Introduction The treatment landscape of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is evolving. Evidence generated from administrative claims is needed to characterize real-world SCLC patients. However, the current ICD-10 coding system cannot distinguish SCLC from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We developed and estimated the accuracy of an algorithm to identify SCLC in claims-only databases.Methods We performed a cross-sectional study of lung cancer patients diagnosed from 2016-2017 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER), linked with Medicare database. The analysis included two phases - data exploration (utilizing a 25% random sample) and data validation (remaining 75% sample). The SEER definition of SCLC and NSCLC were used as the gold standard. Claims-based algorithms were identified and evaluated for their sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV).Results The eligible cohort included 31,912 lung cancer patients. The mean age was 76.3 years, 44.6% were male, with 9.4% having SCLC and 90.6% identified as NSCLC using SEER. The exploration analysis identified potential algorithms based on treatment data. In the validation analysis of 7,438 lung cancer patients who received systemic treatment in the outpatient setting, an etoposide-based algorithm (etoposide use in 180 days following lung cancer diagnosis) to identify SCLC showed: sensitivity 95%, specificity 95%, PPV 82% and NPV 99%.Discussion An etoposide treatment-based algorithm showed good accuracy in identifying SCLC patients. Such algorithms can facilitate analyses of treatment patterns, outcomes, healthcare resource and costs among treated SCLC patients, thereby bolstering the evidence-base for best patient care.

OBJECTIVES:To describe treatment patterns and estimate outcomes among real-world small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients in the US who received three or more lines of therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We conducted a retrospective analysis of adult patients with SCLC who received a front-line platinum-based regimen and two additional lines of therapy (ie., a cohort of at least three lines of therapy). De-identified patients were selected from a United States Flatiron Health oncology database of electronic health records. Treatment patterns were captured by line of therapy. Outcomes evaluated by line of therapy included real-world overall survival (rwOS), real-world progression free survival (rwPFS), real-world response rate (rwRR) and real-world duration of response (rwDOR). RESULTS:The analysis included 326 3L SCLC patients, of which 103 (32 %) received 4L treatment, and 38 % (39/103) of 4L treated received 5L of therapy. Among the 3L cohort, the average age was 67 years, 49 % were male, and nearly all had a history of smoking (96 %). In the 3L setting, the median rwOS was 5.3 months (95 % Confidence Interval (CI): 4.5, 6.0), median rwPFS was 2.5 months (95 % CI: 2.1, 2.7), rwRR was 19.3 % (95 % CI: 15.2, 24.0) and median DOR was 3.4 months (95 % CI: 2.8, 4.4). No differences were seen in outcomes between the overall cohort and a subgroup of patients treated with front-line platinum-based regimen with an anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) agent (atezolizumab or durvalumab), in each respective line of therapy. CONCLUSION:Results from this large, real-world study of US patients with SCLC in the 3L setting and beyond highlight the poor treatment outcomes in advanced SCLC patients with existing therapies and underscore the dire need for new therapies for SCLC patients.

BACKGROUND:The landscape of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) has changed since the 2019 and 2020 approvals of anti-PD-L1 atezolizumab and durvalumab for first-line (1L) treatment in combination with chemotherapy. We studied treatment patterns and real-world overall survival (rwOS) following 1L-3L therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS:A nationwide electronic health record (EHR)-derived de-identified database was used to describe treatment patterns, characteristics, and survival of patients with extensive-stage (ES)-SCLC by 1L anti-PD-L1 treatment. Patients with ES-SCLC who initiated ≥1 line of systemic therapy from 2013 to 2021, with potential follow-up through 2022, were included. RESULTS:Among 9952 patients with SCLC, there were 4308 patients with ES-SCLC treated during the study period who met eligibility criteria. Etoposide + platinum (EP) chemotherapy was most common in the 1L, with addition of anti-PD-L1 therapy to most regimens by 2019. Second-line regimens varied by platinum sensitivity status and shifted from topotecan to lurbinectedin over time. Median rwOS following 1L therapy was 8.3 months (95% CI, 7.9-8.8) in those treated with 1L anti-PD-L1 and 8.0 months (95% CI, 7.8-8.2) in those who were not. Following 2L and 3L, median rwOS was 5.6 (95% CI, 4.9-6.3) and 4.9 months (95% CI, 3.4-6.0), respectively, among 1L anti-PD-L1-treated, and 4.5 (95% CI, 4.2-4.9) and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.7-4.5), respectively, among those who were not. CONCLUSION:Despite the introduction of frontline anti-PD-L1 therapy, survival remains dismal among patients with ES-SCLC treated in the real-world setting.

