Daily summary · 2026-10-04 · post-conference wrap
Today at WCLC 2026
Trending voices
d_stock1K impressions · 1 posts
Tom Newsom-Davis533 impressions · 1 posts
Rohit Malde345 impressions · 1 posts
Lucky57 impressions · 1 postsTrending topics
Trials in focus
Live from Seoul — what the meeting is talking about
Trending Topics
Today’s most-discussed themes, each with a swipeable strip of the posts behind it — scan the meeting without leaving the page. Arrows to browse; swipe on mobile.
EGFR
LLUNG CONNECT powered by COR2ED@lung_connect
Update from WCLC 2026: The latest in HER2-mutant NSCLC
>> From thoracic oncologist Dr @JSabari
What do DESTINY-Lung04, and new data from SOHO-01 & Beamion LUNG-1 mean for HER2-mutant NSCLC?
📺Watch to find out
Endorsed by @WarOnCancer, @Exon20Group &
@BiomarkerCo
Supported by an Independent Educational Grant from Bayer. For HCPs only.
894.4K impressions15 likes2 reposts2026-09-17
MMiss Momentum@MissMomentumX
BlossomHill Therapeutics (Nasdaq: $BLSM)
Big capital raise + Fast Track status is a pretty notable combo. ✨
BlossomHill highlighted the completion of an upsized $168.3 million IPO alongside FDA Fast Track designation for BH-30643 in advanced EGFR C797S-positive non-small cell lung cancer.
That gives the company both a strengthened balance sheet and a defined regulatory milestone behind its lead
12.6K impressions49 likes7 reposts2026-09-21
OOncology Brothers@OncBrothers
Highlights from #WCLC26 #CommunityOncology:
NSCLC
1. #ADAURA Update Adj mEGFR
2. #PAPILLON 1L EGFR Ex20
3. #DESTINYLung04 1L mHER2
4. #ARROS1 1L ROS1+
5. #HARMONi 2L mEGFR
SCLC
6. #MAVERICK @SWOG MRI surv
7. #DeLLphi Tarla SubQ & ⬇️ freq
#lcsm #OncTwitter @IASLC
1/8 https://t.co/K5kHEzMTvv
11.4K impressions10 likes9 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
THE
IASLC
2026 D
2026 World Conference
Endorsed by
Korean
Association
for
on Lung Cancer
KAL
Lung Cancer
C
SEPTEMBER 12 — 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DDr Rishabh Jain@DrRishabhOnco
🫁 EGFR at #WCLC26: 5 trials to watch 👇
1️⃣ ADAURA | PL03.01
8-year update of adjuvant osimertinib in resected EGFR-mutant NSCLC.
🔥 How durable is the survival benefit at 8 years?
2️⃣ PAPILLON | PL03.03
Amivantamab + chemotherapy vs chemotherapy in 1L EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC.
🔥 Does the PFS advantage translate into an OS benefit?
3️⃣ REZILIENT 3 | PL03.04
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy vs ch
8.2K impressions18 likes6 reposts2026-09-11
UUğur Özkerim@UOzkerim
Final OS results from PAPILLON at #WCLC26
In 1L EGFR exon20ins advanced NSCLC, amivantamab + chemotherapy achieved a median OS of 34.3 vs 27.9 months with chemotherapy (HR 0.87).
With substantial crossover to amivantamab after progression (97/128; 76%), the crossover-adjusted analysis showed an OS benefit: HR 0.57
@OncoAlert @GlopesMd @ManuelDomine @StephenVLiu @weoncologists @OpenMedKate @Lung
7.1K impressions6 likes5 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
G
PAPILLON
PAPILLON: Final Overall Survival in the ITT Population
Ami-chemo in 1L
Ex20ins NSCLC
Median os (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
34.3 mo (27.0-40.8)
100
Chemotherapy
27.9 mo (24.0-32.4)
HR, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.66-1.14); P=0.307
80
Amivantamab-chemotherapy demonstrated the
Participants who are surviving (%)
66%
longest median OS reported to date in
Ex20ins-mutated advanced NSCLC
60
58%
47%
40
38%
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
20
Chemotherapy
97 of 128 (76%)
Median follow-up: 48.6 mo (range, 0.3-59.4)
participants who
discontinued due to
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
progressive disease
crossed over to
Months
No. at risk
amivantamaba
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
Chemotherapy 155
153
148
136
127
114
103
96
86
74
63
58
53
50
41
30
20
14
9
4
0
A total of 97 participants (87 participants as part of the crossover cohort plus an additional 10 participants off protocol) received 2L amivantamab monotherapy out of 128 chemotherapy-randomized participants with BICR -confirmed disease progression. 2L, second line, Ex20ins, exon 20 insertion
6
KAREN KELLY
ALEX ADVEL &
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
12
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON: Crossover-Adjusted Final Overall Survival
PAPILLO
Ami-chemo
Ex20ins NS
Inverse Probability of Censoring Weighting (IPCW)
HR (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
0.87 (0.66-1.14);
100
vs chemotherapy (ITT)
P=0.307
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
0.57 (0.39-0.82);
vs IPCW-adjusted chemotherapy®
nominal P=0.003
80
After adjustment for on-protocol crossover with
Participants who are surviving (%)
the prespecified IPCW method, amivantamab-
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
chemotherapy demonstrated a significant
60
(ITT): 34.3 mo
(95% CI, 27.0-40.8)
OS benefit versus chemotherapy
Chemotherapy (IPCW):
40
22.1 mo
(95% CI, 16.4-27.6)
20
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
Chemotherapy (IPCW)
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
No. at risk
Months
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
Chemotherapy (IPCW) 155
149
128
95
71
53
41
34
27
22
17
12
10
9
6
6
2
1
1
0
0
*Two additional recommended models' demonstrated improvement in the OS benefit consistent with IPCW: Two-Stage Estimation (TSE): HR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.35-0 77) and Rank Preserving Structural Failure Time (RPSFT): HR, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.37-1.36).
1. Question and answer on adjustment for cross-over in estimating effects in oncology trials. European Medicines Agency. Accessed August 18, 2026. https I/www
8
KAREN KELLY
CHUL KIM
RATHENOVA
DDr Amol Akhade@SuyogCancer
Post 3rd generation EGFR TKI progression treatment options . Another good summary slide @IASLC #WCLC26 https://t.co/32BfVbpcei
6.7K impressions34 likes7 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
NSCLC, EGFR-mut, post-3rd generation TKI: how to choose?
-03 min 47s
HARMONi
MARIPOSA-2
Amivantamab +
Ivo + PBC
PFS (1ʳУ): 6.8 vs 4.4 m
PFS 6.3 vs 4.2
PBC
HR 0.52
HR 0.48
PBC
PBC
OS (1ʳᵈ, FA): 16.8 vs 14.0 m
OS (IA2): 17.7 vs 15.3 m
HR 0.79 (NS)
HR 0.73 (NS)
Le et al, Lancet Oncol 2026
Passaro, Ann Onc 2024; Popat, ESMO 2024
OptiTROP-
SAFFRON: if MET
Panku-Lung01
Lung04
overexpression or amplification
PFS (1ʳᵈ): 8.3 vs 4.3
PFS (press
PFS (press
Sac-TMT
m, HR 0.49
Iza-Bren
release)
Osi + savolitinib
release)
PBC
OS (2ⁿᵈ, IA): NR vs
PBC
OS not
PBC
OS (press
17.4 m, HR 0.60
mature
release)
Fang et al, NEJM 2025
DDiego A. Díaz-García@diegoadiazg
🫁 HARMONi: Ivonescimab after EGFR-TKI progression.
Ph3 HARMONi evaluated ivonescimab + chemo vs chemo alone in advEGFRmut NSCLC after progression on a 3rdgen EGFR-TKI:
PFS: 6.8 vs 4.4 months
HR 0.52 (95% CI, 0.41-0.66; p<0.0001)
OS: 16.8 vs 14.0 months
HR 0.79 (95% CI, 0.62-1.01)
A significant PFS benefit, while OS remains less definitive.
📖 @TheLancetOncol
DOI 👉🏻 10.1016/S1470-2045(26)00282-
6.5K impressions22 likes10 reposts2026-09-19
[Slide 1]
A
100
Number of events/
Median progression-free
number of patients
survival, months (95% CI)
80
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
129/172
6.8 (5.7-7.1)
Progression-free survival (%)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
146/173
4.4 (4.1-5.5)
60
40
20
Stratified HR (95% CI):
0.52 (0.41-0.66), two-sided p<0.0001
HH
:
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
Time since randomisation (months)
Number at risk (censored)
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
172 (0)
134 (25)
76 (29)
48 (31)
34 (32)
24 (33)
16 (34)
10 (37)
5 (40)
0 (43)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
173 (0)
100 (23)
50 (25)
24 (25)
12 (25)
9 (25)
4 (26)
2 (26)
1 (27)
0 (27)
[Slide 2]
C
100
Number of events/
Median overall survival,
number of patients
months (95% CI)
80
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
122/219
16.8 (14.3-19.0)
Overall survival (%)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
140/219
14.0 (12.8-15.7)
60
40
20
Stratified HR (95% CI): 0.79 (0.62-1.01)
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
Time since randomisation (months)
Number at risk (censored)
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
219 (0)
212 (1)
189 (3)
137 (29)
98 (49)
77 (56)
60 (60)
51 (60)
43 (62)
33 (66)
26 (71)
16 (81)
5 (92)
0 (97)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
219 (0)
210 (1)
186 (3)
132 (32)
92 (51)
63 (59)
52 (60)
44 (60)
38 (60)
30 (60)
18 (66)
9 (73)
0 (79)
[Slide 3]
Ivonescimab plus
Placebo plus
Treatment
p value
chemotherapy
chemotherapy
effect
group (n=219)
group (n=219)
(95% CI)*
Primary endpoints
Progression-free survival (primary
6.8
4.4
0.52
<0.0001
analysis); median (95% CI), monthst
(5.7-7.1)
(4.1-5.5)
(0-41-0.66)
Overall survival (primary analysis);
16.8
14.0
0.79
0.057
median (95% CI), months
(14.3-19.0)
(12.8-15.7)
(0-62-1.01)
Secondary endpoints
Objective response rate (95% CI) +
45% (38-52)
34% (28-41)
10% (1-20)
0.024
Duration of response; median
7.6 (5.5-10.6)
4.2 (2.9-4.7)
..
..
(95% CI), monthst
Best overall response, n (%)+ T
Complete response
4 (2%)
3 (1%)
..
..
Partial response
94 (43%)
72 (33%)
..
..
Stable disease
85 (39%)
85 (39%)
..
..
Progressive disease
13 (6%)
35 (16%)
..
..
Not evaluable
10 (5%)
14 (6%)
..
..
Not applicable
13 (6%)
10 (5%)
..
..
Exploratory endpoints
Time to response; median (95% CI),
1.45
1.45
..
..
monthst
(1.4-1.6)
(1.4-2.4)
Intracranial progression-free survival;
13.7
10.3
0.67
Exploratory
median (95% CI), monthst
(11.6-16.2)
(8.6-12-8)
(0.53-0.85)
Post-hoc endpoints
Extended progression-free survival;
6.3
4.8
0.57
Exploratory
median (95% CI), monthst
(5.6-7.1)
(4.2-5.5)
(0-46-0-71)
Extended overall survival; median
16.8
14.0
0.78
Exploratory
(95% CI), monthstt
(14.3-19.0)
(12.8-15.3)
(0-62-0-98)
Disease control rate (95% CI)+T
84% (78-88)
73% (67-79)
10% (3-18)
Exploratory
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
8 YEARS later, and the ADAURA curves are still speaking.
In resected EGFR+ NSCLC, adjuvant osimertinib continues to show a durable OS benefit:
▫️Stage II–IIIA: 74% v 58% 8-year OS (HR 0.53)
▫️Stage IB–IIIA: 79% vs 64% (HR 0.52)
Long-term follow-up matters.
#WCLC26 @IASLC https://t.co/phPwzmwkBg https://t.co/lwhi3nLitK
6.3K impressions9 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an OS benefit versus placebo in the primary
population (stage II-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year OS rate
8-year os rate
1.0
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
85%
0.9
Osimertinib (n=233)
74 (67, 80)
74%
0.8
Placebo (n=237)
58 (50, 65)
0.7
73%
0.3 OS probability
0.6
os HR
0.53
58%
0.5
(95% CI)
(0.38, 0.75)
0.4
Maturity: 30%
osimertinib 24%; placebo 36%
0.2
0.1
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
osimertinib 92.0 months; placebo 68.5 months
0.0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
Time from randomization (months)
risk
rtinib 233 229 224 224 221 214 208 205 201 192 180 171 159 149 142 128 91 52 28 8 1 0
237 232 226 221 210 202 190 182 172 156 146 125 109 103 94 74 53 33 20 9 2 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. *Among patients who were alive at the planned final OS analysis (DCO: Jan 27, 2023), updated survival data were collected through yearly follow-up until the curre
(May 4, 2026; additional consent provided) and from accessible records / information from last contact date after the final planned os DCO. Patients for whom no additional long-term os data were available remained cen
their last known alive date, survival time unchanged from the final planned OS analysis DCO (Jan 27, 2023). CI, confidence interval; DCO, data cut-off; HR, hazard ratio; os, overall
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an os benefit versus placebo in the overall
population (stage IB-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year os rate
8-year os rate
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
1.0
88%
Osimertinib (n=339)
79 (74, 83)
0.9
79%
0.8
Placebo (n=343)
64 (58, 70)
178%
0.7
64%
os HR
0.52
OS probability
0.6
(95% CI)
(0.39, 0.71)
0.5
0.4
Maturity: 26%
0.3
osimertinib 20%; placebo 31%
0.2
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
0.1
osimertinib 93.3 months; placebo 79.6 months
0.0
0
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120 126 132
Time from randomization (months)
No. at risk
Osimertinib 339 332 325 324 319 311 304 301 295 285 267 250 233 219 210 186 142 85 46 16 3 0
Placebo 343 338 332 326 314 304 290 281 268 247 233 208 185 173 155 131 103 64 36 15 2 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. *Among patients who were alive at the planned final OS analysis (DCO: Jan 27, 2023), updated survival data were collected through yearly follow-up until the
(May 4, 2026; additional consent provided) and from accessible records / information from last contact date after the final planned OS DCO. Patients for whom no additional long-term OS data were available remaine
their Last known alive date, survival time unchanged from the final planned OS analysis DCO (Jan 27, 2023). CI, confidence interval; DCO, data cut-off; HR, hazard ratio; os,
UUğur Özkerim@UOzkerim
Excellent discussion of the evolving 1L landscape for EGFR exon20ins NSCLC at #WCLC26. @LudaBazhenovaMD
A thoughtful comparison of PAPILLON, WU-KONG 28 and REZILIENT3, highlighting that treatment choice goes beyond efficacy alone—CNS disease, exon20ins subtype, toxicity, treatment burden, patient preference and subsequent therapy all matter.
Importantly, cross-trial comparisons and subgroup ana
6.2K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
What should guide our first line decision?
PAPILLON
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
WU-KONG 28
Sunvozertinib
REZILIENT3
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
EFFICACY & TOXICITY
PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
PATIENT PRIORITIES
WHAT COMES NEXT?
Depth and duration of benefit
CNS metastases
IV VS oral therapy
Treatment burden
EGFR exon 20ins subtype
Quality of life
Sequential efficacy
Adverse events
preferences
Resistance mechanisms
[Slide 2]
along
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Do subgroup analyses help us choose first-line therapy?
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT3
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
CNS mets
CNS mets
HR 0.63 (0.38-1.06)
HR 0.96 (0.44-2.08)
CNS mets
HR 0.38 (0.21-0.67)
No CNS mets
HR 0.33 (0.23-0.46)
HR 0.62 (0.47-0.83)
No CNS mets
No CNS mets
HR 0.62 (0.38-0.99)
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
Near loop
HR 0.40 (0.28-0.58)
Near loop
HR 0.59 (0.43-0.82)
Near loop
Not reported
Far loop
HR 0.19 (0.06-0.69)
Far loop
HR 0.83 (0.49-1.38)
Far loop
Not reported
CNS metastases and exon 20 insertion location are potential differentiators but subgroup data remain exploratory
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III randomized 1L trials
PAPILLON
Platinum doublet
Amivantamab
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
+
sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib +
chemotherapy
chemotherapy
PAPILLON: 47
ORR%
WU KONG 28: 31.1
73
(BIRC)
59
65
REZILIENT 3: 40
PAPILLON: 6.7
11.4
mPFS m
10.3
14.5
WU KONG 28: 7.5
0.40; 0.30 -0.53; P<0.001
HR (CI, p)
0.65; 0.50 -0.85; <0.001
0.5; 0.34-0.73; p=0.00015
REZILIENT 38.5
mOS, m
PAPILLON: 27.9 (24.0-32.4)
34.3 (27.0-40.8)
29.8 (21.8-NE)
NR
HR (Cl,p)
WU KONG 28: 28.8 (27.0-NE)
HR, 0.87 (0.66-1.14);
0.99 (0.7-1.40)
0.72 (0.42-1.23)
REZILIENT 3: NR
P=0.307
p 0.49 39% maturity
P=0.11082
PAPILLON: 68
18m-OS
WU KONG 28: 67
74
65.5
Not reported
REZILIENT 3: NR
PAPILLON: 54
24m-OS
WU KONG 28: 56.2
64
57.4
Not reported
REZILIENT 3: NR
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit interpretation.
9
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III 1L randomized trials
Platinum doublet
PAPILLON
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
Neutropenia (34%),
Diarrhea (14%),
Anemia (48.6%),
Most common
Paronychia (10%),
CK increased (20.9)
toxicity (Gr3)
anemia (13%),
Anemia (9.2%),
neutropenia (33.6),
infusion related reaction (1%)
rash (0.6%)
thrombocytopenia (30%)
rash (10.7%)
paronychia (3.7%)
GR3 AE %
75
75
81
% dose reduction*
36
41
44
% dose
11
12
17
discontinuation*
PAPILLON: 3
AE leading to
WU KONG 28: 1.3
5
4.3
9.5
death %
REZILIENT 3: 2.9
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit
interpretation.
* Targeted therapy
10
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🔥ADAURA: Adjuvant osimertinib — exploratory 8-year OS landmark update #WCLC2026
🆙 @JTOonline
🎯8-y OS 74% (osimertinib) vs 58% (placebo; HR 0.53); IB-IIIA: 79% vs 64% (HR 0.52)
🎯Ex19del shows stronger OS benefit (HR 0.45) vs L858R (HR 0.72)
🎯Llongest OS follow-up in adjuvant EGFR NSCLC trial
🎙Dr. Yi-Long Wu @ThomasW35874311 @DrRoyHerbst
#LCSM @OncoAlert @Larvol @EGFRResisters
https://t.co/SCnLw
6.1K impressions10 likes6 reposts2026-09-13
SCLC
PPDBrown@PDBrownOnc
🚨🚨 Randomized Trial #WCLC26 Small Cell Lung Cancer MRI +/-PCI 🚨
• MRI alone superior cognitive outcome
• CFFS benefit of MRI alone similar in LS and ES-SCLC
• No diff OS
• MRI surveillance standard of care for SCLC https://t.co/4YM3QAzBeQ
20.1K impressions54 likes27 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
MAVERICK (SWOG 1827)
MRI +/- PCI
1 Year CFFS**
AE Gr2+
25/10 PCI
5%
41%
LS-SCLC or
ES-SCLC
M A O N Z D R E I
+ MRI*
n=304
MRI
16%
2%
Surveillance
Rusthoven World Lung 2026. 68% LS-SCLC *77% HA-PCI
**Primary Endpoint - Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS) MRI alone, HR 0.61 (90% CI, 0.47-0.78), p<0.004
CFFS No signif diff benefit MRI alone by Dz stage or use immuno.OS MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Landmark, practice changing study at #WCLC26. The phase III MAVERICK study shows no improvement in OS with PCI for SCLC, across limited and extensive stages, with worse cognitive failure free survival and increased toxicity in PCI arm.
The end of the PCI era. https://t.co/SWOPM7iKux
14.6K impressions22 likes10 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
Overall Survival
100%
Preliminary analyses at 128 events
suggest no significant difference in
N
Events
Median(months)
90% CI
MRI brain surveilance
151
67
29.8
(24.8-48.6)
overall survival (OS)
PCI
* MRI brain surveilance
152
61
31.4
75%
(24.4-36.3)
HR(90% Ci): 0.90 (0.67-1.20)
MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
% Survival
Upper bound of 90% CI of 1.2 for MRI
50%
alone is currently below the non-inferiority
margin of 1.25
25%
MRI brain surveillance
Final OS results will be analyzed after 190
PCI
+ MRI brain surveillance
events
0%
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
Number at risk (events / censor)
Months After Randomization
MRI brain surveillance 151 (0/1) 132 (12/7)101 (29/21)76 (44/31) 55 (53/43): 39 (61/51) 31 (64/56): 21 (64/66) 16 (65/70) 11 (67/73) 3 (67 / 81)
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 152 (0/3) 112 (15/25)84 (31/37) 63 (41/48) 47 (48/57) 35 (51/66) 20 (57/75) 15 (59/78) 10 (59/83) 4 (60/88) 1 (61 / 90)
MMiss Momentum@MissMomentumX
BlossomHill Therapeutics (Nasdaq: $BLSM)
Big capital raise + Fast Track status is a pretty notable combo. ✨
BlossomHill highlighted the completion of an upsized $168.3 million IPO alongside FDA Fast Track designation for BH-30643 in advanced EGFR C797S-positive non-small cell lung cancer.
That gives the company both a strengthened balance sheet and a defined regulatory milestone behind its lead
12.6K impressions49 likes7 reposts2026-09-21
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
We now have TWO studies showing B7-H3 ADCs vastly superior to standard topotecan for relapsed SCLC: tam-peli and ris-rez. These studies were different - different agents, different baseline demographics of pts, etc - but the outcomes were similar, control arms performed similarly. These trials reinforce each other. Looking forward to global studies and to first-line studies. The ADC era soundly he
11.5K impressions5 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
RR
DCR
PFS
6m PFS Rate
OS
ILD rate
Tam-Peli 2mg/kg
59.1%
91.1%
7.4 VS 2.8m
58.1%
13.3 vs 9.4
4.9%
VS topotecan
VS 9.7%
VS 50.9%
PFS HR 0.29
VS 17.9%
OS HR 0.46
TAISHAN-302
Zhang, WCLC 2026
Ris-rez, 8mg/kg q3w
58.3%
90.4%
7.2 VS 3.0m
59.9%
18.5m VS 10.3
11.7%
VS topotecan
VS 12.6%
VS 60.2%
PFS HR 0.33
vs 28.5%
OS HR 0.46
ARTEMIS-008
Wang, WCLC 2026
OOncology Brothers@OncBrothers
Highlights from #WCLC26 #CommunityOncology:
NSCLC
1. #ADAURA Update Adj mEGFR
2. #PAPILLON 1L EGFR Ex20
3. #DESTINYLung04 1L mHER2
4. #ARROS1 1L ROS1+
5. #HARMONi 2L mEGFR
SCLC
6. #MAVERICK @SWOG MRI surv
7. #DeLLphi Tarla SubQ & ⬇️ freq
#lcsm #OncTwitter @IASLC
1/8 https://t.co/K5kHEzMTvv
11.4K impressions10 likes9 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
THE
IASLC
2026 D
2026 World Conference
Endorsed by
Korean
Association
for
on Lung Cancer
KAL
Lung Cancer
C
SEPTEMBER 12 — 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. Chad Rusthoven at #WCLC26 presents results from SWOG S1827, the phase III MAVERICK study exploring the benefit of PCI in pts with SCLC. Historic studies before the era of MRI surveillance showed a decrease in brain metastases with PCI and an improvement in OS but recent ES-SCLC studies called the OS improvement into question. MAVERICK looks at both LS and ES disease - note primary endpoint her
10.9K impressions23 likes10 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 42s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SWOG S1827/MAVERICK Trial
Hypothesis
Compared with PCI + MRI surveillance, MRI surveillance alone will result in
superior cognitive failure free survival (CFFS) without a decline in OS
6
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 35s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SWOG S1827/MAVERICK
MRI Brain Surveillance Alone Versus MRI Surveillance and Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation (PCI):
A Randomized Phase III Trial in Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Prophylactic cranial
MRI brain surveillance
irradiation (PCI)
Small-cell lung cancer
(Limited OR Extensive)
Stratify: 1. Limited vs Extensive stage
No prior brain metastases
R
2. Immunotherapy (y/n) 3. Performance Status (0-1 vs 2)
No brain metastases on
MRI after 1st line therapy
No PCI
MRI brain surveillance
Primary Endpoint:
Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
MRI brain surveillance and cognitive testing at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months
(time to cognitive decline or death)
-
-
PCI was 25 Gy / 10 FX, hippocampal-avoidance (HA) PCI allowed at physician discretion
7
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 52s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Trial Design
Eligibility
Patients with limited-stage (LS) and extensive-stage (ES) disease, ≥18 years of age, performance status 0-2
LS-SCLC: must have completed platinum-based chemotherapy and either definitive thoracic radiation or surgical resection
ES-SCLC: must have completed platinum-based chemotherapy
Immunotherapy (concurrent and/or adjuvant to upfront treatment) allowed for both LS- and ES-SCLC
Enrollment within 16 weeks of Day 1 of the last cycle of chemotherapy
Pts must have a response to upfront therapy & no progression in opinion of treating physician (CT or PET/CT within 42 days)
No history of brain metastases and no evidence of brain metastases on MRI within 28 days of enrollment
MRI surveillance
Contrast-enhanced brain MRIs performed at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months
MRI sequences per the Brain Tumor Imaging Protocol for BM (BTIP-BM) consensus recs (Kaufmann, Neuro-oncology 22.6 (2020): 757-772)
Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI)
25 Gy delivered in 10 Fx
Hippocampal avoidance (HA-PCI) allowed at physician discretion
Radiation therapy recommended at time of brain metastases
Radiosurgery (SRS) and whole-brain radiation (WBRT)/hippocampal-avoidant (HA)-WBRT allowed at physician discretion
8
YYakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
Highlighted Studies at #WCLC26
1️⃣ HARMONi-2
In treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥1%, ivonescimab improved PFS (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) and OS (30.8 vs 22.6 months; HR 0.73) compared with pembrolizumab.
This is a genuinely positive trial, but it does not tell the same story for all PD-L1-positive patients. The OS benefit was clear in the ≥50% subgroup, whereas the HR was 0.85 with
9.1K impressions24 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC SEOUL 2026
WCLC26: KEY STUDIES
Early results key data at a glance
HARMONi-2
1
1L PD-L1 >1% advanced NSCLC
Clearly positive.
Strongest signal in PD-L1 >50%.
PFS 11.1 vs 5.8 mo
HR 0.51
In 1-49%, the control arm does
os 30.8 vs 22.6 mo
HR 0.73
not fully reflect current practice.
2
SWOG S1827 / MAVERICK
Post-treatment SCLC MRI surveillance vs MRI + PCI
With reliable MRI access, routine
PCI is now hard to justify.
Cognitive failure / death
HR 0.60
Final os is still needed before
Grade ≥3 toxicity 0.8% vs 7.9%
declaring PCI obsolete.
Interim OS and brain metastasis-free survival: no difference
TAISHAN-302
3
Relapsed SCLC B7-H3 ADC Tam-Peli vs topotecan
Clear survival gain.
A potential topotecan replacement;
os 13.3 vs 9.4 mo
HR 0.46
efficacy after tarlatamab
PFS 7.4 vs 2.8 mo
ORR 59% vs 10%
maintenance remains unknown.
ARTEMIS-008
4
Relapsed SCLC . B7-H3 ADC Ris-Rez VS topotecan
Confirms B7-H3 as a target.
No cross-trial comparison with
os 18.5 vs 10.3 mo
HR 0.46
TAISHAN; ILD and hematologic
PFS 7.2 vs 3.0 mo
ORR 58% vs 13%
toxicity may drive selection.
5
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
PD-L1 >50% metastatic NSCLC SG+pembro VS pembro
More tumor shrinkage,
ORR 56% vs 44%
similar response duration,
os 21.5 vs 22.8 mo
no OS gain:
Grade ≥3 toxicity 56% vs 17%
no role in clinical practice.
Primary PFS threshold not met
13 SEPTEMBER 2026 INTERIM CONGRESS SNAPSHOT
@dr_yakupergun
BBalazs Halmos@BalazsHalmosMD
Slide of #WCLC26 so far from terrific discussant Anne Chiang.
Which bubble tea flavor to choose when it comes to the many tasty emerging ADC options for SCLC???
Hopefully note investment into science/biomarkers will help!
@Annechiangmd https://t.co/rVCSEnLxiC
9.1K impressions4 likes1 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
A
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ADCs: How Will We Choose?
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
NW#
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SCLC ADC Agents
ABBV-711
YL201
I-DXd
SHR-A1921
ZL-1310
DNA-
damaging
agent
ABBV-706
HS-20093
Saci-G
Rova-T
Topo-
isomerase I
inhibitor
SEZ-6
B7-H3
Trop2
DLL3
SEZ-6
B7-H3
Trop2
DLL3
ABBV-
ABBV-
YL201
I-DXd
HS-20093
SHR-
Saci-G
Rova-T
ZL-1310
711
706
(TamPeli)
(Ris-Rez)
A1921
Antibody
SC17
SC17
Proprietary
Ifinatamab
Proprietary
Proprietary
Sacituzumab
Rovalpituzumab
Zocilurtatug
Payload
Calicheamicin
Top1
Top1 inhibitor
Deruxtecan
TOP1i
SHR9265
Govitecan
Tesirine (PBD)
Pelitecan
inhibitor
(Camptothecin
(TOP1i)
(SN38)
(TOP1i)
derivative)
DAR
2
6
8
4
4
4
7.6
2
8
Linker
Noncleavable
Proprietary
Protease-
Plasma
Protease-
Cleavable
Hydrolysable
Protease-
Cleavable tri-
cleavable*
stable,
cleavable
cleavable
peptide
Protease-
cleavable
14
Sethakorn N, Chiang AC. Cancer 2026
DDrew Moghanaki@DrewMoghanaki
In my opinion, this presentation at #WCLC26 immortalizes Dr. Chad Rusthoven in the radiation oncology archives and elevates him to the status of hero among SCLC patient advocates. https://t.co/ZKRaUnuPN4
8.6K impressions18 likes5 reposts2026-09-12
NNoemi Reguart@NReguart
What a day for #SCLC!
Two positive phase III ADC trials today at #WCLC26 ARTEMIS-008 and TAISHAN-302— and this may be just the beginning. Look at the pipeline 👇 The ADC era has finally arrived in SCLC. Bye bye, topotecan! 🚀 https://t.co/fjXfmHC7KL
7.4K impressions44 likes18 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
PHASE 3, HEAD-TO-HEAD VS TOPOTECAN
B7-H3
I-DXd
IDeate-Lung02 (NCT06203210)
HS-20093
ARTEMIS-008 (NCT06498479)
GSK5764227
EMBOLD SCLC-301
(NCT07099898)
MHB088C
MHB088C-P-301 (NCT06954246)
YL201
TAISHAN-302 (NCT06612151)
TROP2
SG
EVOKE-SCLC-04 (NCT06801834)
EGFR X HER3
BL-B01D1
PANKU-Lung03 (NCT06500026)
DLL3
ZL-1310
DLLEVATE (NCT07218146)
SEZ6
ABBV-706
M23-384 (NCT07365241)
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
BBrad Loncar@bradloncar
When I spoke with Pascal Soriot shortly after ASCO, he didn’t seem 100% convinced about the ivonescimab data. But I think you essentially have to do a deal like this at this point or risk missing out. https://t.co/57SMg3axGW
43.6K impressions62 likes2 reposts2026-09-29
PPaolo Tarantino@PTarantinoMD
2019: AstraZeneca made a multibillion-dollar bet on a novel Asia-developed drug called T-DXd. The rest is history.
2026: AstraZeneca made a multibillion-dollar bet on a novel Asia-developed drug called Ivonescimab.
History repeating itself?
https://t.co/5QxvEAHT2A https://t.co/s6qJ8pyLSL
32.1K impressions80 likes11 reposts2026-09-29
[Slide 1]
Q
=
AstraZeneca
AstraZeneca announces
strategic equity investment and
clinical collaboration with
Summit Therapeutics to
advance leading ADC
combination strategy in cancer
PUBLISHED
28 September 2026
MMarty Chargin@MartyChargin
$SMMT ... Summit Therapeutics to receive $2 bln strategic investment from AstraZeneca at $18.36/share equivalent (15.48 -0.13)
AstraZeneca (AZN) agreed to invest $2.0 bln in Summit convertible preferred shares, with a conversion price equivalent to $18.36 per common share.
Summit also entered a clinical collaboration with AstraZeneca to study ivonescimab plus sonesitatug vedotin in certain gastroi
9.3K impressions7 likes0 reposts2026-09-28
YYakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
Highlighted Studies at #WCLC26
1️⃣ HARMONi-2
In treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥1%, ivonescimab improved PFS (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) and OS (30.8 vs 22.6 months; HR 0.73) compared with pembrolizumab.
This is a genuinely positive trial, but it does not tell the same story for all PD-L1-positive patients. The OS benefit was clear in the ≥50% subgroup, whereas the HR was 0.85 with
9.1K impressions24 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC SEOUL 2026
WCLC26: KEY STUDIES
Early results key data at a glance
HARMONi-2
1
1L PD-L1 >1% advanced NSCLC
Clearly positive.
Strongest signal in PD-L1 >50%.
PFS 11.1 vs 5.8 mo
HR 0.51
In 1-49%, the control arm does
os 30.8 vs 22.6 mo
HR 0.73
not fully reflect current practice.
2
SWOG S1827 / MAVERICK
Post-treatment SCLC MRI surveillance vs MRI + PCI
With reliable MRI access, routine
PCI is now hard to justify.
Cognitive failure / death
HR 0.60
Final os is still needed before
Grade ≥3 toxicity 0.8% vs 7.9%
declaring PCI obsolete.
Interim OS and brain metastasis-free survival: no difference
TAISHAN-302
3
Relapsed SCLC B7-H3 ADC Tam-Peli vs topotecan
Clear survival gain.
A potential topotecan replacement;
os 13.3 vs 9.4 mo
HR 0.46
efficacy after tarlatamab
PFS 7.4 vs 2.8 mo
ORR 59% vs 10%
maintenance remains unknown.
ARTEMIS-008
4
Relapsed SCLC . B7-H3 ADC Ris-Rez VS topotecan
Confirms B7-H3 as a target.
No cross-trial comparison with
os 18.5 vs 10.3 mo
HR 0.46
TAISHAN; ILD and hematologic
PFS 7.2 vs 3.0 mo
ORR 58% vs 13%
toxicity may drive selection.
5
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
PD-L1 >50% metastatic NSCLC SG+pembro VS pembro
More tumor shrinkage,
ORR 56% vs 44%
similar response duration,
os 21.5 vs 22.8 mo
no OS gain:
Grade ≥3 toxicity 56% vs 17%
no role in clinical practice.
Primary PFS threshold not met
13 SEPTEMBER 2026 INTERIM CONGRESS SNAPSHOT
@dr_yakupergun
BBiotech Hangout@BiotechCH
On today's #BiotechHangout, @EricSchmidt151, @biotech1 (Josh Schimmer), @MatteisPaul, & guest @adamfeuerstein will cover markets: a sloppy September — what's to blame & should we be worried, $SION cystic fibrosis update & $VRTX’s CF dominance & commercial future, AI in biotech: big deal or no?, deals: another reverse merger (North Immunology) vs IPOs, rare disease data up
8.9K impressions25 likes4 reposts2026-09-18
DDiego A. Díaz-García@diegoadiazg
🫁 HARMONi: Ivonescimab after EGFR-TKI progression.
Ph3 HARMONi evaluated ivonescimab + chemo vs chemo alone in advEGFRmut NSCLC after progression on a 3rdgen EGFR-TKI:
PFS: 6.8 vs 4.4 months
HR 0.52 (95% CI, 0.41-0.66; p<0.0001)
OS: 16.8 vs 14.0 months
HR 0.79 (95% CI, 0.62-1.01)
A significant PFS benefit, while OS remains less definitive.
📖 @TheLancetOncol
DOI 👉🏻 10.1016/S1470-2045(26)00282-
6.5K impressions22 likes10 reposts2026-09-19
[Slide 1]
A
100
Number of events/
Median progression-free
number of patients
survival, months (95% CI)
80
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
129/172
6.8 (5.7-7.1)
Progression-free survival (%)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
146/173
4.4 (4.1-5.5)
60
40
20
Stratified HR (95% CI):
0.52 (0.41-0.66), two-sided p<0.0001
HH
:
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
Time since randomisation (months)
Number at risk (censored)
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
172 (0)
134 (25)
76 (29)
48 (31)
34 (32)
24 (33)
16 (34)
10 (37)
5 (40)
0 (43)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
173 (0)
100 (23)
50 (25)
24 (25)
12 (25)
9 (25)
4 (26)
2 (26)
1 (27)
0 (27)
[Slide 2]
C
100
Number of events/
Median overall survival,
number of patients
months (95% CI)
80
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
122/219
16.8 (14.3-19.0)
Overall survival (%)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
140/219
14.0 (12.8-15.7)
60
40
20
Stratified HR (95% CI): 0.79 (0.62-1.01)
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
Time since randomisation (months)
Number at risk (censored)
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
219 (0)
212 (1)
189 (3)
137 (29)
98 (49)
77 (56)
60 (60)
51 (60)
43 (62)
33 (66)
26 (71)
16 (81)
5 (92)
0 (97)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
219 (0)
210 (1)
186 (3)
132 (32)
92 (51)
63 (59)
52 (60)
44 (60)
38 (60)
30 (60)
18 (66)
9 (73)
0 (79)
[Slide 3]
Ivonescimab plus
Placebo plus
Treatment
p value
chemotherapy
chemotherapy
effect
group (n=219)
group (n=219)
(95% CI)*
Primary endpoints
Progression-free survival (primary
6.8
4.4
0.52
<0.0001
analysis); median (95% CI), monthst
(5.7-7.1)
(4.1-5.5)
(0-41-0.66)
Overall survival (primary analysis);
16.8
14.0
0.79
0.057
median (95% CI), months
(14.3-19.0)
(12.8-15.7)
(0-62-1.01)
Secondary endpoints
Objective response rate (95% CI) +
45% (38-52)
34% (28-41)
10% (1-20)
0.024
Duration of response; median
7.6 (5.5-10.6)
4.2 (2.9-4.7)
..
..
(95% CI), monthst
Best overall response, n (%)+ T
Complete response
4 (2%)
3 (1%)
..
..
Partial response
94 (43%)
72 (33%)
..
..
Stable disease
85 (39%)
85 (39%)
..
..
Progressive disease
13 (6%)
35 (16%)
..
..
Not evaluable
10 (5%)
14 (6%)
..
..
Not applicable
13 (6%)
10 (5%)
..
..
Exploratory endpoints
Time to response; median (95% CI),
1.45
1.45
..
..
monthst
(1.4-1.6)
(1.4-2.4)
Intracranial progression-free survival;
13.7
10.3
0.67
Exploratory
median (95% CI), monthst
(11.6-16.2)
(8.6-12-8)
(0.53-0.85)
Post-hoc endpoints
Extended progression-free survival;
6.3
4.8
0.57
Exploratory
median (95% CI), monthst
(5.6-7.1)
(4.2-5.5)
(0-46-0-71)
Extended overall survival; median
16.8
14.0
0.78
Exploratory
(95% CI), monthstt
(14.3-19.0)
(12.8-15.3)
(0-62-0-98)
Disease control rate (95% CI)+T
84% (78-88)
73% (67-79)
10% (3-18)
Exploratory
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Phase II study of first-line QLC5508 (MHB088C, a B7-H3 ADC) with either QL1706 (PD1/CTLA4 bispecific) or QL2107 (pembro biosimilar) in ES-SCLC from #WCLC26. As with other recent studies, note ~30% of pts with no smoking history. RR for both regimens > 80% with DCR 100%. Toxicity primarily hematologic with <10% discontinuation. Encouraging - need data on durability, CNS efficacy, but another
6.3K impressions15 likes9 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Background and Study Design
QLC5508 is a B7H3 ADC with high cell-binding activity and internalization rate.
QLC5508 showed tolerable safety and promising anti-tumor activity in patients with relapsed ES-SCLC in a phase 1 study. 1,2
The combination of B7H3 ADCs with immune checkpoint blockade suggests a trend toward synergistic antitumor effects
across several solid tumor types. 3,4
This phase 2 part of the ongoing phase 1b/2 trial (NCT07256782) aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of QLC5508 in
combination with QL1706 or QL2107 as first-line treatment in patients with ES-SCLC.
Primary endpoint
Key eligibility criteria for
Cohort 1
Investigator-assessed
phase 2 part
QLC5508 2.4 mg/kg Q3W + QL1706ª 5 mg/kg Q3W
ORR per RECIST 1.1
ES-SCLC
Secondary endpoints
≥ 18 years old
DCR
No prior systemic therapy
DoR
ECOG PS 0 or 1
Cohort 2
PFS
≥1 measurable lesions per RECIST 1.1
QLC5508 2.4 mg/kg Q3W + QL2107b 200 mg Q3W
OS
a QL1706: iparomlimab and tuvonralimab (bifunctional antibody targeting PD-1 and CTLA-4);
Safety
b QL2107: pembrolizumab biosimilar.
References: 1. Shen L, et al. ASCO 2025; Abstract 8510. 2. Zhou C, et al. WCLC 2025; Abstract OA06.02. 3. Zhong R, et al. AACR 2026; Abstract CT038. 4. Aggarwal C, et al. J Immunother Cancer. 2022;10(4):e004424.
Abbreviations: ADC, antibody-drug conjugate. ES-SCLC, extensive-stage Small Cell Lung Cancer; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; Q3W, every 3 weeks; ORB
Objective Response Rate: DCR, Disease Control Rate; DoR, Duration of Response; PFS, Progression-Free Survival; OS, Overall Survival.
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
02 min 39s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Demographic and Baseline Characteristics
A total of 59 patients with previously untreated ES-SCLC were enrolled in phase 2.
At data cutoff (July 8, 2026), median follow-up was 3.6 months, with a median treatment duration of 3.5 months.
QLC5508 +
QLC5508 +
QLC5508 +
QLC5508 +
Total
Total
Characteristics
QL1706
QL2107
Characteristics
QL1706
QL2107
(N=59)
(N = 59)
(N = 16)
(N = 43)
(N = 16)
(N=43)
Median age, years
61.5 (50-70)
61.0 (44-75)
61.0 (44-75)
Tumor stage, n (%)
(range)
Sex, n (%)
III
1 (6.3)
6 (14.0)
7 (11.9)
Male
13 (81.3)
30 (69.8)
43 (72.9)
IV
15 (93.7)
37 (86.0)
52 (88.1)
Female
3 (18.8)
13 (30.2)
16 (27.1)
Smoking, n (%)
Metastatic sites, n (%)
Never
5 (31.3)
13 (30.2)
18 (30.5)
Brain
Former
8 (50.0)
28 (65.1)
36 (61.0)
1 (6.3)
2 (4.7)
3 (5.1)
Current
3 (18.8)
2 (4.7)
5 (8.5)
Liver
6 (37.5)
10 (23.3)
16 (27.1)
ECOG performance status, n (%)
0
1 (6.3)
2 (4.7)
3 (5.1)
Median baseline SOD,
102.1
96.9
98.4
mm (min, max)
(16.0, 161.8)
(42.7, 183.2)
(16.0, 183.2)
1
15 (93.8)
41 (95.3)
56 (94.9)
Abbreviations: SOD, Sum of diameters.
