this potentially fatal complication.

PURPOSE: GEM20110714 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01528618 ), the first randomized, phase III study of systemic chemotherapy in recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), reported significant progression-free survival improvement with gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin (FP; hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.68; P < .001). Data from the final analysis of overall survival (OS) are presented here.METHODS: From February 2012 to October 2015, 362 patients were randomly assigned to receive either GP (gemcitabine 1 g/m²once daily on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 80 mg/m²once daily on day 1; n = 181) or FP (fluorouracil 4 g/m²in continuous intravenous infusion over 96 hours and cisplatin 80 mg/m²once daily on day 1; n = 181) once every 21 days. The primary end point was progression-free survival, which has been previously reported; OS was a secondary end point.RESULTS: After a median follow-up time of 69.5 months with GP and 69.7 months with FP, 148 (81.8%) and 166 (91.7%) deaths occurred in the GP and FP arms, respectively. The estimated hazard ratio for OS was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0.90; two-sided P = .004). The median OS was 22.1 months (95% CI, 19.2 to 25.0 months) with GP versus 18.6 months (95% CI, 15.4 to 21.7 months) with FP. The OS probabilities at 1, 3, and 5 years were 79.9% versus 71.8%, 31.0% versus 20.4%, and 19.2% versus 7.8%, respectively. Poststudy therapy was administered in 51.9% and 55.2% of patients in the GP and FP arms, respectively.CONCLUSION: Among patients with previously untreated advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma, those who receive GP have longer OS than those receive FP. Gemcitabine plus cisplatin should be considered a preferred front-line option for these patients.

Epidermal growth factor receptor exon 20 insertion (EGFRex20ins) mutations represent approximately 4–12% of EGFR mutations and are generally refractory to the 1st and 2nd generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Development of effective therapies for patients with EGFRex20ins mutant non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) represents a great unmet need. Preclinical models have shown that osimertinib is active in NSCLC harboring EGFRex20ins, while the antitumor activity of osimertinib remains to be evaluated in patients with EGFRex20ins mutations. Tumor genotyping was performed in 2316 Chinese NSCLC cases with targeted next generation sequencing (NGS) covering the whole exons of EGFR gene. The frequency and genetic characteristics of EGFRexon20ins mutations were analyzed. Furthermore, six patients with specific EGFRexon20ins mutations and receiving osimertinib 80 mg once daily were retrospectively included to assess the antitumor activity and safety of monotherapy osimertinib. EGFRex20ins mutations were identified in 4.8% (53/1095) of EGFR mutant NSCLC and 2.3% (53/2316) of all NSCLC cases. The most frequently identified EGFRexon20ins is A767_V769dup (17/53,32.1%). We found that the genetic characteristics of EGFRex20ins mutations in Chinese patients with NSCLC were comparable to those reported in Caucasian patients. Four patients with osimertinib therapy achieved partial response and the rest stable disease. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 6.2 months (95% confidence interval 5.0–12.9 months; range 4.9–14.6 months). The most common adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (2/6), pruritis (2/6), stomatitis (1/6) and nausea (1/6). No grade 3 or more AEs were documented. This study revealed that the genetic characteristics of EGFRex20ins mutations in Chinese patients with NSCLC were comparable to those reported in Caucasian patients. Furthermore, our study firstly demonstrated promising antitumor activity of osimertinib in certain EGFRex20ins mutant advanced NSCLC patients, indicating that osimertinib treatment for EGFRex20ins positive patients deserves further study.