Background/Aim: Lung cancer remains the main culprit in cancer-related mortality worldwide. Transcript fusions play a critical role in the initiation and progression of multiple cancers. Treatment approaches based on specific targeting of discovered driver events, such as mutations in EGFR, and fusions in NTRK, ROS1, and ALK genes led to profound improvements in clinical outcomes. The formation of chimeric proteins due to genomic rearrangements or at the post-transcriptional level is widespread and plays a critical role in tumor initiation and progression. Yet, the fusion landscape of lung cancer remains underexplored. Materials and Methods: We used the JAFFA pipeline to discover transcript fusions in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The set of detected fusions was further analyzed to identify recurrent events, genes with multiple partners and fusions with high predicted oncogenic potential. Finally, we used a generalized linear model (GLM) to establish statistical associations between fusion occurrences and clinicopathological variables. RNA sequencing was used to discover and characterize transcript fusions in 270 NSCLC samples selected from the Glans-Look specimen repository. The samples were obtained during the early stages of disease prior to the initiation of chemo- or radiotherapy. Results: We identified a set of 792 fusions where 751 were novel, and 33 were recurrent. Four of the 33 recurrent fusions were significantly associated with clinicopathological variables. Several of the fusion partners were represented by well-established oncogenes ERBB4, BRAF, FGFR2, and MET. Conclusion: The data presented in this study allow researchers to identify, select, and validate promising candidates for targeted clinical interventions.

e20618 Background: Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3), a ligand of the Notch-family, is a potential therapeutic target in small cell lung cancer (SCLC). High expression levels of DLL3 are observed in SCLC, however different methods and thresholds are used. A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to estimate the prevalence of DLL3 expression in SCLC. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases, as well as on clinicaltrials.gov, using a pre-specified search strategy. This SLR was conducted and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022351119). Prevalence of DLL3 expression was evaluated overall and by method of DLL3 assessment and positivity threshold. Results: Of the 30 studies that met our study inclusion criteria, 22 (73.3%) were observational and 8 (26.7%) were clinical trials. Most studies (N = 21, 70%) evaluated less than 100 patient specimens (range: 20 to 1,362 patient specimens). Twelve studies (40%) were conducted in Asia, six (20%) in Europe, five (17%) in North America, five (17%) were multi-country, one in Brazil, and geographical location was not reported in one study. DLL3 testing methods varied across studies, with immunohistochemistry (IHC) being used in 26 (86.7%) studies. Two studies used real-time polymerase chain reaction, one used quantitative mass spectrometry, and one study did not report the testing method. Thirteen of the studies (13/26, 50%) that evaluated DLL3 expression by IHC used the Ventana SP347 assay. DLL3 expression was evaluated at various thresholds of tumor cell staining and showed a wide range of expression, across studies (Table). Conclusions: The SLR findings indicate that most studies assessing DLL3 in SCLC have relied on IHC methodology. Despite the range of thresholds used for evaluating positivity, DLL3 is notably expressed in SCLC. The frequency and impact of aberrant DLL3 localization was not addressed in these studies and minimal data on comparison of IHC with other methodologies exists. Results of this SLR also highlight the need to define a standardized method and threshold of evaluating DLL3 expression. [Table: see text]