5
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
02 min 10s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Both Combinations Demonstrated Promising Antitumor Activity
100
QLC5508 +
QLC5508 +
80
Tumor response
Total
QL1706
QL2107
60
PR
QLC5508 2.4 mg/kg + QL1706 5 mg/kg (N=16°)
Best changes in sum of lesion
diameters from baseline (%)
40
SD
QLC5508 2.4 mg/kg + QL2107 200 mg (N=41°)
No. of patients a
16
41
57
20
0
BOR, n (%)
20
-30
CR
0
0
0
-40
-60
PR
15 (93.8)
38 (92.7)
53 (93.0)
-80
-100
SD
1 (6.3)
3 (7.3)
4 (7.0)
100
PD
0
0
0
80
PR
QLC5508 2.4 mg/kg + QL1706 5 mg/kg (N=16°)
60
SD
93.8
92.7
93.0
PD
QLC5508 2.4 mg/kg + QL2107 200 mg (N=41°)
uORR, % (95% CI)
Change from baseline in the sum
(69.8, 99.8)
(80.1, 98.5)
(83.0, 98.1)
of target lesion diameters (%)
40
20
81.3
80.5
80.7
cORR, % (95% CI)
0
(54.4, 96.0)
(65.1, 91.2)
(68.1, 90.0)
-20
-30
100.0
100.0
100.0
-40
DCR, % (95% CI)
(79.4, 100.0)
(91.4, 100.0)
(93.7, 100.0)
-60
-80
a Patients who received ≥1 dose of study drug, had measurable baseline lesions, and underwent
≥1 valid post-baseline tumor assessment.
-100-
0
6
12
18
24
30
Abbreviations: No., number; u, unconfirmed; C, confirmed; BOR, Best Overall Response; CR, Complete Response; PR. Partial
Time (weeks)
Response; SD, Stable Disease; PD, Progressive Disease; ORR, Objective Response Rate; DCR, Disease Control Ra
6
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
01 min 04s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Safety Profile
Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 43.8% and 37.2% of patients in Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, respectively.
The most frequent all-grade and grade ≥3 TRAEs across both regimens were hematologic toxicities, with neutropenia and leukopenia being the most common grade ≥3
events. Other grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred at low frequencies.
ALT/AST elevations were limited to grade 1-2, with no concurrent bilirubin elevation or treatment discontinuation.
QLC5508 +
QLC5508 +
Total
TRAE, n (%)
QL1706
QL2107
(N = 59)
TRAEs reported in ≥15% of all patients (%)
(N = 16)
(N = 43)
Cohort 1: QLC5508 + QL1706
Cohort 2: QLC5508 + QL2107
Any TRAE
16 (100.0)
43 (100.0)
59 (100.0)
Anemia
Any Grade ≥3
7 (43.8)
16 (37.2)
23 (39.0)
Neutropenia
Any TRSAE
3 (18.8)
10 (23.3)
13 (22.0)
ALT elevated
Any TRAE leading to
Hypoalbuminemia
dose interruption a
2 (12.5)
14 (32.6)
16 (27.1)
GGT elevated
AST elevated
dose reduction a
3 (18.8)
4 (9.3)
7 (11.9)
Leukopenia
discontinuation a
1 (6.3)
3 (7.0)
4 (6.8)
IRR
death
0
1 (2.3)b
1 (1.7)
Asthenia
ILD
Nausea
Any grade
Any grade
Hyponatremi
Grade 2 3
Grade 2 3
Any grade
1 (6.3)
2 (4.7)
3 (5.1)
ALP elevated
Grade ≥3
0
1 (2.3)
1 (1.7)
Thrombocytopenia
a Dose interruption, dose reduction, and discontinuation refer to modifications of
Appetite decreased
any treatment; b One death occurred due to myelosuppression.
100
80
60
40
20
0
20
40
60
80
10
Abbreviations: TRAE, Treatment-Related Adverse Event; SAE, Serious Adverse Event; ALT, Alanine
Transaminase; AST, Aspartate Transaminase; ALP, Alkaline Phosphatase; GGT, y-Glutamyl Transferase; IRR,
Incidence (%)
Infusion-Related Reaction; ILD, Interstitial lung disease.
7
BBiotech2k@Biotech2k1
Catalysts Watchlist:
$INSM
Arikayce 1st line approval sometime in 2027
TPIP data in 2027
$PTGX
IL-17 data in 2027
$BBIO
BBP-418 approval in Nov 2026
Enclarlet approval in May 2027
Infigratinib approval in Mid 2027
$PRAX
Relutrigine approval Dec 2026
Ulixacaltamide approval Jan 2027
$IDYA
Darovasertib approval around mid 2027
$SMMT
Ivonescimab approval Nov 2026 or Feb 2027
$COGT
Bezuc
5.2K impressions29 likes2 reposts2026-09-11
NNewsForce@Newsforce
🇯🇵🇬🇧 Three drug companies are teaming up to test whether two cancer drugs work better together.
AstraZeneca and Daiichi Sankyo will pair their drug Datroway with Summit Therapeutics' ivonescimab in several cancers, including lung and breast.
They'll start with a Phase III trial in triple-negative breast cancer as a first treatment.
Each company supplies its own drug, shares trial cos
4.6K impressions1 likes2 reposts2026-10-02
[Slide 1]
AstraZeneca
Daiichi-Sankyo
NEWSFORCE
ASTRAZENECA AND DAIICHI SANKYO
SUMMIT TO TEST CANCER COMBO
OOncology Brothers@OncBrothers
5. #HARMONi: 2L (after 3rd gen EGFRi), Ivonescimab (PD1/VEGF BsAb) + Chemo vs Chemo in EGFR+ mNSCLC:
- mOS 16.8mos vs 14.0mos (HR: 0.79, p value: 0.057)
- Ivonescimab starting to show positive data in more and more global studies.
- Refractory mEGFR is a crowded space
6/8 https://t.co/SL4VhgGU15 https://t.co/MiGqmqMJ7u
4.6K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
HARMONi Study Design1,2
Key eligibility criteria:
Ivonescimab 20 mg/kg
Treatment until:
Age ≥18 years
+ chemotherapy®IV Q3W
Intolerable toxicity, or
Locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC
ECOG PS score of 0 or 1
Randomization 1:1
Safety
(n=219)
No clinical benefit as
and
EGFR-sensitizing mutation
assessed by investigator, or
survival
Progressed on third-generation EGFR-TKI
Initiation of new antitumor
Placebo + chemotherapy® IV Q3W
follow-up
therapy, or
(n=219)
Any PD-L1 expression
24 months of treatment
N=438
Primary os analysis:
Stratification factors:
Study endpoints:
Data cutoff: April 12, 2025
Geographic region
Primary: OS, PFS by IRRC per RECIST v1.1
Median follow-up of 29.7 months
Brain metastases at baseline
Secondary: ORR by IRRC per RECIST v1.1, DoR,
(Western patients: 9.2 months;
(present or absent)
safety and tolerability
Asian patients: 32.7 months)
This updated OS analysis includes data from two separate data cutoffs:
April 12, 2025 for Asian patients (the data cutoff used for the final OS analysis; median follow-up 32.7 months)
June 30, 2026 for Western patients (to incorporate extended follow-up; median follow-up 23.2 months)
A survival status update was conducted between 15 — 30 June 2026 for Western patients
At the data cutoff, 109 deaths were reported among 165 Western patients, and 9 patients were lost to follow-up
AUC, area under the concentration-time curve; DoR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EGFR-TKI epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor; IRRC, independent radiology review committee; IV, intravenous;
NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand-1; PFS, progression-free survival; Q3W, every 3 weeks; RECIST v1.1, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Clinical Trials.gov identifier for
HARMONI: NCT06396065. "Chemotherapy was pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC 5 mg/mL/min. Carboplatin was discontinued after an induction phase of 4 cycles.
1. Goldman JW, et al. Presented at the World Congress on Lung Cancer (WCLC); September 6-9, 2025; Barcelona, Spain. LeX, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2026;27(9):1094-1109.
5
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Updated Analysis: Overall Survival
Median os was longer with ivonescimab + chemotherapy in both the Western and Asian patients
Western Patients (n=165)
Asian Patients (n=273)
100
Events
Median,
100
Events
Median,
HR (95% CI)
HR (95% CI)
(%)
mo
(%)
mo
Ivo + chemo
51 (61)
17.5
Ivo + chemo
98 (72)
16.7
80
0.76 (0.52-1.10)
80
0.76 (0.58-0.99)
Pbo + chemo
58 (71)
14.0
Pbo + chemo
117 (85)
14.0
60
60
os (%)
40.4%
os (%)
40
40
33.2%
20
20
Ivo + chemo
Ivo + chemo
28.0%
24.2%
Pbo + chemo
Pbo + chemo
0
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
No. at risk
Time (months)
No. at risk
Time (months)
0
Ivo + chemo
83
78
70
56
52
43
40
34
17
5
2
Ivo
+
chemo
136
134
120
104
86
72
60
51
43
33
26
16
5
0
Pbo + chemo 82
76
69
60
49
36
29
18
5
2
1
0
Pbo
+
chemo
137
134
117
99
82
62
52
44
38
30
18
9
0
Median follow-up: 29.9 mo overall; Western patients 23.2 mo (data cutoff June 30, 2026); Asian patients 32.7 mo (data cutoff April 12, 2025)
Chemo, chemotherapy; HR, hazard ratio; vo, ivonescimab; mo, months; OS, overall survival; pbo, placebo. Tick marks denotes censored patients.
7
ADCs
PPaolo Tarantino@PTarantinoMD
2019: AstraZeneca made a multibillion-dollar bet on a novel Asia-developed drug called T-DXd. The rest is history.
2026: AstraZeneca made a multibillion-dollar bet on a novel Asia-developed drug called Ivonescimab.
History repeating itself?
https://t.co/5QxvEAHT2A https://t.co/s6qJ8pyLSL
32.1K impressions80 likes11 reposts2026-09-29
[Slide 1]
Q
=
AstraZeneca
AstraZeneca announces
strategic equity investment and
clinical collaboration with
Summit Therapeutics to
advance leading ADC
combination strategy in cancer
PUBLISHED
28 September 2026
PProf Tom John@TommyJohn00
@g_mountzios presenting EVOKE-03. A negative study with another ADC+Pembro as first line treatment. More tox with ADC. The most interesting slide for me is the result based on region. Asian patients do better. Will this be the same for other studies too? #WCLC26 #LCSM https://t.co/wNtaXlRTBB
13.6K impressions14 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
E
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
EVOKE-03/KEYNOTE D46 Study Design
Key eligibility criteria
Sacituzumab govitecan
Stage IV NSCLC (AJCC 8th)
10 mg/kg
Primary endpoints
No prior systemic treatment for
Randomized
D1, D8, Q3W
PFSᵃ
mNSCLC
1:1
+
OS
ECOG PS 0 or 1
N = 620
Pembrolizumab 200 mg
PD-L1 TPS ≥50%
IV D1 Q3W
Secondary endpoints
No ILD
35 cycles
ORRᵃ
No untreated or unstable brain
DORᵃ
metastases
Pembrolizumab 200 mg
PROs
EGFR/ALK/ROS-1-negative
IV D1 Q3W
Safety
disease
35 cycles
Stratification
ORR
1
PFS
ECOG PS (0 or 1)
a=0
0.001
a=0.007
Predominant tumor histology
(squamous or non-squamous)
0.001
0.999
0.999
Geographic region (East Asia VS
OS
Western Europe/North
a=0.018
America/Australia VS Rest of World)
ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; BICR, blinded independent centralized review; D1, day 1; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; DOR, duration of response;
ILD, interstitial lung disease; IV, intravenous; mNSCLC, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PD-L1, programmed death-ligand 1; PFS, progression-free survival; PRO, patient-
reported outcome; Q3W, every three weeks; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; ROS-1, ROS proto-oncogene 1, receptor tyrosine kinase; TPS, tumor proportion score.
Data cutoff: April 3, 2026. *Per RECIST v1.1 as assessed by BICR.
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Progression-Free Survival in the ITT Population - Primary Analysis
100
SG + Pembro
Pembro
90
Endpoint
(n=311)
(n=309)
80
PFS, median (95% CI), moa,b
11. 8 (8.9; 14.5)
7.7 (5.6; 9.7)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)c
0.81 (0.66; 1.00)
70
P-valued
0.0252
PFS Probability, %
60
PFS rate at 12 mo (95% CI), mo
48.3 (42.1; 54.1)
36.9 (30.9; 42.9)
PFS rate at 18 mo (95% CI), mo
36.0 (29.7; 42.2)
50
29.9 (24.0; 36.1)
PFS events, 367; maturity, 59%; statistical boundary, 0.007
40
30
20
10
Median follow-up was 14.8 months for SG + pembro
0
and 14.4 months for pembro monotherapy
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro
311
235
170
141
103
78
56
41
30
20
11
3
0
0
Pembro mono
309
204
138
106
70
56
41
32
21
16
8
3
1
0
BICR, blinded independent centralized review; mono, monotherapy; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score; ITT, intention-to-treat; mo, months; pembro, pembrolizumab; PFS, progression-free survival;
RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
"Per RECIST v1.1 by BICR. Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored data. Estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS
Western Europe/North America/Australia VS rest of world). "One-sided P-value based on log-rank test stratified by histology (squamous vs non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North
America/Australia vs rest of world).
6
[Slide 3]
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
OS in East Asia and China Subgroups (ITT Population; Exploratory)
East Asiaᵃ
China (Post-hoc)b
100
100
90
90
80
80
70
70
OS Probability, %
60
os Probability, %
60
50
50
40
40
30
30
SG + Pembro (n=114)
Pembro (n=116)
SG + Pembro (n=52)
Pembro (n=55)
20
20
OS, median (95% CI), moᶜ
NR (24.3; NE)
27.9 (16.7; NE)
OS, median (95% CI), moc
NR (24.2; NE)
27.9 (15.8; NE)
10
10
Hazard ratio (95% CI)
0.73 (0.48; 1.10)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)ᵈ
0.65 (0.36; 1.16)
0
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
At Risk
Time, mo
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro 114 (0) 108 (6) 96 (15) 88 (18) 79 (24) 72 (27) 64 (30) 52 (35) 37 (37) 23 (41) 12 (41) 7 (41) 0 (41)
SG + pembro 52 (0) 50 (2) 49 (3) 48 (4) 45 (8) 42 (10) 39 (12) 35 (15) 24 (17) 18 (19) 11 (19) 7 (19) 0 (19)
Pembro mono 116 (0) 102 (14) 90 (21) 81 (26) 71 (33) 63 (39) 51 (46) 41 (46) 33 (49) 22 (50) 12 (51) 2 (51) 0 (51)
Pembro mono 55 (0) 50 (5) 48 (7) 45 (10) 43 (12) 38 (17) 31 (22) 28 (22) 21 (25) 17 (26) 9 (27) 2 (27) 0 (27)
Median follow-up was 18.1 months for the East Asia cohort and 22.4 months for the China cohort
ITT, intention-to-treat; mono, monotherapy; NE, not evaluable; NR, not reached; pembro, pembrolizumab; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
"This analysis was not stratified. "This post-hoc analysis was not stratified or pre-specified. "Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored data. "Estimated using a Cox regression model.
o
[Slide 4]
2020
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall Survival in the ITT Population - Interim Analysis
100
Endpoint
SG + Pembro (n=311)
Pembro (n=309)
OS, median (95% CI), moᵃ
21.5 (18.5; 26.7)
22.8 (18.7; 29.0)
90
Hazard ratio (95% CI)ᵇ
1.07 (0.85; 1.35)
80
P-valueᶜ
0.7155
OS events, 294; maturity, 47%; information fraction, 80%; statistical boundary, 0.008
70
os Probability, %
60
50
40
30
20
10
Median follow-up was 14.8 months for SG + pembro
0
and 14.4 months for pembro monotherapy
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro
311
282
243
214
180
153
123
95
71
46
27
14
1
0
Pembro mono
309
272
237
205
178
148
120
91
69
47
29
11
1
0
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score; ITT, intention-to-treat; mo, months; mono, monotherapy; pembro, pembrolizumab; OS, overall survival; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
"Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored data. Estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by histology (squamous vs non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North America/
Australia VS rest of world). "One-sided P-value based on log-rank test stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia vs Western Europe/North America/Australia vs rest of world).
8
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
We now have TWO studies showing B7-H3 ADCs vastly superior to standard topotecan for relapsed SCLC: tam-peli and ris-rez. These studies were different - different agents, different baseline demographics of pts, etc - but the outcomes were similar, control arms performed similarly. These trials reinforce each other. Looking forward to global studies and to first-line studies. The ADC era soundly he
11.5K impressions5 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
RR
DCR
PFS
6m PFS Rate
OS
ILD rate
Tam-Peli 2mg/kg
59.1%
91.1%
7.4 VS 2.8m
58.1%
13.3 vs 9.4
4.9%
VS topotecan
VS 9.7%
VS 50.9%
PFS HR 0.29
VS 17.9%
OS HR 0.46
TAISHAN-302
Zhang, WCLC 2026
Ris-rez, 8mg/kg q3w
58.3%
90.4%
7.2 VS 3.0m
59.9%
18.5m VS 10.3
11.7%
VS topotecan
VS 12.6%
VS 60.2%
PFS HR 0.33
vs 28.5%
OS HR 0.46
ARTEMIS-008
Wang, WCLC 2026
YYakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
Highlighted Studies at #WCLC26
1️⃣ HARMONi-2
In treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥1%, ivonescimab improved PFS (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) and OS (30.8 vs 22.6 months; HR 0.73) compared with pembrolizumab.
This is a genuinely positive trial, but it does not tell the same story for all PD-L1-positive patients. The OS benefit was clear in the ≥50% subgroup, whereas the HR was 0.85 with
9.1K impressions24 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC SEOUL 2026
WCLC26: KEY STUDIES
Early results key data at a glance
HARMONi-2
1
1L PD-L1 >1% advanced NSCLC
Clearly positive.
Strongest signal in PD-L1 >50%.
PFS 11.1 vs 5.8 mo
HR 0.51
In 1-49%, the control arm does
os 30.8 vs 22.6 mo
HR 0.73
not fully reflect current practice.
2
SWOG S1827 / MAVERICK
Post-treatment SCLC MRI surveillance vs MRI + PCI
With reliable MRI access, routine
PCI is now hard to justify.
Cognitive failure / death
HR 0.60
Final os is still needed before
Grade ≥3 toxicity 0.8% vs 7.9%
declaring PCI obsolete.
Interim OS and brain metastasis-free survival: no difference
TAISHAN-302
3
Relapsed SCLC B7-H3 ADC Tam-Peli vs topotecan
Clear survival gain.
A potential topotecan replacement;
os 13.3 vs 9.4 mo
HR 0.46
efficacy after tarlatamab
PFS 7.4 vs 2.8 mo
ORR 59% vs 10%
maintenance remains unknown.
ARTEMIS-008
4
Relapsed SCLC . B7-H3 ADC Ris-Rez VS topotecan
Confirms B7-H3 as a target.
No cross-trial comparison with
os 18.5 vs 10.3 mo
HR 0.46
TAISHAN; ILD and hematologic
PFS 7.2 vs 3.0 mo
ORR 58% vs 13%
toxicity may drive selection.
5
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
PD-L1 >50% metastatic NSCLC SG+pembro VS pembro
More tumor shrinkage,
ORR 56% vs 44%
similar response duration,
os 21.5 vs 22.8 mo
no OS gain:
Grade ≥3 toxicity 56% vs 17%
no role in clinical practice.
Primary PFS threshold not met
13 SEPTEMBER 2026 INTERIM CONGRESS SNAPSHOT
@dr_yakupergun
BBalazs Halmos@BalazsHalmosMD
Slide of #WCLC26 so far from terrific discussant Anne Chiang.
Which bubble tea flavor to choose when it comes to the many tasty emerging ADC options for SCLC???
Hopefully note investment into science/biomarkers will help!
@Annechiangmd https://t.co/rVCSEnLxiC
9.1K impressions4 likes1 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
A
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ADCs: How Will We Choose?
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
NW#
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SCLC ADC Agents
ABBV-711
YL201
I-DXd
SHR-A1921
ZL-1310
DNA-
damaging
agent
ABBV-706
HS-20093
Saci-G
Rova-T
Topo-
isomerase I
inhibitor
SEZ-6
B7-H3
Trop2
DLL3
SEZ-6
B7-H3
Trop2
DLL3
ABBV-
ABBV-
YL201
I-DXd
HS-20093
SHR-
Saci-G
Rova-T
ZL-1310
711
706
(TamPeli)
(Ris-Rez)
A1921
Antibody
SC17
SC17
Proprietary
Ifinatamab
Proprietary
Proprietary
Sacituzumab
Rovalpituzumab
Zocilurtatug
Payload
Calicheamicin
Top1
Top1 inhibitor
Deruxtecan
TOP1i
SHR9265
Govitecan
Tesirine (PBD)
Pelitecan
inhibitor
(Camptothecin
(TOP1i)
(SN38)
(TOP1i)
derivative)
DAR
2
6
8
4
4
4
7.6
2
8
Linker
Noncleavable
Proprietary
Protease-
Plasma
Protease-
Cleavable
Hydrolysable
Protease-
Cleavable tri-
cleavable*
stable,
cleavable
cleavable
peptide
Protease-
cleavable
14
Sethakorn N, Chiang AC. Cancer 2026
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
T-DXd trying to catch up in the frontline setting with zongertinib and sevabertinib
Results from #DESTINYLung04….
#WCLC26 https://t.co/wb9BkFV7dg
8.7K impressions17 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
My biggest concern: ILD/pneumonitis.
With T-DXd:
‼️Any grade: 20.8%
• Grade ≥3: 4.4%
• Grade 5: 1.8% (4 deaths)
~1 in 5 developing drug-related ILD is really hard to overlook in the frontline setting, especially with other effective HER2-targeted options emerging.
#WCLC26 https://t.co/DhesBCJ4qS https://t.co/LTFqgWyERR
8K impressions18 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
Adverse events of special interest
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
In the T-DXd arm:
n (%)
(n=226)
(n=220)
Any grade
47 (20.8)
5 (2.3)
Most cases of ILD were Grade 1/2 (78.7%)
Grade 1
7 (3.1)
1 (0.5)
and resolved (66.0%)
Adjudicated
Grade 2
30 (13.3)
4 (1.8)
16 of the 30 Grade 2 adjudicated ILD events
drug-related
ILD/pneumonitis*
Grade 3
5 (2.2)+
0
were upgraded from Grade 1 (per investigator)
Grade 4
1 (0.4)
0
because of use of steroids
Grade 5
4 (1.8)
0
Delayed initiation and/or suboptimal steroid
Any grade
7 (3.1)
1 (0.5)
dosing was observed in 90% of all Grade ≥3
Grade 1
0
1 (0.5)
ILD cases, including all four Grade 5 cases
Left ventricular
Grade 2
4 (1.8)
0
Among patients with Grade ≤3 ILD who
dysfunction$
Grade 3
3 (1.3)
0
discontinued T-DXd, 64.1% received
Grade 4
0
0
subsequent therapy, consistent with the
Grade 5
0
0
overall T-DXd arm (71.5%)
ILD remains an important risk of T-DXd and should be monitored/managed appropriately
*An independent adjudication committee reviewed all potential cases of ILD/pneumonitis; Tone patient had a Grade 3 ILD event after the 47-day safety follow-up period; *all counts in this table reflect the locked clinical database (safety
analysis set). One additional fatal event (preferred term: respiratory failure) occurred in the T-DXd arm and was subsequently adjudicated as drug-related Grade 5 ILD; Sleft ventricular ejection fraction decreased; n=25/39 patients with
Grade <3 ILD who discontinued T-DXd received subsequent therapy / n=133/186 patients who discontinued T-DXd received subsequent therapy
14
KAREN KELLY
JULIA ROTOW
NNoemi Reguart@NReguart
What a day for #SCLC!
Two positive phase III ADC trials today at #WCLC26 ARTEMIS-008 and TAISHAN-302— and this may be just the beginning. Look at the pipeline 👇 The ADC era has finally arrived in SCLC. Bye bye, topotecan! 🚀 https://t.co/fjXfmHC7KL
7.4K impressions44 likes18 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
PHASE 3, HEAD-TO-HEAD VS TOPOTECAN
B7-H3
I-DXd
IDeate-Lung02 (NCT06203210)
HS-20093
ARTEMIS-008 (NCT06498479)
GSK5764227
EMBOLD SCLC-301
(NCT07099898)
MHB088C
MHB088C-P-301 (NCT06954246)
YL201
TAISHAN-302 (NCT06612151)
TROP2
SG
EVOKE-SCLC-04 (NCT06801834)
EGFR X HER3
BL-B01D1
PANKU-Lung03 (NCT06500026)
DLL3
ZL-1310
DLLEVATE (NCT07218146)
SEZ6
ABBV-706
M23-384 (NCT07365241)
MMisty Dawn Shields@drshieldsmd
Today, our @SclcSMASHERS received unfortunate news regarding infintamab deruxtecan (I-DXd).
As you may recall, I-DXd is a B7-H3 directed antibody-drug conjugate (i.e., chemotherapy as a biological Trojan horse) that has been studied in SCLC.
We have been anticipating the @FDA would complete their PDUFA process for accelerated approval of I-DXd by October 2026.
Unfortunately, the company Merck
7.3K impressions47 likes18 reposts2026-09-25
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Another wow curve.
Ris-rez improves OS over topotecan, mOS 18.5m (!) vs 10.3m, OS HR 0.46, 1y OS rate 65% vs 43%. Good control arm OS and curves that split early and widen. The ADC era clearly here. #WCLC26 https://t.co/QMat6K2JS7
6.7K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Primary Endpoint: os
At this IA (DCO June 6, 2026), there're 77 (33.5%) OS events in Ris-Rez arm and 121(52.4%) in Topotecan arm.
With a median follow-up of 12.2 months, Ris-Rez demonstrated statistically significant and clinical meaningful
improvement in OS.
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
100
N=230
N=231
Median OS, months
18.5
10.3
80
Hazard Ratio*
0.46
64.5%
(95% CI)
(0.35, 0.62)
Overall Survival Probability (%)
P value*
<0.0001
60
43.3%
40
20
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
Time (Months)
No. at risk
Ris Rez
230
220
186
127
77
43
12
0
Topotecan 231
195
146
86
50
27
11
0
*Hazard ratio and P value were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model and Log-rank test, stratified by baseline brain metastasis status, CTFI, and VALG stage at study entry.
Censoring rule for OS: patients were censored at their last known survival time; for the 15 untreated patients who withdrew consent in topotecan group, censoring occurred at the withdrawal date.
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval; CTFI, chemotherapy-free interval; IA, interim analysis; OS, overall survival; VALG, Veterans Administration Lung Study Group
6
Immunotherapy
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @MartinReck2 presents MDT-Bridge at #WCLC26: pts with resectable or borderline resectable NSCLC received 1-2 cycles of durvalumab + chemotherapy then surgery if resectable or CRT if not, followed by adjuvant/consolidation durvalumab. Of those with borderline resectable NSCLC, 62% underwent resection (97% R0). Overall resection rate 75% and 27% pCR rate.
7.8K impressions26 likes18 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
I
F
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
07 min 29s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
MDT-BRIDGE study design
Global, non-randomized, phase 2 study
Adjuvant/
Neoadjuvant period A
Neoadjuvant period B
consolidation period
Durvalumab +
MDT
Surgery
Baseline MDT
Resectable⁺
investigator's choice
Durvalumab +
reassessment
Durvalumab
resectability
of platinum-based CT
investigator's choice
Restaging/
monotherapy
assessment*
Q3W for 1-2 cycles
of platinum-based CT
optional
Q4W for 12 cycles
(resectable or
Q3W for 2 cycles
pathologic
borderline resectable)
confirmation
CRT
Unresectable
Key inclusion criteria and study requirements
Primary endpoint
Aged ≥18 years
Resection rate, defined as proportion of all patients (FAS) who underwent definitive surgery
Previously untreated
Secondary endpoints
Pathologically confirmed, resectable or borderline
Resection rate in patients deemed resectable/borderline resectable at baseline
resectable stage IIB-IIIB NSCLC (AJCC 8th edition¹)
Surgical outcomes in patients who underwent surgery
EGFR/ALK wild type (per local test)
ORR in patients deemed resectable/unresectable at MDT reassessment
WHO/ECOG PS 0-1
pCR and EFS in all patients (FAS) and patients deemed resectable at MDT reassessment
At least 1 target lesion not previously irradiated
PFS in patients deemed unresectable at MDT reassessment
Pre-operative RT not allowed
Safety
*MDT comprised a medical/pulmonary oncologist, thoracic surgeon, radiation oncologist, and pathologist at a minimum; resectable/borderline resectable status determined per MDT decision based on
baseline available assessments. Patients who were deemed eligible for surgery at MDT evaluation but then deemed unresectable/progressed locally at the pre-surgery assessments entered the unresectable
cohort. Five fractions/week for ~6 weeks (± 3 days) (total 60 Gy + 10%). Efficacy outcomes are reported, unless otherwise indicated, according to prespecified analysis populations except for pCR (assessed
per local pathology review), which was not prespecified for analysis in all patients. AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; FAS, full analysis set (i.e., all
patients who received at least one dose of study intervention); Gy, gray; ORR, objective response rate; PS, performance status; QXW, once every X weeks; RT, radiotherapy; WHO, World Health Organization.
1. Amin MB, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 8th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2017.
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 25s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Resection rates and outcomes (FAS)
The overall resection rate was 74.6% and most patients had R0 resection
100
Resection rate,
80
% (95% CI)*,⁺
60
40
20
74.6%
81.5%
62.0%
(66.7-81.6)
(72.1-88.9)
(47.2-75.3)
0
All patients
Resectable
Borderline resectable
(N=142)
at baseline (n=92)
at baseline (n=50)
2.8%
0.9%
4.0%
3.2%
(0.6-8.0) (0.0-5.1)
(0.8-11.2)
0%
(0.1-16.7)
(0.0-4.8)
0%
Resection
(0.0-11.2)
outcomes,
% (95% CI)*
96.2%
96.0%
96.8%
(90.6-99.0)
(88.8-99.2)
(83.3-99.9)
R0
R1
R2
R0
R1
R2
R0
R1
R2
Resected cohort: all patients
Resected cohort: resectable at
Resected cohort: borderline
(n=106)
baseline (n=75)
resectable at baseline (n=31)
DCO, 12 January 2026. *Defined as the proportion of patients who started resection. Cls calculated by Clopper-Pearson exact method. Percentages based on the number of patients who started
resection surgery as the denominator. CI, confidence interval.
9
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
03 min 37s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
pCR
EFS by pCR
27.3% of all patients resectable at MDT
12-month EFS was higher in patients with vs
reassessment had pCR, including 31.3%
without pCR (100% VS 89.8%)
who were resectable at baseline
Resectable at
pCR
No pCR
MDT reassessment
No. events / no. patients (%)
0/33 (0)
9/73 (12.3)
12-month EFS, % (95% CI)*
100.0 (100.0-100.0)
89.8 (79.6-95.0)
30
1.00
FAS
0.75
pCR rate, % (95% CI)*
20
Probability of EFS
0.50
10
0.25
23.2%
31.3%
18.4%
27.3%
0.00
(16.6-31.1)
(21.6-42.4)
(7.7-34.3)
(19.6-36.1)
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
0
All patients
Resectable
Borderline
Resectable
No. at risk:
Time from first dose (months)
(N=142)
at baseline
resectable at
cohort
pCR 33
33
30
19
10
0
0
0
(n=83)
baseline
(n=121)
No pCR 73
73
64
50
30
5
3
0
(n=38)
DCO, 12 January 2026. *95% Cls calculated by Clopper-Pearson exact method. Median follow-up (range) in censored patients with VS without pCR: 10.4 (5.3-14.1) VS 11.4 (4.6-20.2) months.
13
***
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🆙#WCLC26 #LCSM OA04.03
🔥Final Analysis of the Phase 3 IMpower030 Study: Perioperative Atezolizumab + Chemotherapy in Resectable Stage II-IIIB NSCLC
🎙️@bensolomon1
🎯EFS HR 0.77 (95%CI 0.58-1.02)
🎯OS HR 0.77 (95%CI 0.57-1.07)
🎯pCR Atezo 30.6% vs. Placebo 8.6%
🔢OA04.03
☑️NCT03456063
🔗 https://t.co/rN1vqVmvgD
@OncoAlert @Larvol @IASLC
6.7K impressions12 likes5 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
08 min 25s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study Design
Double-blind period
Open-label period
Key eligibility criteria:
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg +
Surgical
Resectable Stage II, IIIA or
platinum-based chemotherapy*
resection
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg
select IIIB (T3N2) NSCLC
(16 cycles) Q3W
(8th edition)
(4 cycles) Q3W
assessment)
Eligible for R0 resection with
curative intent
R
1:1
Adequate pulmonary and
cardiac function to
Survival follow-up
Placebo +
Surgical
undergo resection
resection
ALK WT/EGFR WT
platinum-based chemotherapy*
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Best supportive care
(4 cycles) Q3W
ECOG PS 0-1
assessment)
Stratification factors:
Primary endpoint:
Key secondary endpoints:
Tumor Stage (II VS IIIA N2- VS IIIA/B N2+)
IRF-EFS
IRF-pCR
INV-EFS
Histology (non-squamous vs squamous)
IRF-MPR
INV-DFS
OS
Safety
*Chemotherapy options: cisplatin + pemetrexed, carboplatin + pemetrexed, or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for patients with non-squamous NSCLC; cisplatin + gemcitabine or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for
patients with squamous NSCLC. Chemotherapy was administered as (per 21-day cycle): cisplatin (75 mg/m² IV) on Day 1; pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 IV) on Day 1; carboplatin (IV, initial target AUC of 6 mg/mL/min)
on Day 1; nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2 IV) on Days 1, 8, and 15; gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m² IV) on Days 1 and 8. PORT required for patients with positive margins prior to initiating post-operative atezolizumab or
best supportive care. PORT mandatory for N2+ disease in V1-6 and optional for patient with N2+ disease at resection after version 7. ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; AUC, area under the curve;
DFS, disease-free survival; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EFS, event-free survival; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; INV, investigator-assessed;
IRF, independent review facility-assessed; IV, intravenous; MPR, major pathological response; OS, overall survival; pCR, pathological complete response; PORT, post-operative radiation therapy;
Q3W, every 3 weeks; R, randomized; R0, complete resection; WT, wild-type.
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 21s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IRF-Assessed EFS
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population (primary endpoint)*
ITT-WT population$
100
100
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Median, months (95% CI)
62.8 (41.4, NE)
34.9 (24.6, 63.8)
Median, months (95% CI)
67.2 (49.1, NE)
43.9 (28.0, 63.8)
80
Stratified HR (95% CI); p value+
0.77 (0.58, 1.02); p=0.07
80
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.75 (0.57, 0.98)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
60
60
52.6%
IRF-EFS (%)
50.5%
IRF-EFS (%)
40
40
44.3%
46.0%
20
20
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
196
180
147
119
111
105
100
95
89
78
65
33
29
1
1
219
201
166
137
129
123
117
111
104
92
78
37
32
1
1
201
174
129
118
102
90
82
78
70
60
54
25
23
2
NE
221
193
144
133
117
105
96
92
84
73
64
29
26
2
NE
Statistical significance was not met in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025.
*A total of 92 (46.9%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=196) and 104 (51.7%) patients in the placebo arm (n=201) had an event; +Stratified Log-rank 2-sided p value; Versus stopping boundary of 0.04;
$A total of 99 (45.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 114 (51.6%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. EFS was defined as time from randomization to the first documented disease progression
per RECIST v1.1 that precluded surgery, local or distant disease recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC) or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. NE, not estimable.
8
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
04 min 13s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT
ITT-WT
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
(n=196)
(n=201)
(n=219)
(n=221)
IRF-pCR, n (%)
58 (29.6)
17 (8.5)
67 (30.6)
19 (8.6)
IRF-MPR, n (%)
105 (53.6)
49 (24.4)
119 (54.3)
55 (24.9)
Median INV-EFS, months
62.8
34.6
65.0
36.5
HR (95% CI)
0.70 (0.53, 0.93)
0.71 (0.55, 0.93)
Outcomes of pCR, MPR and EFS favored atezolizumab VS placebo
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025. Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested.
pCR, absence of any viable primary tumor cells at the time of surgical resection in the primary tumor and all sampled lymph nodes as assessed by central pathology laboratory;
MPR, <10% residual viable tumor cells at the time of surgical resection in the primary tumor as assessed by central pathology laboratory.
10
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
03 min 46s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Overall survival (ITT-WT population)*
Disease-free survival (ITT-WT population)+
100
100
80
80
66.0%
60
60
57.4%
OS (%)
59.9%
DFS (%)
40
40
45.9%
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
20
Median, months (95% CI)
NE (NE)
81.7 (63.8, NE)
20
Median, months (95% CI)
82.7 (54.3, NE)
54.4 (30.2, 66.0)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.77 (0.57, 1.05)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.67 (0.49, 0.90)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84 86
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
219
207
197
182
174
166
159
151
139
125
112
96
57
32
6
188
170
142
131
126
119
113
104
94
85
59
34
16
1
221
206
188
173
160
152
137
127
123
109
94
74
46
21
3
181
137
122
112
100
95
89
84
75
67
48
26
14
2
Outcomes of OS and DFS favored atezolizumab VS placebo
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025. Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested. *A total of 75 (34.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 89 (40.3%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of
median os between the atezolizumab (n=196) and placebo arms (n=201) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.79 (0.57-1.09); Patients with R0 margins after surgical resection. A total of 79 (42.0%) patients in the atezolizumab
arm (n=188) and 95 (52.5%) patients in the placebo arm (n=181) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of median DFS between the atezolizumab (n=167) and placebo arms (n=164) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.66
(0.48-0.91).OS, time from randomization to death from any cause; DFS, time from the first date of no disease (date of surgery) to local or distant recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC), or
death due to any cause, whichever occurs first.
11
DDrew Moghanaki@DrewMoghanaki
I thoroughly enjoyed reading this recently published article led by @TroyKleberMD. It pulls back the curtain on how the largest cancer center in the US selects and manages patients with stage III NSCLC with induction chemoimmunotherapy. The framing is excellent, the results are unbiased, and the discussion is full of excellent pearls. The results also include a nice analysis of different RT strate
5.6K impressions24 likes12 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
Original Study
Using Induction Chemoimmunotherapy as a Bridge to Definitive Local
Therapy for Non-Metastatic NSCLC: Real-World Outcomes From a
Comprehensive Cancer Center
Troy J. Kleber¹, Sage A. Copling², Andrew D. Kjim², César P. Márquez¹, Wenli Dong³,
Waree Rinsurongkawong³, Vadeerat Rinsurongkawong³, J. Jack Lee³, Yuliya Kitsel⁴,
Xiaoyu Han⁴, Sherif M. Ismail⁵, Hui Xu⁴, Ivan Coronado⁴, Zhongxing Liao⁶, Joe Y. Chang⁶,
Aileen Chen⁶, Saumil Gandhi⁶, Matthew S. Ning⁶, Quynh-Nhu Nguyen⁶, Michael S. O'Reilly⁶,
David Qian⁶, James W. Welsh6, Stephen G. Chun⁶, Tina Cascone⁷, Jianjun J. Zhang⁷,
Don L. Gibbons⁷, Mehmet Altan⁷, Ara A. Vaporciyan⁸, David C. Rice⁸, Ravi Rajaram⁸,
Reza J. Mehran⁸, Mara B. Antonoff8, Kyle G. Mitchell⁸, Annikka Weissferdt⁹,
John V. Heymach⁷, Jia Wu⁴, Steven H. Lin⁶,#, Julianna K. Bronk
1 Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
2 McGovern Medical School at UTHealth Houston., Houston, TX
3 Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
4 Department of Imaging Physics, Division of Diagnostic Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
5 Institute for Data Science in Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
6
Department of Thoracic Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
7 Department of Thoracic-Head & Neck Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
8
Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
9 Department of Anatomical Pathology, Division of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
[Slide 2]
Before
Induction Therapy
After
Surgical
Surgery
Candidate
n = 115 (68%)
n = 144 (86%)
n = 29
FRT
(20% of surgical candidates)
n = 44 (26%)
Non-Surgical
Candidate
n = 24 (14%)
SBRT n = 4 (2%)
None n = 5 (3%)
Figure 2. Alluvial plot describing practice patterns of definitive therapy following induction chemoimmunotherapy based on baseline surgical candidacy for stage
I-III NSCLC. Percentages for definitive therapy do not total 100% due to rounding. Five patients did not proceed with definitive surgery or radiotherapy after
induction chemoimmunotherapy because of either death from comorbidities (n = 3), transition to maintenance immunotherapy (n = 1), or loss to follow-up (n = 1).
Abbreviations: FRT = fractionated radiotherapy; SBRT = stereotactic body radiotherapy.
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @bensolomon1 presents IMpower 030: perioperative atezolizumab + chemo in resectable NSCLC at #WCLC26. Unfortunately, EFS did not meet significance. Trends present for EFS and OS but not significant. High rates of surgery in both arms ~90% and placebo arm performed better than expected. Disappointing negative results.
4.1K impressions27 likes11 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
at
2276
on Lung Cancer
-
KALC
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
08 min 11s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study Design
Double-blind period
Open-label period
Key eligibility criteria:
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg +
Surgical
Resectable Stage II, IIIA or
platinum-based chemotherapy*
resection
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg
select IIIB (T3N2) NSCLC
(8th edition)
(4 cycles) Q3W
(16 cycles) Q3W
assessment)
Eligible for R0 resection with
curative intent
R
1:1
Adequate pulmonary and
cardiac function to
Survival follow-up
Placebo +
Surgical
undergo resection
resection
ALK WT/EGFR WT
platinum-based chemotherapy*
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Best supportive care
ECOG PS 0-1
(4 cycles) Q3W
assessment)
Stratification factors:
Primary endpoint:
Key secondary endpoints:
Tumor Stage (II VS IIIA N2- VS IIIA/B N2+)
IRF-EFS
IRF-pCR
INV-EFS
Histology (non-squamous vs squamous)
IRF-MPR
INV-DFS
OS
Safety
*Chemotherapy options: cisplatin + pemetrexed, carboplatin + pemetrexed, or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for patients with non-squamous NSCLC; cisplatin + gemcitabine or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for
patients with squamous NSCLC. Chemotherapy was administered as (per 21-day cycle): cisplatin (75 mg/m² IV) on Day 1; pemetrexed (500 mg/m² IV) on Day 1; carboplatin (IV, initial target AUC of 6 mg/mL/min)
on Day 1; nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m² IV) on Days 1, 8, and 15; gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m² IV) on Days 1 and 8. PORT required for patients with positive margins prior to initiating post-operative atezolizumab or
best supportive care. PORT mandatory for N2+ disease in V1-6 and optional for patient with N2+ disease at resection after version 7. ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; AUC, area under the curve;
DFS, disease-free survival; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EFS, event-free survival; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; INV, investigator-assessed;
IRF, independent review facility-assessed; IV, intravenous; MPR, major pathological response; OS, overall survival; pCR, pathological complete response; PORT, post-operative radiation therapy;
Q3W, every 3 weeks; R, randomized; R0, complete resection; WT, wild-type.
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 14s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IRF-Assessed EFS
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population (primary endpoint)*
ITT-WT population$
100
100
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Median, months (95% CI)
62.8 (41.4, NE)
34.9 (24.6, 63.8)
Median, months (95% CI)
67.2 (49.1, NE)
43.9 (28.0, 63.8)
80
Stratified HR (95% CI); p value+
0.77 (0.58, 1.02); p=0.07
80
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.75 (0.57, 0.98)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
60
60
52.6%
IRF-EFS (%)
50.5%
IRF-EFS (%)
40
40
44.3%
46.0%
20
20
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
196
180
147
119
111
105
100
95
89
78
65
33
29
1
1
219
201
166
137
129
123
117
111
104
92
78
37
32
1
1
201
174
129
118
102
90
82
78
70
60
54
25
23
2
NE
221
193
144
133
117
105
96
92
84
73
64
29
26
2
NE
Statistical significance was not met in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025.
*A total of 92 (46.9%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=196) and 104 (51.7%) patients in the placebo arm (n=201) had an event; TStratified Log-rank 2-sided p value; Versus stopping boundary of 0.04;
$A total of 99 (45.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 114 (51.6%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. EFS was defined as time from randomization to the first documented disease progression
per RECIST v1.1 that precluded surgery, local or distant disease recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC) or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. NE, not estimable.
