Systematic mediastinal lymph node dissection (LND) or sampling is currently recommended for patients with early-stage non–small cell lung cancer. We aimed to investigate whether no mediastinal LND was noninferior to systematic LND in patients with ground glass opacity (GGO)–dominant invasive lung adenocarcinoma.
We conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase III, noninferiority randomized controlled trial comparing systematic mediastinal LND versus no mediastinal LND in patients with GGO-dominant invasive lung adenocarcinoma, who were predicted to have no lymph node metastasis on the basis of criteria established in our previous trial. The primary end point was 3-year disease-free survival. An interim analysis was planned upon enrollment of 300 patients, with predefined termination criteria if no mediastinal lymph node metastasis is detected and life-threatening complications occur in the systematic LND arm. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (ECTOP-1009, identifier: NCT04527419).
Interim analysis of 302 patients revealed no lymph node metastasis in either study arm. The no LND arm had significantly reduced surgery duration (mean, 74 minutes v 109 minutes; P < .001), blood loss (mean, 44 mL v 82 mL; P = .033), and postoperative hospital stay (mean, 3.9 days v 4.5 days; P = .002). Complications observed in the systematic LND arm included chylothorax in one patient (0.7%) and intraoperative massive bleeding because of superior vena cava injury in one patient (0.7%). No lymphadenectomy-related complications occurred in the no LND arm.
On the basis of interim findings and the principle of nonmaleficence, the trial should be terminated. Systematic mediastinal LND should no longer be recommended for patients with GGO-dominant lung adenocarcinoma.
The combination therapy demonstrated improved overall survival (a 25% reduction in mortality) but was associated with increased toxicity, including skin rash and venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). Single-agent osimertinib may lose its role as monotherapy for EGFR-mutated NSCLC, as the FLAURA2 trial showed that combining osimertinib with chemotherapy yielded better outcomes than osimertinib alone.
The phase III NeoADAURA trial evaluated neoadjuvant osimertinib (OSI) with or without platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) versus CT alone in resectable, EGFR-mutated stage II-IIIB non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Both OSI+CT and OSI monotherapy significantly improved major pathologic response (MPR: 26% and 25% vs 2%), and 12-month event-free survival (EFS) rates were higher with OSI-containing regimens (OSI+CT 93%, OSI 95%, CT 83%). Nodal downstaging was also more frequent with OSI arms (53% vs 21%). Neoadjuvant OSI—with or without CT—looks like a real step forward for our EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients, especially given the robust pathologic responses and high rates of surgical completion.
The phase 3 MARIPOSA trial compared amivantamab–lazertinib (Ami-Laz) to osimertinib (Osi) in untreated EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), showing a significant overall survival (OS) benefit for Ami-Laz (3-yr OS was 60% vs 51%). Median OS was not reached for Ami-Laz vs 36.7 months for Osi, with a projected >12-month median OS advantage. Ami-Laz also improved time to symptomatic progression (43.6 vs 29.3 months) and showed durable intracranial control, though grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were higher (80% vs 52%), notably skin, venous thromboembolism (VTE), and infusion reactions. In short, Ami-Laz is emerging as a new standard for first-line EGFRm NSCLC, but we’ll need to be proactive about managing its toxicity profile in clinic and whether this is superior or equivalent to Osi + chemo is currently unclear.
Adagrasib demonstrated a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.5 months compared to 3.8 months with docetaxel in patients with KRAS G12C-mutated tumors. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 47% of patients receiving Adagrasib and 46% in the docetaxel group. In my experience, Adagrasib is also more tolerable, making it a favorable option for this patient population.
There was a 28% reduction in mortality. Patients who achieved a complete response (CR) or clearance of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) also experienced better outcomes.