Background Immune-checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy are emerging as effective first-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), but little is known about the magnitude of benefits and potential clinical predictors. Methods We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials that compared PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy with chemotherapy in first line of treatment for advanced NSCLC. The outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (AEs). A fixed-effect or random-effects model was adopted depending on between-study heterogeneity. Results Six trials involving 3144 patients were included. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy was significantly associated with improvement of PFS (hazards ratio [HR], 0.62; 95% CI 0.57–0.67; P < .001), OS (HR, 0.68; 95% CI 0.53–0.87; P = .002) and ORR (relative ratio [RR], 1.56; 95% CI 1.29–1.89; P < .001), irrespective of PD-L1 expression level. The significant predictor(s) for treatment benefit with combination therapy versus chemotherapy alone were PD-L1 expression level for PFS (P < .001); types of checkpoint inhibitor for ORR (P < .001); histology (P = .025), age (P = .038), gender (P < .001), and types of checkpoint inhibitor (P < .001) for OS. In safety analyses, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy had significantly higher incidence of adverse events (AEs) of grade 3 or higher (RR, 1.14; P = .007), AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (RR, 1.29; P = .022), serious AEs (RR 1.70; P = .006), immune mediated AEs of any grade (RR, 2.37; P < .001), and immune mediated AEs of grade 3 or higher (RR, 3.71; P < .001). Conclusions PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy, compared with chemotherapy, is associated with significantly improved PFS, ORR, and OS in first-line therapy in NSCLC, at the expense of increased treatment-related AEs.

Importance: Neoadjuvant therapy combining programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors with platinum-based chemotherapy has demonstrated significant improvement in pathologic response and survival rates among patients with resectable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, it remains controversial whether PD-1 blockade therapy given before and after surgery (neoadjuvant-adjuvant treatment) is associated with better outcomes than when given only before surgery (neoadjuvant-only treatment).Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety associated with neoadjuvant-adjuvant anti–PD-1 and anti–PD-L1 therapy with neoadjuvant-only anti–PD-1 and anti–PD-L1 therapy for patients with resectable NSCLC.Data Sources: A systematic search was conducted across databases including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, as well as major oncology conferences, through July 31, 2023.Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials comparing neoadjuvant-adjuvant or neoadjuvant-only PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitor therapy vs chemotherapy alone for patients with resectable NSCLC were selected.Data Extraction and Synthesis: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline, 2 authors independently extracted data. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were extracted and then pooled through the generic inverse-variance methods. Relative risks (RRs) for treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were derived via the Mantel-Haenszel method. Using chemotherapy as a common comparator, indirect comparisons between neoadjuvant-adjuvant immunotherapy and neoadjuvant-only immunotherapy were conducted using frequentist methods. A random or fixed model was used based on intertrial heterogeneity identified through the Cochran Q test.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was EFS, with secondary outcomes including OS and TRAEs.Results: The study encompassed 4 trials of neoadjuvant-adjuvant immunotherapy and 1 trial of neoadjuvant-only immunotherapy, involving 2385 patients. Direct meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in EFS for both neoadjuvant-adjuvant and neoadjuvant-only immunotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone. In indirect meta-analysis, the addition of adjuvant immunotherapy to neoadjuvant immunotherapy was not associated with improved EFS (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.63-1.30; P = .59) or OS (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.73-1.90; P = .51) compared with neoadjuvant-only immunotherapy. Moreover, the incidence of any grade of TRAEs significantly increased with the addition of adjuvant immunotherapy (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.00-1.17; P = .04).Conclusions and Relevance: This meta-analysis suggests that adding PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors in the adjuvant phase to neoadjuvant treatment with PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors and chemotherapy may not improve survival outcomes for patients with resectable NSCLC and may be associated with increased adverse events. Future validation of these findings is warranted through head-to-head randomized clinical trials.

Pembrolizumab monotherapy has become the preferred treatment for patients with advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) and a programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) of at least 50%. However, little is known about the value of adding chemotherapy to pembrolizumab in this setting. Therefore, we performed an indirect comparison for pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus pembrolizumab, using the frequentist methods. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). Data were retrieved from randomized trials comparing pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy or pembrolizumab monotherapy against chemotherapy. Five trials involving 1289 patients were included. Direct meta-analysis showed that both pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (ORR: relative risk (RR) 2.16; PFS: hazard ratio (HR) 0.36; OS: HR 0.51) and pembrolizumab alone (ORR: RR 1.33; PFS: HR, 0.65; OS: HR 0.67) improved clinical outcomes compared with chemotherapy. Indirect comparison showed that pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was superior to pembrolizumab alone, in terms of ORR (RR 1.62, 1.18–2.23) and PFS (HR 0.55, 0.32–0.97). A trend towards improved OS was also observed (HR 0.76, 0.51–1.14). In conclusion, the addition of chemotherapy to pembrolizumab further improves the outcomes of patients with advanced NSCLC and a PD-L1 TPS of at least 50%.