8
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
03 min 48s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Overall survival (ITT-WT population)*
Disease-free survival (ITT-WT population)+
100
100
80
80
66.0%
60
60
57.4%
OS (%)
59.9%
DFS (%)
40
40
45.9%
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
20
Median, months (95% CI)
NE (NE)
81.7 (63.8, NE)
20
Median, months (95% CI)
82.7 (54.3, NE)
54.4 (30.2, 66.0)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.77 (0.57, 1.05)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.67 (0.49, 0.90)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84 86
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
219
207
197
182
174
166
159
151
139
125
112
96
57
32
6
188
170
142
131
126
119
113
104
94
85
59
34
16
1
221
206
188
173
160
152
137
127
123
109
94
74
46
21
3
181
137
122
112
100
95
89
84
75
67
48
26
14
2
Outcomes of OS and DFS favored atezolizumab vs placebo
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025. Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested. *A total of 75 (34.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 89 (40.3%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of
median OS between the atezolizumab (n=196) and placebo arms (n=201) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.79 (0.57-1.09); Patients with R0 margins after surgical resection. A total of 79 (42.0%) patients in the atezolizumab
arm (n=188) and 95 (52.5%) patients in the placebo arm (n=181) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of median DFS between the atezolizumab (n=167) and placebo arms (n=164) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.66
(0.48-0.91).OS, time from randomization to death from any cause; DFS, time from the first date of no disease (date of surgery) to local or distant recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC), or
death due to any cause, whichever occurs first.
11
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
Two negative Phase 3 atezolizumab trials—but two very different messages.
IMpower030 missed its statistical threshold despite a strong efficacy signal. S1914 showed no survival gain and greater toxicity.
In early-stage NSCLC, context matters.
#WCLC26 #LungCancer #NSCLC #Immunotherapy
4K impressions9 likes5 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026 AND THE LANCET
BETTER
TWO NEGATIVE ATEZOLIZUMAB TRIALS
SCIENCE
A BRIGHTER
TOMORROW
FOR PATIENTS
IN EARLY STAGE NSCLC
PEOPLE
Same label Different clinical meaning
EVIDENCE
IMPACT
IMpower030
WCLC 2026 PHASE 3
SWOG NRG S1914
THE LANCET 2026 PHASE 3
Resectable stage II to IIIB
High risk T1 to T3 NO MO NSCLC
NSCLC
medically inoperable or declined surgery
N 453
Perioperative atezolizumab plus
chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone
N 417
SBRT plus atezolizumab VS SBRT alone
Median EFS
2 year OS
62.8 mo VS 34.9 mo
82% VS 82%
OS HR 1.04 95% CI 0.69 to 1.58
pCR
29.6% VS 8.5%
Grade 3 or higher AEs
12% VS 3%
PRESPECIFIED STATISTICAL
2 grade 5 respiratory events with atezolizumab
THRESHOLD NOT MET
NO SURVIVAL BENEFIT
Statistically negative clinically suggestive
MORE TOXICITY
EXPERT INTERPRETATION
SAME DRUG
DIFFERENT PATIENTS
1
A negative trial is not always a biologic failure
DIFFERENT QUESTIONS
DIFFERENT ANSWERS
2
Benefit depends on setting timing and patient selection
CONTEXT TURNS
3
Do not add atezolizumab to SBRT outside a clinical trial
DATA INTO CARE
THE LESSON IS CONTEXT NOT A CLASS EFFECT
Sources IMpower030 NCT03456063 WCLC 2026 SWOG NRG S1914 Lancet 2026
drozdogan.com
AAya Mohamed | MSc, MD 🎗@Dr_Oncologista
OptiTROP-Lung05: 🫁
A strong phase 3 signal for ADC + immunotherapy in 1L PD-L1+ advanced NSCLC.
Sac-TMT + pembrolizumab vs pembrolizumab:
• PFS: NR vs 5.7 months; HR 0.35
• ORR: 70.2% vs 42.0%
https://t.co/XDvBtfRXXA
@OncoAlert #lcsm #LungCancer https://t.co/heBozvKuxF
3.8K impressions17 likes3 reposts2026-10-02
[Slide 1]
THE LANCET
o(
Search for
Q
ARTICLES Volume 407, Issue 10548, P2607-2619, June
27, 2026
Download Full Issue
Sacituzumab tirumotecan plus
pembrolizumab versus
pembrolizumab in PD-L1-
positive advanced non-small-
cell lung cancer (OptiTROP-
Lung05): interim analysis of a
randomised, open-label, phase 3
trial
[Slide 2]
A Progression-free survival
100
Sac-TMT plus
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
80
62 (54-70)
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
29 (22-37)
Sac-TMT plus
66/208 (32%)
NR (13-6-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
128/205 (62%)
5.7 (4.3-7.0)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.35 (95% CI, 0.26-0.47) p<0.0001
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Time (months)
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
208
208
195
187
182
164
144
126
120
90
62
47
20
18
1
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(9)
(23)
(36)
(38)
(59)
(82)
(97)
(123)
(125)
(141)
(142)
Pembrolizumab
205
195
149
129
127
108
84
67
61
46
28
24
9
8
1
0
(0)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(11)
(21)
(26)
(28)
(39)
(51)
(55)
(69)
(70)
(76)
(77)
A Tumour proportion score of 1 to 49%
Number of events/
Median progression-
100
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
40/125 (32%)
NR (11.1-NE)
pembrolizumab
80
Pembrolizumab
84/123 (68%)
43 (2.9-5.5)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.28 (95% CI, 0.19-0.41)
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
20
Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
125
125
117
113
108
97
84
73
69
48
34
25
11
10
1
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(8)
(17)
(26)
(27)
(42)
(53)
(62)
(75)
(76)
(84)
(85)
Pembrolizumab
123
117
81
67
66
53
38
27
24
16
11
10
2
1
0
..
(0)
(3)
(4)
(4)
(5)
(7)
(12)
(17)
(19)
(24)
(29)
(30)
(37)
(38)
(39)
(..)
[Slide 3]
C
Non-squamous NSCLC
100
Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
80
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
29/123 (24%)
NR (13-6-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
70/124 (56%)
6.6 (4.3-8.7)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.28 (95% CI, 0.18-0.43)
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
123
123
118
114
110
104
88
73
69
51
35
26
11
11
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(1)
(4)
(17)
(30)
(32)
(47)
(60)
(69)
(84)
(84)
(94)
(-)
Pembrolizumab
124
116
89
76
75
66
51
38
34
25
15
12
4
4
1
0
(0)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(8)
(18)
(23)
(25)
(33)
(39)
(42)
(50)
(50)
(53)
(54)
D
Squamous NSCLC
100
80
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
37/85 (44%)
NR (8.3-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
58/80 (73%)
5-5 (4.1-7.0)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.44 (95% CI, 0.29-0.66)
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Time (months)
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
85
85
77
73
72
60
56
53
51
39
27
21
9
7
1
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(5)
(6)
(6)
(6)
(12)
(22)
(28)
(39)
(41)
(47)
(48)
Pembrolizumab
80
78
59
52
51
42
33
29
27
21
13
12
5
4
0
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(5)
(11)
(12)
(18)
(19)
(22)
(..)
[Slide 4]
B
Tumour proportion score of 50% or greater
100
80
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
26/83 (31%)
NR (NE-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
44/82 (54%)
9.5 (6.9-13.8)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.47 (95% CI, 0.29-0.77)
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Time (months)
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
83
83
78
74
74
67
60
53
51
42
28
22
9
8
0
:.
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(1)
(6)
(10)
(11)
(17)
(29)
(35)
(48)
(49)
(57)
(··)
Pembrolizumab
82
78
68
62
61
55
46
40
37
30
17
14
7
7
1
0
(0)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(3)
(4)
(9)
(9)
(9)
(15)
(22)
(25)
(32)
(32)
(37)
(38)
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
Perioperative IO in resectable NSCLC — the landscape at a glance. 🫁
6 Phase III trials → one simple question:
EFS benefit is common. Has OS followed?
✅ EFS positive in 5/6 trials
OS so far:
• KEYNOTE-671 (pembro): HR 0.74 ✅
• RATIONALE-315 (tisle): HR 0.65 ✅
• CheckMate 77T: HR 0.85 — interim, NS
• AEGEAN: HR 0.89 — interim, NS
• NEOTORCH: HR 0.62 — interim, NS
• IMpower030: HR 0.77 — not forma
3.6K impressions56 likes26 reposts2026-09-20
[Slide 1]
PERIOPERATIVE IO
IN RESECTABLE NSCLC
MV Onco
TRIAL
EFS
OS
PEMBRO
0.58
0.74
KEYNOTE-671
NIVO
0.61
0.85
CheckMate 77T
INTERIM- NS
DURVA
0.69
0.89
AEGEAN
INTERIM - NS
TISLE
0.58
0.65
RATIONALE-315
TORI
0.40*
0.62
NEOTORCH
INTERIM - NS
ATEZO
X
0.77
0.77
IMpowero 030
P = 0.07
NOT FORMALLY
TESTED
SIGNIFICANT OS so FAR
PEMBRO
+
TISLE
KEYNOTE-671
RATIONALE-315
EFS POSITIVE
IN 5/6 TRIALS
*
NEOTORCH HR 0.40: Stage III interim analysis.
HRs shown for EFS and OS.
GGiannis Mountzios@g_mountzios
@MarianaBrandao0 did the impossible 🙅 in #WCLC26:
She managed to discuss 5 high-impact abstracts in diverse areas of immunotherapy in advanced #NSCLC in 15 minutes in a scientifically comprehensive , critical and exquisitely elegant way, placing results in a total perspective for the clinician .
Proud to work such an excellent colleague in @EORTC and in academic collaborations 👏👏👏👏🌟
3.2K impressions17 likes4 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
09 min 28s
B
f
in
wclc.iaslc.org
IASLC
2026 World Conference
<<00
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
The Breakthrough Immunotherapy for Advanced
NSCLC - and a bit of SCLC
I AND
Mariana Brandão, MD/PhD
H.U.B
Thoracic Oncology Unit & Phase 1 Unit
NATITUT
JULES BORDET
Institut Jules Bordet - - Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Belgium
INSTITUUT
Science Without Boundaries: Uniting the World Against Thoracic Can
JAMES YANG
ALONA ZER
IASLC
[Slide 2]
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
-00 min 13s
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
on Lung Cancer
T-cell
Who will "beat" single-agent anti-PD-
(L)1 in PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC?
Vaccines and Recognition MHC-I Immune Tumor evasion cell -Mutation -Deletion
Regulatory Tumor-Induced cells Immune engagers
immune
Cytokines
Single-agent
anti-PD-(L)1
Downregulation of
MHC Molecules
Immune cells
-Secretion of Immune
Suppression
Antigen
-Alterations in APM
-Immune Editing
suppressive Molecules
Recruitment of
-Impairment of
Co-Stimulatory Signals
Regulatory Immune Cells
-T-cell Exhaustion
Mechanisms of
-Tumor-derived Metabolites
-Immune Cell Recruitment Immune Evasion
-PD-L1/PD-1
-CTLA-4
-Hypoxia
-LAG3
-Cytokine and Chemokine
Tumor
-TIM-3
ECM Remodeling
-Immune Checkpoint Expression
T cell
-TIGIT
PD-1
X
PD-L1
Chemokines
@
Tumor cell -OX40
cytokines or
Addemenment
TAMs
T cell
Immune-
Cytokines
VEGF, MMPs etc.
CTLA-4-III-CD28
-CD86
-CD86
All the other agents /
-CD80
CD80
-VISTA -BTLA -CD47 -CD137 Checkpoint -KIRs Regulation
Immune
suppression
APC
combinations
anti-PD-1/anti-
VEGF
Modulation
Immune
Bispecific
ibodies
Brandão, ESMO-IO 2024; Tufail et al, Signal Transd and Targeted Therapy 2025
JAMES YANG
[Slide 3]
NSCLC, EGFR-mut, post-3rd generation TKI: how to choose?
-03 min 54s
HARMONi
MARIPOSA-2
Ivo + PBC
PFS (1ʳ): 6.8 VS 4.4 m
Amivantamab +
PFS 6.3 vs 4.2
HR 0.52
PBC
HR 0.48
PBC
PBC
OS (1ʳу, FA): 16.8 VS 14.0 m
OS (IA2): 17.7 vs 15.3 m
HR 0.79 (NS)
HR 0.73 (NS)
Le et al, Lancet Oncol 2026
Passaro, Ann Onc 2024; Popat, ESMO 2024
OptiTROP-
SAFFRON: if MET
Lung04
Panku-Lung01
overexpression or amplification
PFS (1%): 8.3 VS 4.3
PFS (press
PFS (press
Sac-TMT
m, HR 0.49
Iza-Bren
release)
Osi + savolitinib
release)
PBC
OS (2ⁿᵈ, IA): NR vs
PBC
OS not
PBC
OS (press
17.4m, HR 0.60
mature
release)
Fang et al, NEJM 2025
AMES VANG ALONA.7
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
-07 min 45s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
My mental map
EGFR+ post-osi
SCLC, any line
NSCLC, non-AGA, 1st line treatment
BNT324-01
HARMONi-2
RC148-C001
HARMONi
LONESTAR
Encouraging ORR
Updated analysis
Pumitamig + Elfe-
Don't give local
Improved OS in PD-
D: high activity in
consolidation
L1 ≥1% (vs Pembro)
confirms the
(>70%) in
SCLC, including in
therapy "blindly" to
Squamous & Non-
numerically
Squamous.
longer OS with
the post-
IO-treated patients
OS in PD-L1
tarlatamab setting
Well-tolerated
chemo+lvo VS
≥50%: promising,
2nd negative trial in
chemo, but not
(n=8 pts)
but underpowered
this setting
stat. significant
subgroup analysis
Differences VS
Added value of
Treat the LN and
of a 2ry endpoint
other PD-(L)1 X
combo VS ADC
the thymus as
wait for global
VEGF bsAb?
Biomarkers?
alone?
data
"organs at risk"
SShankar Siva@_ShankarSiva
Stage III #lungcancer receives the STARLORD treatment at #WCLC26.
〰️SABR to nodes up to 40Gy
〰️SABR to primary up to 50Gy
〰️adjuvant immunotherapy
Preliminary follow up, n=26, but appears to be a feasible approach. 8% acute G3 Adverse events
🤔I am curious about this - - but
More follow up required… certainly patient friendly short schedule #lcsm
3.2K impressions28 likes14 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
#WCLCZ6
in
wclc.iaslc.org
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Stereotactic Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung
Cancer Unfit for Concurrent Chemoradiation: The STARLORD study
ДБВ
Order C% Crisitine -
Francesco Cuccia, MD, MSc
Radiation Oncology - ARNAS Civico Hospital, Palermo, Italy
Science Without Boundaries: Uniting the World Against Thoracic Cancer
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 58s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Characteristics
N or percentage
Number of patients
26
May
Median age
75.5 years (range, 68-83 years)
2024
Smoking status
Current=23%; Former=76%
Gender
M=76%;F=23%
TNM 8° edition staging
stagellIB=84.6%; stagellIC=15.4%
ECOG Performance Status
PS1=30.7%; PS2=57.7%;PS3=11.6%
Primary histology
Adenocarcinoma=42.3%; squamous
cell=42.3%; large cell
neuroendocrine=15.4%
PD-L1 status
PD-L1 negative=23%; PD-L1>50%=27%; PD-
L1<50%=50%
Median T size
4.55 cm (range, 3.6-7 cm)
Median SBRT dose for T
45 Gy/5 fx (range, 45-50 Gy/5 fx)
Median SBRT dose for N
35 Gy/5 fx (range, 30-40 Gy/5 fx)
ФВ
Order
6
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
BRAF V600E NSCLC is a unique subset of NSCLC that can respond well to targeted therapy but can also respond to immunotherapy, outlined by Dr. @Sokim_33 at #BTGLung2026 ahead of #WCLC26. Is there debate as to optimal first-line management? https://t.co/RI6fNWQykF
3.1K impressions8 likes2 reposts2026-09-10
[Slide 1]
Challenging questions in BRAF-mutant NSCLC
1L Sequencing for BRAF-V600E
CNS
Targeted therapy vs. Chemo +/- 10?
Extrapolated from melanoma data
FRONT-BRAF (IO+/-chemo vs.
No prospective CNS data in NSCLC
BRAF/MEKi)
Timing of SRS
Retrospective, 284 pts/17-centers
OS: 40.9 vs. 25.1 mo (HR 0.69)
IO Benefit: Smokers, PD-L1 > 1%, age ≥
70, no CNS mets, TP-53 mutant
Acquired resistance
Class II, III BRAF-mutations
Heterogenous
No approved targeted therapy
MAPK activation - NRAS, KRAS, MEK
Pan-RAF, ERK1/2 inhibitors under
Bypass signaling - e.g. EGFR, MET,
investigation
HER2, PI3K activation
Cell cycle escape
Onc Live
BRIDGING
Histologic transformation
T
in Lung Cancer
Di Federico, A et al. The Lancet 2025.
Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
DDr Rishabh Jain@DrRishabhOnco
🫁 EGFR at #WCLC26: 5 trials to watch 👇
1️⃣ ADAURA | PL03.01
8-year update of adjuvant osimertinib in resected EGFR-mutant NSCLC.
🔥 How durable is the survival benefit at 8 years?
2️⃣ PAPILLON | PL03.03
Amivantamab + chemotherapy vs chemotherapy in 1L EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC.
🔥 Does the PFS advantage translate into an OS benefit?
3️⃣ REZILIENT 3 | PL03.04
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy vs ch
8.2K impressions18 likes6 reposts2026-09-11
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @MartinReck2 presents MDT-Bridge at #WCLC26: pts with resectable or borderline resectable NSCLC received 1-2 cycles of durvalumab + chemotherapy then surgery if resectable or CRT if not, followed by adjuvant/consolidation durvalumab. Of those with borderline resectable NSCLC, 62% underwent resection (97% R0). Overall resection rate 75% and 27% pCR rate.
7.8K impressions26 likes18 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
I
F
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
07 min 29s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
MDT-BRIDGE study design
Global, non-randomized, phase 2 study
Adjuvant/
Neoadjuvant period A
Neoadjuvant period B
consolidation period
Durvalumab +
MDT
Surgery
Baseline MDT
Resectable⁺
investigator's choice
Durvalumab +
reassessment
Durvalumab
resectability
of platinum-based CT
investigator's choice
Restaging/
monotherapy
assessment*
Q3W for 1-2 cycles
of platinum-based CT
optional
Q4W for 12 cycles
(resectable or
Q3W for 2 cycles
pathologic
borderline resectable)
confirmation
CRT
Unresectable
Key inclusion criteria and study requirements
Primary endpoint
Aged ≥18 years
Resection rate, defined as proportion of all patients (FAS) who underwent definitive surgery
Previously untreated
Secondary endpoints
Pathologically confirmed, resectable or borderline
Resection rate in patients deemed resectable/borderline resectable at baseline
resectable stage IIB-IIIB NSCLC (AJCC 8th edition¹)
Surgical outcomes in patients who underwent surgery
EGFR/ALK wild type (per local test)
ORR in patients deemed resectable/unresectable at MDT reassessment
WHO/ECOG PS 0-1
pCR and EFS in all patients (FAS) and patients deemed resectable at MDT reassessment
At least 1 target lesion not previously irradiated
PFS in patients deemed unresectable at MDT reassessment
Pre-operative RT not allowed
Safety
*MDT comprised a medical/pulmonary oncologist, thoracic surgeon, radiation oncologist, and pathologist at a minimum; resectable/borderline resectable status determined per MDT decision based on
baseline available assessments. Patients who were deemed eligible for surgery at MDT evaluation but then deemed unresectable/progressed locally at the pre-surgery assessments entered the unresectable
cohort. Five fractions/week for ~6 weeks (± 3 days) (total 60 Gy + 10%). Efficacy outcomes are reported, unless otherwise indicated, according to prespecified analysis populations except for pCR (assessed
per local pathology review), which was not prespecified for analysis in all patients. AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; FAS, full analysis set (i.e., all
patients who received at least one dose of study intervention); Gy, gray; ORR, objective response rate; PS, performance status; QXW, once every X weeks; RT, radiotherapy; WHO, World Health Organization.
1. Amin MB, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 8th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2017.
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 25s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Resection rates and outcomes (FAS)
The overall resection rate was 74.6% and most patients had R0 resection
100
Resection rate,
80
% (95% CI)*,⁺
60
40
20
74.6%
81.5%
62.0%
(66.7-81.6)
(72.1-88.9)
(47.2-75.3)
0
All patients
Resectable
Borderline resectable
(N=142)
at baseline (n=92)
at baseline (n=50)
2.8%
0.9%
4.0%
3.2%
(0.6-8.0) (0.0-5.1)
(0.8-11.2)
0%
(0.1-16.7)
(0.0-4.8)
0%
Resection
(0.0-11.2)
outcomes,
% (95% CI)*
96.2%
96.0%
96.8%
(90.6-99.0)
(88.8-99.2)
(83.3-99.9)
R0
R1
R2
R0
R1
R2
R0
R1
R2
Resected cohort: all patients
Resected cohort: resectable at
Resected cohort: borderline
(n=106)
baseline (n=75)
resectable at baseline (n=31)
DCO, 12 January 2026. *Defined as the proportion of patients who started resection. Cls calculated by Clopper-Pearson exact method. Percentages based on the number of patients who started
resection surgery as the denominator. CI, confidence interval.
9
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
03 min 37s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
pCR
EFS by pCR
27.3% of all patients resectable at MDT
12-month EFS was higher in patients with vs
reassessment had pCR, including 31.3%
without pCR (100% VS 89.8%)
who were resectable at baseline
Resectable at
pCR
No pCR
MDT reassessment
No. events / no. patients (%)
0/33 (0)
9/73 (12.3)
12-month EFS, % (95% CI)*
100.0 (100.0-100.0)
89.8 (79.6-95.0)
30
1.00
FAS
0.75
pCR rate, % (95% CI)*
20
Probability of EFS
0.50
10
0.25
23.2%
31.3%
18.4%
27.3%
0.00
(16.6-31.1)
(21.6-42.4)
(7.7-34.3)
(19.6-36.1)
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
0
All patients
Resectable
Borderline
Resectable
No. at risk:
Time from first dose (months)
(N=142)
at baseline
resectable at
cohort
pCR 33
33
30
19
10
0
0
0
(n=83)
baseline
(n=121)
No pCR 73
73
64
50
30
5
3
0
(n=38)
DCO, 12 January 2026. *95% Cls calculated by Clopper-Pearson exact method. Median follow-up (range) in censored patients with VS without pCR: 10.4 (5.3-14.1) VS 11.4 (4.6-20.2) months.
13
***
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🆙#WCLC26 #LCSM OA04.03
🔥Final Analysis of the Phase 3 IMpower030 Study: Perioperative Atezolizumab + Chemotherapy in Resectable Stage II-IIIB NSCLC
🎙️@bensolomon1
🎯EFS HR 0.77 (95%CI 0.58-1.02)
🎯OS HR 0.77 (95%CI 0.57-1.07)
🎯pCR Atezo 30.6% vs. Placebo 8.6%
🔢OA04.03
☑️NCT03456063
🔗 https://t.co/rN1vqVmvgD
@OncoAlert @Larvol @IASLC
6.7K impressions12 likes5 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
08 min 25s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study Design
Double-blind period
Open-label period
Key eligibility criteria:
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg +
Surgical
Resectable Stage II, IIIA or
platinum-based chemotherapy*
resection
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg
select IIIB (T3N2) NSCLC
(16 cycles) Q3W
(8th edition)
(4 cycles) Q3W
assessment)
Eligible for R0 resection with
curative intent
R
1:1
Adequate pulmonary and
cardiac function to
Survival follow-up
Placebo +
Surgical
undergo resection
resection
ALK WT/EGFR WT
platinum-based chemotherapy*
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Best supportive care
(4 cycles) Q3W
ECOG PS 0-1
assessment)
Stratification factors:
Primary endpoint:
Key secondary endpoints:
Tumor Stage (II VS IIIA N2- VS IIIA/B N2+)
IRF-EFS
IRF-pCR
INV-EFS
Histology (non-squamous vs squamous)
IRF-MPR
INV-DFS
OS
Safety
*Chemotherapy options: cisplatin + pemetrexed, carboplatin + pemetrexed, or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for patients with non-squamous NSCLC; cisplatin + gemcitabine or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for
patients with squamous NSCLC. Chemotherapy was administered as (per 21-day cycle): cisplatin (75 mg/m² IV) on Day 1; pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 IV) on Day 1; carboplatin (IV, initial target AUC of 6 mg/mL/min)
on Day 1; nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2 IV) on Days 1, 8, and 15; gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m² IV) on Days 1 and 8. PORT required for patients with positive margins prior to initiating post-operative atezolizumab or
best supportive care. PORT mandatory for N2+ disease in V1-6 and optional for patient with N2+ disease at resection after version 7. ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; AUC, area under the curve;
DFS, disease-free survival; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EFS, event-free survival; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; INV, investigator-assessed;
IRF, independent review facility-assessed; IV, intravenous; MPR, major pathological response; OS, overall survival; pCR, pathological complete response; PORT, post-operative radiation therapy;
Q3W, every 3 weeks; R, randomized; R0, complete resection; WT, wild-type.
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 21s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IRF-Assessed EFS
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population (primary endpoint)*
ITT-WT population$
100
100
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Median, months (95% CI)
62.8 (41.4, NE)
34.9 (24.6, 63.8)
Median, months (95% CI)
67.2 (49.1, NE)
43.9 (28.0, 63.8)
80
Stratified HR (95% CI); p value+
0.77 (0.58, 1.02); p=0.07
80
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.75 (0.57, 0.98)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
60
60
52.6%
IRF-EFS (%)
50.5%
IRF-EFS (%)
40
40
44.3%
46.0%
20
20
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
196
180
147
119
111
105
100
95
89
78
65
33
29
1
1
219
201
166
137
129
123
117
111
104
92
78
37
32
1
1
201
174
129
118
102
90
82
78
70
60
54
25
23
2
NE
221
193
144
133
117
105
96
92
84
73
64
29
26
2
NE
Statistical significance was not met in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025.
*A total of 92 (46.9%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=196) and 104 (51.7%) patients in the placebo arm (n=201) had an event; +Stratified Log-rank 2-sided p value; Versus stopping boundary of 0.04;
$A total of 99 (45.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 114 (51.6%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. EFS was defined as time from randomization to the first documented disease progression
per RECIST v1.1 that precluded surgery, local or distant disease recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC) or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. NE, not estimable.
8
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
04 min 13s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT
ITT-WT
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
(n=196)
(n=201)
(n=219)
(n=221)
IRF-pCR, n (%)
58 (29.6)
17 (8.5)
67 (30.6)
19 (8.6)
IRF-MPR, n (%)
105 (53.6)
49 (24.4)
119 (54.3)
55 (24.9)
Median INV-EFS, months
62.8
34.6
65.0
36.5
HR (95% CI)
0.70 (0.53, 0.93)
0.71 (0.55, 0.93)
Outcomes of pCR, MPR and EFS favored atezolizumab VS placebo
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025. Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested.
pCR, absence of any viable primary tumor cells at the time of surgical resection in the primary tumor and all sampled lymph nodes as assessed by central pathology laboratory;
MPR, <10% residual viable tumor cells at the time of surgical resection in the primary tumor as assessed by central pathology laboratory.
10
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
03 min 46s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Overall survival (ITT-WT population)*
Disease-free survival (ITT-WT population)+
100
100
80
80
66.0%
60
60
57.4%
OS (%)
59.9%
DFS (%)
40
40
45.9%
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
20
Median, months (95% CI)
NE (NE)
81.7 (63.8, NE)
20
Median, months (95% CI)
82.7 (54.3, NE)
54.4 (30.2, 66.0)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.77 (0.57, 1.05)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.67 (0.49, 0.90)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84 86
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
219
207
197
182
174
166
159
151
139
125
112
96
57
32
6
188
170
142
131
126
119
113
104
94
85
59
34
16
1
221
206
188
173
160
152
137
127
123
109
94
74
46
21
3
181
137
122
112
100
95
89
84
75
67
48
26
14
2
Outcomes of OS and DFS favored atezolizumab VS placebo
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025. Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested. *A total of 75 (34.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 89 (40.3%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of
median os between the atezolizumab (n=196) and placebo arms (n=201) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.79 (0.57-1.09); Patients with R0 margins after surgical resection. A total of 79 (42.0%) patients in the atezolizumab
arm (n=188) and 95 (52.5%) patients in the placebo arm (n=181) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of median DFS between the atezolizumab (n=167) and placebo arms (n=164) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.66
(0.48-0.91).OS, time from randomization to death from any cause; DFS, time from the first date of no disease (date of surgery) to local or distant recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC), or
death due to any cause, whichever occurs first.
11
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
8 YEARS later, and the ADAURA curves are still speaking.
In resected EGFR+ NSCLC, adjuvant osimertinib continues to show a durable OS benefit:
▫️Stage II–IIIA: 74% v 58% 8-year OS (HR 0.53)
▫️Stage IB–IIIA: 79% vs 64% (HR 0.52)
Long-term follow-up matters.
#WCLC26 @IASLC https://t.co/phPwzmwkBg https://t.co/lwhi3nLitK
6.3K impressions9 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an OS benefit versus placebo in the primary
population (stage II-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year OS rate
8-year os rate
1.0
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
85%
0.9
Osimertinib (n=233)
74 (67, 80)
74%
0.8
Placebo (n=237)
58 (50, 65)
0.7
73%
0.3 OS probability
0.6
os HR
0.53
58%
0.5
(95% CI)
(0.38, 0.75)
0.4
Maturity: 30%
osimertinib 24%; placebo 36%
0.2
0.1
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
osimertinib 92.0 months; placebo 68.5 months
0.0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
Time from randomization (months)
risk
rtinib 233 229 224 224 221 214 208 205 201 192 180 171 159 149 142 128 91 52 28 8 1 0
237 232 226 221 210 202 190 182 172 156 146 125 109 103 94 74 53 33 20 9 2 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. *Among patients who were alive at the planned final OS analysis (DCO: Jan 27, 2023), updated survival data were collected through yearly follow-up until the curre
(May 4, 2026; additional consent provided) and from accessible records / information from last contact date after the final planned os DCO. Patients for whom no additional long-term os data were available remained cen
their last known alive date, survival time unchanged from the final planned OS analysis DCO (Jan 27, 2023). CI, confidence interval; DCO, data cut-off; HR, hazard ratio; os, overall
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an os benefit versus placebo in the overall
population (stage IB-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year os rate
8-year os rate
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
1.0
88%
Osimertinib (n=339)
79 (74, 83)
0.9
79%
0.8
Placebo (n=343)
64 (58, 70)
178%
0.7
64%
os HR
0.52
OS probability
0.6
(95% CI)
(0.39, 0.71)
0.5
0.4
Maturity: 26%
0.3
osimertinib 20%; placebo 31%
0.2
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
0.1
osimertinib 93.3 months; placebo 79.6 months
0.0
0
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120 126 132
Time from randomization (months)
No. at risk
Osimertinib 339 332 325 324 319 311 304 301 295 285 267 250 233 219 210 186 142 85 46 16 3 0
Placebo 343 338 332 326 314 304 290 281 268 247 233 208 185 173 155 131 103 64 36 15 2 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. *Among patients who were alive at the planned final OS analysis (DCO: Jan 27, 2023), updated survival data were collected through yearly follow-up until the
(May 4, 2026; additional consent provided) and from accessible records / information from last contact date after the final planned OS DCO. Patients for whom no additional long-term OS data were available remaine
their Last known alive date, survival time unchanged from the final planned OS analysis DCO (Jan 27, 2023). CI, confidence interval; DCO, data cut-off; HR, hazard ratio; os,
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🔥ADAURA: Adjuvant osimertinib — exploratory 8-year OS landmark update #WCLC2026
🆙 @JTOonline
🎯8-y OS 74% (osimertinib) vs 58% (placebo; HR 0.53); IB-IIIA: 79% vs 64% (HR 0.52)
🎯Ex19del shows stronger OS benefit (HR 0.45) vs L858R (HR 0.72)
🎯Llongest OS follow-up in adjuvant EGFR NSCLC trial
🎙Dr. Yi-Long Wu @ThomasW35874311 @DrRoyHerbst
#LCSM @OncoAlert @Larvol @EGFRResisters
https://t.co/SCnLw
6.1K impressions10 likes6 reposts2026-09-13
MMisty Dawn Shields@drshieldsmd
Dr. Roy Herbst @DrRoyHerbst @dartmouth presents the updated 8Y OS follow up analysis of ADAURA for 3Y of adjuvant osimertinib in EGFR mutant NSCLC. Benefit in OS across all stages investigated IB-IIIA. Supportive management of toxicities and quality of life are key factors to ensuring patients can stay on therapy for 3Y.
@EGFRResisters @EgfrUk @jillfeldman4 @lungoncdoc @LUNGevity @RManochakian @
6K impressions8 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an os benefit versus placebo in the primary
population (stage II-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year os rate
8-year os rate
1.0
0.9
85%
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
0.8
74%
Osimertinib (n=233)
74 (67, 80)
0.7
Placebo (n=237)
58 (50, 65)
73%
os probability
0.6
os HR
0.5
0.53
58%
(95% CI)
(0.38, 0.75)
0.4
0.3
Maturity: 30%
0.2
osimertinib 24%; placebo 36%
0.1
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
0.0
osimertinib 92.0 months; placebo 68.5 months
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
Osimertinib 233 229 224 224 221 214 208 205 201 192 180 171 159 149 142 128 91 52 28 8 1 0
Placebo 237 232 226 221 210 202 190 182 172 156 146 125 109 103 94 74 53 33 20 9 2 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. *Among patients who were alive at the planned final os analysis (DCO: Jan 27, 2023), updated survival data were collected through yearly follow-up until the current
(May 4, 2026; additional consent provided) and from accessible records information from last contact date after the final planned os DCO. Patients for whom no additional long-term os data were available remained censes
10
their last known alive date, survival time unchanged from the final planned os analysis DCO Dan 27, 2023). CI, confidence interval; OCO, data cut- off; HR, hazard ratio; os, over
[Slide 3]
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
alamy
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
os benefit was observed across disease stages (IB / II / IIIA)*
Stage IB
91%
Stage IB
Stage II
Stage IIIA
1.0
0.9
8-year os rate, %
0.8
77%
(95% CI)
0.7
os probability
0.6
Osimertinib
91 (82, 95)
78 (68, 85)
70 (59, 78)
0.5
Placebo
77 (68, 85)
63 (52, 71)
52 (41, 63)
0.4
0.3
os HR
0.50
0.60
0.49
0.2
(95% CI)
(0.23, 1.01)
(0.36, 0.97)
(0.31, 0.77)
0.1
0.0
120
126
132
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
Time from randomization (months)
No. of patients at risk
94
93
87
79
74
70
68
58
51
33
18
8
2
0
Osimertinib
106
103
101
100
98
97
96
96
31
6
0
99
96
91
87
83
76
70
61
57
50
16
Placebo
106
106
106
105
104
102
100
1.0
Stage IIIA
1.0
Stage II
0.9
0.9
78%
0.8
70%
0.8
I
0.7
1010-14
+++
0.7
0.6
os probability
0.6
63%
os probability
0.5
52%
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120 126 132
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
0
6
Time from randomization (months)
Time from randomization (months)
Osimertinib 118 116 112 112 112 109 104 104 101 94 89 85 81 75 73 67 53 29 15 3 2 0
No. of patients at risk
Osimertinib 115 113 112 112 109 105 104 101 100 98 91 86 78 74 69 61 38 23 13 5 1 0
No. of patients at risk
Placebo
119 114 109 107 100 95 86 79 77 69 64 53 45 42 38 30 17 10 5 0
Placebo 118 118 117 114 110 107 104 103 95 87 82 72 64 61 56 44 36 23 15 9 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. *AJCC UICC 7th edition. AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival; UICC, Union for International Cancer Control
13
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @bensolomon1 presents IMpower 030: perioperative atezolizumab + chemo in resectable NSCLC at #WCLC26. Unfortunately, EFS did not meet significance. Trends present for EFS and OS but not significant. High rates of surgery in both arms ~90% and placebo arm performed better than expected. Disappointing negative results.
4.1K impressions27 likes11 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
at
2276
on Lung Cancer
-
KALC
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
08 min 11s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study Design
Double-blind period
Open-label period
Key eligibility criteria:
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg +
Surgical
Resectable Stage II, IIIA or
platinum-based chemotherapy*
resection
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg
select IIIB (T3N2) NSCLC
(8th edition)
(4 cycles) Q3W
(16 cycles) Q3W
assessment)
Eligible for R0 resection with
curative intent
R
1:1
Adequate pulmonary and
cardiac function to
Survival follow-up
Placebo +
Surgical
undergo resection
resection
ALK WT/EGFR WT
platinum-based chemotherapy*
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Best supportive care
ECOG PS 0-1
(4 cycles) Q3W
assessment)
Stratification factors:
Primary endpoint:
Key secondary endpoints:
Tumor Stage (II VS IIIA N2- VS IIIA/B N2+)
IRF-EFS
IRF-pCR
INV-EFS
Histology (non-squamous vs squamous)
IRF-MPR
INV-DFS
OS
Safety
*Chemotherapy options: cisplatin + pemetrexed, carboplatin + pemetrexed, or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for patients with non-squamous NSCLC; cisplatin + gemcitabine or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for
patients with squamous NSCLC. Chemotherapy was administered as (per 21-day cycle): cisplatin (75 mg/m² IV) on Day 1; pemetrexed (500 mg/m² IV) on Day 1; carboplatin (IV, initial target AUC of 6 mg/mL/min)
on Day 1; nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m² IV) on Days 1, 8, and 15; gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m² IV) on Days 1 and 8. PORT required for patients with positive margins prior to initiating post-operative atezolizumab or
best supportive care. PORT mandatory for N2+ disease in V1-6 and optional for patient with N2+ disease at resection after version 7. ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; AUC, area under the curve;
DFS, disease-free survival; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EFS, event-free survival; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; INV, investigator-assessed;
IRF, independent review facility-assessed; IV, intravenous; MPR, major pathological response; OS, overall survival; pCR, pathological complete response; PORT, post-operative radiation therapy;
Q3W, every 3 weeks; R, randomized; R0, complete resection; WT, wild-type.
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 14s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IRF-Assessed EFS
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population (primary endpoint)*
ITT-WT population$
100
100
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Median, months (95% CI)
62.8 (41.4, NE)
34.9 (24.6, 63.8)
Median, months (95% CI)
67.2 (49.1, NE)
43.9 (28.0, 63.8)
80
Stratified HR (95% CI); p value+
0.77 (0.58, 1.02); p=0.07
80
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.75 (0.57, 0.98)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
60
60
52.6%
IRF-EFS (%)
50.5%
IRF-EFS (%)
40
40
44.3%
46.0%
20
20
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
196
180
147
119
111
105
100
95
89
78
65
33
29
1
1
219
201
166
137
129
123
117
111
104
92
78
37
32
1
1
201
174
129
118
102
90
82
78
70
60
54
25
23
2
NE
221
193
144
133
117
105
96
92
84
73
64
29
26
2
NE
Statistical significance was not met in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025.
*A total of 92 (46.9%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=196) and 104 (51.7%) patients in the placebo arm (n=201) had an event; TStratified Log-rank 2-sided p value; Versus stopping boundary of 0.04;
$A total of 99 (45.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 114 (51.6%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. EFS was defined as time from randomization to the first documented disease progression
per RECIST v1.1 that precluded surgery, local or distant disease recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC) or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. NE, not estimable.
8
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
03 min 48s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Overall survival (ITT-WT population)*
Disease-free survival (ITT-WT population)+
100
100
80
80
66.0%
60
60
57.4%
OS (%)
59.9%
DFS (%)
40
40
45.9%
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
20
Median, months (95% CI)
NE (NE)
81.7 (63.8, NE)
20
Median, months (95% CI)
82.7 (54.3, NE)
54.4 (30.2, 66.0)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.77 (0.57, 1.05)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.67 (0.49, 0.90)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84 86
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
219
207
197
182
174
166
159
151
139
125
112
96
57
32
6
188
170
142
131
126
119
113
104
94
85
59
34
16
1
221
206
188
173
160
152
137
127
123
109
94
74
46
21
3
181
137
122
112
100
95
89
84
75
67
48
26
14
2
Outcomes of OS and DFS favored atezolizumab vs placebo
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025. Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested. *A total of 75 (34.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 89 (40.3%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of
median OS between the atezolizumab (n=196) and placebo arms (n=201) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.79 (0.57-1.09); Patients with R0 margins after surgical resection. A total of 79 (42.0%) patients in the atezolizumab
arm (n=188) and 95 (52.5%) patients in the placebo arm (n=181) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of median DFS between the atezolizumab (n=167) and placebo arms (n=164) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.66
(0.48-0.91).OS, time from randomization to death from any cause; DFS, time from the first date of no disease (date of surgery) to local or distant recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC), or
death due to any cause, whichever occurs first.
11
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
8 year update of ADAURA at #WCLC26 from @DrRoyHerbst - with 3y of adjuvant osimertinib in EGFR mutant NSCLC, 8y OS rate 74% vs 58% with OS HR 0.53 and benefit seen across stages: stage IB HR 0.50, stage II HR 0.60, stage IIIA HR 0.49 - reaffirms standard of care. https://t.co/RsglSiUsuX
4K impressions44 likes20 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 d 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an OS benefit versus placebo in the primary
population (stage II-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year os rate
8-year os rate
1.0
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
0.9
85%
Osimertinib (n=233)
74 (67, 80)
0.8
74%
0.7
Placebo (n=237)
58 (50, 65)
73%
os probability
0.6
os HR
0.53
0.5
58%
(95% CI)
(0.38, 0.75)
0.4
0.3
Maturity: 30%
osimertinib 24%; placebo 36%
0.2
0.1
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
0.0
osimertinib 92.0 months; placebo 68.5 months
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
Osimertinib 233 229 224 224 221 214 208 205 201 192 180 171 159 149 142 128 91 52 28 8 1 0
Placebo 237 232 226 221 210 202 190 182 172 156 146 125 109 103 94 74 53 33 20 9 2
0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. "Among patients who were alive at the planned final OS analysis (DCO: Jan 27, 2023). updated survival data were collected through yearly follow-up until the current DCO
(May 4. 2026: additional consent provided) and from accessible records / information from last contact date after the final planned OS DCO. Patients for whom no additional long-term OS data were available remained censored at
10
their last known alive date. survival time unchanged from the final planned OS analysis DCO (Jan 27. 2023). CI. confidence interval: DCO. data cut-off: HR. hazard ratio: OS. overall survival.
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
os benefit was observed across predefined subgroups in the overall
population (stage IB-IIIA disease)
Subgroup
No. of events / patients
HR
95% CI
Overall (N=682)
Stratified log-rank
175 / 682
0.52
0.39, 0.71
Unadjusted Cox PH
175 / 682
0.56
0.41, 0.75
Sex
Male
60 / 204
0.74
0.44, 1.22
Female
115 / 478
0.47
0.32, 0.69
Age
<65 years
83 / 380
0.59
0.38, 0.91
≥65 years
92 / 302
0.53
0.34, 0.80
Smoking history
Yes
46 / 194
0.58
0.32, 1.04
No
129 / 488
0.55
0.38, 0.79
Race
Asian
106 / 434
0.64
0.43, 0.93
Non-Asian
69 / 248
0.45
0.27, 0.74
Stage*
IB
33 / 212
0.50
0.23, 1.01
II
66 / 236
0.60
0.36, 0.97
IIIA
76 / 234
0.49
0.31, 0.77
EGFR mutation
Ex19del
93 / 378
0.45
0.29, 0.68
L858R
82 / 304
0.72
0.46, 1.11
Adjuvant
Yes
105 / 410
0.54
0.36, 0.80
chemotherapy
No
70 / 272
0.58
0.36, 0.94
0.1
1.0
10.0
HR for OS (95% CI)
Favors osimertinib Favors placebo
DCO: May 4, 2026. *AJCC UICC 7th edition.
