Virtual Library
Start Your Search
F. Solca
Author of
-
+
OA11 - Angiogenesis in Advanced Lung Cancer (ID 387)
- Event: WCLC 2016
- Type: Oral Session
- Track: Advanced NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:L.M. Montuenga, J. Heymach
- Coordinates: 12/06/2016, 11:00 - 12:30, Stolz 2
-
+
OA11.06 - Role of Fibroblasts in the Subtype-Specific Therapeutic Effects of Nintedanib in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) (ID 5029)
11:00 - 12:30 | Author(s): F. Solca
- Abstract
- Presentation
Background:
There is growing evidence that tumor-associated fibroblasts (TAFs) play a major role in critical steps of tumor progression in solid tumors including NSCLC. However the role of TAFs in regulating the response to targeted therapies is poorly understood. One of such targeted therapies is nintedanib (NTD), a multi-kinase inhibitor of VEGF, FGF and PDGF receptors that has been recently approved to treat advanced lung adenocarcinoma (ADC) patients. Although the therapeutic effects of NTD in lung cancer have been associated with its anti-angiogenic functions, NTD has also been shown to exhibit anti-fibrotic effects in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Since lung fibrosis is largely driven by activated fibroblasts/myofibroblasts, and TAFs are positive for myofibroblasts markers, it is conceivable that NTD anti-tumor effects may be additionally driven through its direct action on lung TAFs. The main goal of this study was to analyze the latter hypothesis.
Methods:
Patient derived lung TAFs from ADC and SCC patients as well as paired control fibroblasts from non-malignant pulmonary tissue were exposed to increasing concentrations of NTD and analyzed for growth and activation upon stimulation with growth factors and TGF- β1, respectively. Activation markers included alpha-smooth muscle actin and collagen-I.
Results:
We found that NTD exhibited a dual inhibitory role in TAFs in terms of growth and TGF-β1-induced activation in a subtype-specific fashion. Specifically, NTD-mediated growth inhibition was larger in SCC-TAFs than in ADC-TAFs, which correlated with the larger Erk signaling previously reported by our group in SCC-TAFs in the absence of mitogenic stimuli. Conversely, inhibition by NTD of TGF-β1-mediated activation was larger in ADC-TAFs than SCC-TAFs. Likewise, NTD inhibited the growth and invasive advantages of ADC cancer cells in vitro elicited by the conditioned medium of ADC-TAFs treated with TGF-β1 compared to those advantages elicited in the absence of NTD. These results reveal for the first time that the pro-tumorigenic effects of ADC-TAFs in vitro are markedly reduced in the presence of NTD.
Conclusion:
TAFs in vivo are largely activated and quiescent, and TGF-β1 is a potent fibroblast activator that is frequently upregulated in lung cancer and associated with poor prognosis. Based on these previous observations, we argue that our new findings strongly suggest that the selective therapeutic advantage observed for NTD in ADC patients may be in part related to its selective inhibition of TGF-β1-dependent activation of ADC-TAFs. These findings provide novel mechanistic insights on the subtype-specific therapeutic effects of NTD in NSCLC.
Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.
-
+
P3.02b - Poster Session with Presenters Present (ID 494)
- Event: WCLC 2016
- Type: Poster Presenters Present
- Track: Advanced NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 12/07/2016, 14:30 - 15:45, Hall B (Poster Area)
-
+
P3.02b-003 - Second-Line Afatinib versus Erlotinib for Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Lung (LUX-Lung 8): Analysis of Tumour and Serum Biomarkers (ID 5627)
14:30 - 15:45 | Author(s): F. Solca
- Abstract
Background:
LUX-Lung 8 compared second-line afatinib (40 mg/day; n=398) and erlotinib (150 mg/day; n=397) in patients with stage IIIB/IV squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung. PFS (median 2.6 vs 1.9 months, HR=0.81 [95% CI, 0.69–0.96], p=0.010) and OS (median 7.9 vs 6.8 months, HR=0.81 [0.69–0.95], p=0.008) were both significantly improved with afatinib versus erlotinib. Here we report exploratory molecular (n=245) and immunohistochemical (n=288) analyses of tumour samples to assess the frequency of short variants (SVs) and copy number alterations (CNAs) in cancer-related genes and whether these tumour genomic alterations, or EGFR expression levels, have clinical utility as prognostic/predictive biomarkers in patients with SCC of the lung. We also assessed the predictive utility of the prospectively validated VeriStrat®, a serum protein test (n=675).
Methods:
Archived tumour samples were retrospectively analysed using next-generation sequencing (FoundationOne™). Tumour EGFR expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry; EGFR positivity was defined as staining in ≥10% of cells. Pretreatment serum samples were assigned as VeriStrat-Good or VeriStrat-Poor according to a mass spectrometry signature. Cox regression analysis was used to correlate OS/PFS with genomic alterations (individual or grouped into gene families e.g. ErbB family), EGFR expression levels and VeriStrat status.
Results:
The frequency of ErbB family alterations was low (SVs: EGFR 6.5%, HER2 4.9%, HER3 6.1%, HER4 5.7%; CNAs: EGFR 6.9%, HER2 3.7%). No individual genetic alterations, or grouped ErbB family aberrations, were prognostic of OS/PFS. Treatment benefit from afatinib versus erlotinib was consistent in all molecular subgroups. Most tumours were EGFR-positive by immunohistochemistry (afatinib: 82%; erlotinib: 86%). EGFR expression was not predictive of OS or PFS benefit (EGFR-positive PFS: HR=0.76 [0.57‒1.02]; OS: HR=0.84 [0.63‒1.12]; EGFR-negative PFS: HR=0.87 [0.45‒1.68]; OS: HR=0.77 [0.40‒1.51]). In afatinib-treated patients, both PFS (HR=0.56 [0.43‒0.72], p<0.0001) and OS (HR=0.40 [0.31‒0.51], p<0.0001) were improved in the VeriStrat-Good versus the VeriStrat-Poor group. VeriStrat-Good patients had significantly longer OS and PFS when treated with afatinib versus erlotinib (median OS: 11.5 vs 8.9 months, HR=0.79 [0.63‒0.98]; PFS: HR=0.73 [0.59‒0.92]). In VeriStrat-Poor patients there was no significant difference in OS between afatinib and erlotinib (HR=0.90 [0.70‒1.16]). However, there was no significant interaction between treatment arms and VeriStrat classification.
Conclusion:
Despite comprehensive, multifaceted analysis, no biomarkers were identified that predicted the benefit with afatinib over erlotinib in patients with SCC of the lung. Afatinib is a treatment option in this setting irrespective of patients’ tumour genetics or EGFR expression levels. However, patient outcome strongly depends on VeriStrat status.
