Virtual Library

Start Your Search

John R Goffin



Author of

  • +

    MA 10 - Immunotherapy I (ID 664)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Mini Oral
    • Track: Immunology and Immunotherapy
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      MA 10.01 - Durvalumab ± Tremelimumab with Platinum-Doublets in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Canadian Cancer Trials Group Study IND.226 (ID 8700)

      11:00 - 12:30  |  Author(s): John R Goffin

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Anti-PD1-monotherapy has activity in NSCLC with improved outcomes compared to chemotherapy. Preclinical, and early clinical data, suggests that combining immune checkpoint inhibitors and platinum-based chemotherapy may be synergistic. We examined the cohort of patients (pts) with metastatic NSCLC, with no prior therapy for advanced disease, from this multicentre phase Ib trial. The primary objective was to establish the recommend phase II doses of durvalumab (Du) ± tremelimumab (Tr) in combination with platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Secondary objectives included assessing safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of the 4-drug combination.

      Method:
      Pts were treated with Du±Tr at one of 4 dose levels (DL) concomitantly with either pemetrexed (Pem) +cisplatin/carboplatin followed by maintenance Pem for nonsquamous histology or gemcitabine (Gem) +cisplatin/carboplatin for squamous tumours. At DL0 Du 15 mg/kg IV q3wks was added; DL1 added Du 15mg/kg q3wk + Tr 1mg/kg x1 dose; DL2a added Du 15mg/kg q3wk + Tr 1 mg/kg q6wk x multiple doses; DL2b added Du 15mg/kg q3wk + Tr 3 mg/kg q6wk (1 dose with cycle 1 and 2 doses with maintenance pem), DL3 and DL4 added a fixed doses of Du 1125mg/Tr 56 mg and Du 1500 mg/ Tr 75 mg q3wk respectively. Du could continue until 1 year or unacceptable toxicity.

      Result:
      To date, 45 pts (median age=62 (range 36-78); 44% male, 100% ECOG PS≤1) have received 346 cycles in the Pem-platinum cohort while 9 pts (median age=64 (range 57-80); 78% male, 100% ECOG PS≤1) have been received 55 cycles in the Gem-platinum group. Most adverse events were ≤grade 2 and attributed to chemotherapy. Immunotherapy-related adverse events (irAEs) ≥ grade 3 were observed in 27% of patients and were more commonly reported with the addition of Tr. In the Pem-platinum cohort, diarrhea (n=5), fatigue (n=4) and elevated lipase (n=4) were the most come irAEs ≥ grade 3, while rash, pneumonitis and hypothyroidism occurred in 1 pt each after the introduction of Tr. In the Gem-platinum cohort, irAEs ≥ grade 3 were fatigue and rash (1 pt each at DL2b) and elevated lipase (1 pt at DL3). The objective response rate in 35 evaluable patients receiving Pem-platinum was 57.1% (95% CI=39.4, 73.7 ) and 37.5% (95% CI=8.5, 75.5) in the 8 evaluable patients receiving Gem-Platinum.

      Conclusion:
      The combination of Du±Tr can be safely administered with platinum-doublet chemotherapy with encouraging preliminary response data. Adding Tr may increase ≥ grade 3 irAE hence patient selection and early intervention is key to managing irAEs. *contributed equally

      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.

      Only Active 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 or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    MA 20 - Recent Advances in Pulmonology/Endoscopy (ID 685)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Mini Oral
    • Track: Pulmonology/Endoscopy
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      MA 20.11 - Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Prevalence in a Lung Cancer Screening Population (ID 9588)

      14:30 - 16:15  |  Presenting Author(s): John R Goffin

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and lung cancer are associated through tobacco use. COPD is underdiagnosed in both the primary care and lung cancer populations. Diagnosis of COPD should lead to improved care and quality of life. Screening programs could provide an opportunity to capture undiagnosed COPD. We analyzed the Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer Study (PanCan Study) to evaluate the prevalence of COPD in a screening population.

      Method:
      The PanCan Study was a single arm lung cancer screening trial which recruited individuals to low dose CT scan, autofluorescence bronchoscopy, and biomarker screening. Eligible individuals were 50-75 years of age, had smoked within 15 years, and had a minimum six-year risk of lung cancer ≥ 2% based on a risk prediction model derived from PLCO study data, which included COPD as a risk factor. Consenting subjects completed a questionnaire including background medical conditions, high-risk work exposures, and smoking history. Baseline spirometry was performed, and COPD was defined by GOLD criteria. For individuals not receiving post-bronchodilator spirometry, COPD was defined as ‘probable’ if GOLD criteria were met pre-bronchodilator and there was no prior diagnosis of asthma. Individuals with definite or probable COPD were defined as having COPD.