12
AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; CI, confidence interval; DCO, data cut off: EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; Ex19del, exon 19 detetion; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival; UICC, Union for International Cancer Control
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
os benefit was observed across disease stages (IB / II / IIIA)*
1.0
Stage IB
91%
Stage IB
Stage II
Stage IIIA
0.9
0.8
8-year os rate, %
0.7
77%
(95% CI)
os probability
0.6
0.5
Osimertinib
91 (82, 95)
78 (68, 85)
70 (59, 78)
0.4
Placebo
77 (68, 85)
63 (52, 71)
52 (41, 63)
0.3
0.2
os HR
0.50
0.60
0.49
0.1
(95% CI)
(0.23, 1.01)
(0.36, 0.97)
(0.31, 0.77)
0.0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
Time from randomization (months)
No. of patients at risk
Osimertinib
106
103
101
100
98
97
96
96
94
93
87
79
74
70
68
58
51
33
18
8
2
0
Placebo
106
106
106
105
104
102
100
99
96
91
87
83
76
70
61
57
50
31
16
6
0
1.0
Stage II
1.0
Stage IIIA
0.9
0.9
0.8
78%
0.8
70%
0.7
0.7
os probability
0.6
os probability
0.6
0.5
63%
0.5
152%
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
Time from randomization (months)
Time from randomization (months)
No. of patients at risk
No. of patients at risk
Osimertinib
118
116
112
112
112
109
104
104
101
94
89
85
81
75
73
67
53
29
15
3
0
Osimertinib 115 113 112 112 109 105 104 101 100 98 91 86 78 74 69 61 38 23 13 5 1 0
Placebo
118
118
117
114
110
107
104
103
95
87
82
72
64
61
56
44
36
23
15
9
2
0
Placebo
119
114
109
107
100
95
86
79
77
69
64
53
45
42
38
30
17
10
5
0
13
DCO: May 4. 2026. *AICC UICC 7th edition AICC. American Joint Committee on Cancer: CI, confidence interval: HR. hazard ratio: OS. overall survival: UICC. Union for International Cancer Control.
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | ADAURA 8-year OS update
📚 JTO full text: https://t.co/NPr2K3lxYi
🧬 Exploratory long-term follow-up of adjuvant osimertinib ×3 years after complete resection of EGFR-mutated stage IB–IIIA NSCLC (n=682)
🏆 Stage IB–IIIA:
• 8-y OS: 79% vs 64%
• HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.39–0.71)
→ 15% absolute OS gain
📊 Stage II–IIIA:
• 8-y OS: 74% vs 58%
• HR 0.53 (95% CI 0.38–0.75)
→ 16% absolute gain
🔎 Benef
4K impressions12 likes5 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an os benefit versus placebo in the primary
population (stage II-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year os rate
8-year os rate
1.0
0.9
85%
8-year OS rate, % (95% CI)
0.8
74%
Osimertinib (n=233)
74 (67, 80)
0.7
Placebo (n=237)
58 (50, 65)
73%
os probability
0.6
os HR
0.5
0.53
58%
(95% CI)
(0.38, 0.75)
0.4
0.3
Maturity: 30%
0.2
osimertinib 24%; placebo 36%
0.1
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
0.0
osimertinib 92.0 months; placebo 68.5 months
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
Osimertinib 233 229 224 224 221 214 208 205 201 192 180 171 159 149 142 128 91 52 28 8 1 0
Placebo 237 232 226 221 210 202 190 182 172 156 146 125 109 103 94 74 53 33 20 9 2 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. *Among patients who were alive at the planned final os analysis (DCO: lan 27, JULY updated survival data ware relected through postly bire 40 INCI the - DOD
(May 4, 2020; additional consent provided) and from accessible records / information from tast contact date after the first planned os DCO. Patients for when NO additional une NPS as data - Instable I - #
10
their Last known alive date. survival time unchanged hom the final planned os analysis DCO (lan 27, 20231 a confidence interved, DCO, Bata - 4P. 16, have - or moral I
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
I
Osimertinib continued to show an os benefit versus placebo in the overall
population (stage IB-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year os rate
8-year os rate
1.0
0.9
88%
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
79%
0.8
Osimertinib (n=339)
79 (74, 83)
0.7
178%
Placebo (n=343)
64 (58, 70)
os probability
0.6
64%
os HR
0.52
0.5
(95% CI)
(0.39, 0.71)
0.4
0.3
Maturity: 26%
0.2
osimertinib 20%; placebo 31%
0.1
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
0.0
osimertinib 93.3 months; placebo 79.6 months
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
Osimertinib 339 332 325 324 319 311 304 301 295 285 267 250 233 219 210 186 142 85 46 16 3 0
Placebo 343 338 332 326 314 304 290 281 268 247 233 208 185 173 155 131 103 64 36 15 2 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. *Among patients who were alive at the planned final os analysis (DCO: tan 27, 2023), updated survival data were collected through yearly blow 9 unce the current DCO
(May 4, 2026; additional consent provided) and from accessible records / information from last contact date after the final planned os DCO. Patients for whom no additional long term os data were evalable remained censored at
11
their last known alive date, survival time unchanged from the final planned 05 analysis DCO (Jan 27, 2023). CL confidence interval, DCO, data cut-off, off, NA hazard races os, Iverall know
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
os benefit was observed across predefined subgroups in the overall
population (stage IB-IIIA disease)
Subgroup
No. of events / patients
HR
95% CI
Overall (N=682)
Stratified log-rank
175 / 682
0.52
0.39, 0.71
Unadjusted Cox PH
175 / 682
0.56
0.41, 0.75
Sex
Male
60 / 204
0.74
0.44, 1.22
Female
115 / 478
0.47
0.32, 0.69
Age
<65 years
83 / 380
0.59
0.38, 0.91
≥65 years
92 / 302
0.53
0.34, 0.80
Smoking history
Yes
46 / 194
0.58
0.32, 1.04
No
129 / 488
0.55
0.38, 0.79
Race
Asian
106 / 434
0.64
0.43, 0.93
Non-Asian
69 / 248
0.45
0.27, 0.74
Stage*
IB
33 / 212
0.50
0.23, 1.01
II
66 / 236
0.60
0.36, 0.97
IIIA
76 / 234
0.49
0.31, 0.77
EGFR mutation
Ex19del
93 / 378
0.45
0.29, 0.68
L858R
82 / 304
0.72
0.46, 1.11
Adjuvant
Yes
105 / 410
0.54
0.36,0.80
chemotherapy
No
70 / 272
0.58
0.36, 0.94
0.1
1.0
10.0
HR for os (95% CI)
Favors osimertinib Favors placebo
DCO May & MM *A/CC LICC M admin
12
AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer: CL, confidence interval: DCO, data cut-off; EGFR. epidermal growth factor receptor; Extited exan 19 delation MR hazard ration Dd, overall survival UCC, Union to International Cancer Control
<
D
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
os benefit was observed across disease stages (IB / II / IIIA)*
1.0
Stage IB
91%
0.9
Stage IB
Stage II
Stage IIIA
0.8
8-year os rate, %
0.7
77%
os probability
(95% CI)
0.6
0.5
Osimertinib
91 (82, 95)
78 (68, 85)
70 (59, 78)
0.4
Placebo
0.3
77 (68, 85)
63 (52, 71)
52 (41, 63)
0.2
os HR
0.50
0.60
0.49
0.1
(95% CI)
(0.23, 1.01)
(0.36,0.97)
(0.31,0.77)
0.0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120 126 132
Time from randomization (months)
No. of patients at risk
Osimertinib 106 103 101 100 98 97 96 96 94 93 87 79 74 70 68 58 51 33 18 8 2 0
Placebo 106 106 106 105 104 102 100 99 96 91 87 83 76 70 61 57 50 31 16 6 0
1.0
Stage II
1.0
Stage IIIA
0.9
0.9
0.8
78%
0.8
70%
0.7
0.7
os probability
0.6
63%
0.4
os probability
0.6
0.5
0.5
152%
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120 126 132
0 6 12 18 24 30 35 42 48 54 60 $6 72 78 54 DO Dd 182 100 114 133 128 123
Time from randomization (months)
Time from randomization (months)
No. of patients at risk
No. of patients at risk
Osimertinib 118 116 112 112 112 109 104 104 101 94 89 85 81 75 73 67 53 29 15 3 0
Osimertinib 115 113 112 112 109 105 104 101 100 DO 91 B6 78 74 - 61 30 22 13 5 1 a
Placebo 118 118 117 114 110 107 104 103 95 87 82 72 64 61 56 44 36 23 15 9 2 0
Placebo 119 114 109 107 100 95 as 79 77 00 64 53 45 42 38 33 17 10 & @
13
DCO: May 4, 2026. *AICC UICC 7th edition AICC, American limit Committee on Cancer, a confidence I HR, Of, in I uce, - be transfered Cancel CHECK
RRami Manochakian MD, FASCO@RManochakian
🚨🔥@OncoAlert Hot off the press.
Just published @JTOonline in conjunction with presentation @IASLC #WCLC26.
⭐️8-Year #OverallSurvival #Update of:
❇️#ADAURA phase 3 trial of
#Adjuvant #Osimertinib vs #Placebo for Resected #EGFR mutant Stage IB-IIIA Non-Small Cell #LungCancer.
✅8-y #OS:
Stage II-IIIA: 74% vs 58% (HR 0.53)
Stage IB-IIIA: 79% vs 64% (HR 0.52)
👇🏻
https://t.co/yYufxv2zhH
3.7K impressions4 likes3 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
Journal of
IASLC
INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION
Thoracic
FOR THE STUDY
OF LUNG CANCER
Oncology
Conquering Thoracic Cancers Worldwide
BRIEF REPORT
Articles in Press, 104179, September 13, 2026
Open Access
Adjuvant Osimertinib in Resected EGFR-Mutated Stage
IB-IIIA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Exploratory 8-year
Overall Survival Landmark Update from the ADAURA Trial
Radiation / SBRT
PPDBrown@PDBrownOnc
🚨🚨 Randomized Trial #WCLC26 Small Cell Lung Cancer MRI +/-PCI 🚨
• MRI alone superior cognitive outcome
• CFFS benefit of MRI alone similar in LS and ES-SCLC
• No diff OS
• MRI surveillance standard of care for SCLC https://t.co/4YM3QAzBeQ
20.1K impressions54 likes27 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
MAVERICK (SWOG 1827)
MRI +/- PCI
1 Year CFFS**
AE Gr2+
25/10 PCI
5%
41%
LS-SCLC or
ES-SCLC
M A O N Z D R E I
+ MRI*
n=304
MRI
16%
2%
Surveillance
Rusthoven World Lung 2026. 68% LS-SCLC *77% HA-PCI
**Primary Endpoint - Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS) MRI alone, HR 0.61 (90% CI, 0.47-0.78), p<0.004
CFFS No signif diff benefit MRI alone by Dz stage or use immuno.OS MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Landmark, practice changing study at #WCLC26. The phase III MAVERICK study shows no improvement in OS with PCI for SCLC, across limited and extensive stages, with worse cognitive failure free survival and increased toxicity in PCI arm.
The end of the PCI era. https://t.co/SWOPM7iKux
14.6K impressions22 likes10 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
Overall Survival
100%
Preliminary analyses at 128 events
suggest no significant difference in
N
Events
Median(months)
90% CI
MRI brain surveilance
151
67
29.8
(24.8-48.6)
overall survival (OS)
PCI
* MRI brain surveilance
152
61
31.4
75%
(24.4-36.3)
HR(90% Ci): 0.90 (0.67-1.20)
MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
% Survival
Upper bound of 90% CI of 1.2 for MRI
50%
alone is currently below the non-inferiority
margin of 1.25
25%
MRI brain surveillance
Final OS results will be analyzed after 190
PCI
+ MRI brain surveillance
events
0%
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
Number at risk (events / censor)
Months After Randomization
MRI brain surveillance 151 (0/1) 132 (12/7)101 (29/21)76 (44/31) 55 (53/43): 39 (61/51) 31 (64/56): 21 (64/66) 16 (65/70) 11 (67/73) 3 (67 / 81)
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 152 (0/3) 112 (15/25)84 (31/37) 63 (41/48) 47 (48/57) 35 (51/66) 20 (57/75) 15 (59/78) 10 (59/83) 4 (60/88) 1 (61 / 90)
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. Chad Rusthoven at #WCLC26 presents results from SWOG S1827, the phase III MAVERICK study exploring the benefit of PCI in pts with SCLC. Historic studies before the era of MRI surveillance showed a decrease in brain metastases with PCI and an improvement in OS but recent ES-SCLC studies called the OS improvement into question. MAVERICK looks at both LS and ES disease - note primary endpoint her
10.9K impressions23 likes10 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 42s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SWOG S1827/MAVERICK Trial
Hypothesis
Compared with PCI + MRI surveillance, MRI surveillance alone will result in
superior cognitive failure free survival (CFFS) without a decline in OS
6
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 35s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SWOG S1827/MAVERICK
MRI Brain Surveillance Alone Versus MRI Surveillance and Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation (PCI):
A Randomized Phase III Trial in Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Prophylactic cranial
MRI brain surveillance
irradiation (PCI)
Small-cell lung cancer
(Limited OR Extensive)
Stratify: 1. Limited vs Extensive stage
No prior brain metastases
R
2. Immunotherapy (y/n) 3. Performance Status (0-1 vs 2)
No brain metastases on
MRI after 1st line therapy
No PCI
MRI brain surveillance
Primary Endpoint:
Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
MRI brain surveillance and cognitive testing at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months
(time to cognitive decline or death)
-
-
PCI was 25 Gy / 10 FX, hippocampal-avoidance (HA) PCI allowed at physician discretion
7
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 52s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Trial Design
Eligibility
Patients with limited-stage (LS) and extensive-stage (ES) disease, ≥18 years of age, performance status 0-2
LS-SCLC: must have completed platinum-based chemotherapy and either definitive thoracic radiation or surgical resection
ES-SCLC: must have completed platinum-based chemotherapy
Immunotherapy (concurrent and/or adjuvant to upfront treatment) allowed for both LS- and ES-SCLC
Enrollment within 16 weeks of Day 1 of the last cycle of chemotherapy
Pts must have a response to upfront therapy & no progression in opinion of treating physician (CT or PET/CT within 42 days)
No history of brain metastases and no evidence of brain metastases on MRI within 28 days of enrollment
MRI surveillance
Contrast-enhanced brain MRIs performed at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months
MRI sequences per the Brain Tumor Imaging Protocol for BM (BTIP-BM) consensus recs (Kaufmann, Neuro-oncology 22.6 (2020): 757-772)
Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI)
25 Gy delivered in 10 Fx
Hippocampal avoidance (HA-PCI) allowed at physician discretion
Radiation therapy recommended at time of brain metastases
Radiosurgery (SRS) and whole-brain radiation (WBRT)/hippocampal-avoidant (HA)-WBRT allowed at physician discretion
8
YYakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
Highlighted Studies at #WCLC26
1️⃣ HARMONi-2
In treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥1%, ivonescimab improved PFS (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) and OS (30.8 vs 22.6 months; HR 0.73) compared with pembrolizumab.
This is a genuinely positive trial, but it does not tell the same story for all PD-L1-positive patients. The OS benefit was clear in the ≥50% subgroup, whereas the HR was 0.85 with
9.1K impressions24 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC SEOUL 2026
WCLC26: KEY STUDIES
Early results key data at a glance
HARMONi-2
1
1L PD-L1 >1% advanced NSCLC
Clearly positive.
Strongest signal in PD-L1 >50%.
PFS 11.1 vs 5.8 mo
HR 0.51
In 1-49%, the control arm does
os 30.8 vs 22.6 mo
HR 0.73
not fully reflect current practice.
2
SWOG S1827 / MAVERICK
Post-treatment SCLC MRI surveillance vs MRI + PCI
With reliable MRI access, routine
PCI is now hard to justify.
Cognitive failure / death
HR 0.60
Final os is still needed before
Grade ≥3 toxicity 0.8% vs 7.9%
declaring PCI obsolete.
Interim OS and brain metastasis-free survival: no difference
TAISHAN-302
3
Relapsed SCLC B7-H3 ADC Tam-Peli vs topotecan
Clear survival gain.
A potential topotecan replacement;
os 13.3 vs 9.4 mo
HR 0.46
efficacy after tarlatamab
PFS 7.4 vs 2.8 mo
ORR 59% vs 10%
maintenance remains unknown.
ARTEMIS-008
4
Relapsed SCLC . B7-H3 ADC Ris-Rez VS topotecan
Confirms B7-H3 as a target.
No cross-trial comparison with
os 18.5 vs 10.3 mo
HR 0.46
TAISHAN; ILD and hematologic
PFS 7.2 vs 3.0 mo
ORR 58% vs 13%
toxicity may drive selection.
5
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
PD-L1 >50% metastatic NSCLC SG+pembro VS pembro
More tumor shrinkage,
ORR 56% vs 44%
similar response duration,
os 21.5 vs 22.8 mo
no OS gain:
Grade ≥3 toxicity 56% vs 17%
no role in clinical practice.
Primary PFS threshold not met
13 SEPTEMBER 2026 INTERIM CONGRESS SNAPSHOT
@dr_yakupergun
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
MRI alone, without PCI, showed a significant improvement in cognitive failure free survival with a median of 37.8m vs 16.5m, HR 0.60 with cognitive failure free survival rate at 12m of 17% vs 6%. #WCLC26 https://t.co/OnbRI74f4G
7.3K impressions13 likes5 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
01 min 59s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Primary Endpoint - Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
100%
MRI surveillance alone resulted in improved CFFS
MRI brain surveillance
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
MRI alone, HR 0.60, 90% CI 0.46-0.78, p=0.0005
75%
N
Events
6-month Estimate(%)
90% CI
Patients randomized to MRI alone were significantly
MRI brain surveillance
113
91
37.8
(30.0-45.5)
% CFFS
more likely to be both alive and free from cognitive
50%
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
107
92
16.5
(10.7-23.4)
decline compared to those randomized to MRI+PCI
HR(90% CI): 0.60 (0.46-0.78)
1-sided p-value: 0.0005
25%
Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
0%
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
6 month % [90% CI]
12 month % [90% CI]
Number at risk (events / censor)
Months After Randomization
MRI alone
38% [30-46]
17% [12-24]
MRI brain surveillance 113 (0/0) 72 (33/8) 38 (66/9) 23 (80/10) 14 (86/13) 11 (88/14) 10 (88/15) 8 (90 / 15) 1 (91/21)
MRI + PCI
17% [11-23]
6% [3-11]
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 107 (0/0) 60 (35/12) 14 (80/13) 9 (85/13) 5 (89 / 13) 2 (91/14) 2 (91 / 14) 2 (91 / 14) NA
*Detailed analyses of cognitive function will be
presented at an upcoming meeting
12
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
The slides we have been waiting for:
PCI is officially dead in small cell lung cancer. 🫳🏽🎤
#wclc26 @IASLC https://t.co/ci5WQkIhVQ https://t.co/HleeAeQhBY
5.6K impressions8 likes2 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
01 min 54s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Primary Endpoint - Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
100%
MRI surveillance alone resulted in improved CFFS
T
MRI brain surveillance
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
MRI alone, HR 0.60, 90% CI 0.46-0.78, p=0.0005
75%
N
Events
6-month Estimate(%)
90% CI
Patients randomized to MRI alone were significantly
MRI brain surveillance
113
91
37.8
(30.0-45.5)
% CFFS
more likely to be both alive and free from cognitive
50%
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
107
92
16.5
(10.7-23.4)
decline compared to those randomized to MRI+PCI
HR(90% CI): 0.60 (0.46-0.78)
1-sided p-value: 0.0005
25%
Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
1
0%
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
6 month % [90% CI]
12 month % [90% CI]
Months After Randomization
Number at risk (events / censor)
MRI alone
38% [30-46]
17% [12-24]
MRI brain surveillance 113 (0/0) 72 (33/8) 38 (66/9) 23 (80/10) 14 (86 / 13) 11 (88/14) 10 (88/15) 8 (90/15) 1 (91/21)
MRI + PCI
17% [11-23]
6% [3-11]
MRI brain surveillance 107 (0/0) 60 (35/12) 14 (80/13) 9 (85/13) 5 (89/13) 2 (91/14) 2 (91/14) 2 (91/14) NA
*Detailed analyses of cognitive function will be
presented at an upcoming meeting
12
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
00 min 09s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall Survival
100%
Preliminary analyses at 128 events
suggest no significant difference in
N
Events
Median(months)
90% CI
MRI brain surveillance
151
67
29.8
(24.8-48.6)
overall survival (OS)
75%
PCI
+
MRI brain surveillance
152
61
31.4
(24.4-36.3)
HR(90% CI): 0.90 (0.67-1.20)
MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
% Survival
50%
Upper bound of 90% CI of 1.2 for MRI
alone is currently below the non-inferiority
margin of 1.25
25%
MRI brain surveillance
+
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
Final OS results will be analyzed after 19
events
0%
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
Number at risk (events / censor)
Months After Randomization
MRI brain surveillance 151 (0/1) 132 (12/7)101 (29 / 21)76 (44/31) 55 (53/43) 39 (61/51) 31 (64/56) 21 (64/66) 16 (65/70) 11 (67/73) 3 (67/81)
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 152 (0/3) 112 15/25)84 (31/37) 63 (41/48) 47 (48/57) 35 (51/66) 20 (57/75) 15 (59/78) 10 (59/83) 4 (60/88) 1 (61/90)
15
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
Very excited about the #MAVERICK study for our patients with SCLC.
Is PCI still needed in the modern day MRI brain surveillance era? #WCLC26 @IASLC https://t.co/TvIHH1m6DH
5.2K impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
DIOU
YAS SCHL
MARAD
4
-
45
A ANY -
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | SWOG S1827/MAVERICK
🧠 Ph3: MRI surveillance vs PCI + MRI after 1L therapy in LS/ES-SCLC (n=303)
📌 Primary endpoint amended from OS → cognitive failure-free survival (CFFS) due to accrual
📉 CFFS favored MRI alone: HR 0.60 (90% CI 0.46–0.78)
• 6-mo: 38% vs 17%
• 12-mo: 17% vs 6%
🧠 PCI ↓ brain mets: 12-mo 15% vs 30% (sHR 2.19)
📊 No PFS difference: HR 0.96
⏳ Preliminary OS similar: HR 0.9
3.5K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
06 min 31s
SWOG S1827/MAVERICK
MRI Brain Surveillance Alone Versus MRI Surveillance and Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation (PCI):
A Randomized Phase III Trial in Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Prophylactic cranial
MRI brain surveillance
irradiation (PCI)
Small-cell lung cancer
(Limited OR Extensive)
Stratify: 1. Limited VS Extensive stage
No prior brain metastases
R
2. Immunotherapy (y/n) 3. Performance Status (0-1 VS 2)
No brain metastases on
MRI after 1st line therapy
No PCI
MRI brain surveillance
Primary Endpoint:
Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
- MRI brain surveillance and cognitive testing at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months
(time to cognitive decline or death)
-
PCI was 25 Gy / 10 FX, hippocampal-avoidance (HA) PCI allowed at physician discretion
7
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
02 min 01s
Primary Endpoint - Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
100%
MRI surveillance alone resulted in improved CFFS
T
MRI brain surveillance
+
PCI
+ MRI brain surveillance
MRI alone, HR 0.60, 90% CI 0.46-0.78, p=0.0005
75%
N
Events
6-month Estimate(%)
90% CI
Patients randomized to MRI alone were significantly
MRI brain surveillance
113
91
37.8
(30.0-45.5)
% CFFS
more likely to be both alive and free from cognitive
50%
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
107
92
16.5
(10.7-23.4)
decline compared to those randomized to MRI+PCI
HR(90% CI): 0.60 (0.46-0.78)
1-sided p-value: 0.0005
25%
Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
1
0%
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
6 month % [90% CI]
12 month % [90% CI]
Months After Randomization
Number at risk (events / censor)
MRI alone
38% [30-46]
17% [12-24]
MRI brain surveillance 113 (0/0) 72 (33/8) 38 (66/9) 23 (80 10) 14 (86/13) 11 (88/14) 10 (88/15) 8 (90/15) 1 (91/21)
MRI + PCI
17% [11-23]
6% [3-11]
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 107 (0/0) 60 (35/12) 14 (80/13) 9 (85/13) 5 (89 / 13) 2 (91/14) 2 (91/14) 2 (91/14) NA
*Detailed analyses of cognitive function will be
presented at an upcoming meeting
12
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
00 min 45s
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Subgroup analyses of cognitive failure free survival (CFFS) by disease stage
Limited Stage
100%
Extensive Stage
100%
75%
75%
-
MRI brain surveillance
-
MRI brain surveillance
% CFFS
-
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
% CFFS
50%
-
50%
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
25%
25%
0%
0%
3
9
12
15
18
21
24
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
0
6
Months After Randomization
Number at risk (events 1 censor)
Months After Randomization
Number at risk (events / censor)
MRI brain surveillance 80 (0/0) 55 (21 / 4) 31(44/5) 19 (55/6) 12 (60/8) 11(61/8) 10 (61/9) 8 (63/9) 1 (64 / 15)
MRI brain surveillance 33 (0/0) 17 (12/4) 7(22/4) 4 (25/4) 2 (26/5)
NA
NA
NA
NA
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 78(0/0) 48(25/5) 12(60/6) 9 (63/6) 5(67/6) 2 (69 / 7) 2 (69 / 7) 2 (69 / 7) NA
MRI brain surveillance
29 (0/0) 12 (10/7) 2 (20/7)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HR 0.59 (90% CI, 0.43-0.79)
HR 0.65 (90% CI, 0.38-1.10)
6-month CFFS: 42.3% (MRI) vs 18.2% (MRI+PCI)
6-month CFFS: 25.7% (MRI) vs 10.6% (MRI+PCI)
14
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
00 min 11s
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall Survival
100%
Preliminary analyses at 128 events
suggest no significant difference in
N
Events
Median(months)
90% CI
MRI brain surveillance
151
67
29.8
(24.8-48.6)
overall survival (OS)
75%
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
152
61
31.4
(24.4-36.3)
HR(90% CI): 0.90 (0.67-1.20)
MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
% Survival
Upper bound of 90% CI of 1.2 for MRI
50%
alone is currently below the non-inferiority
margin of 1.25
25%
MRI brain surveillance
Final OS results will be analyzed after 190
+
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
events
0%
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
Number at risk (events / censor)
Months After Randomization
MRI brain surveillance 151 (0/1) 132 (12/7)101 (29/21)76 (44/31) 55 (53/43) 39 (61/51) 31 (64/56) 21 (64/66) 16 (65/70) 11 (67/73) 3 (67/81)
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 152 (0/3) 112 (15 25)84 (31/37) 63 (41/48) 47 (48/57) 35 (51/66) 20 (57/75) 15 (59/78) 10 (59/83) 4 (60/88) 1 (61/90)
15
SShankar Siva@_ShankarSiva
Great to kick off #WCLC2026 with the joint @IASLC - @ESTRO_RT forum “Reimagining #radiotherapy in Metastatic Lung Cancer” … many concepts now a clinical reality in routine practice - SABR, local consolidation, metastasis directed therapy, oligoprogression + more #lcsm #radonc https://t.co/sE45epy31i
3.5K impressions23 likes8 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
III
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
KALC
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
KALC
SEPTEMBER
SEPTEMBER 2026
JIRAPORN
SETAKORNNUKUL
DIVYA KHOSLA
WS10
WS10
12.30
Room 104 Grand
Room 104 Grand Baltroom,
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
IASLC
INTERN
Endorsed By
2026
KALC
ASSOCI
FOR THE
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
OF LUN
[Slide 2]
M
FOR THE STUDY OF LUNG ASSOCIATION CANCER
LUNG CANCER
THE STUDY TONAL
IASIC INTERNATIONAL
OF ASSOCIATION LUNG CANCER
ASSOCIATION
NOU
ASLC INTERNATIONAL FOR HE STUDY OF LUNG CANCE ASSOCIAT LUNG CANCER
UNA
TYNOU
.
NOTE
IASLC
FREE 9. I / I UNITED
GERARD
C
- O -
C
MUNOZ PABLO SCHUFFENEGGER
OF
ASIC Committee Member
FACULTY
PONTIFICIA CHILE UNIVERSIDAD
CATELICA of CHILE
FACULT
Authority
Invite
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
18 min 44s
The Primary in Stage IV Lung Cancer
>50% the site of first progression is
A.
the lung
C.
Significant symptomatic burden on
patients (E.g. Pain, cough,
hemoptysis, SOB, dysphagia)
B.
D.
Lung RT is a standard of care to
alleviate symptoms, but is not
used routinely in all patients
3
FLORENCE
GERARD WALLS
ATIE KEANE
IASLC
INTERNATIONAL
2026 World Conference
ASSOCIATION
on Lung Cancer
KALC
FOR THE STUDY
OF LUNG CANCER
15,2008 SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
NEW
[Slide 4]
I
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
19 min 00s
Why focus on the lung primary?
Evolutionary reservoir
Primary-tumour RT
Local morbidity
Bleeding
Haemoptysis
Airway obstruction
Atelectasis
Post-obstructive infection
Lung primary
Potential source of
further dissemination
Local invasion
Pain
Biological hypothesis
Mcl
hon et at. JTO 2026; Al Bakir et al. Nature 2023
3
NNonsparseOncologist@5_utr
MAVERICK: MRI surveillance +/- PCI for SCLC; SRS/WBRT if development of brain mets
Primary endpoint, OS with a whopping NI margin of 25% greater hazard of death ❗️ and OS results premature https://t.co/lpKoASZHq8
3.2K impressions21 likes2 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
00 min 05s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall Survival
100%
Preliminary analyses at 128 events
suggest no significant difference in
N
Events
Median(months)
90% CI
MRI brain surveillance
151
67
29.8
overall survival (OS)
(24.8-48.6)
75%
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
152
61
31.4
(24.4-36.3)
HR(90% CI):
0.90 (0.67-1.20)
MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
% Survival
Upper bound of 90% CI of 1.2 for MRI
50%
alone is currently below the non-inferiority
HH
-
margin of 1.25
25%
MRI brain surveillance
+
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
Final OS results will be analyzed after 190
events
0%
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
Number at risk (events / censor)
Months After Randomization
brain surveillance 151 (0/1) 132 (12/7)101 (29/21)76 (44/31) 55 (53/43) 39 (61/51) 31 (64/56) 21 (64/66) 16 (65/70) 11 (67/73) 3 (67/81)
ain surveillance 152 (0/3) 112 (15/25)84 (31/37) 63 (41/48) 47 (48/57) 35 (51/66) 20 (57/75) 15 (59/78) 10 (59/83) 4 (60/88) 1 (61/90)
15
Live from Seoul — who is leading the conversation
Conference Social Leaderboard
Also live in Seoul: OncLive’s Bridging the Gaps in Lung Cancer (#BTGLung2026) — the WCLC 2026 curtain-raiser, with faculty session coverage from Dr. Liu, Dr. Planchard, Dr. Felip and more.
Accounts ranked by the reach they are generating during the meeting, split by who they are. Finance and crypto accounts are excluded entirely.
594 accounts · 2,947,599 impressions · top 20 shown
1
LUNG CONNECT powered by COR2ED@lung_connect
Beamion LUNG-1, DESTINY-Lung04, SOHO-01
EGFR · Social Media & SciComm · SCLC
EGFR · Social Media & SciComm · SCLC
895.9Kimpressions
32engagements
7posts
2
Stephen V Liu, MD@stephenvliu
ADAURA, AEGEAN, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, Beamion LUNG-1 +15
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
246.2Kimpressions
1410engagements
73posts
3
Eric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
ADAURA, ADRIATIC, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, CROWN +7
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
116.4Kimpressions
594engagements
49posts
4
Hidehito HORINOUCHI@hhorinouchi
ADAURA, ARROS-1, BNT327 (pumitamig), DeLLphi-304, GFH375 (KRAS G12D) +6
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers
95.4Kimpressions
484engagements
45posts
5
gilberto lopes@glopesmd
ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04, FLAURA2, HARMONi-2 +10
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
61.8Kimpressions
539engagements
65posts
6
Drew Moghanaki@drewmoghanaki
MAVERICK, MDT-BRIDGE, PACIFIC
Immunotherapy · Radiation / SBRT · SCLC
Immunotherapy · Radiation / SBRT · SCLC
58.1Kimpressions
330engagements
27posts
7
MV Chandrakanth@chandrakanthmv
ADAURA, ADRIATIC, AEGEAN, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008 +19
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
55.1Kimpressions
580engagements
40posts
8
Masahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@m_torasawa
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DeLLphi-304, DeLLphi-308 +8
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
52.3Kimpressions
206engagements
14posts
9
Misty Dawn Shields@drshieldsmd
ADAURA, ADRIATIC, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04 +7
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
47Kimpressions
417engagements
29posts
10
Dr Amol Akhade@suyogcancer
ADAURA, ADRIATIC, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46 +10
ADCs · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR · Immunotherapy
ADCs · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR · Immunotherapy
46.5Kimpressions
333engagements
14posts
13
Dr. Estela Rodriguez@latinamd
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, BNT327 (pumitamig), DeLLphi-309 +13
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
41.6Kimpressions
579engagements
63posts
15
The ASCO Post@ascopost
ARROS-1, DeLLphi-308, DeLLphi-309, DESTINY-Lung04, HARMONi-2 +4
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
30.6Kimpressions
172engagements
15posts
17
Balazs Halmos@balazshalmosmd
ADAURA, ARROS-1, HARMONi-2, MAVERICK
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · Radiation / SBRT
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · Radiation / SBRT
27.4Kimpressions
204engagements
8posts
18
Jill Feldman@jillfeldman4
ADAURA, MAVERICK
EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
26Kimpressions
268engagements
14posts
19
Uğur Özkerim@uozkerim
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46 +7
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Immunotherapy
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Immunotherapy
23.4Kimpressions
124engagements
11posts
20
Mustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
ABBV-1480, ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, BNT324-01 +17
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
23.3Kimpressions
208engagements
11posts
21
Prof Tom John@tommyjohn00
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46 +5
ADCs · AI in Oncology · EGFR · Radiation / SBRT
ADCs · AI in Oncology · EGFR · Radiation / SBRT
23.3Kimpressions
190engagements
16posts
23
Oncology Brothers@oncbrothers
ADAURA, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, HARMONi, MAVERICK +1
ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR · Radiation / SBRT
ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR · Radiation / SBRT
21Kimpressions
47engagements
6posts
24
Diego A. Díaz-García@diegoadiazg
ABBV-1480, ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, BNT327 (pumitamig) +15
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
20.6Kimpressions
213engagements
18posts
25
Dr. Antonio Calles 🫁🚭@tony_calles
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, MAVERICK +4
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Immunotherapy
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Immunotherapy
19.4Kimpressions
175engagements
18posts
26
Dr Riyaz Shah@drriyazshah
ADAURA, AEGEAN, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, CheckMate-77T +14
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · KRAS
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · KRAS
18.8Kimpressions
172engagements
25posts
27
Tejas Patil@tejaspatilmd
ARROS-1, FLAURA2, HARMONi, HARMONi-2, HARMONi-6 +5
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
18.6Kimpressions
64engagements
15posts
28
Dr Rishabh Jain@drrishabhonco
ADAURA, DESTINY-Lung04, PAPILLON, REZILIENT3, TAISHAN-302
ADCs · EGFR · Immunotherapy · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
ADCs · EGFR · Immunotherapy · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
17.5Kimpressions
65engagements
5posts
29
Shankar Siva@_shankarsiva
STARLORD
Immunotherapy · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · Radiation / SBRT
Immunotherapy · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · Radiation / SBRT
17.1Kimpressions
186engagements
7posts
30
Laura Alder, MD@lauraaldermd
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DeLLphi-309, DESTINY-Lung04 +6
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
16.9Kimpressions
210engagements
14posts
31
Miguel Gonzalez Velez, MD@mgonzalezvelmd
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, CROWN, DeLLphi-309 +6
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
16.1Kimpressions
98engagements
12posts
32
Tom Newsom-Davis@tnewsomdavis
ADAURA, AEGEAN, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, CheckMate-77T +12
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
15.7Kimpressions
96engagements
20posts
33
Noemi Reguart@nreguart
ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04, Iza-Bren (OA10.01), PAPILLON, REZILIENT3 +2
ADCs · EGFR · SCLC
ADCs · EGFR · SCLC
13.8Kimpressions
165engagements
9posts
34
Kenn Samala@ksamalamd
ABBV-1480, ADAURA, ADRIATIC, AEGEAN, ARROS-1 +18
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
13.7Kimpressions
139engagements
71posts
35
Jennifer A. Marks, MD@jennifermarksmd
ADAURA, ADRIATIC, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04 +7
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
12.9Kimpressions
96engagements
22posts
37
Urs Weber MD@urswebermd
ADAURA, AEGEAN, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, CheckMate-77T +10
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
12.3Kimpressions
137engagements
18posts
38
Belmina Rose@bmcneely08
HARMONi, HARMONi-2
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
12.3Kimpressions
98engagements
4posts
39
Herbert Loong, MBBS, FASCO@herbloong
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
ADCs · Social Media & SciComm
ADCs · Social Media & SciComm
12Kimpressions
94engagements
10posts
41
Giannis Mountzios@g_mountzios
BNT324-01, BNT327 (pumitamig), EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, HARMONi, HARMONi-2 +6
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Immunotherapy
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Immunotherapy
11.7Kimpressions
122engagements
6posts
44
David Gandara@drgandara
ADAURA, MAVERICK
EGFR · KRAS · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · Radiation / SBRT
EGFR · KRAS · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · Radiation / SBRT
11.2Kimpressions
245engagements
3posts
45
Dr. Nagla Abdel Karim@naglaakarimmd
LAURA, MAVERICK
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · SCLC · Screening & Early Detection
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · SCLC · Screening & Early Detection
11.1Kimpressions
138engagements
13posts
46
Yakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
ARTEMIS-008, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, HARMONi-2, MAVERICK, TAISHAN-302
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Radiation / SBRT · SCLC
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Radiation / SBRT · SCLC
10.9Kimpressions
44engagements
2posts
48
Roberto Borea, MD@robertoboreamd
ARTEMIS-008, EMPOWER-Lung 1, MAVERICK, TAISHAN-302
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
10.5Kimpressions
205engagements
17posts
50
Rami Manochakian MD, FASCO@rmanochakian
ADAURA, MAVERICK, TAISHAN-302
ADCs · EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · Radiation / SBRT
ADCs · EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · Radiation / SBRT
9.3Kimpressions
33engagements
4posts
53
Aadel Chaudhuri, MD PhD@aadel_chaudhuri
MAVERICK
Radiation / SBRT · SCLC
Radiation / SBRT · SCLC
9.1Kimpressions
63engagements
4posts
55
Manuel Dómine, MD, PhD@manueldomine
ADAURA, PACIFIC, REZILIENT3
EGFR · Immunotherapy · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · SCLC
EGFR · Immunotherapy · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · SCLC
8.6Kimpressions
80engagements
13posts
56
Elvina Almuradova@dr_elvinaa
ADAURA, ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04, HARMONi-2, MAVERICK +6
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
8.2Kimpressions
85engagements
10posts
59
d.planchard@dplanchard
ADAURA, Beamion LUNG-1
ADCs · EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
ADCs · EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
7.3Kimpressions
52engagements
5posts
60
OsmanKostekMD@oncologymarward
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, BNT324-01, BNT327 (pumitamig) +7
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
7.2Kimpressions
44engagements
12posts
61
Ana I. Velázquez Mañana, MD, MSc, FASCO@anavmanana
Social Media & SciComm
6.5Kimpressions
77engagements
6posts
64
ilyas sahin, MD@ilyassahinmd
ARTEMIS-008, HARMONi-2, MAVERICK, TAISHAN-302
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · SCLC
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · SCLC
5.8Kimpressions
71engagements
2posts
66
Christian Rolfo@christianrolfo
EMPOWER-Lung 1
ctDNA & Biomarkers · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
ctDNA & Biomarkers · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
5.5Kimpressions
117engagements
4posts
67
Jose Fernando Moura, PhD@fernandoonco
ADAURA, ADRIATIC, ARROS-1, DeLLphi-309, DESTINY-Lung04 +7
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
5.4Kimpressions
34engagements
13posts
70
Joshua Reuss@joshua_reuss
ADAURA, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, HARMONi-6, OptiTROP-Lung05 +3
ADCs · EGFR
ADCs · EGFR
5.1Kimpressions
47engagements
7posts
71
Nugget Research@nuggetresearch
HARMONi, HARMONi-2, HARMONi-6, HARMONi-7
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR · SCLC
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR · SCLC
4.9Kimpressions
9engagements
9posts
73
Annie Wong 黃毅敏@anmwongnz
MAVERICK, PACIFIC
AI in Oncology · Immunotherapy · Radiation / SBRT · SCLC
AI in Oncology · Immunotherapy · Radiation / SBRT · SCLC
4.6Kimpressions
55engagements
9posts
80
Hari B. Keshava@hari_keshava
ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR · Screening & Early Detection
4.1Kimpressions
26engagements
6posts
82
Dan Morgenstern, MD, MSc@dan_morgen
AI in Oncology · EGFR · Health Equity & Access
4Kimpressions
49engagements
5posts
84
Young Kwang Chae, MD, MPH, MBA@youngkwangchae
ARTEMIS-008, MAVERICK, TAISHAN-302
ADCs · Radiation / SBRT · Social Media & SciComm · SCLC
ADCs · Radiation / SBRT · Social Media & SciComm · SCLC
4Kimpressions
24engagements
4posts
85
Yüksel Ürün@dryukselurun
HARMONi, HARMONi-2
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
3.9Kimpressions
17engagements
1posts
88
Aya Mohamed | MSc, MD 🎗@dr_oncologista
OptiTROP-Lung05, sac-TMT
ADCs · Immunotherapy
ADCs · Immunotherapy
3.8Kimpressions
26engagements
1posts
90
Abdulaziz AlJassim@drz_84
ADAURA, ARTEMIS-008, TAISHAN-302
ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · SCLC
ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · SCLC
3.7Kimpressions
9engagements
5posts
94
Michael@tradermichael_1
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Immunotherapy
3.5Kimpressions
19engagements
4posts
17 accounts · 100,093 impressions · top 20 shown
1
IASLC@iaslc
ARTEMIS-008, MAVERICK, PAPILLON
ADCs · EGFR · Health Equity & Access · Social Media & SciComm
ADCs · EGFR · Health Equity & Access · Social Media & SciComm
44Kimpressions
357engagements
41posts
2
Lung Cancer Europe@lungcancereu
IMpower030, LONESTAR, MAVERICK, TAISHAN-302
ADCs · AI in Oncology · Immunotherapy · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
ADCs · AI in Oncology · Immunotherapy · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
13.8Kimpressions
111engagements
10posts
3
Grupo Español de Cáncer de Pulmón@gecp_org
PACIFIC
ctDNA & Biomarkers · Immunotherapy · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · SCLC
ctDNA & Biomarkers · Immunotherapy · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · SCLC
13.8Kimpressions
149engagements
44posts
4
LUNGevity Foundation@lungevity
ARTEMIS-008, TAISHAN-302
ADCs · SCLC · Screening & Early Detection
ADCs · SCLC · Screening & Early Detection
7.4Kimpressions
77engagements
15posts
5
International Lung Cancer Summit@lungsummit
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, BNT327 (pumitamig), DeLLphi-308 +11
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
5.3Kimpressions
44engagements
12posts
6
Lung Cancer Research Foundation@lcrf_org
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46 +5
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR
5.3Kimpressions
27engagements
11posts
9
Vivek Tomar #RiseToSurviveCancer@r2survivecancer
Health Equity & Access
1.4Kimpressions
16engagements
6posts
12
EGFR Positive Lung Cancer UK@egfruk
ADAURA, PAPILLON, REZILIENT3
EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
1.1Kimpressions
7engagements
3posts
41 accounts · 610,947 impressions · top 20 shown
1
MedJ@medj0401
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46 +3
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
226.5Kimpressions
33engagements
16posts
2
OncLive.com@onclive
ADAURA, ADRIATIC, ARROS-1, BNT327 (pumitamig), DeLLphi-308 +14
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
71.2Kimpressions
250engagements
52posts
3
Jacob Plieth@jacobplieth
ARROS-1, BNT327 (pumitamig), HARMONi-2, HARMONi-7, IMpower030 +3
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · KRAS · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · KRAS · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
56.3Kimpressions
95engagements
13posts
4
がんナビ通信@cancer_navi
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR · Radiation / SBRT
41.9Kimpressions
250engagements
16posts
5
OncoAlert@oncoalert
ADAURA, ADRIATIC, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, BNT327 (pumitamig) +15
ADCs · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR · Immunotherapy
ADCs · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR · Immunotherapy
29.9Kimpressions
274engagements
12posts
7
Minhua Chu@chuminhua432
ABBV-1480, ARTEMIS-008, BNT324-01, BNT327 (pumitamig), HARMONi-2 +3
ADCs · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · ctDNA & Biomarkers · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
16.3Kimpressions
45engagements
9posts
8
VJ Oncology@vjoncology
Iza-Bren (OA10.01), PAPILLON, REZILIENT3
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
ADCs · AI in Oncology · ctDNA & Biomarkers · EGFR
14.4Kimpressions
28engagements
29posts
9
Lung Cancers Today@lung_cancers
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DeLLphi-309, DESTINY-Lung04 +6
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
14Kimpressions
155engagements
46posts
10
OncoDaily@oncodaily
ADAURA, ARROS-1, BNT327 (pumitamig), DESTINY-Lung04, HARMONi-2 +3
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
12.4Kimpressions
95engagements
48posts
13
Targeted Oncology@targetedonc
ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, MAVERICK +2
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Immunotherapy
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Immunotherapy
8Kimpressions
46engagements
12posts
14
Medthority@medthority
ARTEMIS-008, DeLLphi-308, DeLLphi-309, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, MAVERICK +1
ADCs · Immunotherapy · Radiation / SBRT · Social Media & SciComm
ADCs · Immunotherapy · Radiation / SBRT · Social Media & SciComm
7.6Kimpressions
8engagements
33posts
16
OncoDaily Lung@oncodailylung
DESTINY-Lung04, HARMONi-2, IMpower133, Iza-Bren (OA10.01), OptiTROP-Lung05 +3
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR · Immunotherapy
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR · Immunotherapy
7.1Kimpressions
115engagements
23posts
17
MedPage Today@medpagetoday
HARMONi-2, MAVERICK
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Immunotherapy
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Immunotherapy
6.5Kimpressions
14engagements
9posts
20
CancerNetwork®@cancernetwrk
ADAURA, ARTEMIS-008, DESTINY-Lung04, HARMONi-2, MAVERICK +3
EGFR · Immunotherapy · SCLC
EGFR · Immunotherapy · SCLC
4Kimpressions
12engagements
7posts
22
BioWorld@bioworld
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · SCLC
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · SCLC
3.5Kimpressions
10engagements
4posts
23
CancerTherapyAdvisor@cancertheradvsr
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, BNT327 (pumitamig), DESTINY-Lung04 +5
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Immunotherapy
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Immunotherapy
3.4Kimpressions
1engagements
15posts
24
OncUpdates@oncupdates
ADAURA, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, HARMONi, MAVERICK +1
Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · Radiation / SBRT · Social Media & SciComm · SCLC
Perioperative / Neoadjuvant · Radiation / SBRT · Social Media & SciComm · SCLC
2.9Kimpressions
5engagements
3posts
25
OncoNexus@onco_nexus
ADAURA, ARROS-1, ARTEMIS-008, Beamion LUNG-1, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46 +4
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Immunotherapy
ADCs · ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Immunotherapy
2.7Kimpressions
18engagements
18posts
27
eChinaHealth@echinahealth
ADAURA, ARROS-1, BNT324-01, BNT327 (pumitamig), DESTINY-Lung04 +3
EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
2.2Kimpressions
15engagements
15posts
29
The Pharma Letter@thepharmaletter
ARROS-1, HARMONi-2
ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Immunotherapy · SCLC
ALK / ROS1 · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · Immunotherapy · SCLC
1.3Kimpressions
8engagements
3posts
32
Business-News-Today.com@bntbriefing
HARMONi-7
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · SCLC
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · SCLC
694impressions
0engagements
7posts
33
Pharma Jonpi . / 1.1 / .@pharma_jonpi
ARTEMIS-008, BNT324-01, BNT327 (pumitamig), DeLLphi-309, TAISHAN-302
SCLC
SCLC
599impressions
0engagements
3posts
34
Bagholder Unlimited@but_the_comps
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, HARMONi-2
ADCs
ADCs
363impressions
1engagements
2posts
36
Oncology Central@oncologycentral
ADAURA, ARROS-1
ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
ALK / ROS1 · EGFR · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
234impressions
0engagements
2posts
18 accounts · 75,386 impressions · top 20 shown
2
Summit Therapeutics@smmt_tx
HARMONi, HARMONi-2
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF
22.3Kimpressions
32engagements
4posts
8
Lilly Oncology Medical@lillyoncmed
LIBRETTO-432
Immunotherapy · KRAS · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
Immunotherapy · KRAS · Perioperative / Neoadjuvant
1.3Kimpressions
3engagements
3posts
14
Prognyx@prognyx
HARMONi-2, REZILIENT3
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
ADCs · Bispecifics / PD-1xVEGF · EGFR
86impressions
3engagements
5posts
Readouts & reactions
Trials — Live from WCLC 2026
The trials being presented and discussed during the meeting, ranked by conference-week reach. Click a trial to read the posts behind it.
