Adjuvant Systemic Therapy and Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Stage I-IIIA Completely Resected Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: ASCO Guideline Rapid Recommendation Update

Author(s): Katherine Pisters, MD1; Mark G. Kris, MD2; Laurie E. Gaspar, MD3,4; and Nofisat Ismaila, MD5; for the Adjuvant Systemic Therapy and Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Stage I to IIIA NSCLC Guideline Expert Panel
Source: DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.00051 Journal of Clinical Oncology Published online February 15, 2022. PMID: 35167335

Dr. Lucio Gordan's Thoughts

Timely update. MRD monitoring post-surgery will likely change this paradigm in the next few years. In the meantime, this is a good summary and in-depth discussion. Follow-up is necessary to understand impact on overall survival.

ABSTRACT

ASCO Rapid Recommendations Updates highlight revisions to select ASCO guideline recommendations as a response to the emergence of new and practice-changing data. The rapid updates are supported by an evidence review and follow the guideline development processes outlined in the ASCO Guideline Methodology Manual. The goal of these articles is to disseminate updated recommendations, in a timely manner, to better inform health practitioners and the public on the best available cancer care options.

BACKGROUND

In 2017, ASCO with Ontario Health—Cancer Care Ontario published a guideline on adjuvant therapy in resected stage I-III non–small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs).1 Two randomized control trials (RCTs)2,3 were published in 20202 and 20213 and prompted this amendment to the 2017 guideline.

METHODS

A targeted electronic literature search to identify RCTs of osimertinib and atezolizumab in this patient population was conducted. No additional randomized trials were uncovered. Members from the original Expert Panel reconvened to assess key evidence from the Wu and Felip trials and to create and approve the revision to the recommendations.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

In the Wu et al2 targeted therapy trial, patients with completely resected EGFR (Ex19 del or L858R) mutation–positive stage IB-IIIA (7th edition, AJCC Cancer Staging Manual),4 NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive either osimertinib (80 mg once daily) or placebo for 3 years or until disease recurrence or fulfillment of a criterion for discontinuation. Administration of postoperative chemotherapy before random assignment was allowed but not mandatory (given in 26% and 75% of stage IB and II-IIIA patients, respectively). The benefit of postoperative osimertinib was not affected by the use of postoperative chemotherapy. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS) according to investigator assessment among patients with stage II-IIIA disease. A total of 682 patients were randomly assigned; 60% received adjuvant chemotherapy. At 24 months, 90% of stage II-IIIA patients receiving osimertinib (95% CI, 84 to 93) versus 44% receiving placebo (95% CI, 37 to 51) were alive and disease-free (overall hazard ratio [HR] for primary study end point 0.17; 99.06% CI, 0.11 to 0.26; P < .001). In the stage IB-IIIA population, 89% of the patients receiving osimertinib versus 52% receiving placebo were alive and disease-free at 24 months (95% CI, 85 to 92 v 95% CI, 46 to 58; overall HR 0.20; 99.12% CI, 0.14 to 0.30; P < .001). Overall survival data, a secondary end point, are immature, and it is unknown whether there is an overall survival benefit. In the Felip et al3 immunotherapy trial, patients with completely resected stage IB (≥ 4 cm)-IIIA (7th edition, AJCC Cancer Staging Manual)4 NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant atezolizumab (1,200 mg every 21 days for 16 cycles or 1 year) or best supportive care (BSC) after adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The primary end point was investigator-assessed DFS in patients with stage II-IIIA NSCLC with at least 1% programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. A total of 1,005 patients were randomly assigned and included in the intent-to-treat population. At 32 months median follow-up, DFS was greater for patients with stage II-IIIA, PD-L1–positive with atezolizumab versus BSC (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.88; P = .0039) and also for all patients with stage II-IIIA with atezolizumab versus BSC (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.96; P = .020). The quality of the evidence of these studies was assessed using the GRADE tool. Wu et al had a high certainty of evidence, whereas Felip et al had a moderate certainty of evidence.

2021 UPDATED RECOMMENDATION

Recommendation 1.2

Stage IB (3 < T ≤ 4 cm, N0M0): Adjuvant osimertinib is recommended for patients with sensitizing EGFR (Ex19del or L858R) mutations (Type: evidence based; Evidence quality: high; Strength of recommendation: strong).

Recommendation 1.2.1

Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy and/or atezolizumab are not recommended for routine use in this patient group. A postoperative multimodality evaluation, including a consultation with a medical oncologist, is recommended to assess benefits and risks of adjuvant therapies for each patient. Factors to consider other than tumor stage when making a recommendation for adjuvant therapy are outlined after the adjuvant systemic therapy section of the 2017 guideline (Type: evidence based and panel consensus, benefits outweigh harms, especially in patients with larger tumors; Evidence quality: intermediate; Strength of recommendation: moderate).

Recommendation 1.3

Stages IIA, IIB, and IIIA: Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is recommended for all patients. Adjuvant osimertinib is recommended after chemotherapy for patients with tumors with sensitizing EGFR mutations, regardless of the PD-L1 status. Adjuvant atezolizumab is recommended for all patients with PD-L1 ≥ 1% after cisplatin-based chemotherapy except for patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations (Type: evidence based and panel consensus; Evidence quality: high; Strength of recommendation: strong). Note: the guideline recommendations are based on the 7th edition staging system used in the studies as opposed to the current 8th edition staging system for lung cancer.5

Author Affiliations

1MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 2Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 3Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Loveland, CO 4University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO 5American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

Neoadjuvant Osimertinib for Resectable EGFR-Mutated Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

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.

Read More »

Phase III Study of Mediastinal Lymph Node Dissection for Ground Glass Opacity–Dominant Lung Adenocarcinoma

This large, well-done study compared systematic mediastinal lymph node dissection (LND) versus no LND in patients with GGO-dominant invasive lung adenocarcinoma (CTR ≤0.5, ≤3 cm, cT1N0M0). Interim analysis of 302 patients showed no lymph node metastases in either arm, with both groups achieving 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of 100% at the time of analysis. The no LND arm had significantly shorter surgery duration (74 vs 109 min), less blood loss (44 vs 82 mL), shorter hospital stays (3.9 vs 4.5 days), and fewer grade ≥2 complications (3.3% vs 9.3%). Based on these findings, the trial was terminated early for nonmaleficence, and the authors recommend omitting systematic mediastinal LND in this population. In short, for carefully selected GGO-dominant lung adenocarcinoma, skipping mediastinal LND appears safe and spares patients’ unnecessary morbidity—this could be a real practice-changer for our early-stage, node-negative cases.

Read More »

Overall Survival with Amivantamab–Lazertinib in EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC

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.

Read More »

Adagrasib versus docetaxel in KRASG12C-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (KRYSTAL-12): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

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.

Read More »