INTRODUCTION:Understanding of the patient-perceived symptom burden of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is limited. The objective of this study was to explore patients' experiences with SCLC, identify which treatment-/disease-related symptoms have the greatest impact on their well-being, and gain caregiver perspectives.METHODS:A noninterventional, cross-sectional, multimodal, mixed methods study was conducted from April-June 2021. Adult patients with SCLC and unpaid caregivers were eligible to participate. Patients' experiences, captured via 5-day video diaries and follow-up interviews, were scored 1-10 on how bothersome the patients perceived each symptom/symptomatic adverse event. Patients indicated if they believed a symptom was disease or treatment related. Caregivers participated in an online community board.RESULTS:The study included nine patients (five with extensive-stage [ES] disease, four with limited-stage [LS] disease) and nine caregivers. Except for one patient/caregiver pairing, patients and caregivers were unmatched. The most common impactful symptoms in patients with ES-SCLC were shortness of breath, fatigue, coughing, chest pain, and nausea/vomiting; in LS-SCLC, these were fatigue and shortness of breath. Among patients with ES disease, SCLC had a high impact on physical (leisure/hobbies, work, sleep, ability to do household chores and errands/responsibilities outside home), social (family dynamics, extrafamilial social interaction), and emotional (mental health) aspects. Patients with LS-SCLC faced the long-term physical effects of treatment, financial implications, and emotional toll of an uncertain prognosis. SCLC had a high personal and psychologic burden among caregivers, whose duties consumed much of their time. Caregivers observed similar symptoms and impacts of SCLC as those reported by patients.CONCLUSIONS:This study provides valuable insight into patient- and caregiver-perceived burden of SCLC and can inform the design of prospective studies. Clinicians should seek to understand patients' opinions and priorities before making treatment decisions.

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive neuroendocrine carcinoma with a poor prognosis. Initial responses to standard-of-care chemo-immunotherapy are, unfortunately, followed by rapid disease recurrence in most patients. Current treatment options are limited, with no therapies specifically approved as third-line or beyond. Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3), a Notch inhibitory ligand, is an attractive therapeutic target because it is overexpressed on the surface of SCLC cells with minimal to no expression on normal cells. Several DLL3-targeted therapies are being developed for the treatment of SCLC and other neuroendocrine carcinomas, including antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), T-cell engager (TCE) molecules, and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) therapies. First, we discuss the clinical experience with rovalpituzumab tesirine (Rova-T), a DLL3-targeting ADC, the development of which was halted due to a lack of efficacy in phase 3 studies, with a view to understanding the lessons that can be garnered for the rapidly evolving therapeutic landscape in SCLC. We then review preclinical and clinical data for several DLL3-targeting agents that are currently in development, including the TCE molecules-tarlatamab (formerly known as AMG 757), BI 764532, and HPN328-and the CAR T-cell therapy AMG 119. We conclude with a discussion of the future challenges and opportunities for DLL3-targeting therapies, including the utility of DLL3 as a biomarker for patient selection and disease progression, and the potential of rational combinatorial approaches that can enhance efficacy.

Since the 2019 and 2020 approvals of PD-L1 inhibitors atezolizumab and durvalumab for first line (1L) treatment in combination with chemotherapy, the landscape of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) has changed. We studied recent treatment patterns and real-world overall survival (rwOS) after 1L therapy in this new scenario.

Supplementary Table 1, Figures 1-4 from ATM Deficiency Sensitizes Mantle Cell Lymphoma Cells to Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase-1 Inhibitors

Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3), a member of the Notch pathway, has been identified as a potential therapeutic target as it is highly expressed in small cell lung cancer (SCLC), a subtype accounting for 15

Identifying actionable driver mutations in NSCLC has enabled the broad adoption of precision oncology approaches into routine clinical practice. Improvements in testing infrastructure and tissue acquisition processes have made biomarker analysis increasingly available to patients diagnosed with NSCLC. While the benefit of these new systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) regimes was initially demonstrated in clinical trials, real world data are necessary to evaluate their societal contribution and confirm value to the health care system.

The use of consolidative durvalumab following concurrent chemoradiotherapy in unresectable Stage III NSCLC patients has contributed to improvement in patient outcome; however, some patients experience early treatment failure on durvalumab, characterized by primary drug resistance or toxicity requiring durvalumab termination. With clinical characteristics associated with early treatment failure on immunotherapy not well explored, this study investigated this phenomenon and endeavored to identify predictors associated with resistance or toxicity on durvalumab.