1DESTINY-Lung04View full trial page →963.6K impressions45.5K primary · 918.2K preview392 engagements73 posts · 48 voices▾
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
T-DXd trying to catch up in the frontline setting with zongertinib and sevabertinib
Results from #DESTINYLung04….
#WCLC26 https://t.co/wb9BkFV7dg
8.7K impressions17 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @JuliaRotow at #WCLC26 with primary results from DESTINY-Lung04: first-line trastuzumab deruxtecan vs platinum + pemetrexed + pembro in advanced HER2 mutant NSCLC. Primary endpoint of PFS favors T-DXd at 14.3 vs 8.3m, HR 0.63 and RR 70% vs 44.5%, DOR 13.7 vs 9.7m, PFS2 22.7 vs 17.3m.
5.1K impressions34 likes17 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
DESTINY-Lung04 trial design
A randomized, open-label, multicenter, Phase 3 trial (NCT05048797)
Patients
Unresectable locally advanced or
Endpoints
T-DXd*
metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC
n=227
Primary
Treatment naïve for advanced disease
PFS (BICR)
HER2 exon 19 or 20 mutation by
R
Secondary
central/local test
1:1
OSI
ECOG PS 0 or 1
N=454
Pembro+ +
platinum chemo +
ORR and DOR (BICR)
Asymptomatic/stable/treated brain
pemetrexed$
PFS2 (investigator)
metastases permitted
n=227
Safety and tolerability
≥1 measurable lesion per RECIST 1.1
Stratification factors
Data cutoff for final PFS analysis / first OS interim analysis: June 9, 2026
Presence/history of brain metastases (yes VS no)
- Formal hypothesis testing for OS will be performed at second interim and final analyses only
Smoking history status (ever VS never)
Median (range) duration of follow up: 21.6 months (0.4-51.1) with T-DXd vs
20.4 months (0.1-52.0) with pembro + chemo
PFS, ORR, and DOR all per RECIST 1.1. Participants with objective radiological CNS disease progression per RECIST 1.1 could continue with their assigned trial treatment if, in the investigator's opinion, they continued to receive clinical
benefit and were without any discontinuation criteria. Treatment crossover was not permitted
*5.4 mg/kg IV Q3W until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria; +200 mg IV Q3W until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria; investigator choice of cisplatin
(75 mg/m²) or carboplatin (AUC 5) IV Q3W for up to four cycles; $500 mg/m² IV Q3W until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria; for the final PFS analysis, -306 events provided 90% power to detect
a hazard ratio of 0.69 with a two-sided significance level of 5%; the first OS interim analysis was conducted at the time of final PFS analysis; no formal hypothesis testing was planned
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
PFS (BICR): primary endpoint
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
1.0
(n=227)
(n=227)
Median PFS, months
14.3
8.3
0.8
(95% CI)
(12.4, 16.5)
(7.0, 9.9)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)
0.63 (0.50, 0.79)
P-value
<0.0001
Probability of PFS
0.6
A 6 months
0.4
0.2
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
T-DXd
227
203
178
141
104
69
58
37
27
19
15
13
6
4
1
0
0
Pembro + chemo
227
180
123
86
50
33
25
18
17
13
10
8
5
3
2
2
0
T-DXd monotherapy demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful
PFS improvement vs standard-of-care pembro + doublet chemo
PFS per RECIST 1.1; at data cutoff, there were 307 BICR-assessed PFS events
6
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
Secondary efficacy endpoints
ORR
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
100
(n=227)
(n=227)
90
Odds ratio (95% CI): 2.93 (2.00, 4.34)
Best overall response,*¹ n (%)
80
70
Complete response
4 (1.8)
4 (1.8)
ORR* (%)
60
70.0%
Partial response
155 (68.3)
97 (42.7)
(95% CI 63.6, 75.9)
50
Stable disease
61 (26.9)
98 (43.2)
40
44.5%
30
Progressive disease
4 (1.8)
15 (6.6)
(95% CI 37.9, 51.2)
20
Non-evaluable
3 (1.3)
13 (5.7)
10
n=159/227
Median DOR,* months (95% CI)
13.4 (10.4, 17.2)
9.7 (7.0, 11.1)
n=101/227
0
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
Median PFS2,$ months (95% CI)
22.7 (20.3, 26.3)
17.3 (15.6, 21.8)
CR
PR
CR
PR
Hazard ratio (95% CI)
0.80 (0.62, 1.02)
*By BICR per RECIST 1.1; includes unconfirmed responses; *for patients who died with no evaluable RECIST assessments, best overall response was assigned as either progressive disease (if the death occurred <13 weeks after
randomization) or non-evaluable (if the death occurred >13 weeks after randomization); PFS2 was determined by investigator per RECIST 1.1 according to local standard clinical practice as the time from randomization to second
progression (earliest progression event following first subsequent therapy) or death
8
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
#WCLC26 In DESTINY-Lung04, no OS signal yet. Toxicities led to discontinuation in 16% of both arms. Biggest concern here is the ILD at 20.8% - while most were grade 1/2 and resolved, these are still high rates. This will impact delivery and possibly subsequent therapies... https://t.co/ZUQSd7yaFX
4K impressions20 likes7 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
Overall survival
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
1.0
(n=227)
(n=227)
OS events, n (%)
115 (50.7)
98 (43.2)
0.8
Median OS, months
29.3
33.1
(95% CI)
(26.2, 33.4)
(27.7, 40.7)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)
1.15 (0.88, 1.52)
Probability of OS
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
T-DXd
227
222
214
201
176
157
136
117
85
79
63
58
40
31
22
8
3
1
0
Pembro + chemo
227
213
198
184
164
142
123
110
85
79
69
62
43
31
20
14
5
2
0
No OS benefit was observed with T-DXd; subsequent treatments may have impacted results
At data cutoff, overall data maturity for os was 46.9% Median follow up was 21.6 months (range 0.4-51.1) in the T-DXd arm and 20.4 months (range 0.1-52.0) in the pembro + chemo arm
*This administrative OS interim analysis was performed with a two-sided alpha-spend of 0.0001. Formal hypothesis testing will be performed at the second interim analysis and final analysis
9
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
Overall safety summary (investigator assessed)
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
(n=226)
(n=220)
Median (range) treatment duration
12.3 (0.7-44.8)
7.1 (0.7-49.1)
Drug-related AEs, n (%)
Any grade
204 (90.3)
197 (89.5)
Grade ≥3
77 (34.1)
74 (33.6)
Serious
35 (15.5)
22 (10.0)
Associated with any drug discontinuation
36 (15.9)
35 (15.9)
Associated with dose reduction
40 (17.7)
35 (15.9)
Associated with death*
4 (1.8)
1 (0.5)
"Drug-related AEs associated with death were pneumonitis (n=4) in the T-DXd arm and sepsis (n=1) in the pembro chemo arm
12
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
Most common (≥15%)* drug-related AEs (investigator assessed)
T-DXd (n=226)
Pembro + chemo (n=220)
Nausea
50.0
1.8
0.9
38.2
Fatigue¹
38.5
4.4
3.2
34.1
Neutropenia
35.0
11.1
14.1
35.0
Alopecia
32.7
0.9
6.8
Decreased appetite
29.6
0.4
0.5
21.8
Anemia
27.9
2.7
11.4
44.1
Constipation
24,8
17.3
Diarrhea
23.5
2.2
1.4
12.7
Transaminases increased
23.0
1.8
3.2
29.1
Leukopeniall
19.5
3.5
5.9
22.7
Vomiting
19.0
1.3
0.9
14.1
Thrombocytopenia**
18.1
4.4
5.5
21.4
Any grade
Stomatitist
15.0
7.7
Grade ≥3
Rash
5.8
0.4
0.9
15.5
60
40
20
0
20
40
60
Patients experiencing drug-related AEs (%)
*In either arm; fatigue (grouped term): fatigue, asthenia, malaise, and lethargy; neutropenia (grouped term): neutropenia and neutrophil count decreased; $anemia (grouped term): anemia, hemoglobin decreased, hematocrit decreased,
and red blood cell count decreased; transaminases increased (grouped term): transaminases increased, aspartate aminotransferase increased, alanine aminotransferase increased, gamma-glutamyltransferase increased, liver function
test abnormal, hepatic function abnormal, hypertransaminasemia, and liver function test increased; leukopenia (grouped term): leukopenia and white blood cell count decreased; **thrombocytopenia (grouped term): platelet count
decreased and thrombocytopenia; Tistomatitis (grouped term): aphthous ulcer, mouth ulceration, oral mucosa erosion, oral mucosal blistering, oral mucosal eruption, and stomatitis; #rash (grouped term): rash, rash macular, rash
maculo-papular, rash papular, rash pruritic, and rash pustular
13
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
Adverse events of special interest
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
In the T-DXd arm:
n (%)
(n=226)
(n=220)
Any grade
47 (20.8)
5 (2.3)
Most cases of ILD were Grade 1/2 (78.7%)
Grade 1
7 (3.1)
1 (0.5)
and resolved (66.0%)
Adjudicated
Grade 2
30 (13.3)
4 (1.8)
16 of the 30 Grade 2 adjudicated ILD events
drug-related
ILD/pneumonitis*
Grade 3
5 (2.2)+
0
were upgraded from Grade 1 (per investigator)
Grade 4
1 (0.4)
0
because of use of steroids
Grade 5
4 (1.8)*
0
Delayed initiation and/or suboptimal steroid
Any grade
7 (3.1)
1 (0.5)
dosing was observed in 90% of all Grade ≥3
Grade 1
0
1 (0.5)
ILD cases, including all four Grade 5 cases
Left ventricular
Grade 2
4 (1.8)
0
Among patients with Grade ≤3 ILD who
dysfunction$
Grade 3
3 (1.3)
0
discontinued T-DXd, 64.1% received
Grade 4
0
0
subsequent therapy, consistent with the
Grade 5
0
0
overall T-DXd arm (71.5%)
ILD remains an important risk of T-DXd and should be monitored/managed appropriately
*An independent adjudication committee reviewed all potential cases of ILD/pneumonitis; tone patient had a Grade 3 ILD event after the 47-day safety follow-up period; Fall counts in this table reflect the locked clinical database (safety
analysis set). One additional fatal event (preferred term: respiratory failure) occurred in the T-DXd arm and was subsequently adjudicated as drug-related Grade 5 ILD; sleft ventricular ejection fraction decreased; n=25/39 patients with
Grade <3 ILD who discontinued T-DXd received subsequent therapy / n=133/186 patients who discontinued T-DXd received subsequent therapy
14
TThe ASCO Post@ASCOPost
In phase 3️⃣ DESTINY-Lung04, first-line trastuzumab deruxtecan achieved a 70% response rate in advanced HER2-mutant #NSCLC vs 44.5% with pembrolizumab + chemotherapy.
🗣️Presented by @JuliaRotow of @DanaFarber at #WCLC26
Explore the findings ➡️ https://t.co/0Xh3uHavmm https://t.co/Q7poJr2jJw
2.5K impressions18 likes7 reposts2026-09-21
[Slide 1]
OF
DDr Rishabh Jain@DrRishabhOnco
DESTINY-Lung04: impressive PFS with first-line T-DXd, but the OS curve tells a very different story.
T-DXd vs pembrolizumab + platinum/pemetrexed:
• mPFS: 14.3 vs 8.3 months
• HR 0.63 | P<0.0001
• 37% lower risk of progression/death
But OS did not favor T-DXd:
• mOS: 29.3 vs 33.1 months
• HR 1.15 (95% CI 0.88–1.52)
• OS remains immature
Clinical verdict: A clear first-line PFS win in HER2-
2.4K impressions4 likes1 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
DESTINY-Lung04 trial design
A randomized, open-label, multicenter, Phase 3 trial (NCT05048797)
Patients
Unresectable locally advanced or
Endpoints
T-DXd*
metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC
n=227
Primary
Treatment naïve for advanced disease
PFS (BICR)
HER2 exon 19 or 20 mutation by
R
Secondary
central/local test
1:1
OSI
ECOG PS 0 or 1
N=454
Pembrot +
platinum chemo +
ORR and DOR (BICR)
Asymptomatic/stable/treated brain
pemetrexed5
PFS2 (investigator)
metastases permitted
n=227
Safety and tolerability
≥1 measurable lesion per RECIST 1.1
Stratification factors
Data cutoff for final PFS analysis / first OS interim analysis: June 9, 2026
Presence/history of brain metastases (yes VS no)
- Formal hypothesis testing for OS will be performed at second interim and final analyses only
Smoking history status (ever VS never)
Median (range) duration of follow up: 21.6 months (0.4-51.1) with T-DXd VS
20.4 months (0.1-52.0) with pembro + chemo
PFS, ORR, and DOR all per RECIST 1.1. Participants with objective radiological CNS disease progression per RECIST 1.1 could continue with their assigned trial treatment if, in the investigator's opinion, they continued to receive clinical
benefit and were without any discontinuation criteria. Treatment crossover was not permitted
*5.4 mg/kg IV Q3W until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria, 1200 mg IV Q3W until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria; investigator choice of cisplatin
(75 mg/m2) or carboplatin (AUC 5) IV Q3W for up to four cycles; $500 mg/m2 IV Q3W until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria; for the final PFS analysis, -306 events provided 90% power to detect
a hazard ratio of 0.69 with a two-sided significance level of 5%; the first OS interim analysis was conducted at the time of final PFS analysis; no formal hypothesis testing was planned
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
PFS (BICR): primary endpoint
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
1.0
(n=227)
(n=227)
Median PFS, months
14.3
8.3
0.8
(95% CI)
(12.4, 16.5)
(7.0, 9.9)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)
0.63 (0.50, 0.79)
P-value
<0.0001
Probability of PFS
0.6
A 6 months
#
0.4
0.2
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
T-DXd
227
203
178
141
104
69
58
37
27
19
15
13
6
4
1
0
0
Pembro + chemo
227
180
123
86
50
33
25
18
17
13
10
8
5
3
2
2
0
T-DXd monotherapy demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful
PFS improvement vs standard-of-care pembro + doublet chemo
PFS per RECIST 1.1; at data cutoff, there were 307 BICR-assessed PFS events
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
Overall survival*
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
1.0
(n=227)
(n=227)
OS events, n (%)
115 (50.7)
98 (43.2)
0.8
Median os, months
29.3
33.1
(95% CI)
(26.2, 33.4)
(27.7, 40.7)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)
1.15 (0.88, 1.52)
Probability of OS
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
T-DXd
227
222
214
201
176
157
136
117
85
79
63
58
40
31
22
8
3
1
0
Pembro + chemo
227
213
198
184
164
142
123
110
85
79
69
62
43
31
20
14
5
2
0
No OS benefit was observed with T-DXd; subsequent treatments may have impacted results
At data cutoff, overall data maturity for OS was 46.9% Median follow up was 21.6 months (range 0 4-51.1) in the T-DXd arm and 20 4 months (range 0 1-52.0) in the pembro + chemo arm
"This administrative OS interim analysis was performed with a two-sided alpha-spend of 0.0001 Formal hypothesis testing will be performed at the second interim analysis and final analysis
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | DESTINY-Lung04
🧬 Ph3: 1L T-DXd vs pembrolizumab + chemo in advanced HER2m NSCLC (n=454; ~94% HER2 exon20)
📉 PFS: 14.3 vs 8.3 mo; HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.50–0.79; p<0.0001)
→ ~6-month improvement
🎯 ORR: 70.0% vs 44.5%
⏳ DoR: 13.4 vs 9.7 mo
🧠 Benefit maintained in patients with brain mets: PFS HR 0.62
📊 Interim OS showed no benefit:
• 29.3 vs 33.1 mo
• HR 1.15 (95% CI 0.88–1.52)
⚠️ Inte
2K impressions5 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
DESTINY-Lung04 trial design
A randomized, open-label, multicenter, Phase 3 trial (NCT05048797)
Patients
Unresectable locally advanced or
Endpoints
metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC
T-DXd*
Treatment naïve for advanced disease
n=227
Primary
PFS (BICR)
HER2 exon 19 or 20 mutation by
R
central/local test
1:1
Secondary
ECOG PS 0 or 1
OSI
N=454
Pembrot
+
Asymptomatic/stable/treated brain
platinum chemot +
ORR and DOR (BICR)
metastases permitted
pemetrexeds
PFS2 (investigator)
n=227
Safety and tolerability
≥1 measurable lesion per RECIST 1.1
Stratification factors
Data cutoff for final PFS analysis / first OS interim analysis: June 9, 2026
Presence/history of brain metastases (yes VS no)
- Formal hypothesis testing for OS will be performed at second interim and final analyses only
Smoking history status (ever VS never)
Median (range) duration of follow up: 21.6 months (0.4-51.1) with T-DXd VS
20.4 months (0.1-52.0) with pembro + chemo
PFS, ORR, and DOR all per RECIST 1.1. Participants with objective radiological CNS disease progression per RECIST 1.1 could continue with their assigned trial treatment if, in the investigator's opinion, they continued to receive clinical
benefit and were without any discontinuation criteria. Treatment crossover was not permitted
*5.4 mg/kg IV Q3W until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria; 1200 mg IV Q3W until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria, investigator choice of cisplatin
(75 mg/m²) or carboplatin (AUC 5) IV Q3W for up to four cycles; $500 mg/m2 IV Q3W until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria; for the final PFS analysis, -306 events provided 90% power to detect
a hazard ratio of 0.69 with a two-sided significance level of 5%; The first OS interim analysis was conducted at the time of final PFS analysis; no formal hypothesis testing was planned
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
Demographics and baseline characteristics
T-DXd
Pembro +
(n=227)
T-DXd
chemo (n=227)
Pembro
+
(n=227)
chemo (n=227)
Median age, years (range)
62 (26-85)
62 (31-85)
Liver metastases, n (%)
45 (19.8)
31 (13.7)
Age group, n (%)
<65 years
123 (54.2)
133 (58.6)
Brain metastases, n (%)*
52 (22.9)
55 (24.2)
â65 years
104 (45.8)
94 (41.4)
Prior radiotherapy
83 (36.6)
73 (32.2)
Prior therapy for
Female sex, n (%)
Cytotoxic chemo
34 (15.0)
133 (58.6)
28 (12.3)
131 (57.7)
early-stage disease, n (%)
Immunotherapy
5 (2.2)
2 (0.9)
Asia
105 (46.3)
120 (52.9)
Targeted therapy
1 (0.4)
3 (1.3)
Europe
87 (38.3)
69 (30.4)
Exon 20
Region, n (%)
214 (94.3)
HER2 mutation, n (%)+
211 (93.0)
North America
26 (11.5)
30 (13.2)
Exon 19
10 (4.4)
15 (6.6)
Rest of World
9 (4.0)
<1%
8 (3.5)
95 (41.9)
81 (35.7)
1-49%
0
34 (15.0)
107 (47.1)
108 (47.6)
PD-L1 status, n (%)*
38 (16.7)
≥50%
11 (4.8)
8 (3.5)
ECOG PS, n (%)
1
120 (52.9)
118 (52.0)
Missing$
87 (38.3)
100 (44.1)
Missing
-
1 (0.4)
Recurrence/relapse
41 (18.1)
42 (18.5)
Ever
86 (37.9)
86 (37.9)
Disease status, n (%)
De novo metastatic
172 (75.8)
177 (78.0)
Smoking status, n (%)
Never
Unresectable,
141 (62.1)
141 (62.1)
locally advanced
14 (6.2)
8 (3.5)
*All patients with brain metastases at baseline had received prior local therapy; Tper local or central test. Three patients in the T-DXd arm and one patient in the pembro chemo arm had NSCLC with a positive HER2 activating mutation
that was not exon 19 or 20; +per central test; ⁵prospective testing was not mandated; central retrospective testing was completed when tissue was available
5
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
PFS (BICR): primary endpoint
1.0
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
(n=227)
(n=227)
Median PFS, months
14.3
8.3
0.8
(95% CI)
(12.4, 16.5)
(7.0,9.9)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)
0.63 (0.50, 0.79)
Probability of PFS
P-value
<0.0001
0.6
A 6 months
0.4
0.2
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
T-DXd
227
203
178
141
104
69
58
37
27
19
15
13
6
4
1
0
0
Pembro + chemo
227
180
123
86
50
33
25
18
17
13
10
8
5
3
2
2
0
T-DXd monotherapy demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful
PFS improvement VS standard-of-care pembro + doublet chemo
PFS per RECIST 1.1; at data, cutoff, there were 307 BICR-assessed PFS events
6
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DESTINY-Lung04
Overall survival
1.0
T-DXd
Pembro + chemo
(n=227)
(n=227)
OS events, n (%)
115 (50.7)
98 (43.2)
0.8
Median os, months
29.3
33.1
(95% CI)
(26.2, 33.4)
(27.7, 40.7)
Probability of OS
Hazard ratio (95% CI)
0.6
1.15 (0.88, 1.52)
0.4
0.2
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
T-DXd
227
222
214
201
176
157
136
117
85
79
63
58
40
31
22
8
3
1
0
Pembro + chemo
227
213
198
184
164
142
123
110
85
79
69
62
43
31
20
14
5
2
0
No OS benefit was observed with T-DXd; subsequent treatments may have impacted results
At data cutoff, overall data maturity for os was 46.9%. Median follow up was 21.6 months (range 0.4-51.1) in the T-DXd arm and 20.4 months (range 0.1-52.0) in the pembro chemo arm
"This administrative OS interim analysis was performed with a two-sided alpha-spend of 0.0001. Formal hypothesis testing will be performed at the second Interim analysis and final analysis
9
LLUNG CONNECT powered by COR2ED@lung_connect
Update from WCLC 2026: The latest in HER2-mutant NSCLC
>> From thoracic oncologist Dr @JSabari
What do DESTINY-Lung04, and new data from SOHO-01 & Beamion LUNG-1 mean for HER2-mutant NSCLC?
📺Watch to find out
Endorsed by @WarOnCancer, @Exon20Group &
@BiomarkerCo
Supported by an Independent Educational Grant from Bayer. For HCPs only.
894.4K impressions15 likes2 reposts2026-09-17
OOncology Brothers@OncBrothers
Highlights from #WCLC26 #CommunityOncology:
NSCLC
1. #ADAURA Update Adj mEGFR
2. #PAPILLON 1L EGFR Ex20
3. #DESTINYLung04 1L mHER2
4. #ARROS1 1L ROS1+
5. #HARMONi 2L mEGFR
SCLC
6. #MAVERICK @SWOG MRI surv
7. #DeLLphi Tarla SubQ & ⬇️ freq
#lcsm #OncTwitter @IASLC
1/8 https://t.co/K5kHEzMTvv
11.4K impressions10 likes9 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
THE
IASLC
2026 D
2026 World Conference
Endorsed by
Korean
Association
for
on Lung Cancer
KAL
Lung Cancer
C
SEPTEMBER 12 — 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 — The Studies to Watch
Seoul, 12–15 September
A clinical map of the key questions at @IASLC WCLC 2026: early/locally advanced NSCLC, oncogenic drivers, IO combinations, SCLC (including CNS), limited-stage multimodal therapy, and local control.
Presidential symposium highlights include ADAURA OS update, PAPILLON, REZILIENT 3, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, TAISHAN-302, A
5.5K impressions5 likes4 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026: THE STUDIES TO WATCH
Seoul
12-15 September 2026
Presidential symposium
01
EARLY / LOCALLY ADVANCED NSCLC
02
ADVANCED NSCLC: DRIVERS
ADAURA
PL03.01
PAPILLON
PL03.03
Osimertinib
exploratory 8-year OS
EGFR exon 20 amivantamab + chemo
os
IMpower030
OA04.03
REZILIENT 3
PL03.04
Perioperative atezolizumab + chemo
EGFR exon 20 zipalertinib + chemo
MDT-BRIDGE
ARROS-1
PL03.06
OA04.02
ROS1 zidesamtinib TKI-naive
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemo
DESTINY-Lung04
PL03.08
Adjuvant gefitinib + chemo
OA04.01
HER2-mutant
first-line T-DXd
EGFR-mutant phase III
HARMONi
0A14.05
NAUTIKA1
M006.01/ OA04.04
Post-EGFR TKI ivonescimab + chemo os
Neoadjuvant alectinib / divarasib
AMIGO-1
0A12.04
Amivantamab + lazertinib + pemetrexed
03
ADVANCED NSCLC: NO DRIVER
04
SCLC: SYSTEMIC THERAPY & CNS
HARMONi-2
OA14.01
TAISHAN-302
PL02.03
Ivonescimab vs pembrolizumab OS
Tam-Peli vs topotecan relapsed
ARTEMIS-008
PL02.04
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE D46
PL02.06
Risvutatug rezetecan vs topotecan
Sacituzumab govitecan + pembrolizumab
PD-L1 ≥50%
SWOG S1827 MAVERICK
PL02.01
Pumitamig + BNT324
0A14.02
Brain MRI surveillance ± cranial irradiation
PD-L1/VEGF-A + B7-H3
NSCLC/SCLC
DeLLphi-309
OA05.01
Tarlatamab extended-interval dosing
RC148 / ABBV-1480
OA14.04
PD-1/VEGF bispecific + chemo
DeLLphi-308
M015.07
Tarlatamab subcutaneous delivery
MAVERICK: cross-stage brain prevention.
05
LIMITED-STAGE SCLC
06
SURGERY, RADIOTHERAPY & LOCAL CONTROL
Neoadjuvant serplulimab + chemo
M015.03
Wedge vs segmentectomy
OA08.01
pathological response / MRD
GGO-dominant early NSCLC
GREAT
OA08.02
Serplulimab + concurrent CRT
P3.288
Segmentectomy VS lobectomy
followed by serplulimab phase
II
STARLORD
OA09.04
CXCL9+ DCs / CXCR3+ Tregs
M015.01
Stereotactic RT when concurrent CRT is unsuitable
treatment resistance
LONESTAR
0A14.03
Early clinical and translational signals
Local consolidation after nivolumab + ipilimumab
EMERGING SCIENCE
KRAS G12D: GFH375 / QLC1101
DLL3 CAR-T: LB2102
mRNA vaccine: BNT116
OA12.01-02
OA05.02
M006.03
Pre-congress watchlist
Not a results summary
11 Sep 2026
Source: IASLC WCLC 2026 program
wclc.iaslc.org
2SOHO-01View full trial page →903.9K impressions8.3K primary · 895.6K preview60 engagements25 posts · 17 voices▾
PPharmacy Times@Pharmacy_Times
The FDA has expanded the accelerated approval of sevabertinib to first-line HER2 TKD–mutant advanced NSCLC. SOHO-01 data showed a 75% objective response rate among treatment-naive patients. Learn more: https://t.co/HbLsReIEXs
2.2K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-10
MMel Mann | Cancer Survivor & Patient Advocate@MelDMann
A rare lung cancer mutation just got a frontline option.
FDA expanded accelerated approval for sevabertinib (Hyrnuo) to adults with HER2 tyrosine kinase domain–mutated nonsquamous NSCLC — including people who haven’t had systemic therapy yet.
In the SOHO-01 cohort of 69 previously untreated patients, about 3 in 4 had a confirmed response. Most responders were still responding at 6 months.
Here’
1.1K impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-09-10
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
In SOHO-01 with sevabertinib, much larger dataset from @LeXiuning @PrelajArsela. In 73 pts with paired evaluable ctDNA (HER2+ at baseline), 22 had a putative resistance event. T862A seen in 16% with one compound T798I/T862A. HER2 amplification seen in 3%. No C805S and no S783C. https://t.co/NKtrzqEcbg
865 impressions7 likes1 reposts2026-09-26
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Methods
SOHO-01: Patients with advanced HER2-mutant NSCLC
SOHO-01 study design¹
Cohorts D, E, and F (N=209)
No radiological progression
Patients with advanced HER2-mutant NSCLC:
Treatment ongoing (n=41)
Sevabertinib 20 mg BID
Death or discontinuation without
progression (n=19)
Documented progression per RECIST v1.1
Cohort D: Patients naïve to HER2 ex20ins-
(investigator assessment) (n=149)
targeted therapy (N=81)
No paired plasma samples available
for analysis (n=63)
Cohort E: Patients previously treated with
HER2-targeted ADCs (N=55)
Patients with paired plasma samples (n=86)+
Sequencing failed (n=1)
Cohort F: Patients naïve to systemic anticancer
therapy for locally advanced or metastatic
disease (N=73)
Valid NGS results (n=85)
No baseline plasma HER2 mutation
Cohort G: Patients naïve to HER2 ex20ins-
detected (n=12)
targeted TKIs with active, clinically stable CNS
metastases*
Resistance analysis set
(baseline detectable plasma HER2 mutation) (n=73)
Data cut-off date: November 17, 2025
*Data from Cohort G are not presented here; Paired baseline (C1D1 or SCR, collected during screening or at C1D1 pre-dose) and PD samples available (plasma obtained up to 4 weeks before, at, or after PD).
ADC, antibody-drug conjugate; BID, twice daily; C1D1, Cycle 1 Day 1; CNS, central nervous system; ex20ins, exon 20 insertion; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; NGS, next-generation sequencing; NSCLC, non-small-cell
lung cancer; PD, progressive disease; SCR, screening; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
1. Le X, et al. N Engl J Med 2025;393:1819-1832.
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Putative mechanisms of acquired resistance
Putative resistance-associated
Acquired
Acquired
ERBB2 alterations
RTK/RAS/MAPK/PI3K alterations
genomic events were identified in
1
22 of 73 patients (30%)
Alteration Type
2
Mutation
3
HER2 T862A (xDFG) substitutions
4
Amplification
were the most common secondary
5
Fusion
6
alterations (16%)
7
Cohort
There was 1 case of compound
8
D
T798I/T862A
9
E
10
F
Patient
HER2 amplifications were found in
11
12
BOR
3% of patients
13
PR
14
SD
No C805S or S783C mutations
15
PD
were detected in PD plasma
16
17
samples
HER2 mutation
18
YVMA
19
Bypass/downstream alterations
Point mutation
20
Other ex20ins
were less frequent and
21
NA
predominantly involved emergent
22
alterations in PI3K/PTEN and
1111 1111
T7981
T862A
T8625
ERBB2 ERBB2: GRB7
AKT2 E320Q CCND2
KRAS KRASAPK1 G12D E322K MDM2
HER2
NF1L
mutation domain
MAPK-pathway genes (12%)
TKD
Multiple alterations can coexist in
the same patient
Note: mutation analysis was conducted using plasma samples. Paired baseline (C1D1 or SCR, collected during screening or at C1D1 pre-dose) and PD samples available (plasma obtained up to 4 weeks before, at, or after PD). Variants
shown here were not detected at BL.
BL, baseline; BOR, best overall response; C1D1, Cycle 1 Day 1; ex20ins, exon 20 insertion; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; NA, not applicable; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; SCR, screening; SD, stable
disease; TKD, tyrosine kinase domain.
5
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Putative mechanisms of acquired resistance
to sevabertinib: Structural modeling
Sevabertinib Loss of Interaction with A862
Structural modeling provides a mechanistic rationale
for the secondary HER2 alterations observed at
T862
T862A
A862
progression in a subset of patients in SOHO-01:
- T862A (16%) - loss of a key molecular interaction
- T798I (n=1, compound T798I/T862A) - steric
hindrance
D863
D863
In an isogenic Ba/F3 HER2 cell line, these substitutions
Sevabertinib Steric Clash with 1798
reduced sevabertinib potency by ~10- to 100-fold
- In contrast, the C805S alteration retained
T798
1798
sensitivity to sevabertinib and was not detected at
T798I
progression
HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2.
6
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Response and PFS in acquired T862A cases
T862A status at PD and time to progression (investigator assessed)
Cohort D
Patients who acquired T862A at PD had an ORR of 92% (11/12)
Cohort E
Cohort F
Patients who acquired T862A at PD had comparable DoR and
PR
SD
PFS compared with those without
PD
One patient had T862A detected at baseline, whose tumor had
T862A not detected
T862A detected
primary resistance to sevabertinib (Cohort E, post-HER2-
T862A detected at baseline
targeted-ADC)
T862A detected at PD
T862A not detected
Time from PD until EOT
Patient
Summary of PFS by investigator by T862A detection status at
progression (Cohorts D, E, and F)
New T862A mutation
n
PFS range (months)
at progression
No
60
1.1-23.5
Yes
12
2.8-16.4
One patient who had a T862A mutation at baseline was excluded
0
6
12
18
24
30
Month
*Data cut-off: November 17, 2025. Progression samples were taken within 4 weeks before or at any time after radiographic PD (RECIST 1.1). Included are patients from Cohorts D, E, and F (20 mg BID) who had successful NGS
results, who had paired baseline and progression timepoint data (investigator-confirmed clinical progression), and whose locally reported HER2-activating mutation was detected in the baseline plasma sample.
ADC, antibody-drug conjugate; BID, twice daily; DoR, duration of response; EOT, end of treatment; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; NGS, next-generation sequencing; ORR, overall response rate;
PD, progressive disease; PFS, progression-free survival; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease.
7
ggilberto lopes@GlopesMd
FDA expands sevabertinib in HER2-mutant NSCLC.
Accelerated approval now includes 1L advanced non-squamous NSCLC with HER2 (ERBB2) TKD activating mutations.
SOHO-01: ORR 75% in 69 untreated patients.
#LungCancer #NSCLC #HER2 https://t.co/s3F5WQAmj1
698 impressions7 likes4 reposts2026-09-10
[Slide 1]
FDA expands sevabertinib
in HER2-mutant NSCLC
Accelerated approval now includes first-line
advanced non-squamous disease
MXI
HER2 (ERBB2)
ORR 75%
20 mg twice
TKD activating
in untreated
daily with food
mutations
cohort
FDA action: September 9, 2026
Source: FDA
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
@Bayer 's sevabertinib is a new first-line oral option for advanced HER2-mutant non-squamous NSCLC.
#FDA accelerated approval is based on a 75% response rate among 69 patients in single-arm SOHO-01—not yet proof of survival benefit or superiority.
#LungCancer #HER2 https://t.co/OlUhDZaK4s
516 impressions11 likes4 reposts2026-09-10
[Slide 1]
FDA
FDA ACCELERATED APPROVAL
9 SEPTEMBER 2026
HER2 MUTANT LUNG CANCER
A NEW FIRST LINE ORAL THERAPY
Sevabertinib (Hyrnuo)
Bayer
APPROVED PATIENT GROUP
Adults
Locally advanced or metastatic
Non-squamous NSCLC
No prior systemic therapy for advanced disease
HER2 (ERBB2) tyrosine kinase domain activating mutation
NGS
AN NGS DETECTED MUTATION IS REQUIRED
HER2 mutation # HER2 amplification # HER2 IHC 3+
SOHO-01
Single-arm study
69 patients
75%
Response ≥6 months
Response ≥12 months
OBJECTIVE RESPONSE RATE
73%
38%
95% CI 64-85
20 mg twice daily
With food
LIMITS OF THE EVIDENCE
!
No control group
Overall survival benefit not yet demonstrated
Continued approval may depend on a confirmatory randomized phase 3 trial
A new option
Not proof of superiority
Source: FDA
SOHO-01
drozdogan.com
PPDUFA Pulse@PDUFA_Pulse
Bayer's HYRNUO first-line expansion rests on SOHO-01, a single-arm study.
Its 75% response rate is evidence of activity. It cannot establish superiority over another treatment without a comparator.
Keep the approval and the comparative claim separate.
304 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
LLUNG CONNECT powered by COR2ED@lung_connect
Update from WCLC 2026: The latest in HER2-mutant NSCLC
>> From thoracic oncologist Dr @JSabari
What do DESTINY-Lung04, and new data from SOHO-01 & Beamion LUNG-1 mean for HER2-mutant NSCLC?
📺Watch to find out
Endorsed by @WarOnCancer, @Exon20Group &
@BiomarkerCo
Supported by an Independent Educational Grant from Bayer. For HCPs only.
894.4K impressions15 likes2 reposts2026-09-17
LLUNG CONNECT powered by COR2ED@lung_connect
WCLC 2026 update!
New developments in HER2-mutant #NSCLC 🫁
Thoracic oncologist Dr @JSabari shares expert insights on data from:
- DESTINY-Lung04
- SOHO-01
- Beamion LUNG-1
📹 Get Dr Sabari’s key clinical takeaways in this video
Watch his full video update and get a more detailed look at the data in the slides: https://t.co/fnCq1m5Lee
🤝 Endorsed by @WarOnCancer, @Exon20Group &
401 impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-09-18
PPRECISION ONCOLOGY CONNECT powered by COR2ED@PresOnc_Connect
Update from #WCLC26: The latest in HER2-mutant #NSCLC 🧬
>> From thoracic oncologist Dr @JSabari
What do DESTINY-Lung04, and new data from SOHO-01 & Beamion LUNG-1 mean for HER2-mutant NSCLC?
