Yan Xu1, Min Hu2, Meizhuo Zhang3, Wei Zhong4, Xiaolu Yin5, Yun Sun6, Minjiang Chen7, Jing Zhao8, Xiaoyan Si9, Hanping Wang10, Xiaotong Zhang11, Li Zhang12, Ji Li13, Hongzhi Guan14, Zhenfan Yang15, Mengzhao Wang16. 1. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: maraxu@163.com. 2. Dizal (Jiangsu) Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, Shanghai, China. Electronic address: min.hu.jx@hotmail.com. 3. Research and Development Information, AstraZeneca, Shanghai, China. Electronic address: meizhuo.zhang@gmail.com. 4. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: weizhong3603@sina.com. 5. Precision Medicine & Genomics China, Astrazeneca. Electronic address: Lucy.Yin@astrazeneca.com. 6. Dizal (Jiangsu) Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, Shanghai, China. Electronic address: sunyun0102@163.com. 7. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: minjiangchen@163.com. 8. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: pumchzj@sina.com. 9. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: xiaoyanfff@sina.com. 10. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: wanghanping78@hotmail.com. 11. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: zhangxtpumch@126.com. 12. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: zhanglipumch@aliyun.com. 13. Department of Pathology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: diabloliji1978@sina.com. 14. Department of Neurology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: guanhz@263.net. 15. Dizal (Jiangsu) Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, Shanghai, China. Electronic address: Pamela.Yang@dizalpharma.com. 16. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: mengzhaowang@sina.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) secondary to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a devastating complication associated with poor prognosis. Diagnosis and assessment of responses in LM have been challenging due to limitation of traditional imaging tools and lack of standard evaluation criteria until very recently. To bridge this gap, we conducted the first prospective, observational study in cytologically diagnosed NSCLC-LM patients (NCT02803619). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 49 NSCLC-LM patients were enrolled. LM responses were evaluated with a composite endpoint integrating neurological symptoms, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) parameters and central nervous system (CNS) imaging. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS) after diagnosis of LM. Exploratory endpoint was the association between OS and prognostic factors. Primary tumor and CSF samples were collected for biomarker analysis. RESULTS: 93.9% of the cohort carried oncogenic drivers, and 85.7% harbored EGFR activating mutations. Median OS since LM diagnosis of the overall population was 9.7 months. EGFR mutant LM patients had a longer survival compared with wildtype ones. LM clinical responses assessed by the composite endpoint showed significant correlation with OS. Status of EGFR activating mutations was highly concordant between primary tumor and CSF. T790 M occurrence in CNS lesions was relatively rare and associated with intracranial exposure level of EGFR-TKIs. CONCLUSION: Our results supported the composite endpoint for objective response evaluation of LM was valid, suggested LM outweighed peripheral lesions on the impact to patient survival, and emphasized the urge and promise of development of CNS-penetrant targeted therapies to improve clinical outcome of NSCLC-LM patients.
OBJECTIVE:Leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) secondary to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a devastating complication associated with poor prognosis. Diagnosis and assessment of responses in LM have been challenging due to limitation of traditional imaging tools and lack of standard evaluation criteria until very recently. To bridge this gap, we conducted the first prospective, observational study in cytologically diagnosed NSCLC-LMpatients (NCT02803619). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 49 NSCLC-LMpatients were enrolled. LM responses were evaluated with a composite endpoint integrating neurological symptoms, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) parameters and central nervous system (CNS) imaging. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS) after diagnosis of LM. Exploratory endpoint was the association between OS and prognostic factors. Primary tumor and CSF samples were collected for biomarker analysis. RESULTS: 93.9% of the cohort carried oncogenic drivers, and 85.7% harbored EGFR activating mutations. Median OS since LM diagnosis of the overall population was 9.7 months. EGFR mutant LM patients had a longer survival compared with wildtype ones. LM clinical responses assessed by the composite endpoint showed significant correlation with OS. Status of EGFR activating mutations was highly concordant between primary tumor and CSF. T790 M occurrence in CNS lesions was relatively rare and associated with intracranial exposure level of EGFR-TKIs. CONCLUSION: Our results supported the composite endpoint for objective response evaluation of LM was valid, suggested LM outweighed peripheral lesions on the impact to patient survival, and emphasized the urge and promise of development of CNS-penetrant targeted therapies to improve clinical outcome of NSCLC-LMpatients.
Authors: James C H Yang; Sang-We Kim; Dong-Wan Kim; Jong-Seok Lee; Byoung Chul Cho; Jin-Seok Ahn; Dae H Lee; Tae Min Kim; Jonathan W Goldman; Ronald B Natale; Andrew P Brown; Barbara Collins; Juliann Chmielecki; Karthick Vishwanathan; Ariadna Mendoza-Naranjo; Myung-Ju Ahn Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-12-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Janna Josephus Anna Oda Schoenmaekers; Marthe Sentijna Paats; Anne-Marie Clasina Dingemans; Lizza Elisabeth Lucia Hendriks Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res Date: 2020-12