clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01331863.

Hypothesis: Prior experimental and human studies have demonstrated the circadian organization of immune cells’ proliferation, trafficking, and antigen recognition and destruction. Nivolumab targets T(CD8) cells, the functions, and trafficking of which are regulated by circadian clocks, hence suggesting possible daily changes in nivolumab’s efficacy. Worse progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were reported for malignant melanoma patients receiving more than 20% of their immune checkpoint inhibitor infusions after 16:30 as compared to earlier in the day. Methods: Consecutive metastatic non-small-cell cancer (NSCLC) patients received nivolumab (240 mg iv q 2 weeks) at a daily time that was ‘randomly’ allocated for each course on a logistical basis by the day-hospital coordinators. The median time of all nivolumab administrations was computed for each patient. The study population was split into two timing groups based upon the median value of the median treatment times of all patients. CTCAE-toxicity rates, iRECIST-tumor responses, PFS and OS were computed according to nivolumab timing. PFS and OS curves were compared and hazard ratios (HR) were computed for all major categories of characteristics. Multivariable and sensitivity analyses were also performed. Results: The study accrued 95 stage-IV NSCLC patients (PS 0–1, 96%), aged 41–83 years. The majority of nivolumab administrations occurred between 9:27 and 12:54 for 48 patients (‘morning’ group) and between 12:55 and 17:14 for the other 47 (‘afternoon’ group). Median PFS (95% CL) was 11.3 months (5.5–17.1) for the ‘morning’ group and 3.1 months (1.5–4.6) for the ‘afternoon’ one (p < 0.001). Median OS was 34.2 months (15.1–53.3) and 9.6 months (4.9–14.4) for the ‘morning’ group and the ‘afternoon’ one, respectively (p < 0.001). Multivariable analyses identified ‘morning’ timing as a significant predictor of longer PFS and OS, with respective HR values of 0.26 (0.11–0.58) and 0.17 (0.08–0.37). The timing effect was consistent across all patient subgroups tested. Conclusions: Nivolumab was nearly four times as effective following ‘morning’ as compared to ‘afternoon’ dosing in this cohort of NSCLC patients. Prospective timing-studies are needed to minimize the risk of resistance and to maximize the benefits from immune checkpoint inhibitors.

No abstract

The aim of the present study was to determine the potential benefit of conventional cisplatin-based chemotherapy on patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and poor performance status (PS), defined as 60-70 on the Karnofsky scale.Retrospective analysis was carried out of a randomised trial performed in advanced NSCLC where 485 patients received three courses of gemcitabine+ifosfamide+cisplatin induction chemotherapy.Of the patients, 80% had good PS (Karnofsky 80-100) and 20% poor PS. Response rates were 38 and 28%, respectively. Clinical improvement, defined as achieving a good PS during chemotherapy, was observed overall in 25% of the poor PS patients, with rates of 38, 20 and 14%, respectively, in case of response, no change and progression. PS improved more quickly in the responders. Survival of patients with poor PS was significantly worse, but survival of responders was similar, irrespective of the initial poor or good PS. Although nonfatal toxicity was almost similar, there were more toxic deaths (including vascular and cardiac fatalities) in the poor PS patients (9.2 versus 2.1%).In conclusion, combination chemotherapy is associated with clinical improvement in a substantial number of patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer of poor performance status.

Sequential chemotherapy using cisplatin-based regimen followed by paclitaxel does not result in better outcome than cisplatin-based chemotherapy using taxane as salvage treatment.