📺Watch to find out
Slides coming soon! Sign up to know as soon as they’re released: https://t.co/oZfRWfZXSO
🤝Endorsed by @WarOnCancer, @Exon20Group & @BiomarkerCo
Supported by an Independen
225 impressions7 likes2 reposts2026-09-16
3Beamion LUNG-1View full trial page →898.1K impressions2.4K primary · 895.6K preview25 engagements13 posts · 5 voices▾
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
In Beamion LUNG-1 with zongertinib, 8 paired tissue results from pts with PD showed two acquired HER2 mutations: T862A and S783C. Notably absent were T798I (gatekeeper) and C805S (binding site). The acquired mutations not detected in plasma. #WCLC26 @dplanchard https://t.co/nyxk6nVOSd
2K impressions13 likes5 reposts2026-09-26
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Background and Methods
Zongertinib is an irreversible TKI that selectively inhibits HER2 while sparing wild-type EGFR, thereby minimizing associated toxicities¹
Beamion LUNG-1 Phase lb (dose expansion): patients with advanced HER2-mutant NSCLC
Cohort 1
Previously treated* patients with TKD mutations (n=75)
Here, we analyzed paired tumor tissue and plasma samples collected
before treatment and at disease progression to explore acquired
resistance mechanisms to zongertinib
Cohort 2
Treatment-naïve patients with TKD mutations (n=74)
Genomics
Transcriptomics
Cohort 3
Previously treated* patients with
Acquired oncogenic driver alterations
Differential gene expression and
non-TKD mutations (n=20)
pathway activation downstream of,
Tumor DNA analysis:
or independent of, HER2
Cohort 4
Treatment-naïve or previously treated patients with
TruSightᵀ Oncology 500
TKD mutations and active brain metastases (n=30)
Roche KAPA Total RNAseq
Plasma ctDNA analysis:
Cohort 5
Patients previously treated with HER2-directed ADC
NGS AVENIO assay
and with TKD mutations (n=31)
*Excluding those previously treated with a HER2-directed ADC
ADC, antibody-drug conjugate; ctDNA, circulating tumor DNA; DNA, deoxyribonucleic acid; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; NGS, next-generation sequencing;
NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; RNAseq, ribonucleic acid sequencing; TKD, tyrosine kinase domain; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor
1. Heymach JV, et al. N Engl J Med 2025;392:2321-33
3
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Tumor Tissue DNA Analyses Revealed a Heterogenous Resistance Landscape at Disease Progression
Tumor DNA was analyzed from 8 paired baseline/PD samples
Emergent mutations identified at PD, but not at baseline, included HER2, CDKN2A, ATR, HER4, and LRP1B
Acquired HER2 mutations, S783C and T862A, were detected at PD, which may potentially disrupt key hydrogen bond interactions between
zongertinib and HER2
No acquired HER2 T798I (gatekeeper) or C805S (binding site for zongertinib) mutations were detected at PD
Overall mutation profile in paired tumor samples
HER2 mutation profile in paired tumor samples
Cohorts
HER2
1
Not detected (G776V*)
G776V (21.2%)
TP53
ARID1A
5
A775_G776insYVMA (56.5%)
A775_G776insYVMA (46.7%) + T862A (39.2%)
SMARCA4
PTPRT
4
G776delinsVC (49.2%)
G776delinsVC (52.0%) S783C (27.9%)
FAT1
MAGI2
2
A775_G776insYVMA (22.6%)
A775_G776insYVMA (38.9%)
Variant type
BARD1
Deletion
ATM
1
D769Y (68.9%) + V777L (70.5%)
D769Y (70.8%) + V777L (72.4%)
Insertion-deletion
VAF (%)
CDKN2A
Multi-nucleotide variant
ATR
1
A775_G776insYVMA (4.9%)
x
Not detected
80
Single-nucleotide variant
HER4
60
4
A775_G776insYVMA (42.8%)
Not detected
LRP1B
40
20
6
4
2
0
0
2
4
6
2
A775_G776insYVMA (6.6%)
x
Not detected
Alterations
Alterations
Baseline (n=8)
PD (n=8)
Baseline
PD
Tumor DNA analyses revealed a heterogeneous resistance landscape at disease progression,
with no predominant acquired resistance mutation identified
*Patient had a positive G776V local test result
CDKN2A, cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A; DNA, deoxyribonucleic acid; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; HER, human epidermal growth factor receptor; PD, progressive disease; VAF, variant allele frequency
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Plasma ctDNA Analyses Supported Key Genomic Findings at Disease Progression
Plasma ctDNA was analyzed from 7 paired baseline/PD samples
Generally, the oncogenic driver variants found in tissue DNA were also identified in plasma ctDNA
The acquired T862A mutation was not detected in plasma ctDNA, and corresponding plasma data were not available for S783C
Activating HER2 mutations remained detectable in PD samples
HER2 mutation profile in paired samples
Tumor DNA
Plasma ctDNA
Not detected (G776V*)
G776V (21.2%)
G776V (2.6%)
G776V (2.6%)
A775_G776insYVMA (56.5%)
A775_G776insYVMA (46.7%) + T862A (39.2%)
+
Not detected
x
A775_G776insYVMA (3.9%)
G776delinsVC (49.2%)
G776delinsVC (52.0%) + S783C (27.9%)
?
Sample not available
?
Sample not available
A775_G776insYVMA (22.6%)
A775_G776insYVMA (38.9%)
A775_G776insYVMA (6.0%)
A775_G776insYVMA (8.8%)
D769Y (68.9%) + V777L (70.5%)
D769Y (70.8%) + V777L (72.4%)
D769Y (22.9%) + V777L (26.1%)
D769Y (45.1%) + V777L (46.7%)
VAF (%)
Not detected
80
A775_G776insYVMA (4.9%)
A775_G776insYVMA (5.4%)
A775_G776insYVMA (53.2%)
60
A775_G776insYVMA (42.8%)
Not detected
A775_G776insYVMA (22.4%)
A775_G776insYVMA (2.8%)
40
20
A775_G776insYVMA (6.6%)
Not detected
A775_G776insYVMA (4.0%)
A775_G776insYVMA (3.7%)
Baseline
PD
Baseline
PD
Plasma ctDNA analyses showed broad concordance with tumor DNA analyses
*Patient had a positive G776V local test result
ctDNA, circulating tumor DNA; DNA, deoxyribonucleic acid; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; PD, progressive disease; VAF, variant allele frequency
5
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Tumor Tissue RNA Analyses Revealed Shared Pathways at Disease Progression
Tumor RNA was analyzed in 11 paired
Proliferative signaling
Metabolic reprogramming
Tumor immunogenicity
baseline/PD samples
36
15
Transcriptomic analyses of predefined
12
signaling pathways (HALLMARK)
identified changes consistent with:
Signature Activity Score (ULM)
34
12
10
Baseline
PD
32
9
8
- Increased proliferative signaling
30
6
- Increased metabolic reprogramming
6
- Reduced tumor immunogenicity
28
4
HER2 feedback loop
MAPK reactivation
EMT / resistance
HER3
KRAS
MET
11
15
7
No significant changes in specific bypass
7
5
Signature Activity Score (ULM)
7
Transcripts Per Million (TPM)
6
pathways, such as HER2 feedback loop,
9
12
6
,
4
5
suggest that progression is driven by
6
5
7
9
4
broader biological adaptation rather than
4
5
3
3
recurrent activation of a single mechanism
5
6
3
4
2
2
2
Putative Outlier
FALSE
TRUE
Tumor RNA revealed shared pathway-level changes at progression
DNA, deoxyribonucleic acid; EMT, epithelial-mesenchymal transition; HER, human epidermal growth factor receptor; KRAS, Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog; MAPK, mitogen-activated protein kinase; PD, progressive disease;
RNA, ribonucleic acid; ULM, univariate linear model
6
LLUNG CONNECT powered by COR2ED@lung_connect
Catch up on 𝘏𝘌𝘙2-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) data presented at ASCO 2026
Dr @herbloong & Dr @ipreeshagul joined us at ASCO 2026 to share their views on data emerging from the meeting
📺 Watch the video to get their expert insights on data from SOHO-01, Beamion LUNG-3, PRO results from the Beamion LUNG-1 trial, and advances in HER2 testing
Get the slides & see more updates f
211 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-21
OOncoNexus@Onco_Nexus
Resistance to zongertinib in HER2-mutant #NSCLC appears molecularly diverse, but the biology may converge. New #WCLC2026 Beamion LUNG-1 data found shared proliferation, metabolic, and immune-signaling changes at progression, supporting repeat profiling. https://t.co/RX9yNfV7QM @dplanchard @GustaveRoussy @nicogirardcurie @MP_3855
237 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-10
LLUNG CONNECT powered by COR2ED@lung_connect
Update from WCLC 2026: The latest in HER2-mutant NSCLC
>> From thoracic oncologist Dr @JSabari
What do DESTINY-Lung04, and new data from SOHO-01 & Beamion LUNG-1 mean for HER2-mutant NSCLC?
📺Watch to find out
Endorsed by @WarOnCancer, @Exon20Group &
@BiomarkerCo
Supported by an Independent Educational Grant from Bayer. For HCPs only.
894.4K impressions15 likes2 reposts2026-09-17
LLUNG CONNECT powered by COR2ED@lung_connect
WCLC 2026 update!
New developments in HER2-mutant #NSCLC 🫁
Thoracic oncologist Dr @JSabari shares expert insights on data from:
- DESTINY-Lung04
- SOHO-01
- Beamion LUNG-1
📹 Get Dr Sabari’s key clinical takeaways in this video
Watch his full video update and get a more detailed look at the data in the slides: https://t.co/fnCq1m5Lee
🤝 Endorsed by @WarOnCancer, @Exon20Group &
401 impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-09-18
PPRECISION ONCOLOGY CONNECT powered by COR2ED@PresOnc_Connect
Update from #WCLC26: The latest in HER2-mutant #NSCLC 🧬
>> From thoracic oncologist Dr @JSabari
What do DESTINY-Lung04, and new data from SOHO-01 & Beamion LUNG-1 mean for HER2-mutant NSCLC?
📺Watch to find out
Slides coming soon! Sign up to know as soon as they’re released: https://t.co/oZfRWfZXSO
🤝Endorsed by @WarOnCancer, @Exon20Group & @BiomarkerCo
Supported by an Independen
225 impressions7 likes2 reposts2026-09-16
4ADAURAView full trial page →157.6K impressions126.4K primary · 31.2K preview904 engagements119 posts · 75 voices▾
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
8 YEARS later, and the ADAURA curves are still speaking.
In resected EGFR+ NSCLC, adjuvant osimertinib continues to show a durable OS benefit:
▫️Stage II–IIIA: 74% v 58% 8-year OS (HR 0.53)
▫️Stage IB–IIIA: 79% vs 64% (HR 0.52)
Long-term follow-up matters.
#WCLC26 @IASLC https://t.co/phPwzmwkBg https://t.co/lwhi3nLitK
6.3K impressions9 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an OS benefit versus placebo in the primary
population (stage II-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year OS rate
8-year os rate
1.0
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
85%
0.9
Osimertinib (n=233)
74 (67, 80)
74%
0.8
Placebo (n=237)
58 (50, 65)
0.7
73%
0.3 OS probability
0.6
os HR
0.53
58%
0.5
(95% CI)
(0.38, 0.75)
0.4
Maturity: 30%
osimertinib 24%; placebo 36%
0.2
0.1
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
osimertinib 92.0 months; placebo 68.5 months
0.0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
Time from randomization (months)
risk
rtinib 233 229 224 224 221 214 208 205 201 192 180 171 159 149 142 128 91 52 28 8 1 0
237 232 226 221 210 202 190 182 172 156 146 125 109 103 94 74 53 33 20 9 2 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. *Among patients who were alive at the planned final OS analysis (DCO: Jan 27, 2023), updated survival data were collected through yearly follow-up until the curre
(May 4, 2026; additional consent provided) and from accessible records / information from last contact date after the final planned os DCO. Patients for whom no additional long-term os data were available remained cen
their last known alive date, survival time unchanged from the final planned OS analysis DCO (Jan 27, 2023). CI, confidence interval; DCO, data cut-off; HR, hazard ratio; os, overall
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an os benefit versus placebo in the overall
population (stage IB-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year os rate
8-year os rate
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
1.0
88%
Osimertinib (n=339)
79 (74, 83)
0.9
79%
0.8
Placebo (n=343)
64 (58, 70)
178%
0.7
64%
os HR
0.52
OS probability
0.6
(95% CI)
(0.39, 0.71)
0.5
0.4
Maturity: 26%
0.3
osimertinib 20%; placebo 31%
0.2
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
0.1
osimertinib 93.3 months; placebo 79.6 months
0.0
0
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120 126 132
Time from randomization (months)
No. at risk
Osimertinib 339 332 325 324 319 311 304 301 295 285 267 250 233 219 210 186 142 85 46 16 3 0
Placebo 343 338 332 326 314 304 290 281 268 247 233 208 185 173 155 131 103 64 36 15 2 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. *Among patients who were alive at the planned final OS analysis (DCO: Jan 27, 2023), updated survival data were collected through yearly follow-up until the
(May 4, 2026; additional consent provided) and from accessible records / information from last contact date after the final planned OS DCO. Patients for whom no additional long-term OS data were available remaine
their Last known alive date, survival time unchanged from the final planned OS analysis DCO (Jan 27, 2023). CI, confidence interval; DCO, data cut-off; HR, hazard ratio; os,
MMisty Dawn Shields@drshieldsmd
@BalazsHalmosMD @KolPulseAI @BalazsHalmosMD waiting for ADAURA data like… https://t.co/z46iTY3KWa
6.1K impressions3 likes1 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
of
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🔥ADAURA: Adjuvant osimertinib — exploratory 8-year OS landmark update #WCLC2026
🆙 @JTOonline
🎯8-y OS 74% (osimertinib) vs 58% (placebo; HR 0.53); IB-IIIA: 79% vs 64% (HR 0.52)
🎯Ex19del shows stronger OS benefit (HR 0.45) vs L858R (HR 0.72)
🎯Llongest OS follow-up in adjuvant EGFR NSCLC trial
🎙Dr. Yi-Long Wu @ThomasW35874311 @DrRoyHerbst
#LCSM @OncoAlert @Larvol @EGFRResisters
https://t.co/SCnLw
6.1K impressions10 likes6 reposts2026-09-13
MMisty Dawn Shields@drshieldsmd
Dr. Roy Herbst @DrRoyHerbst @dartmouth presents the updated 8Y OS follow up analysis of ADAURA for 3Y of adjuvant osimertinib in EGFR mutant NSCLC. Benefit in OS across all stages investigated IB-IIIA. Supportive management of toxicities and quality of life are key factors to ensuring patients can stay on therapy for 3Y.
@EGFRResisters @EgfrUk @jillfeldman4 @lungoncdoc @LUNGevity @RManochakian @
6K impressions8 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an os benefit versus placebo in the primary
population (stage II-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year os rate
8-year os rate
1.0
0.9
85%
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
0.8
74%
Osimertinib (n=233)
74 (67, 80)
0.7
Placebo (n=237)
58 (50, 65)
73%
os probability
0.6
os HR
0.5
0.53
58%
(95% CI)
(0.38, 0.75)
0.4
0.3
Maturity: 30%
0.2
osimertinib 24%; placebo 36%
0.1
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
0.0
osimertinib 92.0 months; placebo 68.5 months
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
Osimertinib 233 229 224 224 221 214 208 205 201 192 180 171 159 149 142 128 91 52 28 8 1 0
Placebo 237 232 226 221 210 202 190 182 172 156 146 125 109 103 94 74 53 33 20 9 2 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. *Among patients who were alive at the planned final os analysis (DCO: Jan 27, 2023), updated survival data were collected through yearly follow-up until the current
(May 4, 2026; additional consent provided) and from accessible records information from last contact date after the final planned os DCO. Patients for whom no additional long-term os data were available remained censes
10
their last known alive date, survival time unchanged from the final planned os analysis DCO Dan 27, 2023). CI, confidence interval; OCO, data cut- off; HR, hazard ratio; os, over
[Slide 3]
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
alamy
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
os benefit was observed across disease stages (IB / II / IIIA)*
Stage IB
91%
Stage IB
Stage II
Stage IIIA
1.0
0.9
8-year os rate, %
0.8
77%
(95% CI)
0.7
os probability
0.6
Osimertinib
91 (82, 95)
78 (68, 85)
70 (59, 78)
0.5
Placebo
77 (68, 85)
63 (52, 71)
52 (41, 63)
0.4
0.3
os HR
0.50
0.60
0.49
0.2
(95% CI)
(0.23, 1.01)
(0.36, 0.97)
(0.31, 0.77)
0.1
0.0
120
126
132
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
Time from randomization (months)
No. of patients at risk
94
93
87
79
74
70
68
58
51
33
18
8
2
0
Osimertinib
106
103
101
100
98
97
96
96
31
6
0
99
96
91
87
83
76
70
61
57
50
16
Placebo
106
106
106
105
104
102
100
1.0
Stage IIIA
1.0
Stage II
0.9
0.9
78%
0.8
70%
0.8
I
0.7
1010-14
+++
0.7
0.6
os probability
0.6
63%
os probability
0.5
52%
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120 126 132
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
0
6
Time from randomization (months)
Time from randomization (months)
Osimertinib 118 116 112 112 112 109 104 104 101 94 89 85 81 75 73 67 53 29 15 3 2 0
No. of patients at risk
Osimertinib 115 113 112 112 109 105 104 101 100 98 91 86 78 74 69 61 38 23 13 5 1 0
No. of patients at risk
Placebo
119 114 109 107 100 95 86 79 77 69 64 53 45 42 38 30 17 10 5 0
Placebo 118 118 117 114 110 107 104 103 95 87 82 72 64 61 56 44 36 23 15 9 0
DCO: May 4, 2026. *AJCC UICC 7th edition. AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival; UICC, Union for International Cancer Control
13
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
It’s time- the EIGHT year overall survival update for ADAURA here at #WCLC26 https://t.co/aGPLYTqtZS https://t.co/EwMuPW0jct
4.4K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
8 year update of ADAURA at #WCLC26 from @DrRoyHerbst - with 3y of adjuvant osimertinib in EGFR mutant NSCLC, 8y OS rate 74% vs 58% with OS HR 0.53 and benefit seen across stages: stage IB HR 0.50, stage II HR 0.60, stage IIIA HR 0.49 - reaffirms standard of care. https://t.co/RsglSiUsuX
4K impressions44 likes20 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 d 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Osimertinib continued to show an OS benefit versus placebo in the primary
population (stage II-IIIA disease) at the current DCO*
5-year os rate
8-year os rate
1.0
8-year os rate, % (95% CI)
0.9
85%
Osimertinib (n=233)
74 (67, 80)
0.8
74%
0.7
Placebo (n=237)
58 (50, 65)
73%
os probability
0.6
os HR
0.53
0.5
58%
(95% CI)
(0.38, 0.75)
0.4
0.3
Maturity: 30%
osimertinib 24%; placebo 36%
0.2
0.1
Median follow-up for OS (all patients):
0.0
osimertinib 92.0 months; placebo 68.5 months
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
No. at risk
Time from randomization (months)
Osimertinib 233 229 224 224 221 214 208 205 201 192 180 171 159 149 142 128 91 52 28 8 1 0
Placebo 237 232 226 221 210 202 190 182 172 156 146 125 109 103 94 74 53 33 20 9 2
0
DCO: May 4, 2026. Tick marks indicate censored data. "Among patients who were alive at the planned final OS analysis (DCO: Jan 27, 2023). updated survival data were collected through yearly follow-up until the current DCO
(May 4. 2026: additional consent provided) and from accessible records / information from last contact date after the final planned OS DCO. Patients for whom no additional long-term OS data were available remained censored at
10
their last known alive date. survival time unchanged from the final planned OS analysis DCO (Jan 27. 2023). CI. confidence interval: DCO. data cut-off: HR. hazard ratio: OS. overall survival.
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
os benefit was observed across predefined subgroups in the overall
population (stage IB-IIIA disease)
Subgroup
No. of events / patients
HR
95% CI
Overall (N=682)
Stratified log-rank
175 / 682
0.52
0.39, 0.71
Unadjusted Cox PH
175 / 682
0.56
0.41, 0.75
Sex
Male
60 / 204
0.74
0.44, 1.22
Female
115 / 478
0.47
0.32, 0.69
Age
<65 years
83 / 380
0.59
0.38, 0.91
≥65 years
92 / 302
0.53
0.34, 0.80
Smoking history
Yes
46 / 194
0.58
0.32, 1.04
No
129 / 488
0.55
0.38, 0.79
Race
Asian
106 / 434
0.64
0.43, 0.93
Non-Asian
69 / 248
0.45
0.27, 0.74
Stage*
IB
33 / 212
0.50
0.23, 1.01
II
66 / 236
0.60
0.36, 0.97
IIIA
76 / 234
0.49
0.31, 0.77
EGFR mutation
Ex19del
93 / 378
0.45
0.29, 0.68
L858R
82 / 304
0.72
0.46, 1.11
Adjuvant
Yes
105 / 410
0.54
0.36, 0.80
chemotherapy
No
70 / 272
0.58
0.36, 0.94
0.1
1.0
10.0
HR for OS (95% CI)
Favors osimertinib Favors placebo
DCO: May 4, 2026. *AJCC UICC 7th edition.
12
AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; CI, confidence interval; DCO, data cut off: EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; Ex19del, exon 19 detetion; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival; UICC, Union for International Cancer Control
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
os benefit was observed across disease stages (IB / II / IIIA)*
1.0
Stage IB
91%
Stage IB
Stage II
Stage IIIA
0.9
0.8
8-year os rate, %
0.7
77%
(95% CI)
os probability
0.6
0.5
Osimertinib
91 (82, 95)
78 (68, 85)
70 (59, 78)
0.4
Placebo
77 (68, 85)
63 (52, 71)
52 (41, 63)
0.3
0.2
os HR
0.50
0.60
0.49
0.1
(95% CI)
(0.23, 1.01)
(0.36, 0.97)
(0.31, 0.77)
0.0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
Time from randomization (months)
No. of patients at risk
Osimertinib
106
103
101
100
98
97
96
96
94
93
87
79
74
70
68
58
51
33
18
8
2
0
Placebo
106
106
106
105
104
102
100
99
96
91
87
83
76
70
61
57
50
31
16
6
0
1.0
Stage II
1.0
Stage IIIA
0.9
0.9
0.8
78%
0.8
70%
0.7
0.7
os probability
0.6
os probability
0.6
0.5
63%
0.5
152%
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
96
102
108
114
120
126
132
Time from randomization (months)
Time from randomization (months)
No. of patients at risk
No. of patients at risk
Osimertinib
118
116
112
112
112
109
104
104
101
94
89
85
81
75
73
67
53
29
15
3
0
Osimertinib 115 113 112 112 109 105 104 101 100 98 91 86 78 74 69 61 38 23 13 5 1 0
Placebo
118
118
117
114
110
107
104
103
95
87
82
72
64
61
56
44
36
23
15
9
2
0
Placebo
119
114
109
107
100
95
86
79
77
69
64
53
45
42
38
30
17
10
5
0
13
DCO: May 4. 2026. *AICC UICC 7th edition AICC. American Joint Committee on Cancer: CI, confidence interval: HR. hazard ratio: OS. overall survival: UICC. Union for International Cancer Control.
OOncology Brothers@OncBrothers
Highlights from #WCLC26 #CommunityOncology:
NSCLC
1. #ADAURA Update Adj mEGFR
2. #PAPILLON 1L EGFR Ex20
3. #DESTINYLung04 1L mHER2
4. #ARROS1 1L ROS1+
5. #HARMONi 2L mEGFR
SCLC
6. #MAVERICK @SWOG MRI surv
7. #DeLLphi Tarla SubQ & ⬇️ freq
#lcsm #OncTwitter @IASLC
1/8 https://t.co/K5kHEzMTvv
11.4K impressions10 likes9 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
THE
IASLC
2026 D
2026 World Conference
Endorsed by
Korean
Association
for
on Lung Cancer
KAL
Lung Cancer
C
SEPTEMBER 12 — 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DDr Rishabh Jain@DrRishabhOnco
🫁 EGFR at #WCLC26: 5 trials to watch 👇
1️⃣ ADAURA | PL03.01
8-year update of adjuvant osimertinib in resected EGFR-mutant NSCLC.
🔥 How durable is the survival benefit at 8 years?
2️⃣ PAPILLON | PL03.03
Amivantamab + chemotherapy vs chemotherapy in 1L EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC.
🔥 Does the PFS advantage translate into an OS benefit?
3️⃣ REZILIENT 3 | PL03.04
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy vs ch
8.2K impressions18 likes6 reposts2026-09-11
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 — The Studies to Watch
Seoul, 12–15 September
A clinical map of the key questions at @IASLC WCLC 2026: early/locally advanced NSCLC, oncogenic drivers, IO combinations, SCLC (including CNS), limited-stage multimodal therapy, and local control.
Presidential symposium highlights include ADAURA OS update, PAPILLON, REZILIENT 3, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, TAISHAN-302, A
5.5K impressions5 likes4 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026: THE STUDIES TO WATCH
Seoul
12-15 September 2026
Presidential symposium
01
EARLY / LOCALLY ADVANCED NSCLC
02
ADVANCED NSCLC: DRIVERS
ADAURA
PL03.01
PAPILLON
PL03.03
Osimertinib
exploratory 8-year OS
EGFR exon 20 amivantamab + chemo
os
IMpower030
OA04.03
REZILIENT 3
PL03.04
Perioperative atezolizumab + chemo
EGFR exon 20 zipalertinib + chemo
MDT-BRIDGE
ARROS-1
PL03.06
OA04.02
ROS1 zidesamtinib TKI-naive
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemo
DESTINY-Lung04
PL03.08
Adjuvant gefitinib + chemo
OA04.01
HER2-mutant
first-line T-DXd
EGFR-mutant phase III
HARMONi
0A14.05
NAUTIKA1
M006.01/ OA04.04
Post-EGFR TKI ivonescimab + chemo os
Neoadjuvant alectinib / divarasib
AMIGO-1
0A12.04
Amivantamab + lazertinib + pemetrexed
03
ADVANCED NSCLC: NO DRIVER
04
SCLC: SYSTEMIC THERAPY & CNS
HARMONi-2
OA14.01
TAISHAN-302
PL02.03
Ivonescimab vs pembrolizumab OS
Tam-Peli vs topotecan relapsed
ARTEMIS-008
PL02.04
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE D46
PL02.06
Risvutatug rezetecan vs topotecan
Sacituzumab govitecan + pembrolizumab
PD-L1 ≥50%
SWOG S1827 MAVERICK
PL02.01
Pumitamig + BNT324
0A14.02
Brain MRI surveillance ± cranial irradiation
PD-L1/VEGF-A + B7-H3
NSCLC/SCLC
DeLLphi-309
OA05.01
Tarlatamab extended-interval dosing
RC148 / ABBV-1480
OA14.04
PD-1/VEGF bispecific + chemo
DeLLphi-308
M015.07
Tarlatamab subcutaneous delivery
MAVERICK: cross-stage brain prevention.
05
LIMITED-STAGE SCLC
06
SURGERY, RADIOTHERAPY & LOCAL CONTROL
Neoadjuvant serplulimab + chemo
M015.03
Wedge vs segmentectomy
OA08.01
pathological response / MRD
GGO-dominant early NSCLC
GREAT
OA08.02
Serplulimab + concurrent CRT
P3.288
Segmentectomy VS lobectomy
followed by serplulimab phase
II
STARLORD
OA09.04
CXCL9+ DCs / CXCR3+ Tregs
M015.01
Stereotactic RT when concurrent CRT is unsuitable
treatment resistance
LONESTAR
0A14.03
Early clinical and translational signals
Local consolidation after nivolumab + ipilimumab
EMERGING SCIENCE
KRAS G12D: GFH375 / QLC1101
DLL3 CAR-T: LB2102
mRNA vaccine: BNT116
OA12.01-02
OA05.02
M006.03
Pre-congress watchlist
Not a results summary
11 Sep 2026
Source: IASLC WCLC 2026 program
wclc.iaslc.org
5HARMONi-2View full trial page →144.3K impressions124.9K primary · 19.4K preview415 engagements69 posts · 52 voices▾
AAdu@plainyogurt21
what is the bar $SMMT final PFS analysis.
Interesting Harmoni-2 results but Harmoni-3 diff game, Subgroup on NonSq and Low PD1.....
Harmoni 3 missed one interim, even with the most minimal alpha spend, probably needed HR < .65. What is the bar for the PFS to hit? (Harmoni 6 was PFS .6 -> OS .66)
Putting aside completely whatever science on the PD1 dependency, the competition from ADCs a
10.8K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall survival by PD-L1 expression level
OS benefit with ivonescimab was consistent in both PD-L1 High and PD-L1 Low expressors
PD-L1 High (TPS >50%)
PD-L1 Low (TPS 1-49%)
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
(n=83)
(n 85)
(n=115)
(n =115)
90
90
mOS
NR
23.2 mo
mos
28.5 mo
22.1 mo
10
#
70
63.2%
10
53.4%
60
60
54.1%
(%)50
50
os (74) OS(%)
50
49.7%
38.6%
46.8%
40
#
30
HR = 0.58 (95% CI 0.38 0.89)
30
HR = 0.85 (95% CI 0.61 - 1.18)
34.1%
31.3%
20
20
+
Censered
+
Centred
10
Ivenescimab
10
Pembrolizanab
Pentrolemal
0
I
0
2
I
6
$
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
12
0
1
-
6
$
10
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
12
Time (months)
Time(neaths)
Number disk
Subsidisk
I
tronescient 1)
"
"
"
"
53
"
11
5)
.
"
43
19
"
20
113
106
1
19
#
13
II
74
M
16
56
61
56
11
if
42
#
*
15
N
27
26
21
11
11
Personal
in
103
*
.
"
77
7)
#
51
"
%
.
4)
0
#
18
14
22
12
The subgroup analysis was descriptive and not formally powered.
11
Caicun Zhou I HARMONi-2
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall survival by histology
OS benefit with ivonescimab was consistent in both squamous and non-squamous histology
Squamous
Non-Squamous
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
(n=90)
(n=91)
(n 108)
(n 109)
99
90
mOS
30.5 mo
19.3 mo
mos
33.6 mo
25.6 mo
#
#
70
70-
58.3%
60
60
57.5%
OS(%)
I
50
41.0%
48.2%
50
52.8%
-
40
40-
42.4%
38.3%
30
HR = 0.65 (95% CI 0.45 - 0.95)
30-
HR = 0.79 (95% CI 0.55 - 1.14)
26.9%
20
20
+
Censered
Censed
10
Presescinab
10-
Ironescinab
Pentrolization
0
0
0
2
6
10
12
14
16
=
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
#)
0
0
:
6
I
10
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
31
40
42
Time(months)
Time (nonths)
Numbership
Nutritisk
Insured 90
"
"
#
%
"
41
"
"
11
N
N
"
#
#
18
N
a
14
.
I
-
N
1
"
#
"
Internal #1
15
12
%
11
17
43
51
12
45
40
is
15
11
a
24
2)
#
"
,
-
102
15
1)
3
"
a
1)
N
16
11
et
"
a
41
"
2
11
The subgroup analysis was descriptive and not formally powered.
12
Caicun Zhou | HARMONi-2
[Slide 2]
100
78.9%
Ivonescimab
Tislelizumab
90
+ chemo
+ chemo
80
64.7%
(N=266)
(N=266)
70
72.2%
mOS, months
27.89
23.69
Overall Survival (%)
60
(95% CI)
(27.89, NE)
(20.11, NE)
50
48.6%
Stratified HR
0.66
40
(95% CI)
(0.50, 0.87)
30
p-value
0.0017
20
OS significance boundary: 0.0049
10
0
The median OS in the ivonescimab group would
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
have not been reached without the last single event
Months
No. at risk (censored)
Ivonescimab
266(0)
252(0)
238(0)
224(0)
202(8)
152(46)
119(73)
85(100)
49(135)
15(168)
0(182)
+Chemo
Tislelizumab
266(0)
257(0)
238(0)
211(0)
186(6)
142(36)
113(55)
80(77)
43(107)
12(136)
0(146)
+Chemo
Data cutoff date: Feb 27, 2026
Abbreviation: mOS, median overall survival; NE, not estimable; HR,
Median Follow-up: 21.36 months
ASCO 2026 Plenary Session
hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval
[Slide 3]
2026
2027
2H26
HARMONi-3
Final PFS data readout in 1L
Final PFS data readout in
Final os data readout in 1L
Timeline
squamous NSCLC (2H26)
1L non-squamous NSCLC
squamous NSCLC (2027)
(1H27)
Text
Physician's
sq PFS HR ≤ 0.70
Non-sq PFS HR ≤ 0.70
os HR ≤ 0.75
Expectation
Early trend of OS benefits
Early trend of os benefits
[Slide 4]
An interim analysis of progression-free survival was planned when approximately 208 (70%) progression-free
survival events as assessed by the IRRC were observed. To strictly control the overall type 1 error at a one-sided
alpha level of 0.025, we used a hierarchical testing procedure for the primary endpoint (progression-free survival)
and the key secondary endpoint (overall survival). Overall survival would only be tested if progression-free survival
was found to be significant. The Lan-DeMets spending function with O'Brien-Fleming boundary was used to control
the type 1 error for both endpoints at the interim and final analyses. In April, 2024, the protocol was amended to
adjust the sample size from 396 to 528 participants, taking into account the consideration of overall survival in the
sample size estimation. Correspondingly, the number of events needed for the interim analysis on the primary
endpoint increased from 186 to 208.
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | HARMONi-2
🧬 Ph3: 1L ivonescimab vs pembro in PD-L1+ advanced NSCLC (TPS ≥1%; n=398)
🏆 OS: 30.8 vs 22.6 mo; HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.57–0.95; p=0.009)
📈 3-y OS: 45.0% vs 33.1%
📊 Previously reported PFS: 11.1 vs 5.8 mo; HR 0.51
🎯 ORR: 50.0% vs 38.5%
🔎 Descriptive OS by PD-L1:
• TPS ≥50%: HR 0.58
• TPS 1–49%: HR 0.85
⚠️ G≥3 TRAEs: 41.6% vs 21.6%, with expected VEGF-related AEs including prote
4.4K impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study design
HARMONi-2: A randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial
Patient Population
Locally advanced or
metastatic (IIIB-IV) NSCLC
Ivonescimab
20 mg/kg Q3W (N=198)
Key Eligibility Criteria
R
Treatment until no clinical
PD-L1 TPS ≥1%
1:1
benefit, unacceptable toxicity
No prior systemic therapy
or up to 24 months
No EGFRmutations or ALK
Pembrolizumab
N=398
alterations
200 mg Q3W (N=200)
ECOG PS 0 or 1
Stratification Factors
Endpoints
Clinical stage (IIIB/C VS IV)
Primary endpoint: PFS by blind IRRC per RECIST v1.1
Histology (SQ VS non-SQ)
Key Secondary endpoint : OS
PD-L1 TPS (≥50% VS 1-49%)
Secondary endpoints: PFS assessed by INVs, ORR, DoR, TTR and safety
Abbreviations: NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score; PD-L1, programmed
death ligand 1; TPS, tumor proportion score; R, randomization; SQ, squamous cell carcinoma; Q3W, every three weeks; PFS, progression-free survival; IRRC, independent radiology review committee; OS, overall survival;
INV, investigator; ORR, overall response rate; DoR, duration of response; TTR, time to response.
5
Caicun Zhou I HARMONi-2
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Statistical considerations
Hierarchical testing:
PFS tested first, followed by OS, to control the overall type I error at a one-sided α=0.025
PFS
α=0.025
PFS was statistically significant at interim analysis (mPFS 11.1 VS 5.8 months;
stratified HR 0.51 [95% CI 0.38-0.69]; one-sided p<0.0001), enabling formal OS testing
1
The prespecified interim OS analysis
The first IA was conducted at 157 events (HR 0.777, nominal a=0.0001*)
os
The second IA was conducted at 234 events, with one-sided alpha of 0.0141
α=0.025
based on the pre-specified O'Brien-Flemming spending function
*Minimal alpha allocated to the first IA of OS to provide preliminary OS information to support regulatory approval
Abbreviations: PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival; IA, interim analysis, HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.
6
Caicun Zhou HARMONi-2
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall survival
Ivonescimab demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in OS with a median follow-up of 36.0 months
Data cutoff date: Aug 20, 2026
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
(n 198)
(n 200)
90
30.8 mo
22.6 mo
mos (95% CI)
(25.4 37.8)
(17.8 26.5)
80
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.73 (0.57 0.95)
KN-042
HARMONi-2
70
p-value
0.009
China study'
OS rate (%)
vonescimab
Pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
60
(n - 198)
(n 200)
(n 128)
os
50
57.9%
45.0%
24-mo
57.9%
48.0%
43.8%
40
48.0%
30
33.1%
36-mo
45.0%
33.1%
28.1%
20
+
Censered
10
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizamab
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
1. Yilong Wu et at. Five-year outcomes of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in
Time (months)
Chinese patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and programmed cell death ligand
Number ofrisk
1 tumor proportion score '%: KEYNOTE-042 China study. Int. J. Cancer.
2026;158:2429-2439.
treatment 198
291
18)
178
160
150
141
136
125
122
113
113
105
101
"
$5
74
66
"
26
12
2
200
187
177
164
150
150
138
129
120
108
100
*
$6
78
72
65
64
55
40
22
4
9
Caicun Zhou | HARMONi-2
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Subgroup analysis of overall survival
OS benefit with ivonescimab was observed across prespecified subgroups
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
HR (95% CI)
(n/N)
(n/N)
Overall
104/198
130/200
0.73 (0.57, 0.95)
Age, years
< <65
49/97
52/85
0.75 (0.51, 1.11)
265
55/101
78/115
0.72 (0.51, 1.01)
Sex
Male
85/164
106/169
0.74 (0.56, 0.98)
Female
19/34
24/31
0.69 (0.38, 1.25)
Baseline ECOG
0
12/25
16/26
0.66 (0.31, 1.40)
1
92/173
114/174
0.74 (0.56, 0.98)
Smoking Status
Never
18/39
30/38
0.45 (0.25, 0.80)
Current smoker
18/39
22/42
0.88 (0.47, 1.64)
Former smoker
68/120
78/120
0.80 (0.58, 1.11)
Liver metastases
Yes
15/25
25/28
0.44 (0.23, 0.86)
No
89/173
105/172
0.78 (0.59, 1.04)
Brain metastases
Yes
22/33
31/39
0.80 (0.46, 1.38)
No
82/165
99/161
0.73 (0.54, 0.97)
23 metastases sites
Yes
34/49
43/51
0.69 (0.44, 1.08)
No
70/149
87/149
0.74 (0.54, 1.01)
Disease stage
IIIB/IIIC
8/15
5/16
1.98 (0.64, 6.06)
IV
96/183
125/184
0.68 (0.52, 0.89)
Histological type
Squamous
50/90
64/91
0.65 (0.45, 0.95)
Non-squamous
54/108
66/109
0.79 (0.55, 1.14)
PD-L1 tumor proportion score
>50%
37/83
54/85
0.58 38. 0.89)
1-49%
67/115
76/115
0.85 (0.61, 1.18)
0.1
10
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
Abbreviations: ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; PD-L1, programmed death ligand 1; CI, confidence interval.
10
Caicun Zhou I HARMONi-2
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall survival by PD-L1 expression level
OS benefit with ivonescimab was consistent in both PD-L1 High and PD-L1 Low expressors
PD-L1 High (TPS >50%)
PD-L1 Low (TPS 1-49%)
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
(n=83)
(n 85)
(n=115)
(n 115)
90
90
mOS
NR
23.2 mo
mos
28.5 mo
22.1 mo
10
#
70
63.2%
10
53.4%
60
50
54.1%
OS(%)
50
8 I
50
49.7%
38.6%
46.8%
40
#
30
HR = 0.58 (95% CI 0.38 0.89)
30
HR = 0.85 (95% CI 0.61 - 1.18)
34.1%
31.3%
20
20
+
Censered
+
Centred
10
Ivenescimab
10
Presecinab
Pembrolizamab
Pentrolizations
0
0
0
2
4
6
$
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
12
0
1
I
6
I
10
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
$
40
12
Time(months)
Time(nesth)
Number (isk
Nutedink
I
1)
"
"
"
"
83
"
11
5)
.
"
"
"
.
1
N
42
"
#
13
II
74
"
16
56
61
56
11
if
42
#
*
15
.
27
26
21
11
11
Petritional
in
103
-
.
"
11
7)
.
51
18
%
.
4)
0
11
18
14
22
12
The subgroup analysis was descriptive and not formally powered.
11
Caicun Zhou I HARMONi-2
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall survival by histology
OS benefit with ivonescimab was consistent in both squamous and non-squamous histology
Squamous
Non-Squamous
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
(n 90)
(n=91)
(n 108)
(n 109)
99
90
mOS
30.5 mo
19.3 mo
mos
33.6 mo
25.6 mo
#
#
70
70-
58.3%
60
60
57.5%
OS(%)
50
41.0%
48.2%
50
52.8%
-
40
40-
42.4%
38.3%
30
HR = 0.65 (95% CI 0.45 - 0.95)
30
HR = 0.79 (95% CI 0.55 - 1.14)
26.9%
20
20
+
Censored
Censed
10
Presescinab
10-
Pentrolment
Pentrolemal
0
0
0
6
10
12
14
16
=
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
0
0
:
6
$
10
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
31
40
42
Time(months)
Time (months)
Numbership
Nutritisk
Inconclusive 90
"
"
"
%
"
41
H
"
11
N
N
"
#
#
11
N
a
14
.
I
-
N
1)
"
#
"
Internal #1
15
12
%
11
17
4)
11
12
45
#
is
15
11
a
24
2
a
"
,
-
102
15
1)
15
11
a
#
N
16
11
et
"
a
"
"
2
11
The subgroup analysis was descriptive and not formally powered.
12
Caicun Zhou | HARMONi-2
DDr Amol Akhade@SuyogCancer
This probably is the best summary slide for Harmoni 2 trial data @IASLC @StephenVLiu @RManochakian @PatelOncology #wclc26 https://t.co/LdbUYEUJWp
4.2K impressions22 likes9 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
2026 world Conference
SEPTEMBER - 15, 2026
NSCLC, non-AGA
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
histology, PD 01 min 16s
HARMONi-2 - am I changing my clinical practice tomorrow for PD-
L1 ≥50% NSCLC (replacing anti-PD-L1 by Ivonescimab)?
Unpowered subgroup analysis of a secondary endpoint
No
Higher toxicity. Predictive biomarkers?
Do I think that this is exciting data?
Waiting for the phase III, global, HARMONi-7 trial results, in
Yes
PD-L1 ≥ 50% (by locally assessed Dako 22C3 / SP142)
YYüksel Ürün@DrYukselUrun
Ivonescimab beat pembrolizumab on overall survival in first-line PD-L1+ NSCLC!
Next chapter is longer follow-up from the separate global HARMONi study, including Western patients.
Different trial. Different population. But critical for understanding geographic translatability. @OncoAlert @OpenMedicineHQ @StephenVLiu @JackWestMD #WCLC26
3.9K impressions8 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
BBelmina Rose@bmcneely08
Two weeks ago I said the next thing I wanted from $SMMT was the actual survival data.
Now we have more of the answer.
HARMONi-2 showed median OS of 30.8 months with ivonescimab vs 22.6 months with Keytruda.
HR: 0.73.
That matters because PFS can tell you a drug delays progression.
OS tells you whether patients are actually living longer.
That is a much harder endpoint to dismiss.
The PD-L1 high
3.7K impressions14 likes12 reposts2026-09-17
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 closes with a landmark result: #ivonescimab became the first PD-1 × VEGF bispecific to beat pembrolizumab on overall survival in Phase 3.
Gotistobart, NAUTIKA1, AMIGO-1 and early mesothelioma data offer four more signals to watch.
#LungCancer #NSCLC https://t.co/rIaGuOGGBQ
3.6K impressions13 likes6 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
SEOUL
FINAL DAY
15 SEPTEMBER 2026
CTLA-4
WCLC 2026
PD-1
ALK
FINAL READOUTS
VEGF
EGFR
ONE LANDMARK RESULT FOUR SIGNALS TO WATCH
HARMONi-2
PHASE 3
FIRST-LINE PD-L1 ≥1% ADVANCED NSCLC
CHINA
n=398
36-MONTH FOLLOW-UP
FIRST PHASE 3 os WIN FOR A PD-1 X VEGF BISPECIFIC
VERSUS PEMBROLIZUMAB
IVONESCIMAB vs PEMBROLIZUMAB
OVERALL SURVIVAL
PROGRESSION-FREE SURVIVAL
30.8 VS 22.6 months
11.1 VS 5.8 months
HR 0.73
P=0.009
HR 0.51
+8.2 MONTHS
KEY SUBGROUPS
PD-L1 ≥50%
PD-L1 1-49%
SQUAMOUS
NON-SQUAMOUS
(OS)
HR 0.58
HR 0.85
HR 0.65
HR 0.79
PD-1 x VEGF IS NOW PHASE 3 os VALIDATED
!
LIMITS
SINGLE-COUNTRY STUDY
PEMBROLIZUMAB ALONE IS NOT THE IDEAL GLOBAL CONTROL FOR PD-L1 1-49%
No clear excess bleeding signal reported in the squamous subgroup
THE FINAL 24 HOURS
IMPORTANT BUT NOT EQUAL EVIDENCE
PRESERVE-003
PHASE 3 STAGE 1
NAUTIKA1
PHASE 2
GOTISTOBART REVIVES CTLA-4
ALK TARGETING MOVES BEFORE SURGERY
PRETREATED SQUAMOUS NSCLC AFTER CHEMOTHERAPY AND IMMUNOTHERAPY
RESECTABLE ALK-POSITIVE STAGE IB-IIIB NSCLC
os 18.5 VS 10.0 months
MPR 61%
pCR 25%
HR 0.56
Gotistobart vs docetaxel
Neoadjuvant alectinib
!
Strong signal
Stage 1 dataset n=87
!