New requirements in Canada’s pricing processes for patented drugs may exacerbate delays in regulatory and reimbursement reviews. This study seeks to better understand the impact of any additional delays on non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients by measuring the following: (a) durations and outcomes of regulatory and reimbursement reviews of NSCLC drugs in Canada and reference countries; (b) delays in Canada’s reviews of three NSCLC drugs (nivolumab, afatinib, and pemetrexed [NAP]); and (c) estimating clinical, patient, and economic impacts of delays in Canada’s reviews on access to NAP. Information from the Context Matters database and the literature (2005–2020) was used to evaluate the durations and outcomes of reimbursement reviews of NSCLC drugs in Canada and comparator countries. Public information was used to assess delays in Canada’s reviews of NAP. Empirical modeling with data from the literature and the Southern Alberta Lung Cancer database was used to estimate the impact of delays in Canada’s NAP reviews on patients (i.e., as losses in person-years of life and quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]). Regulatory and reimbursement reviews in countries of interest take 12–18 months. In Canada, reviews of NSCLC drugs took 216 days (median), with a 24% rejection rate (mean = 19%). Delays in NAP reviews ranged from 5 to 94 days at Health Canada, 0–80 days at CADTH/pCODR, and 12–797 days in Canadian provinces. These delays may have affected 6400 patients, who lost up to 1740 person-years of life and 1122 QALYs (valued at CA$112 million). Changes to Canada’s prescription drug pricing processes may prolong reviews.

(1) Background: As genomic testing is becoming a part of the mainstream oncology practice, it is vital to ensure that our patients fully understand the implications of these tests. This study aimed to compare the attitudes and expectations of cancer patients with those of their physicians regarding the role of biomarker testing in clinical decision making. (2) Methods: Two separate, complimentary, self-administered questionnaires for patients with cancer and their physicians, respectively, were collected in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Out of 117, 113 completed patient surveys were included in the statistical analysis, constituting a 96.4% response rate. These surveys were subsequently matched with those of their corresponding oncologists to determine the concordance rates. (3) Results: Overall, patients demonstrated a good understanding of general cancer biology (80.0%) and diagnostic processes (90.0%) associated with precision oncology. Most patients wanted their tumours to be tested to guide treatment, and the oncologists broadly shared these views (concordance 65.1%). However, there were discrepancies between the knowledge and expectations regarding the applications of test results on actual diagnosis and prognosis between patients and their oncologists (concordance 26.1% and 36.0%, respectively). While only 28.0% of patients thought they had enough knowledge to make informed decisions, the majority (68.0%) said they needed more information. (4) Conclusion: Our study shows that patients and cancer physicians do not always agree with the roles and applications of genomic tests, which could lead to misplaced expectations and poor health outcomes. More research is needed to devise strategies to improve education and communication to align these expectations and improve the quality of clinical decision making.

Intracranial disease progression is a significant complication in patients with EGFR-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that can impact performance status, quality of life, and treatment options for patients. There is an increased need of oral tyrosine kinase inhibitors with central nervous system (CNS) activity in treating this population to prolong survival. Osimertinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) which has demonstrated penetration of the blood brain barrier and effective treatment of intracranial metastases in some patients.

The phase-III FLAURA clinical trial demonstrated benefit and effectiveness of osimertinib as a first-line treatment for EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients; however, subgroup analysis suggests the magnitude of benefit may differ between Asian and non-Asian patients. Prior real-world data from our institution also suggests EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients of Asian racial ancestry are the most likely to derive benefit from earlier generation EGFR-inhibitors. This study examined real-world clinical population of EGFR-mutant patients treated with first-line osimertinib to compare and contrast the characteristics and response to osimertinib among Asian and non-Asian patients.

The use, safety and effectiveness of crizotinib as part of the management of ROS1-rearranged NSCLC patients in a real-world Canadian clinical cohort was the focus of this retrospective review. Twenty-one ROS1-rearranged patients with advanced/metastatic disease receiving crizotinib between 2014–2020 were identified; crizotinib demonstrated tolerability and effectiveness in this population where outcomes were similar to those described in other crizotinib-treated real-world cohorts, but lower than those of the PROFILE 1001 clinical trial population. Systemic anti-cancer therapy prior to crizotinib initiation occurred in half of the study cohort, with platin-pemetrexed and immune checkpoint inhibitors being most common. Platin-pemetrexed showed good effectiveness in this cohort, but despite high prevalence of upregulated PD-L1 expression, immune checkpoint inhibitors showed poor effectiveness in his cohort. Among all systemic therapies received, crizotinib showed the most effective disease control, although longer intervals between diagnosis and crizotinib initiation were more common among those showing a lack of clinical response to crizotinib, and patients with brain metastases at the time of crizotinib initiation also showed increased diagnosis to crizotinib initiation intervals and decreased clinical response to crizotinib. This study reveals crizotinib has clinical benefit, but timely identification of ROS1-rearrangements and initiation targeted therapies appears important to maximize outcome in this population.