      Result:
      Of 2537 individuals recruited, 2514 had available spirometry data. Mean age was 62.3 years, 55.3% were male, median pack-years smoked was 50, 62.3% were active smokers, 45.1% had symptoms of dyspnea, 52.4% cough, and 37.5% wheeze. 35.2% had worked in a high-risk occupation. Overall, 1136 (45.2%) met spirometry criteria for COPD. Of 1987 individuals without a prior history of COPD, 41.9% met spirometry criteria for COPD, of which 53.7% had moderate to severe disease. Of 527 individuals (21%) reporting a diagnosis of COPD at baseline, 57.5% met spirometry criteria for COPD, 32.2% did not, and 10.3% had a prior diagnosis of asthma. In a multivariate model for risk of COPD, age (odds ratio (OR)~per year~ 1.06), dyspnea (OR 1.42), being a current smoker (OR 1.43), and pack-years (log transformed OR 1.42) were significant (all p < 0.001) as were high-risk occupation (OR 1.24, p=0.013) and wheeze (OR 1.24, p = 0.024).

      Conclusion:
      A diagnosis of COPD by spirometry is common in a lung cancer screening trial population. Individuals with a pre-existing self-reported diagnosis of COPD often fail to meet spirometry criteria for their diagnosis. Testing a lung cancer screening population for COPD could significantly improve COPD diagnosis and treatment.

      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.

      Only Active 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 or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    OA 06 - Global Tobacco Control and Epidemiology I (ID 662)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Oral
    • Track: Epidemiology/Primary Prevention/Tobacco Control and Cessation
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      OA 06.01 - Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Within an Organized CT Lung Cancer (LC) Screening Program (ID 9642)

      15:45 - 17:30  |  Author(s): John R Goffin

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Low-dose CT (LDCT) screening of smokers at high risk of developing lung cancer has been shown to reduce LC-specific and overall mortality. A retrospective analysis of the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) data suggests that smoking cessation contributed to the mortality reduction. Pilot LDCT screening programs are being implemented in Ontario with smoking cessation integrated. The Canadian Partnership Against Cancer with Statistics Canada have developed a microsimulation model (OncoSim-LC, version 2.5) that projects the impact of cancer control measures on LC incidence, mortality and cost. Assuming that each annual visit for LDCT is a teachable moment to promote smoking cessation, we have modelled the potential cost and cost-effectiveness of integrating cessation into an organized screening program.

      Method:
      OncoSim-LC incorporates Canadian demographic characteristics, risk factors, cancer management approaches and outcomes and resource utilization to assess clinical, economic and healthcare system impacts. We compare a base case of organized screening with no cessation to various scenarios of screening with cessation. Modelling assumptions included: annual screening of 55-74 year olds with 30+ pack year smoking history, target participation rate reached over 10 years; one cessation intervention (nicotine replacement therapy + varenicline + 12 weeks of counselling) costs $490; up to 10 cessation attempts per eligible individual dependent on screening encounters; a permanent quit rate of 5% per cessation attempt. Cost-effectiveness was estimated with a lifetime horizon, health system perspective and 1.5% discount rate. Costs are in 2016 CAD.

      Result:
      Cessation within a screening program with 60% recruitment and 70% rescreening (adherence) would cost approximately $76 million (undiscounted) per year for 2017-2036 or 8% of the total cost of screening, treatment and cessation. Compared to screening with no cessation, approximately 110 fewer incident cases and 50 fewer lung cancer deaths would occur on average per year for 2017-2036 and cost $14,000/QALY (lifetime horizon). 90% recruitment and 80% rescreening would result in 260 fewer deaths and cost of $24,000/QALY. At a doubled permanent quit rate of 10%, screening with cessation would cost $6,000/QALY. A 50% increase in the cost of the cessation intervention would decrease cost-effectiveness to $22,000/QALY.

      Conclusion:
      Based on the OncoSim-LC model, a cessation program within an organized LDCT screening program would cost well under $50,000/QALY even over multiple quit attempts. Integrating robust smoking cession initiatives within a LDCT screening program could save lives and be relatively cost-effective.

      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.