Single-arm
Not practice-changing yet
AMIGO-1
PHASE 2
PUMITAMIG
PHASE 2
A PLATINUM-FREE EGFR TRIPLET
A NEW MESOTHELIOMA SIGNAL
FIRST-LINE EGFR-MUTANT METASTATIC NSCLC
FIRST-LINE UNRESECTABLE PLEURAL OR PERITONEAL MESOTHELIOMA
AMIVANTAMAB
+
LAZERTINIB
+
PEMETREXED
MEDIAN PFS 16.6 MONTHS
Chemotherapy-light intensification
PD-L1 x VEGF-A bispecific + platinum/pemetrexed
!
Single-arm proof of concept
!
China
Single-arm
Early
EXPERT
1
HARMONi-2 is the
Gotistobart reopens the
The other signals move therapy
2
3
TAKE
practice-defining biologic proof
CTLA-4 conversation after prior IO
earlier or chemotherapy-light
but still need confirmation
THE DIRECTION IS CLEAR
THE EVIDENCE IS NOT YET EQUAL
Sources
IASLC WCLC 2026
HARMONi-2
PRESERVE-003
NAUTIKA1
AMIGO-1
Pumitamig Phase 2
drozdogan.com
YYakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
Highlighted Studies at #WCLC26
1️⃣ HARMONi-2
In treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥1%, ivonescimab improved PFS (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) and OS (30.8 vs 22.6 months; HR 0.73) compared with pembrolizumab.
This is a genuinely positive trial, but it does not tell the same story for all PD-L1-positive patients. The OS benefit was clear in the ≥50% subgroup, whereas the HR was 0.85 with
9.1K impressions24 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC SEOUL 2026
WCLC26: KEY STUDIES
Early results key data at a glance
HARMONi-2
1
1L PD-L1 >1% advanced NSCLC
Clearly positive.
Strongest signal in PD-L1 >50%.
PFS 11.1 vs 5.8 mo
HR 0.51
In 1-49%, the control arm does
os 30.8 vs 22.6 mo
HR 0.73
not fully reflect current practice.
2
SWOG S1827 / MAVERICK
Post-treatment SCLC MRI surveillance vs MRI + PCI
With reliable MRI access, routine
PCI is now hard to justify.
Cognitive failure / death
HR 0.60
Final os is still needed before
Grade ≥3 toxicity 0.8% vs 7.9%
declaring PCI obsolete.
Interim OS and brain metastasis-free survival: no difference
TAISHAN-302
3
Relapsed SCLC B7-H3 ADC Tam-Peli vs topotecan
Clear survival gain.
A potential topotecan replacement;
os 13.3 vs 9.4 mo
HR 0.46
efficacy after tarlatamab
PFS 7.4 vs 2.8 mo
ORR 59% vs 10%
maintenance remains unknown.
ARTEMIS-008
4
Relapsed SCLC . B7-H3 ADC Ris-Rez VS topotecan
Confirms B7-H3 as a target.
No cross-trial comparison with
os 18.5 vs 10.3 mo
HR 0.46
TAISHAN; ILD and hematologic
PFS 7.2 vs 3.0 mo
ORR 58% vs 13%
toxicity may drive selection.
5
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
PD-L1 >50% metastatic NSCLC SG+pembro VS pembro
More tumor shrinkage,
ORR 56% vs 44%
similar response duration,
os 21.5 vs 22.8 mo
no OS gain:
Grade ≥3 toxicity 56% vs 17%
no role in clinical practice.
Primary PFS threshold not met
13 SEPTEMBER 2026 INTERIM CONGRESS SNAPSHOT
@dr_yakupergun
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
🫁 Meet the HARMONi family of ivonescimab trials.
First, the naming trick:
A → HARMONi → 2 → 6
There is no “1” — HARMONi itself is the trial name.
Four Phase III stories:
🔹 HARMONi-A → EGFRm, post-TKI
🔹 HARMONi → global EGFRm, post-3rd-gen TKI
🔹 HARMONi-2 → 1L PD-L1 ≥1%, IVO vs pembrolizumab
🔹 HARMONi-6 → 1L squamous, IVO + chemo vs tislelizumab + chemo
Different settings. Same central questi
3.9K impressions63 likes18 reposts2026-09-20
[Slide 1]
THE HARMONi FAMiLY
IVONESCiMAB
PD-1 X VEGF
MV Onco
4
PUBLISHED PHASE III TRIALS
A
HARMONi
2
6
NO "1" HERE!
"HARMONi" IS THE TRIAL NAME.
HARMONi-A
PFS
7.1 vs 4.8 mo
EGFRm NSCLC
HR 0.46
IVO + CHEMO
POST-TKI
vs
OS
CHEMO
16.8 vs 14.1 mo
CHINA
EGFR RESISTANT
HR 0.74
HARMONi
PFS
6.8 vs 4.4 mo
EGFRm NSCLC
IVO + CHEMO
HR 0.52
POST-3rd GEN TKI
vs
os
CHEMO
16.8 vs 14.0 mo
GLOBAL
EGFR RESISTANT
HR 0.79
PRIMARY OS ANALYSIS
NOT SIGNIFICANT
HARMONi-2
PFS
11.1 vs 5.8 mo
1L NSCLC
IVO
HR 0.51
PD-L1 ≥1%
vs
EGFR / ALK -
OS
PEMBRO
30.8 vs 22.6 To
PD-1 x VEGF
NO CHEMO
vs PD-1 ALONE
HR 0.73
HARMONi-6
PFS
11.1 vs 6.9 mo
1L
IVO + CHEMO
HR 0.60
SQUAMOUS NSCLC
ANY PD-L1
vs
OS
EGFR / ALK EXCLUDED
TISLELIZUMAB
27.9 vs 23.7 To
SQUAMOUS
+ CHEMO
HR 0.66
+ CHEMO
A
HARMONi
2
6
REMEMBER: NO "1"
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🆙 #WCLC26 #LCSM Oral Session
🔥 Overall Survival Analysis From HARMONi-2: Ivonescimab vs Pembrolizumab as First-Line Treatment for PD-L1-Positive NSCLC
🎯OS HR 0.73 (95%CI 0.57-0.95)
🎯Sq HR 0.65 (95%CI 0.45-0.95)
🎯Non-Sq HR 0.79 (95%CI 0.55-1.14)
🎯OS HR by PD-L1: 1-49% HR 0.85, ≥50% HR 0.58
🎙️ Dr. Caicun Zhou
🔢 OA14.01
🔗 https://t.co/6rnqfa9Nsn
@OncoAlert @Larvol @IASLC
3K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study design
5 / 18
HARMONi-2: A randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial
Patient Population
Locally advanced or
metastatic (IIIB-IV) NSCLC
Ivonescimab
20 mg/kg Q3W (N=198)
Key Eligibility Criteria
R
Treatment until no clinical
PD-L1 TPS ≥1%
1:1
benefit, unacceptable toxicity
No prior systemic therapy
or up to 24 months
No EGFRmutations or ALK
Pembrolizumab
N=398
alterations
200 mg Q3W (N=200)
ECOG PS 0 or 1
Stratification Factors
Endpoints
Clinical stage (IIIB/C VS IV)
Primary endpoint: PFS by blind IRRC per RECIST v1.1
Histology (SQ VS non-SQ)
Key Secondary endpoint : OS
PD-L1 TPS (≥50% VS 1-49%)
Secondary endpoints: PFS assessed by INVs, ORR, DoR, TTR and safety
Abbreviations: NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score; PD-L1, programmed
death ligand 1; TPS, tumor proportion score; R, randomization; SQ, squamous cell carcinoma; Q3W, every three weeks; PFS, progression-free survival; IRRC, independent radiology review committee; OS, overall survival;
INV, investigator; ORR, overall response rate; DoR, duration of response; TTR, time to response.
5
Caicun Zhou I HARMONi-2
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall survival
Ivonescimab demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in OS with a median follow-up of 36.0 months
Data cutoff date: Aug 20, 2026
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
(n = 198)
(n = 200)
90
30.8 mo
22.6 mo
mOS (95% CI)
(25.4 37.8)
(17.8 26.5)
80
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.73 (0.57 0.95)
KN-042
HARMONi-2
70
p-value
0.009
China study¹
OS rate (%)
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
60
(n = 198)
(n = 200)
(n = 128)
OS (%)
50
57.9%
45.0%
24-mo
57.9%
48.0%
43.8%
40
48.0%
30
33.1%
36-mo
45.0%
33.1%
28.1%
20
+
Censored
10
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
1. Yilong Wu et al. Five-year outcomes of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in
Time (months)
Chinese patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and programmed cell death ligand
Number ofrisk
1 tumor proportion score >1%: KEYNOTE-042 China study. Int. J. Cancer.
2026;158:2429-2439.
Ivonescimb 198
191
183
178
160
150
141
136
125
122
113
113
105
101
89
85
74
66
39
26
12
2
Pembrolizumnb 200
187
177
164
156
150
138
129
120
108
100
96
86
78
72
65
64
55
40
22
4
1
9
Caicun Zhou I HARMONi-2
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall survival by PD-L1 expression level
OS benefit with ivonescimab was consistent in both PD-L1 High and PD-L1 Low expressors
PD-L1 High (TPS >50%)
PD-L1 Low (TPS 1-49%)
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
(n = 83)
(n = 85)
(n = 115)
(n = 115)
90
90
mOS
NR
23.2 mo
mos
28.5 mo
22.1 mo
80
80
70
63.2%
70
53.4%
60
60
54.1%
OS (%)
50
so (%)
50
49.7%
38.6%
46.8%
40
40
30
HR = 0.58 (95% CI 0.38 - 0.89)
30
HR = 0.85 (95% CI 0.61 - 1.18)
34.1%
31.3%
20
20
+
Censored
+
Censored
10
Ivonescimab
10
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
0
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
Time(months)
Time(months)
Number ofrisk
Number ofrisk
Ivonescimeb 83
79
77
75
68
63
60
58
57
57
53
53
50
49
44
43
39
35
20
16
$
Ivonescimeb 115
112
106
103
92
87
81
78
68
65
60
60
55
52
45
42
35
31
19
10
4
Penbrolizumeb 85
80
74
68
66
66
61
56
51
45
42
40
36
35
30
27
26
21
18
10
2
1
Penbrolizumab 115
107
103
96
90
84
77
73
69
63
58
56
50
43
42
38
38
34
22
12
2
The subgroup analysis was descriptive and not formally powered.
11
Caicun Zhou I HARMONi-2
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Safety summary
Most common TRAEs (incidence ≥ 15%)
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
TRAE summary, n (%)
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
(n = 197 ᵃ)
(n = 199 ᵃ)
Proteinuria
48.2
8.1
13.1
TRAEs (all grade)
184 (93.4)
169 (84.9)
AST increased
25.9
1.0
1.0
17.6
Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs
82 (41.6)
43 (21.6)
Hypertension
20.3
7.1
0.5
3.0
Serious TRAEs
59 (29.9)
43 (21.6)
Anaemia
20.3
1.5
0.5
20.1
Leading to
discontinuation
8 (4.1)
10 (5.0)
ALT increased
19.3
1.5
1.0
15.6
Leading to death
1 (0.5)
3 (1.5)
Hypercholesterolaemia
19.3
14.1
Ivonescimab.All Grade
Pembrolizumab.All Grade
Hypoalbuminaemia
18.8
1.0
13.6
vonescimab.Grade ≥3
Pembrolizumab.Grade 23
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
Blood bilirubin increased
18.3
1.0
0.5
13.6
Possible VEGF-
(n = 197 ᵃ)
(n = 199 ᵃ)
Hypothyroidism
18.3
0.5
12.1
related AEs b, n (%)
All grade
Grade ≥ 3
All grade
Grade ≥ 3
Rash
9.6
0.5
1.5
17.6
Proteinuria
95 (48.2)
16 (8.1)
26 (13.1)
0
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Hypertension
40 (20.3)
14 (7.1)
6 (3.0)
1 (0.5)
Patients with TRAEs (%)
Haematuria
18 (9.1)
0
17 (8.5)
0
Haemoptysis
13 (6.6)
0
7 (3.5)
1 (0.5)
The median duration of exposure:
Epistaxis
3 (1.5)
0
0
0
14.0 cycles (ivonescimab) vs 10.0 cycles (pembrolizumab)
Gingival bleeding
2 (1.0)
0
0
0
No new safety signals
Cerebral infarction
2 (1.0)
2 (1.0)
1 (0.5)
0
No apparent increase in bleeding risk
a Patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment. b Possible VEGF-related AEs occurring in 1% of patients in either arm are presented.
Abbreviations: TRAEs, treatment-related adverse events;irAE, immune-related adverse events; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase.
15
Caicun Zhou HARMONi-2
6MAVERICKView full trial page →144.2K impressions107.6K primary · 36.5K preview861 engagements113 posts · 80 voices▾
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Landmark, practice changing study at #WCLC26. The phase III MAVERICK study shows no improvement in OS with PCI for SCLC, across limited and extensive stages, with worse cognitive failure free survival and increased toxicity in PCI arm.
The end of the PCI era. https://t.co/SWOPM7iKux
14.6K impressions22 likes10 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
Overall Survival
100%
Preliminary analyses at 128 events
suggest no significant difference in
N
Events
Median(months)
90% CI
MRI brain surveilance
151
67
29.8
(24.8-48.6)
overall survival (OS)
PCI
* MRI brain surveilance
152
61
31.4
75%
(24.4-36.3)
HR(90% Ci): 0.90 (0.67-1.20)
MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
% Survival
Upper bound of 90% CI of 1.2 for MRI
50%
alone is currently below the non-inferiority
margin of 1.25
25%
MRI brain surveillance
Final OS results will be analyzed after 190
PCI
+ MRI brain surveillance
events
0%
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
Number at risk (events / censor)
Months After Randomization
MRI brain surveillance 151 (0/1) 132 (12/7)101 (29/21)76 (44/31) 55 (53/43): 39 (61/51) 31 (64/56): 21 (64/66) 16 (65/70) 11 (67/73) 3 (67 / 81)
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 152 (0/3) 112 (15/25)84 (31/37) 63 (41/48) 47 (48/57) 35 (51/66) 20 (57/75) 15 (59/78) 10 (59/83) 4 (60/88) 1 (61 / 90)
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. Chad Rusthoven at #WCLC26 presents results from SWOG S1827, the phase III MAVERICK study exploring the benefit of PCI in pts with SCLC. Historic studies before the era of MRI surveillance showed a decrease in brain metastases with PCI and an improvement in OS but recent ES-SCLC studies called the OS improvement into question. MAVERICK looks at both LS and ES disease - note primary endpoint her
10.9K impressions23 likes10 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 42s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SWOG S1827/MAVERICK Trial
Hypothesis
Compared with PCI + MRI surveillance, MRI surveillance alone will result in
superior cognitive failure free survival (CFFS) without a decline in OS
6
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 35s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SWOG S1827/MAVERICK
MRI Brain Surveillance Alone Versus MRI Surveillance and Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation (PCI):
A Randomized Phase III Trial in Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Prophylactic cranial
MRI brain surveillance
irradiation (PCI)
Small-cell lung cancer
(Limited OR Extensive)
Stratify: 1. Limited vs Extensive stage
No prior brain metastases
R
2. Immunotherapy (y/n) 3. Performance Status (0-1 vs 2)
No brain metastases on
MRI after 1st line therapy
No PCI
MRI brain surveillance
Primary Endpoint:
Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
MRI brain surveillance and cognitive testing at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months
(time to cognitive decline or death)
-
-
PCI was 25 Gy / 10 FX, hippocampal-avoidance (HA) PCI allowed at physician discretion
7
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 52s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Trial Design
Eligibility
Patients with limited-stage (LS) and extensive-stage (ES) disease, ≥18 years of age, performance status 0-2
LS-SCLC: must have completed platinum-based chemotherapy and either definitive thoracic radiation or surgical resection
ES-SCLC: must have completed platinum-based chemotherapy
Immunotherapy (concurrent and/or adjuvant to upfront treatment) allowed for both LS- and ES-SCLC
Enrollment within 16 weeks of Day 1 of the last cycle of chemotherapy
Pts must have a response to upfront therapy & no progression in opinion of treating physician (CT or PET/CT within 42 days)
No history of brain metastases and no evidence of brain metastases on MRI within 28 days of enrollment
MRI surveillance
Contrast-enhanced brain MRIs performed at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months
MRI sequences per the Brain Tumor Imaging Protocol for BM (BTIP-BM) consensus recs (Kaufmann, Neuro-oncology 22.6 (2020): 757-772)
Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI)
25 Gy delivered in 10 Fx
Hippocampal avoidance (HA-PCI) allowed at physician discretion
Radiation therapy recommended at time of brain metastases
Radiosurgery (SRS) and whole-brain radiation (WBRT)/hippocampal-avoidant (HA)-WBRT allowed at physician discretion
8
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
Very excited about the #MAVERICK study for our patients with SCLC.
Is PCI still needed in the modern day MRI brain surveillance era? #WCLC26 @IASLC https://t.co/TvIHH1m6DH
5.2K impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
DIOU
YAS SCHL
MARAD
4
-
45
A ANY -
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | SWOG S1827/MAVERICK
🧠 Ph3: MRI surveillance vs PCI + MRI after 1L therapy in LS/ES-SCLC (n=303)
📌 Primary endpoint amended from OS → cognitive failure-free survival (CFFS) due to accrual
📉 CFFS favored MRI alone: HR 0.60 (90% CI 0.46–0.78)
• 6-mo: 38% vs 17%
• 12-mo: 17% vs 6%
🧠 PCI ↓ brain mets: 12-mo 15% vs 30% (sHR 2.19)
📊 No PFS difference: HR 0.96
⏳ Preliminary OS similar: HR 0.9
3.5K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
06 min 31s
SWOG S1827/MAVERICK
MRI Brain Surveillance Alone Versus MRI Surveillance and Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation (PCI):
A Randomized Phase III Trial in Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Prophylactic cranial
MRI brain surveillance
irradiation (PCI)
Small-cell lung cancer
(Limited OR Extensive)
Stratify: 1. Limited VS Extensive stage
No prior brain metastases
R
2. Immunotherapy (y/n) 3. Performance Status (0-1 VS 2)
No brain metastases on
MRI after 1st line therapy
No PCI
MRI brain surveillance
Primary Endpoint:
Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
- MRI brain surveillance and cognitive testing at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months
(time to cognitive decline or death)
-
PCI was 25 Gy / 10 FX, hippocampal-avoidance (HA) PCI allowed at physician discretion
7
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
02 min 01s
Primary Endpoint - Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
100%
MRI surveillance alone resulted in improved CFFS
T
MRI brain surveillance
+
PCI
+ MRI brain surveillance
MRI alone, HR 0.60, 90% CI 0.46-0.78, p=0.0005
75%
N
Events
6-month Estimate(%)
90% CI
Patients randomized to MRI alone were significantly
MRI brain surveillance
113
91
37.8
(30.0-45.5)
% CFFS
more likely to be both alive and free from cognitive
50%
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
107
92
16.5
(10.7-23.4)
decline compared to those randomized to MRI+PCI
HR(90% CI): 0.60 (0.46-0.78)
1-sided p-value: 0.0005
25%
Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS)
1
0%
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
6 month % [90% CI]
12 month % [90% CI]
Months After Randomization
Number at risk (events / censor)
MRI alone
38% [30-46]
17% [12-24]
MRI brain surveillance 113 (0/0) 72 (33/8) 38 (66/9) 23 (80 10) 14 (86/13) 11 (88/14) 10 (88/15) 8 (90/15) 1 (91/21)
MRI + PCI
17% [11-23]
6% [3-11]
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 107 (0/0) 60 (35/12) 14 (80/13) 9 (85/13) 5 (89 / 13) 2 (91/14) 2 (91/14) 2 (91/14) NA
*Detailed analyses of cognitive function will be
presented at an upcoming meeting
12
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
00 min 45s
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Subgroup analyses of cognitive failure free survival (CFFS) by disease stage
Limited Stage
100%
Extensive Stage
100%
75%
75%
-
MRI brain surveillance
-
MRI brain surveillance
% CFFS
-
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
% CFFS
50%
-
50%
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
25%
25%
0%
0%
3
9
12
15
18
21
24
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
0
6
Months After Randomization
Number at risk (events 1 censor)
Months After Randomization
Number at risk (events / censor)
MRI brain surveillance 80 (0/0) 55 (21 / 4) 31(44/5) 19 (55/6) 12 (60/8) 11(61/8) 10 (61/9) 8 (63/9) 1 (64 / 15)
MRI brain surveillance 33 (0/0) 17 (12/4) 7(22/4) 4 (25/4) 2 (26/5)
NA
NA
NA
NA
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 78(0/0) 48(25/5) 12(60/6) 9 (63/6) 5(67/6) 2 (69 / 7) 2 (69 / 7) 2 (69 / 7) NA
MRI brain surveillance
29 (0/0) 12 (10/7) 2 (20/7)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HR 0.59 (90% CI, 0.43-0.79)
HR 0.65 (90% CI, 0.38-1.10)
6-month CFFS: 42.3% (MRI) vs 18.2% (MRI+PCI)
6-month CFFS: 25.7% (MRI) vs 10.6% (MRI+PCI)
14
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
00 min 11s
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall Survival
100%
Preliminary analyses at 128 events
suggest no significant difference in
N
Events
Median(months)
90% CI
MRI brain surveillance
151
67
29.8
(24.8-48.6)
overall survival (OS)
75%
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
152
61
31.4
(24.4-36.3)
HR(90% CI): 0.90 (0.67-1.20)
MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
% Survival
Upper bound of 90% CI of 1.2 for MRI
50%
alone is currently below the non-inferiority
margin of 1.25
25%
MRI brain surveillance
Final OS results will be analyzed after 190
+
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
events
0%
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
Number at risk (events / censor)
Months After Randomization
MRI brain surveillance 151 (0/1) 132 (12/7)101 (29/21)76 (44/31) 55 (53/43) 39 (61/51) 31 (64/56) 21 (64/66) 16 (65/70) 11 (67/73) 3 (67/81)
PCI + MRI brain surveillance 152 (0/3) 112 (15 25)84 (31/37) 63 (41/48) 47 (48/57) 35 (51/66) 20 (57/75) 15 (59/78) 10 (59/83) 4 (60/88) 1 (61/90)
15
TThe ASCO Post@ASCOPost
🧠 Phase 3️⃣ MAVERICK: Brain MRI surveillance alone improved cognitive failure-free survival vs MRI + prophylactic cranial irradiation in #SCLC.
️➡️ No apparent OS difference
➡️ Fewer serious TRAEs
🗣️Presented by Chad Rusthoven, MD at #WCLC26
🔗 https://t.co/0ozyRq9sET https://t.co/wA3JRcO6kV
3.3K impressions15 likes12 reposts2026-09-17
[Slide 1]
S
NNonsparseOncologist@5_utr
MAVERICK: MRI surveillance +/- PCI for SCLC; SRS/WBRT if development of brain mets
Primary endpoint, OS with a whopping NI margin of 25% greater hazard of death ❗️ and OS results premature https://t.co/lpKoASZHq8
3.2K impressions21 likes2 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
00 min 05s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall Survival
100%
Preliminary analyses at 128 events
suggest no significant difference in
N
Events
Median(months)
90% CI
MRI brain surveillance
151
67
29.8
overall survival (OS)
(24.8-48.6)
75%
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
152
61
31.4
(24.4-36.3)
HR(90% CI):
0.90 (0.67-1.20)
MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
% Survival
Upper bound of 90% CI of 1.2 for MRI
50%
alone is currently below the non-inferiority
HH
-
margin of 1.25
25%
MRI brain surveillance
+
PCI + MRI brain surveillance
Final OS results will be analyzed after 190
events
0%
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
Number at risk (events / censor)
Months After Randomization
brain surveillance 151 (0/1) 132 (12/7)101 (29/21)76 (44/31) 55 (53/43) 39 (61/51) 31 (64/56) 21 (64/66) 16 (65/70) 11 (67/73) 3 (67/81)
ain surveillance 152 (0/3) 112 (15/25)84 (31/37) 63 (41/48) 47 (48/57) 35 (51/66) 20 (57/75) 15 (59/78) 10 (59/83) 4 (60/88) 1 (61/90)
15
OOncology Brothers@OncBrothers
Highlights from #WCLC26 #CommunityOncology:
NSCLC
1. #ADAURA Update Adj mEGFR
2. #PAPILLON 1L EGFR Ex20
3. #DESTINYLung04 1L mHER2
4. #ARROS1 1L ROS1+
5. #HARMONi 2L mEGFR
SCLC
6. #MAVERICK @SWOG MRI surv
7. #DeLLphi Tarla SubQ & ⬇️ freq
#lcsm #OncTwitter @IASLC
1/8 https://t.co/K5kHEzMTvv
11.4K impressions10 likes9 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
THE
IASLC
2026 D
2026 World Conference
Endorsed by
Korean
Association
for
on Lung Cancer
KAL
Lung Cancer
C
SEPTEMBER 12 — 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
YYakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
Highlighted Studies at #WCLC26
1️⃣ HARMONi-2
In treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥1%, ivonescimab improved PFS (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) and OS (30.8 vs 22.6 months; HR 0.73) compared with pembrolizumab.
This is a genuinely positive trial, but it does not tell the same story for all PD-L1-positive patients. The OS benefit was clear in the ≥50% subgroup, whereas the HR was 0.85 with
9.1K impressions24 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC SEOUL 2026
WCLC26: KEY STUDIES
Early results key data at a glance
HARMONi-2
1
1L PD-L1 >1% advanced NSCLC
Clearly positive.
Strongest signal in PD-L1 >50%.
PFS 11.1 vs 5.8 mo
HR 0.51
In 1-49%, the control arm does
os 30.8 vs 22.6 mo
HR 0.73
not fully reflect current practice.
2
SWOG S1827 / MAVERICK
Post-treatment SCLC MRI surveillance vs MRI + PCI
With reliable MRI access, routine
PCI is now hard to justify.
Cognitive failure / death
HR 0.60
Final os is still needed before
Grade ≥3 toxicity 0.8% vs 7.9%
declaring PCI obsolete.
Interim OS and brain metastasis-free survival: no difference
TAISHAN-302
3
Relapsed SCLC B7-H3 ADC Tam-Peli vs topotecan
Clear survival gain.
A potential topotecan replacement;
os 13.3 vs 9.4 mo
HR 0.46
efficacy after tarlatamab
PFS 7.4 vs 2.8 mo
ORR 59% vs 10%
maintenance remains unknown.
ARTEMIS-008
4
Relapsed SCLC . B7-H3 ADC Ris-Rez VS topotecan
Confirms B7-H3 as a target.
No cross-trial comparison with
os 18.5 vs 10.3 mo
HR 0.46
TAISHAN; ILD and hematologic
PFS 7.2 vs 3.0 mo
ORR 58% vs 13%
toxicity may drive selection.
5
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
PD-L1 >50% metastatic NSCLC SG+pembro VS pembro
More tumor shrinkage,
ORR 56% vs 44%
similar response duration,
os 21.5 vs 22.8 mo
no OS gain:
Grade ≥3 toxicity 56% vs 17%
no role in clinical practice.
Primary PFS threshold not met
13 SEPTEMBER 2026 INTERIM CONGRESS SNAPSHOT
@dr_yakupergun
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 — The Studies to Watch
Seoul, 12–15 September
A clinical map of the key questions at @IASLC WCLC 2026: early/locally advanced NSCLC, oncogenic drivers, IO combinations, SCLC (including CNS), limited-stage multimodal therapy, and local control.
Presidential symposium highlights include ADAURA OS update, PAPILLON, REZILIENT 3, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, TAISHAN-302, A
5.5K impressions5 likes4 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026: THE STUDIES TO WATCH
Seoul
12-15 September 2026
Presidential symposium
01
EARLY / LOCALLY ADVANCED NSCLC
02
ADVANCED NSCLC: DRIVERS
ADAURA
PL03.01
PAPILLON
PL03.03
Osimertinib
exploratory 8-year OS
EGFR exon 20 amivantamab + chemo
os
IMpower030
OA04.03
REZILIENT 3
PL03.04
Perioperative atezolizumab + chemo
EGFR exon 20 zipalertinib + chemo
MDT-BRIDGE
ARROS-1
PL03.06
OA04.02
ROS1 zidesamtinib TKI-naive
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemo
DESTINY-Lung04
PL03.08
Adjuvant gefitinib + chemo
OA04.01
HER2-mutant
first-line T-DXd
EGFR-mutant phase III
HARMONi
0A14.05
NAUTIKA1
M006.01/ OA04.04
Post-EGFR TKI ivonescimab + chemo os
Neoadjuvant alectinib / divarasib
AMIGO-1
0A12.04
Amivantamab + lazertinib + pemetrexed
03
ADVANCED NSCLC: NO DRIVER
04
SCLC: SYSTEMIC THERAPY & CNS
HARMONi-2
OA14.01
TAISHAN-302
PL02.03
Ivonescimab vs pembrolizumab OS
Tam-Peli vs topotecan relapsed
ARTEMIS-008
PL02.04
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE D46
PL02.06
Risvutatug rezetecan vs topotecan
Sacituzumab govitecan + pembrolizumab
PD-L1 ≥50%
SWOG S1827 MAVERICK
PL02.01
Pumitamig + BNT324
0A14.02
Brain MRI surveillance ± cranial irradiation
PD-L1/VEGF-A + B7-H3
NSCLC/SCLC
DeLLphi-309
OA05.01
Tarlatamab extended-interval dosing
RC148 / ABBV-1480
OA14.04
PD-1/VEGF bispecific + chemo
DeLLphi-308
M015.07
Tarlatamab subcutaneous delivery
MAVERICK: cross-stage brain prevention.
05
LIMITED-STAGE SCLC
06
SURGERY, RADIOTHERAPY & LOCAL CONTROL
Neoadjuvant serplulimab + chemo
M015.03
Wedge vs segmentectomy
OA08.01
pathological response / MRD
GGO-dominant early NSCLC
GREAT
OA08.02
Serplulimab + concurrent CRT
P3.288
Segmentectomy VS lobectomy
followed by serplulimab phase
II
STARLORD
OA09.04
CXCL9+ DCs / CXCR3+ Tregs
M015.01
Stereotactic RT when concurrent CRT is unsuitable
treatment resistance
LONESTAR
0A14.03
Early clinical and translational signals
Local consolidation after nivolumab + ipilimumab
EMERGING SCIENCE
KRAS G12D: GFH375 / QLC1101
DLL3 CAR-T: LB2102
mRNA vaccine: BNT116
OA12.01-02
OA05.02
M006.03
Pre-congress watchlist
Not a results summary
11 Sep 2026
Source: IASLC WCLC 2026 program
wclc.iaslc.org
7TAISHAN-302View full trial page →109.6K impressions80.4K primary · 29.2K preview416 engagements69 posts · 47 voices▾
NNoemi Reguart@NReguart
What a day for #SCLC!
Two positive phase III ADC trials today at #WCLC26 ARTEMIS-008 and TAISHAN-302— and this may be just the beginning. Look at the pipeline 👇 The ADC era has finally arrived in SCLC. Bye bye, topotecan! 🚀 https://t.co/fjXfmHC7KL
7.4K impressions44 likes18 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
PHASE 3, HEAD-TO-HEAD VS TOPOTECAN
B7-H3
I-DXd
IDeate-Lung02 (NCT06203210)
HS-20093
ARTEMIS-008 (NCT06498479)
GSK5764227
EMBOLD SCLC-301
(NCT07099898)
MHB088C
MHB088C-P-301 (NCT06954246)
YL201
TAISHAN-302 (NCT06612151)
TROP2
SG
EVOKE-SCLC-04 (NCT06801834)
EGFR X HER3
BL-B01D1
PANKU-Lung03 (NCT06500026)
DLL3
ZL-1310
DLLEVATE (NCT07218146)
SEZ6
ABBV-706
M23-384 (NCT07365241)
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. Li Zhang presents results from TAISHAN-302: phase III study of tambotatug pelitecan (tam-peli, YL201), a B7-H3 antibody drug conjugate (topo-1 payload, DAR 8) vs topotecan in relapsed SCLC at #WCLC26. Included pts with SCLC progressed after 1 line of platinum-based chemotherapy with a 1:1 randomization to tam-peli 2mg/kg q3w vs standard topotecan. Median f/u ~9m and 71 pts in tam-peli arm stil
4.3K impressions10 likes6 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
I
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
-02 min 24s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
TAISHAN-302 Study Design
A multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (NCT06612151)
Treatment until disease progression per RECIST v1.1 or
intolerable toxicity. Crossover between arms is not permitted.
Primary endpoint:
Key eligibility criteria:
OS
Tam-Peli
Histologically or cytologically
2.0 mg/kg, D1 Q3W,
Key secondary endpoints:
confirmed SCLC
maximum dose of 200 mg
PFS by investigators
R
ORR by investigators
Progressed after 1 prior line
of platinum-based therapy
1:1
Other secondary endpoints:
Topotecan
DCR, DoR, TTR by investigators
At least one measurable
lesion per RECIST v1.1
N=451
Safety, PK, and immunogenicity
1.2 mg/m², D1-5 Q3W*
ECOG PS 0-1
Exploratory endpoints:
Intracranial efficacy
Stratification factors
Disease status (local" or systemic disease)
Brain metastasis (yes or no)
Chemotherapy-free interval (<90 or >90 days)
Per the prescribing enformation approved in China
" Patients with local driend defined as those initially diagnosed with Inded viage disease who developed local recumence within 6 months after pârlinum based pkm definitive radiotherapy
D. day. DCR disease control rate DoR duration of response COOG PS. Eastom Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, ORR, objective response - OS, overall united PFS progression from united
PK, phamacokinetics, Q3W every 3 WORKS, TTR time to response
4
Li Zhang I Tam-Peli, an anti-B7-H3 antibody-drug conjugate, versus topotecan in relapsed SCLC: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (TAISHAN-302)
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
-04 min 35s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Patient Disposition
451 patients randomized
FPI: Dec 17, 2024
LPI: Oct 26, 2025
225 assigned to
226 assigned to
Tam-Peli arm (ITT)
Topotecan arm (ITT)
1 treatment discontinued
9 treatment discontinued
224 treated with
217 treated with
Tam-Peli (SS)
Topotecan (SS)
153 treatment discontinued
209 treatment discontinued
104 Disease progression per RECIST v1.1
153 Disease progression per RECIST v1.1
19 Patient decision
31 Patient decision
16 Adverse event
6 Adverse event
6 Clinical disease progression
7 Clinical disease progression
6 Death
6 Death
2 Others
6 Others
71 treatment ongoing
8 treatment ongoing
Data cut-off: May 20, 2026. Median follow-up was 9.2 months (95% Cl: 8.8, 10.2) for Tam-Peli and 9.5 months (95% Cl: 8.9, 10.1) for topotecan.
FPI, first patient in; ITT, intent-to-treat set; LPI, last patient in, RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; SS, safety set.
6
Li Zhang
Tam-Peli, an anti-B7-H3 antibody-drug conjugate, versus topotecan in relapsed SCLC: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (TAISHAN-302)
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
-05 min 20s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Baseline Characteristics
Tam-Peli
Characteristic, n (%)
Topotecan
(N = 225)
(N = 226)
Median (range), years
62.0 (28, 74)
62.0 (18, 75)
Age
≥ 65
88 (39.1)
77 (34.1)
Male
183 (81.3)
191 (84.5)
Sex
Female
42 (18.7)
35 (15.5)
0
39 (17.3)
27 (11.9)
ECOG PS
1
186 (82.7)
199 (88.1)
Current or former
162 (72.0)
158 (69.9)
Smoking history
Never
63 (28.0)
68 (30.1)
Chemotherapy
225 (100)
226 (100)
Immunotherapy
194 (86.2)
199 (88.1)
Prior therapy
Target therapy
13 (5.8)
19 (8.4)
Other
5 (2.2)
5 (2.2)
Local disease*
7 (3.1)
10 (4.4)
Disease stage at enrollment
Systemic disease
218 (96.9)
216 (95.6)
≥ 90 days
115 (51.1)
116 (51.3)
Chemotherapy-free interval
< 90 days
110 (48.9)
110 (48.7)
Brain
78 (34.7)
77 (34.1)
Metastases
Liver
72 (32.0)
80 (35.4)
≥ 3 distant metastatic sites"
86 (42.0)
77 (36.2)
* Patients with local disease defined as those initially diagnosed with limited-stage disease who developed local recurrence within 6 months after platinum-based chemotherapy plus definitive radiotherapy
** Percentages are based on the number of patients who have metastases.
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.
7
Li Zhang I Tam-Peli, an anti-B7-H3 antibody-drug conjugate, versus topotecan in relapsed SCLC: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (TAISHAN-302)
iilyas sahin, MD@ilyassahinMD
Small-cell lung cancer is an aggressive cancer that often comes back after initial treatment.
In phase 3 TAISHAN-302, tambotatug pelitecan (Tam-Peli) beat the standard chemotherapy topotecan:
• Survival: 13.3 vs 9.4 months
• PFS: 7.4 vs 2.8 months
• Response: 59% vs 10%
• Grade ≥3 side effects: 55% vs 78%
Longer survival, much higher response, and less severe toxicity ; a striking result in rel
3.7K impressions53 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
a account now. Already nave an
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
f X in
"
Tambotatug Pelitecan in
Small-Cell Lung Cancer
after Platinum-Based
Therapy
Authors: Yuanyuan Zhao, M.D., Hongxu Liu, M.D.,
iD
Xiangjiao Meng, M.D.
, Zhihua Liu, M.D., Yan
Yu, Ph.D., Yulong Zheng, Ph.D., Longhua Sun,
M.D., +25 , for the TAISHAN-302
Investigators* Author Info & Affiliations
Published September 12, 2026
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2610229
NEW
Copyright © 2026
DDr Rishabh Jain@DrRishabhOnco
🚨 TAISHAN-302 | A major new option in relapsed SCLC
Phase 3 data in NEJM: Tambotatug pelitecan (Tam-Peli), a B7-H3–targeted ADC, significantly outperformed topotecan after platinum-based therapy.
451 patients randomized 1:1
📌 Overall survival
13.3 vs 9.4 months
HR 0.46 | P<0.001
📌 PFS
7.4 vs 2.8 months
HR 0.29 | P<0.001
📌 ORR
59.1% vs 9.7%
📌 Grade ≥3 AEs
55.4% vs 77.9%
Notably, intrac
3.2K impressions9 likes1 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
NEJM
Sept 12, 2026
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2610229
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
TAISHAN-302
TARGETING
B7-H3
IN SCLC
B7-H3 ADC delivers major survival gain
in relapsed small-cell lung cancer
Phase 3
Tambotatug pelitecan (Tam-Peli) VS topotecan
N = 451
OVERALL SURVIVAL
PROGRESSION-FREE SURVIVAL
13.3 vs 9.4
7.4
vs
2.8
months
months
months
months
HR 0.46
P < 0.001
HR 0.29
P<0.001
OBJECTIVE RESPONSE RATE
GRADE ≥3 ADVERSE EVENTS
Newtments.
More hope.
59.1%
vs
9.7%
55.4%
VS
77.9%
Tam-Peli
Topotecan
Tam-Peli
Topotecan
P < 0.001
INTRACRANIAL RESPONSE
32%
vs
3%
(n = = 143 with baseline intracranial lesions)
Tam-Peli
Topotecan
VERDICT
A compelling new second-line
option in relapsed SCLC.
SCLC, small-cell lung cancer.
NCT06612151.
@DrRishabhOnco
WHERE SCIENCE
MEETS BETTER CARE.
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | TAISHAN-302 (1st interim)
📚 Simultaneously published in NEJM
https://t.co/iyQXEIkVmA
🧬 Ph3: Tam-Peli (YL201), a B7-H3 ADC, vs topotecan in relapsed SCLC after 1 prior platinum line (n=451; ~87% prior IO)
🏆 OS: 13.3 vs 9.4 mo; HR 0.46 (95% CI 0.35–0.62, p<0.0001)
📉 PFS: 7.4 vs 2.8 mo; HR 0.29
🎯 cORR: 59.1% vs 9.7%
🧠 Intracranial activity:
• PFS: 6.1 vs 4.2 mo; HR 0.43
• cORR: 32.4%
3.1K impressions16 likes5 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
-02 min 24s
TAISHAN-302 Study Design
A multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (NCT06612151)
Treatment until disease progression per RECIST v1.1 or
intolerable toxicity. Crossover between arms is not permitted.
Primary endpoint:
Key eligibility criteria:
OS
Tam-Peli
Histologically or cytologically
2.0 mg/kg, D1 Q3W,
Key secondary endpoints:
confirmed SCLC
maximum dose of 200 mg
PFS by investigators
R
ORR by investigators
Progressed after 1 prior line
of platinum-based therapy
1:1
Other secondary endpoints:
Topotecan
DCR, DoR, TTR by investigators
At least one measurable
lesion per RECIST v1.1
N=451
Safety, PK, and immunogenicity
1.2 mg/m2, D1-5 Q3W*
ECOG PS 0-1
Exploratory endpoints:
Intracranial efficacy
Stratification factors
Disease status (local** or systemic disease)
Brain metastasis (yes or no)
Chemotherapy-free interval (<90 or >90 days)
* Per the prescribing information approved in China.
** Patients with local disease defined as those initially diagnosed with limited-stage disease who developed local recurrence within 6 months after platinum-based chemotherapy plus definitive radiotherapy.
D, day, DCR, disease control rate; DoR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival,
PK, pharmacokinetics; Q3W, every 3 weeks; TTR, time to response.
4
Zhana Tam. an anti-B7-H3 antibodv-drug coniugate. versus topotecan in relapsed SCLC: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (TAISHAN-302)
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
-05 min 31s
Overall Survival
Tam-Peli demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in os vs. topotecan,
with a 54% reduction in rate of death
100%
Tam-Peli
Topotecan
80%
(N = 225)
(N = 226)
Probability (%) of survival
OS events, n (%)
76 (33.8)
60%
124 (54.9)
Median OS,
13.3
9.4
40%
months (95% CI)
(12.1, NE)
(7.7, 10.5)
20%
+ + Censored
Tam-Peli
Topotecan
HR 0.46 (95% Cl: 0.35, 0.62)
0%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
P <0.0001*
Time (Months)
No. at risk:
Time (Months) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Tam-Peli 225 223 222 219 211 204 194 171 126 88 64 48 30 18 12 3 2 0 0
Topotecan 226 224 213 197 179 164 147 122 97 65 44 27 17 11 7 5 2 1 0
Data cut-off: May 20, 2026. Median follow-up of OS was 9.2 months for Tam-Peli and 9.5 months for topotecan. compared with a=0.0075, which is calculated based on actual number of OS events observed (200).
CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio (stratified); NE, not estimable; OS, overall survival.
8
Li Zhang I Tam-Peli, an anti-B7-H3 antibody-drug conjugate, versus topotecan in relapsed SCLC: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (TAISHAN-302)
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
-06 min 08s
OS in Subgroups
A consistent os benefit of Tam-Peli over topotecan was observed across all predefined subgroups
No. of events/subjects
Category
Subgroup
Tam-Peli
Topotecan
Hazard Ratio (95%CI)
Overall
76/225
124/226
0.46 (0.35, 0.62)
<65 years
46/137
77/149
Age
0.52 (0.36, 0.75)
≥65 years
30/88
47/77
0.42 (0.26, 0.66)
Male
66/183
110/191
Sex
0.49 (0.36, 0.66)
Female
10/42
14/35
0.51 (0.22, 1.15)
0
10/39
9/27
ECOG PS
0.72 (0.29, 1.78)
1
66/186
115/199
0.47 (0.35, 0.63)
Yes
54/162
91/158
Smoking history
0.42 (0.30, 0.59)
No
22/63
33/68
0.63 (0.37, 1.08)
Yes
64/194
110/199
Prior PD-(L)1 therapy
0.44 (0.33, 0.61)
No
12/31
14/27
0.76 (0.35, 1.66)
Local disease*
0/7
5/10
0.00 (0.00, NE)
Disease stage at enrollment
Systemic disease
76/218
119/216
0.49 (0.36, 0.65)
>90 days
33/115
54/116
0.51 (0.33, 0.80)
Chemotherapy-free interval
<90 days
43/110
70/110
0.44 (0.30, 0.64)
Yes
27/78
45/77
0.43 (0.27, 0.70)
Brain metastasis
No
49/147
79/149
0.50 (0.35, 0.72)
Yes
29/72
57/80
0.34 (0.22, 0.54)
Liver metastasis
No
47/153
67/146
0.59 (0.41, 0.86)
High
5/12
7/10
0.34 (0.10, 1.09)
B7-H3 expression**
Intermediate
13/38
17/36
0.66 (0.32, 1.36)
Low
31/104
46/83
0.40 (0.26, 0.64)
Favors Tam-Peli
Favors Topotecan
* Patients with local disease defined as those initially diagnosed with limited-stage disease who developed local recurrence
within 6 months after platinum-based chemotherapy plus definitive radiotherapy.