      Only Active 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 or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    OA 15 - Diagnostic Radiology, Staging and Screening for Lung Cancer II (ID 684)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Oral
    • Track: Radiology/Staging/Screening
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      OA 15.01 - Lung Cancer Screening: Participant Selection by Risk Model – the Pan-Canadian Study (ID 8466)

      14:30 - 16:15  |  Author(s): John R Goffin

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Retrospective studies indicate that selecting individuals for low dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening based on a highly predictive risk model is superior to applying National Lung Screening Trial (NLST)-like criteria, which use only categorized age, pack-year and smoking quit-time information. The Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer Study (PanCan Study) was designed to prospectively evaluate whether individuals at high risk for lung cancer could be identified for screening using a risk prediction model. This paper describes the study design and results.

      Method:
      2537 individuals were recruited through 8 centers across Canada based on a ≥2% of lung cancer risk estimated by the PanCan model, a precursor to the validated PLCOm2012 model. Individuals were screened at baseline and 1 and 4 years post-baseline.

      Result:
      At a median 5.5 years of follow-up, 164 individuals (6.5%) were diagnosed with 172 lung cancers. This was a significantly greater percentage of persons diagnosed with lung cancers than was observed in the NLST(4.0%)(p<0·001). Compared to 57% observed in the NLST, 77% of lung cancers in the PanCan Study were early stage (I or II) (p<0.001) and to 25% in a comparable population, age 50-75 during 2007-2009 in Ontario, Canada’s largest province, (p<0·001).

      Conclusion:
      Enrolling high-risk individuals into a LDCT screening study or program using a highly predictive risk model, is efficient in identifying individuals who will be diagnosed with lung cancer and is compatible with a strong stage shift – identifying a high proportion at early, potentially curable stage. Funding This study was funded by the Terry Fox Research Institute and Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00751660

      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.

      Only Active 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 or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    P2.01 - Advanced NSCLC (ID 618)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Poster Session with Presenters Present
    • Track: Advanced NSCLC
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      P2.01-032 - A Randomized Phase Ii Trial of Selumetinib + Platinum-pemetrexed (Pem-c) in Kras Wildtype (Wt)/Unknown NSCLC: CCTG Ind219 (ID 9083)

      09:00 - 16:00  |  Author(s): John R Goffin

      • Abstract
      • Slides

      Background:
      Selumetinib (SEL), an oral inhibitor of MEK 1 and 2, could be particularly effective in tumours with an activated Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK pathway, but has not been fully studied in KRAS WT nor in the first-line setting. The scheduling of SEL with chemotherapy might impact efficacy and/or toxicity.

      Method:
      IND219 is an open-label three-arm study of PEM-C±SEL. Arm A: PEM-C+SEL days 2-19; Arm B: PEM-C+SEL days 1-21; Arm C: PEM-C alone. Primary objective was response rate (ORR); secondary objectives were tolerability and progression-free survival (PFS). Pts were stratified by KRAS WT versus unknown and cisplatin versus carboplatin. Before the planned interim analysis (60 pts), pts were allocated 1:1:1 to arm A, B or C, with a plan to continue either Arm A or B plus Arm C a 3:1 ratio to ensure that the final analysis includes Arm A or B and Arm C in a 2:1 ratio. The trial would stop if neither Arm A or B had > 4 responses; if both did, the arm would be selected based on response and toxicity data. Correlative studies included genomic testing.

      Result:
      Arm A/B/C enrolled 20/21/21 pts. PEM-C exposure was lower with SEL (median cycles 5 versus 6 for Arm C). Seven pts on Arm A (35%; 95% CI 15-59% median duration 3.8m), 13 on Arm B (62%; 95% CI 38-82%; median duration 6.3m), and 5 on Arm C (24%; 95% CI 8-47%; median duration 11.6m) had PR, meeting the criteria to continue. PFS was 7.5m (95% CI 4.0 to 9.0 m) for Arm A, 6.7m (95% CI 4.1 to 8.2 m) on Arm B, and 4.0m on Arm C (95% CI 1.4 to 6.8 m). HR for PFS of Arm A over Arm C was 0.76 (95% CI 0.38 to 1.51, 2-sided p=0.42); HR for PFS of Arm B over Arm C was 0.75 (95% CI 0.37 to 1.54, p=0.43). After adjusting for age, performance status, gender and KRAS, PFS comparisons remained NS. Toxicity was most commonly grade 1-2, but more frequent with SEL especially mucositis, diarrhea, anorexia, dehydration, edema and rash. A high rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) was seen in all arms, highest in Arm A (Arm A 45 % versus 14 % [p=0.11])

      Conclusion:
      SEL+PEM-C is associated with higher, but less durable ORR. In this small study, PFS is numerically prolonged adding SEL to PEM-C with expected additive toxicity. Further exploration of these intriguing results is ongoing.

      Only Active 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 or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.