0
0.5
1 1.5 2
** Include patients who have baseline B7-H3 expression data only. H-score is categorized as low (0-100), intermediate
(101-200), or high (201-300).
Hazard Ratio
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; OS, overall survival,
9
Li
Zhang I Tam-Peli, an anti-B7-H3 antibody-drug conjugate, versus topotecan in relapsed SCLC: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (TAISHAN-302)
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
-06 min 23s
Progression-Free Survival by Investigators
Tam-Peli demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS vs. topotecan,
with a 71% reduction in rate of disease progression or death
100%
Tam-Peli
Topotecan
(N = 225)
(N = 226)
80%
Probability (%) of PFS
58.1%
PFS events, n (%)
134 (59.6)
179 (79.2)
60%
Median PFS,
7.4
2.8
40%
months (95% CI)
(6.1, 7.6)
(1.8,3.0)
17.9%
20%
+ + Censored
Tam-Peli
Topotecan
HR 0.29 (95% Cl: 0.23, 0.37)
0%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
P <0.0001
Time (Months)
No. at risk:
Time (Months) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Tam-Peli 225 220 196 174 167 136 105 91 36 33 14 14 4 3 1 1 1 0
Topotecan 226 198 113 80 67 41 26 21 11 9 7 6 3 1 1 1 1 0
Data cut-off: May 20, 2026. Median follow-up of PFS was 7.8 months for Tam-Peli and 8.4 months for topotecan.
CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio (stratified); PFS, progression-free survival.
10
Li
Zhang
I Tam-Peli, an anti-B7-H3 antibody-drug conjugate, versus topotecan in relapsed SCLC: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (TAISHAN-302)
ggilberto lopes@GlopesMd
Two B7-H3 ADCs presented at #WCLC26 produced very encouraging results in relapsed SCLC: ARTEMIS-008 (Ris-Rez) and TAISHAN-302 (Tam-Peli).
We put them side by side in a descriptive cross-trial comparison. https://t.co/yjHAxmq7S1
2.8K impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
B7-H3 ADCs in Relapsed SCLC
DESCRIPTIVE CROSS-TRIAL COMPARISON: ARTEMIS-008 (RIS-REZ) VS TAISHAN-302 (TAM-PELI)
SAME SCIENCE. A BRIGHTER TOMORROW FOR SCLC.
Miami
!
Not a head-to-head comparison. Differences in eligibility, case mix, follow-up, endpoint assessment, and trial conduct limit cross-trial inference.
1
TRIAL SNAPSHOT
2
ELIGIBILITY / POPULATION / BASELINE DIFFERENCES
(Experimental arms shown; control arms were similar within each study)
ARTEMIS-008
TAISHAN-302
ARTEMIS-008
TAISHAN-302
(Ris-Rez)
(Tam-Peli)
(Ris-Rez, N=230)
(Tam-Peli, N=225)
Investigation drug
Ris-Rez
Tam-Peli
Prior PD-(L)1 exposure, n (%)
190 (82.6)
194 (86.2)
(B7-H3-directed TOP1 ADC)
(B7-H3-targeted ADC with
TMALIN linker and topoisomerase-l
Brain metastases at baseline, n (%)
44 (19.1)
78 (34.7)
inhibitor payload)
Liver metastases at baseline, n (%)
49 (21.3)
72 (32.0)
Study design
Phase 3, open-label
Phase 3, open-label
randomized controlled trial
randomized controlled trial
Chemotherapy-free interval <90 days,
n (%)
83 (36.1)
110 (48.9)
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06498479
NCT06612151
Randomized (n)
230 vs 231
225 VS 226
Disease extent, n (%)
Extensive-stage
Systemic disease
200 (87.0)
218 (96.9)
Geographic scope
China-only
China-only cohort
Stable brain metastases
(100% Asian cohort)
Brain metastases eligibility
Stratified by brain
allowed
metastases (yes or no)
Data cut-off
June 6, 2026
May 20, 2026
Median follow-up
12.2 months
9.2 months (Tam-Peli arm)
Interpretation: TAISHAN-302 appears to have enrolled a somewhat higher-risk population,
9.5 months (topotecan arm)
especially for CNS and liver metastatic burden and shorter chemotherapy-free interval.
3
EFFICACY RESULTS
4
SAFETY
Outcome
ARTEMIS-008
TAISHAN-302
Hazard Ratio (95% CI)
ARTEMIS-008
TAISHAN-302
(Ris-Rez)
(Tam-Peli)
Safety outcome, n (%)
Favors ADC
Favors Topotecan
(Ris-Rez, N=230)
(Tam-Peli, N=225)
Overall survival
Grade ≥3 treatment-related
Median OS, months
13.3 vs 9.4
0.46
adverse events (TRAEs)
140 (60.9)
104 (46.4)
18.5 VS 10.3
HR (95% CI)
0.46 (0.35-0.62)
0.46 (0.35-0.62)
0.46
Serious TRAEs
79 (34.3)
58 (25.9)
Progression-free survival
Interstitial lung disease (ILD)
BICR mPFS, months
7.2 VS 3.0
-
0.33
Any grade (overall)
27 (11.7)
Not reported
HR (95% CI)
0.33 (0.25-0.42)
Grade >3
-
9 (3.9)
Not reported
Investigator mPFS, months
7.8 VS 4.0
7.4 VS 2.8
0.35
Treatment-related deaths
Not reported
0 (0.0)
HR (95% CI)
0.35 (0.28-0.45)
0.35 (0.23-0.37)
0.29
Safety definitions and exposure duration differed; comparisons are descriptive only.
Objective response rate
58.3 (51.6-64.7)
59.1 (52.4-65.6)
-
ORR, % (95% CI)
BOTTOM LINE
VS 12.6 (8.6-17.5)
VS 9.7 (6.2-14.4)
Both B7-H3 ADCs showed substantial activity versus topotecan. Similar OS
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
hazard ratios and ORRs are encouraging, but differences in enrolled populations
mPFS, median progression-free survival; ORR, objective response rate; BICR, blinded independent central review;
CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.
and follow-up prevent any firm ranking without a direct comparative study.
WCLC26
MIAMI, FLORIDA
PATIENTS FOR A BRIGHTER TOMORROW
Advancing lung cancer care worldwide.
YYakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
Highlighted Studies at #WCLC26
1️⃣ HARMONi-2
In treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥1%, ivonescimab improved PFS (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) and OS (30.8 vs 22.6 months; HR 0.73) compared with pembrolizumab.
This is a genuinely positive trial, but it does not tell the same story for all PD-L1-positive patients. The OS benefit was clear in the ≥50% subgroup, whereas the HR was 0.85 with
9.1K impressions24 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC SEOUL 2026
WCLC26: KEY STUDIES
Early results key data at a glance
HARMONi-2
1
1L PD-L1 >1% advanced NSCLC
Clearly positive.
Strongest signal in PD-L1 >50%.
PFS 11.1 vs 5.8 mo
HR 0.51
In 1-49%, the control arm does
os 30.8 vs 22.6 mo
HR 0.73
not fully reflect current practice.
2
SWOG S1827 / MAVERICK
Post-treatment SCLC MRI surveillance vs MRI + PCI
With reliable MRI access, routine
PCI is now hard to justify.
Cognitive failure / death
HR 0.60
Final os is still needed before
Grade ≥3 toxicity 0.8% vs 7.9%
declaring PCI obsolete.
Interim OS and brain metastasis-free survival: no difference
TAISHAN-302
3
Relapsed SCLC B7-H3 ADC Tam-Peli vs topotecan
Clear survival gain.
A potential topotecan replacement;
os 13.3 vs 9.4 mo
HR 0.46
efficacy after tarlatamab
PFS 7.4 vs 2.8 mo
ORR 59% vs 10%
maintenance remains unknown.
ARTEMIS-008
4
Relapsed SCLC . B7-H3 ADC Ris-Rez VS topotecan
Confirms B7-H3 as a target.
No cross-trial comparison with
os 18.5 vs 10.3 mo
HR 0.46
TAISHAN; ILD and hematologic
PFS 7.2 vs 3.0 mo
ORR 58% vs 13%
toxicity may drive selection.
5
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
PD-L1 >50% metastatic NSCLC SG+pembro VS pembro
More tumor shrinkage,
ORR 56% vs 44%
similar response duration,
os 21.5 vs 22.8 mo
no OS gain:
Grade ≥3 toxicity 56% vs 17%
no role in clinical practice.
Primary PFS threshold not met
13 SEPTEMBER 2026 INTERIM CONGRESS SNAPSHOT
@dr_yakupergun
MMedJ@MedJ0401
Two Chinese phase 3 trials take B7-H3 ADCs to the WCLC 2026 Presidential Symposium: TAISHAN-302 and ARTEMIS-008 compare them with topotecan in relapsed SCLC. The focus: overall survival and safety, beyond early response rates. Full article below. https://t.co/rnhCfTAJho
8.5K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 2]
PL02.03. Tam-Peli, an Anti-B7-H3 Antibody-Drug Conjugate, Versus Topotecan in Relapsed SCLC: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 Study
L. Zhang¹, Y. Zhao¹, H. Liu², X. Meng³, Z. Liu⁴, Y. Yu5, Y. Zheng⁶, L. Sun7, R. Yang⁸, J. Liu6, Y. Zhao⁹, L. Wu¹⁰, L. Yang¹¹, Z. Zhang¹², M. Li¹³, P. Zhang¹⁴, Y.
Zhang¹⁵, H. Zhong¹⁶, J. Cui¹⁷, Z. Huang¹ Y. Yin¹⁹, M. Li20, F. Tong²¹, D. Xue²², D. Lv²³, X. Li24, X. Zhang²⁴, S. Chin²⁴, J. Cai24, T. Xue24, Y. Huang¹, H. Zhao¹
Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Cancer,
Guangzhou/CN 2Cancer Hospital of Dalian University of Technology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang/CN ³Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute,
Shandong First Medical University, Jinan/CN, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, Nanchang/CN, ⁵Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin/CN ⁶The First Affiliated
Hospital, Zhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory for Drug Evaluation and Clinical Research, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou/CN, The First Affiliated
Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang/CN The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Tumor Hospital, Kunming/CN 9The Affiliated Cancer
Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou/CN, ¹⁰Hunan Cancer Hospital/The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Xiangya School of Medicine,
Central South University, Changsha/CN, 11 Gansu Provincial Cancer Hospital, Lanzhou/CN, ¹²The First Affiliated Hospital, and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan
University of Science and Technology, Luoyang/CN, ¹³The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou/CN, 4Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital Affiliated to
Tongji University, Shanghai/CN 5West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu/CN ¹⁶Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine,
Shanghai/CN 17 The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun/CN, Clinical Oncology School of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou/CN, 19 Linyi
People's Hospital, Linyi/CN 20The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an/CN Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science
and Technology, Wuhan/CN 22Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou/CN ²³Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University,
Taizhou/CN ²⁴MediLink Therapeutics (Suzhou) Co., Ltd., Suzhou/CN 1 8:59 AM- 9:09
AM
10m
View abstract
@
Jo
View biography
[Slide 3]
PL02.04. Risvutatug Rezetecan (a B7-H3-Directed ADC) Versus Topotecan in Relapsed SCLC: Primary Results of Phase 3 ARTEMIS-008
J. Wang1, L. Wang2, J. Duan¹, H. Liu³, Q. Wang4, H. Wang2, L. Sun5, S. Huang⁶, Y. Huang⁷, F. Tong⁸, W. Zheng9, T. Chu¹⁰, Y. Fan¹¹, D. Huang¹², P. Zhang¹³, W.
Guo¹⁴, B. Liu¹⁵, J. Zhou¹⁶, Q. Li17, Y. Dong¹⁸, Q. Liu¹⁸, M. Zhang¹⁸ X. Zhang¹⁸, J. Yu2
National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Peking Union Medical College,
Beijing/CN, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University, Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan/CN 3 Jilin Cancer Hospital,
Changchun/CN 4The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Institute of Cancer Research, Henan Academy of Innovations in
Medical Science, Zhengzhou/CN ⁵The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang/CN, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University,
Zhengzhou/CN Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou/CN Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan/CN, 9Shengjing
Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang/CN, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai/CN, Zhejiang Cancer
Hospital, Hangzhou/CN 12 Cancer Institute&Hospital, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin/CN ¹³Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University, Shanghai/CN
/ 14Shanxi Provincial Cancer Hospital, Taiyuan/CN 15 Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin/CN, 16Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer
Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu/CN 17Xiangyang Center Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of
Hubei University Arts and Science, Xiangyang/CN, Shanghai Hansoh BioMedical Co., Ltd, Shanghai/CN
-
9:11 AM- 9:21 AM
10m
T
View abstract
o
View biography
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 — The Studies to Watch
Seoul, 12–15 September
A clinical map of the key questions at @IASLC WCLC 2026: early/locally advanced NSCLC, oncogenic drivers, IO combinations, SCLC (including CNS), limited-stage multimodal therapy, and local control.
Presidential symposium highlights include ADAURA OS update, PAPILLON, REZILIENT 3, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, TAISHAN-302, A
5.5K impressions5 likes4 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026: THE STUDIES TO WATCH
Seoul
12-15 September 2026
Presidential symposium
01
EARLY / LOCALLY ADVANCED NSCLC
02
ADVANCED NSCLC: DRIVERS
ADAURA
PL03.01
PAPILLON
PL03.03
Osimertinib
exploratory 8-year OS
EGFR exon 20 amivantamab + chemo
os
IMpower030
OA04.03
REZILIENT 3
PL03.04
Perioperative atezolizumab + chemo
EGFR exon 20 zipalertinib + chemo
MDT-BRIDGE
ARROS-1
PL03.06
OA04.02
ROS1 zidesamtinib TKI-naive
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemo
DESTINY-Lung04
PL03.08
Adjuvant gefitinib + chemo
OA04.01
HER2-mutant
first-line T-DXd
EGFR-mutant phase III
HARMONi
0A14.05
NAUTIKA1
M006.01/ OA04.04
Post-EGFR TKI ivonescimab + chemo os
Neoadjuvant alectinib / divarasib
AMIGO-1
0A12.04
Amivantamab + lazertinib + pemetrexed
03
ADVANCED NSCLC: NO DRIVER
04
SCLC: SYSTEMIC THERAPY & CNS
HARMONi-2
OA14.01
TAISHAN-302
PL02.03
Ivonescimab vs pembrolizumab OS
Tam-Peli vs topotecan relapsed
ARTEMIS-008
PL02.04
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE D46
PL02.06
Risvutatug rezetecan vs topotecan
Sacituzumab govitecan + pembrolizumab
PD-L1 ≥50%
SWOG S1827 MAVERICK
PL02.01
Pumitamig + BNT324
0A14.02
Brain MRI surveillance ± cranial irradiation
PD-L1/VEGF-A + B7-H3
NSCLC/SCLC
DeLLphi-309
OA05.01
Tarlatamab extended-interval dosing
RC148 / ABBV-1480
OA14.04
PD-1/VEGF bispecific + chemo
DeLLphi-308
M015.07
Tarlatamab subcutaneous delivery
MAVERICK: cross-stage brain prevention.
05
LIMITED-STAGE SCLC
06
SURGERY, RADIOTHERAPY & LOCAL CONTROL
Neoadjuvant serplulimab + chemo
M015.03
Wedge vs segmentectomy
OA08.01
pathological response / MRD
GGO-dominant early NSCLC
GREAT
OA08.02
Serplulimab + concurrent CRT
P3.288
Segmentectomy VS lobectomy
followed by serplulimab phase
II
STARLORD
OA09.04
CXCL9+ DCs / CXCR3+ Tregs
M015.01
Stereotactic RT when concurrent CRT is unsuitable
treatment resistance
LONESTAR
0A14.03
Early clinical and translational signals
Local consolidation after nivolumab + ipilimumab
EMERGING SCIENCE
KRAS G12D: GFH375 / QLC1101
DLL3 CAR-T: LB2102
mRNA vaccine: BNT116
OA12.01-02
OA05.02
M006.03
Pre-congress watchlist
Not a results summary
11 Sep 2026
Source: IASLC WCLC 2026 program
wclc.iaslc.org
8EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46View full trial page →103K impressions84.6K primary · 18.4K preview185 engagements41 posts · 33 voices▾
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
EVOKE-03 did not meet the primary endpoint.
PFS 11.8 vs 7.7m, HR 0.81 but did not meet threshold for statistical significance. Consistent across subgroups. No difference in OS: 21.5 vs 22.8m, HR 1.07. #WCLC26 https://t.co/j3v6jr8N7H
32.9K impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Progression-Free Survival in the ITT Population - Primary Analysis
100
SG + Pembro
Pembro
90
Endpoint
(n=311)
(n=309)
PFS, median (95% CI), moᵃ.ᵇ
11. 8 (8.9; 14.5)
7.7 (5.6; 9.7)
80
Hazard ratio (95% CI)c
0.81 (0.66; 1.00)
70
P-valued
0.0252
PFS Probability, %
60
PFS rate at 12 mo (95% CI), mo
48.3 (42.1; 54.1)
36.9 (30.9; 42.9)
PFS rate at 18 mo (95% CI), mo
36.0 (29.7; 42.2)
29.9 (24.0; 36.1)
50
PFS events, 367; maturity, 59%; statistical boundary, 0.007
40
30
20
10
Median follow-up was 14.8 months for SG + pembro
0
and 14.4 months for pembro monotherapy
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro
311
235
170
141
103
78
56
41
30
20
11
3
0
0
Pembro mono
309
204
138
106
70
56
41
32
21
16
8
3
1
0
BICR, blinded independent centralized review; mono, monotherapy; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score: ITT. intention-to-treat; mo, months; pembro, pembrolizumab; PFS, progression-free survival;
RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
"Per RECIST v1.1 by BICR. Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored data. Estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS
Western Europe/North America/Australia vs rest of world). "One-sided P-value based on log-rank test stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North
America/Australla VS rest of world).
6
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Progression-Free Survival Sub-Group Analyses
#Events/N
Hazard Ratio
#Events/N
Hazard Ratio
SG + Pembro
Pembro mono
(95% CI)
SG + Pembro
Pembro mono
(95% CI)
Overall
179/311
188/309
0.81 (0.66; 1.00)
Predominant Tumor Histology
Age, years
Squamous
69/96
61/96
1.11 (0.78; 1.56)
<65
68/126
75/120
0.65 (0.47; 0.91)
Non-squamous
110/215
127/213
0.70 (0.54; 0.90)
≥65
111/185
113/189
0.91 (0.70; 1.18)
Smoking Status
Sex
Never smoker
34/52
41/53
0.59 (0.37; 0.93)
Male
129/219
138/224
0.83 (0.66; 1.06)
Former/current smoker
145/259
147/256
0.85 (0.67; 1.07)
Female
50/92
50/85
0.70 (0.47; 1.04)
Baseline Brain Metastasis Status
Race
Yes
19/27
17/30
White
109/176
104/168
0.89 (0.68; 1.16)
No
160/284
171/279
0.77 (0.62; 0.95)
All others
70/135
84/141
0.69 (0.51; 0.96)
Baseline Liver Metastasis Status
Geographic Region
Yes
38/49
33/49
0.92 (0.58; 1.47)
East Asia
59/114
67/116
0.68 (0.48; 0.97)
No
141/262
155/260
0.76 (0.61; 0.96)
Western Europe/
41/60
33/58
North America/Australia
1.20 (0.76; 1.89)
Rest of the world
79/137
88/135
0.76 (0.56; 1.03)
0.1
1
10
SG + pembro
Pembro mono
Baseline ECOG PS
Favor
0
46/107
56/108
0.73 (0.50; 1.08)
1
133/204
132/201
0.81 (0.64; 1.03)
0.1
1
10
SG + pembro
Pembro mono
Favor
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score; ITT, intention-to-treat; mo, months; mono, monotherapy; pembro, pembrolizumab; SG, sacituzumab govitecan. Analysis is based on Cox regression model with Efron's
method of tie handling with treatment as a covariate stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North America/Australia vs rest of world). Subgroup
analyses are based on unstratified Cox regression model with Efron's method of tie handling with treatment as a covariate. Subgroup analyses were not performed for categories representing fewer than 10% of the ITT population.
7
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall Survival in the ITT Population - Interim Analysis
100
Endpoint
SG + Pembro (n=311)
Pembro (n=309)
90
OS, median (95% CI), moᵃ
21.5 (18.5; 26.7)
22.8 (18.7; 29.0)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)ᵇ
1.07 (0.85; 1.35)
80
P-valueᶜ
0.7155
70
OS events, 294; maturity, 47%; information fraction, 80%; statistical boundary, 0.008
OS Probability, %
60
50
40
30
20
10
Median follow-up was 14.8 months for SG + pembro
0
and 14.4 months for pembro monotherapy
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro
311
282
243
214
180
153
123
95
71
46
27
14
1
0
Pembro mono
309
272
237
205
178
148
120
91
69
47
29
11
1
0
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score; ITT, intention-to-treat; mo, months; mono, monotherapy; pembro, pembrolizumab; OS, overall survival; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored data. Estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North America/
Australia VS rest of world). One-sided P-value based on log-rank test stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous). ECOG PS (0 VS 1). and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North America/Australia vs rest of world).
8
PProf Tom John@TommyJohn00
@g_mountzios presenting EVOKE-03. A negative study with another ADC+Pembro as first line treatment. More tox with ADC. The most interesting slide for me is the result based on region. Asian patients do better. Will this be the same for other studies too? #WCLC26 #LCSM https://t.co/wNtaXlRTBB
13.6K impressions14 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
E
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
EVOKE-03/KEYNOTE D46 Study Design
Key eligibility criteria
Sacituzumab govitecan
Stage IV NSCLC (AJCC 8th)
10 mg/kg
Primary endpoints
No prior systemic treatment for
Randomized
D1, D8, Q3W
PFSᵃ
mNSCLC
1:1
+
OS
ECOG PS 0 or 1
N = 620
Pembrolizumab 200 mg
PD-L1 TPS ≥50%
IV D1 Q3W
Secondary endpoints
No ILD
35 cycles
ORRᵃ
No untreated or unstable brain
DORᵃ
metastases
Pembrolizumab 200 mg
PROs
EGFR/ALK/ROS-1-negative
IV D1 Q3W
Safety
disease
35 cycles
Stratification
ORR
1
PFS
ECOG PS (0 or 1)
a=0
0.001
a=0.007
Predominant tumor histology
(squamous or non-squamous)
0.001
0.999
0.999
Geographic region (East Asia VS
OS
Western Europe/North
a=0.018
America/Australia VS Rest of World)
ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; BICR, blinded independent centralized review; D1, day 1; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; DOR, duration of response;
ILD, interstitial lung disease; IV, intravenous; mNSCLC, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PD-L1, programmed death-ligand 1; PFS, progression-free survival; PRO, patient-
reported outcome; Q3W, every three weeks; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; ROS-1, ROS proto-oncogene 1, receptor tyrosine kinase; TPS, tumor proportion score.
Data cutoff: April 3, 2026. *Per RECIST v1.1 as assessed by BICR.
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Progression-Free Survival in the ITT Population - Primary Analysis
100
SG + Pembro
Pembro
90
Endpoint
(n=311)
(n=309)
80
PFS, median (95% CI), moa,b
11. 8 (8.9; 14.5)
7.7 (5.6; 9.7)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)c
0.81 (0.66; 1.00)
70
P-valued
0.0252
PFS Probability, %
60
PFS rate at 12 mo (95% CI), mo
48.3 (42.1; 54.1)
36.9 (30.9; 42.9)
PFS rate at 18 mo (95% CI), mo
36.0 (29.7; 42.2)
50
29.9 (24.0; 36.1)
PFS events, 367; maturity, 59%; statistical boundary, 0.007
40
30
20
10
Median follow-up was 14.8 months for SG + pembro
0
and 14.4 months for pembro monotherapy
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro
311
235
170
141
103
78
56
41
30
20
11
3
0
0
Pembro mono
309
204
138
106
70
56
41
32
21
16
8
3
1
0
BICR, blinded independent centralized review; mono, monotherapy; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score; ITT, intention-to-treat; mo, months; pembro, pembrolizumab; PFS, progression-free survival;
RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
"Per RECIST v1.1 by BICR. Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored data. Estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS
Western Europe/North America/Australia VS rest of world). "One-sided P-value based on log-rank test stratified by histology (squamous vs non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North
America/Australia vs rest of world).
6
[Slide 3]
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
OS in East Asia and China Subgroups (ITT Population; Exploratory)
East Asiaᵃ
China (Post-hoc)b
100
100
90
90
80
80
70
70
OS Probability, %
60
os Probability, %
60
50
50
40
40
30
30
SG + Pembro (n=114)
Pembro (n=116)
SG + Pembro (n=52)
Pembro (n=55)
20
20
OS, median (95% CI), moᶜ
NR (24.3; NE)
27.9 (16.7; NE)
OS, median (95% CI), moc
NR (24.2; NE)
27.9 (15.8; NE)
10
10
Hazard ratio (95% CI)
0.73 (0.48; 1.10)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)ᵈ
0.65 (0.36; 1.16)
0
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
At Risk
Time, mo
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro 114 (0) 108 (6) 96 (15) 88 (18) 79 (24) 72 (27) 64 (30) 52 (35) 37 (37) 23 (41) 12 (41) 7 (41) 0 (41)
SG + pembro 52 (0) 50 (2) 49 (3) 48 (4) 45 (8) 42 (10) 39 (12) 35 (15) 24 (17) 18 (19) 11 (19) 7 (19) 0 (19)
Pembro mono 116 (0) 102 (14) 90 (21) 81 (26) 71 (33) 63 (39) 51 (46) 41 (46) 33 (49) 22 (50) 12 (51) 2 (51) 0 (51)
Pembro mono 55 (0) 50 (5) 48 (7) 45 (10) 43 (12) 38 (17) 31 (22) 28 (22) 21 (25) 17 (26) 9 (27) 2 (27) 0 (27)
Median follow-up was 18.1 months for the East Asia cohort and 22.4 months for the China cohort
ITT, intention-to-treat; mono, monotherapy; NE, not evaluable; NR, not reached; pembro, pembrolizumab; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
"This analysis was not stratified. "This post-hoc analysis was not stratified or pre-specified. "Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored data. "Estimated using a Cox regression model.
o
[Slide 4]
2020
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall Survival in the ITT Population - Interim Analysis
100
Endpoint
SG + Pembro (n=311)
Pembro (n=309)
OS, median (95% CI), moᵃ
21.5 (18.5; 26.7)
22.8 (18.7; 29.0)
90
Hazard ratio (95% CI)ᵇ
1.07 (0.85; 1.35)
80
P-valueᶜ
0.7155
OS events, 294; maturity, 47%; information fraction, 80%; statistical boundary, 0.008
70
os Probability, %
60
50
40
30
20
10
Median follow-up was 14.8 months for SG + pembro
0
and 14.4 months for pembro monotherapy
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro
311
282
243
214
180
153
123
95
71
46
27
14
1
0
Pembro mono
309
272
237
205
178
148
120
91
69
47
29
11
1
0
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score; ITT, intention-to-treat; mo, months; mono, monotherapy; pembro, pembrolizumab; OS, overall survival; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
"Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored data. Estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by histology (squamous vs non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North America/
Australia VS rest of world). "One-sided P-value based on log-rank test stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia vs Western Europe/North America/Australia vs rest of world).
8
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @g_mountzios at #WCLC26 presents results of EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE D46: phase III study of sacituzumab govitecan (Trop2 ADC) with pembro vs pembro alone in NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50%. Median f/u 14.7m. https://t.co/U1jhvkkDXB
6.2K impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
ASLG
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
i
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
EVOKE-03/KEYNOTE D46 Study Design
Key eligibility criteria
Sacituzumab govitecan
Stage IV NSCLC (AJCC 8th)
10 mg/kg
Primary endpoints
No prior systemic treatment for
Randomized
D1, D8, Q3W
PFSᵃ
mNSCLC
1:1
+
OS
ECOG PS 0 or 1
N = 620
Pembrolizumab 200 mg
PD-L1 TPS ≥50%
IV D1 Q3W
Secondary endpoints
No ILD
35 cycles
ORRᵃ
No untreated or unstable brain
DORᵃ
metastases
Pembrolizumab 200 mg
PROs
EGFR/ALK/ROS-1-negative
IV D1 Q3W
Safety
disease
35 cycles
Stratification
ORR
1
PFS
ECOG PS (0 or 1)
a=0
0.001
a=0.007
Predominant tumor histology
(squamous or non-squamous)
0.001
0.999
0.999
Geographic region (East Asia VS
OS
Western Europe/North
a=0.018
America/Australia VS Rest of World)
ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; BICR, blinded independent centralized review; D1, day 1; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score: EGFR. epidermal growth factor receptor; DOR, duration of response;
ILD, interstitial lung disease; IV, intravenous; mNSCLC, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate: OS, overall survival; PD-L1, programmed death-ligand 1; PFS, progression-free survival; PRO, patient-
reported outcome; Q3W, every three weeks; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; ROS-1, ROS proto-oncogene 1, receptor tyrosine kinase; TPS, tumor proportion score.
Data cutoff: April 3, 2026. "Per RECIST v1.1 as assessed by BICR.
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Baseline Demographics and Disposition
Characteristicᵃ
SG + Pembro (n=311)b
Pembro (n=309)b
As of April 3, 2026, 620 participants were
Median age (range), y
67 (34-87)
68 (37-86)
randomized and 616 received study treatment
Male, n (%)
219 (70.4)
224 (72.5)
Median follow-up was 14.7 months
Geographical regionᶜ
East Asia
114 (36.7)
116 (37.5)
The median number of treatment cycles was
Western Europe/North
60 (19.3)
58 (18.8)
10 for SG and 12 for pembro in the
America/Australia
Rest of world
137 (44.1)
combination arm compared with 9 for pembro
135 (43.7)
monotherapy
ECOG PS
0
107 (34.4)
108 (35.0)
At the data cutoff, 70.4% of participants in the
1
204 (65.6)
201 (65.0)
SG + pembro arm and 71.2% in the pembro
Histology
monotherapy arm had discontinued any study
Squamous
96 (30.9)
96 (31.1)
treatment
Non-squamous
215 (69.1)
213 (68.9)
Smoking status
- Radiologic progression was the primary reason
Never smoker
52 (16.7)
53 (17.2)
for treatment discontinuation
Current/former smoker
259 (83.3)
256 (82.8)
Cancer stage
IIIC
1 (0.3)
0 (0.0)
IVA
158 (50.8)
168 (54.4)
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score: PD-L1, programmed death-
IVB
ligand 1; pembro, pembrolizumab; SG, sacituzumab govitecan; TPS, tumor proportion score.
152 (48.9)
141 (45.6)
"One participant in the pembro monotherapy arm had a PD-L1 TPS <50%; "Intention -to-treat
Brain metastasis
population; "Geographic breakdown: East Asia Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, Korea (Republic
27 (8.7)
30 (9.7)
of), Taiwan, Thailand, China; North America/Western EU/Australia Greece, United Kingdom,
Liver metastasis
49 (15.8)
49 (15.9)
United States, Canada, Australia, Germany, Italy; Rest of World - Israel, Latvia, Poland,
Romania, Turkey, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Peru, Estonia, Lithuania.
All data are n (%) unless otherwise stated.
5
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
It was a privilege to be part of the 13th OncoWisdom discussion, What’s New in Lung Cancer from WCLC 2026?
My appreciation to Dr Amol Akhade for the opportunity and for an engaging discussion with several new perspectives.
9 take-home messages that stayed with me:
• Bullish on ivonescimab
• The appetite for PCI is shrinking
• The next decade belongs to SCLC
• Rethinking thoracic RT in the era of
2.8K impressions4 likes4 reposts2026-09-23
[Slide 1]
LINES THAT STAYED WITH ME
MV Onco
FROM ONCOWISDOM
PART 1/2
What's New in Lung Cancer from WCLC 2026
THE BIG SHIFTS
1
IVONESCIMAB
"WE ARE BULLISH
ON IVONESCIMAB -
ESPECIALLY IN
HIGH PD-L1 DISEASE."
PD-1
VEGF
blockade
blockade
PD-1 x VEGF
2
PCI IN SCLC
"THE APPETITE
FOR PCI IN SCLC
IT
HAS SIGNIFICANTLY
REDUCED."
MRI SURVEILLANCE is increasingly
changing the conversation.
3
THE SCLC ERA
"THE NEXT DECADE
BELONGS TO SCLC."
DLL3 ADCs new combinations
4
THORACIC RT IN ES-SCLC
"WE'D BE MORE CAUTIOUS
WITH THORACIC RT
!
IN ES-SCLC."
WHY?
Tarlatamab + ADCs
may also carry
PULMONARY TOXICITY/ILD.
Think about
subsequent treatment.
CONTINUED
PART 2
OSIMERTINIB
ADCs
ROS1
HER2
EXON 20
[Slide 2]
MV Onco
LINES THAT STAYED WITH ME
PART 2 /2
FROM ONCOWISDOM
PRECISION GETS
What's New in Lung Cancer from WCLC 2026
MORE PRECISE
1. ADJUVANT OSIMERTINIB
3 YEARS
"AT THE END OF
Could eventually help
identify who may need
3 YEARS OF OSIMERTINIB,
ctDNA / MRD
continuation beyond
3 years or restarting later.
ctDNA SHOULD BECOME PART
CONTINUE?
OF THE DECISION-MAKING."
STOP?
Evolving concept - -
not current standard of care.
RESTART LATER?
2. EVOKE-03
"NEGATIVE TRIAL -
"COULD A
BUT WAS TOXICITY
BETTER-TOLERATED ADC
AND LOWER DOSE INTENSITY
CHANGE THE RESULT?"
PART OF THE STORY?"
Hypothesis - not proven explanation.
3. ROS1
"THE ROS1 TKI SPACE
IS GETTING MORE AND MORE
Potency
CNS activity
Options
IMPRESSIVE."
4. HER2-MUTANT NSCLC
"T-DXd DELIVERED
DESTINY-Lung04
IMPRESSIVE PFS -
PFS 14.3 vs 8.3 months
BUT THE os STORY
OS data still immature.
IS NOT SETTLED YET."
5. EGFR EXON 20 INSERTIONS
C-HELIX
NEAR-LOOP
FAR-LOOP
"EXON 20ins
IS NOT ONE DISEASE."
FAR-LOOP INSERTIONS
ARE RELATIVELY TKI-RESISTANT
"WHERE THE INSERTION
AMIVANTAMAB-BASED THERAPY
SITS MATTERS."
MAY BE ATTRACTIVE
Biologically plausible / evolving treatment-selection concept;
not proven prospective far-loop-specific superiority.
FINAL TAKE-HOME
IT IS ALSO ABOUT
PRECISION IS NO LONGER
WHERE IT SITS
JUST ABOUT
"WHAT MUTATION?"
HOW IT BEHAVES
WHAT COMES NEXT
MV Onco
PProject Kai@kainvests
$IOVA 🗞️WCLC 2026 is on and we are already hearing some news from ongoing clinical trials on NSCLC.
Below, we can see how Merck-Gilead’s EVOKE-03 did not meet the primary end point thanks to Dr. Stephen (and bavariaron on StockTwits).
So far we see some promising early data as usual, and more trials getting discontinued, as usual as well.
Iovance Biotherapeutics (@IovanceBio) continues to be be
2.6K impressions8 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
DDr Amol Akhade@SuyogCancer
Evoke 03 . Important negative study. SG plus Pembrolizumab in 1st line NSCLC with PDL1 above 50 % @IASLC @StephenVLiu @DrRiyazShah @RManochakian @FordePatrick @PatelOncology https://t.co/PDuPiGhxX3
2.3K impressions17 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Conclusions
Although SG + pembro demonstrated a numerically longer PFS versus pembro monotherapy at
PFS primary analysis, the study did not meet its primary endpoint because the difference was
not statistically significant
Confirmed ORR and disease control rate were numerically higher with SG + pembro than
with pembro monotherapy (55.6% vs 43.7%, ~12% difference; 83.3% vs 73.1%,
MARC
0
Conference
respectively); median DOR was similar between treatment groups
At the interim OS analysis, a statistically significant difference for this dual primary endpoint
was not met
The safety profile of SG plus pembro was consistent with the known profiles of each agent,
and no new or additional toxicities were observed with the combination
DOR, duration of response: pembro, pembrolizumab; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
12
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES: UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall Survival in the ITT Population - Interim Analysis
100
Endpoint
SG + Pembro (n=311)
Pembro (n=309)
90
OS, median (95% CI), mo®
21.5 (18.5; 26.7)
22.8 (18.7; 29.0)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)ᵇ
1.07 (0.85; 1.35)
80
P-value
0.7155
70
OS events, 294; maturity, 47%; information fraction, 80%; statistical boundary, 0.008
OS Probability, %
60
(1)
50
40
30
20
10
Median follow-up was 14.8 months for SG + pembro
0
and 14.4 months for pembro monotherapy
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro
311
282
243
214
180
153
123
95
71
46
27
14
1
0
Pembro mono
309
272
237
205
178
148
120
91
69
47
29
11
1
0
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score: ITT. intention to treat, mo, months; mono, monotherapy, pembro, pembrolizumab; OS, overall survival; SO, sacituzumab govitecan.
"Based on Kaplan Meter method for censored data Estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by histology (squamous vs squamous). ECOG PS vs 1). and geographic region (East Asia vs Western Europe/North America
Australia vs rest of world). "One-sided P-value based on log-rank test stratilied by histology (squamous vs on-squamous), ECOG PS v3 11. and geographic region (East Asia V3 Western Europe/North America/Australia va rest of world).
8
SCIENCE WITHOUT POUNDADIES UNITING TUE WODLD AGAINST THODACIC CANCED
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Progression-Free Survival in the ITT Population - Primary Analysis
100
SG + Pembro
Pembro
90
Endpoint
(n=311)
(n=309)
PFS, median (95% CI), moᵃ.ᵇ
11. 8 (8.9; 14.5)
7.7 (5.6; 9.7)
80
Hazard ratio (95% CI)°
0.81 (0.66; 1.00)
70
P-valued
0.0252
PFS Probability, %
60
PFS rate at 12 mo (95% CI), mo
48.3 (42.1; 54.1)
36.9 (30.9; 42.9)
PFS rate at 18 mo (95% CI), mo
36.0 (29.7; 42.2)
29.9 (24.0; 36.1)
=
50
PFS events, 367; maturity, 59%; statistical boundary, 0.007
40
30
20
10
Median follow-up was 14.8 months for SG + pembro
0
and 14.4 months for pembro monotherapy
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro
311
235
170
141
103
78
56
41
30
20
11
3
0
0
Pembro mono
309
204
138
106
70
56
41
32
21
16
8
3
1
0
BICR. bunded independent centralized review mono, monotherapy; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score: ITT, intention to treat: mo, months: pembro, pembrolizumab; PFS, progression free survival;
RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Turnors: SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
*Per RECIST vi.1 by BICR. 'Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored date. Estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by histology (squamous vs non- squamous), ECOG PS vs 1), and geographic region (East Asia VIS
Western Europe/North America/Australia VS rest of world) One sided P-value based on log rank test stratified by histology (squamous vs non squamous). ECOG PS (Ovs 1), and (eographic region (East Asia VIII Western Europe/North
vs rest of world).
6
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES: UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
EVOKE-03/KEYNOTE D46 Study Design
Key eligibility criteria
Sacituzumab govitecan
Stage IV NSCLC (AJCC 8th)
10 mg/kg
Primary endpoints
No prior systemic treatment for
Randomized
D1, D8, Q3W
PFSᵃ
mNSCLC
1:1
OS
ECOG PS 0 or 1
N 620
Pembrolizumab 200 mg
PD-L1 TPS ≥50%
IV D1 Q3W
Secondary endpoints
No ILD
35 cycles
ORRᵃ
IAHC
No untreated or unstable brain
DORᵃ
metastases
Pembrolizumab 200 mg
PROs
EGFR/ALK/ROS-1-negative
IV D1 Q3W
Safety
disease
35 cycles
Stratification
ORR
1
PFS
ECOG PS (0 or 1)
a=0
0.001
a=0.007
Predominant tumor histology
(squamous or non-squamous)
0.001
0.999
0.999
Geographic region (East Asia VS
OS
Western Europe/North
a=0.018
America/Australia VS Rest of World)
ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; BICR, blinded independent centratized review; D1, day 1: ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score: EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; DOR, duration of response;
ILD, interstitial lung disease; IV, intravenous; mNSCLC metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate: OS, overall survival; PD-L1, programmed death-ligand 1: PFS, progression-free survival: PRO, patient-
reported outcome; Q3W, every three weeks; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors: ROS-1, ROS proto-oncogene 1, receptor tyrosine kinase; TPS, tumor proportion score.
Data cutoff: April 3, 2026. "Per RECIST v1.1 as assessed by BICR.
4
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES: UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST THORACIC CANCER
YYakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
Highlighted Studies at #WCLC26
1️⃣ HARMONi-2
In treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥1%, ivonescimab improved PFS (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) and OS (30.8 vs 22.6 months; HR 0.73) compared with pembrolizumab.
This is a genuinely positive trial, but it does not tell the same story for all PD-L1-positive patients. The OS benefit was clear in the ≥50% subgroup, whereas the HR was 0.85 with
9.1K impressions24 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC SEOUL 2026
WCLC26: KEY STUDIES
Early results key data at a glance
HARMONi-2
1
1L PD-L1 >1% advanced NSCLC
Clearly positive.
Strongest signal in PD-L1 >50%.
PFS 11.1 vs 5.8 mo
HR 0.51
In 1-49%, the control arm does
os 30.8 vs 22.6 mo
HR 0.73
not fully reflect current practice.
2
SWOG S1827 / MAVERICK
Post-treatment SCLC MRI surveillance vs MRI + PCI
With reliable MRI access, routine
PCI is now hard to justify.
Cognitive failure / death
HR 0.60
Final os is still needed before
Grade ≥3 toxicity 0.8% vs 7.9%
declaring PCI obsolete.
Interim OS and brain metastasis-free survival: no difference
TAISHAN-302
3
Relapsed SCLC B7-H3 ADC Tam-Peli vs topotecan
Clear survival gain.
A potential topotecan replacement;
os 13.3 vs 9.4 mo
HR 0.46
efficacy after tarlatamab
PFS 7.4 vs 2.8 mo
ORR 59% vs 10%
maintenance remains unknown.
ARTEMIS-008
4
Relapsed SCLC . B7-H3 ADC Ris-Rez VS topotecan
Confirms B7-H3 as a target.
No cross-trial comparison with
os 18.5 vs 10.3 mo
HR 0.46
TAISHAN; ILD and hematologic
PFS 7.2 vs 3.0 mo
ORR 58% vs 13%
toxicity may drive selection.
5
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
PD-L1 >50% metastatic NSCLC SG+pembro VS pembro
More tumor shrinkage,
ORR 56% vs 44%
similar response duration,
os 21.5 vs 22.8 mo
no OS gain:
Grade ≥3 toxicity 56% vs 17%
no role in clinical practice.
Primary PFS threshold not met
13 SEPTEMBER 2026 INTERIM CONGRESS SNAPSHOT
@dr_yakupergun
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 — The Studies to Watch
Seoul, 12–15 September
A clinical map of the key questions at @IASLC WCLC 2026: early/locally advanced NSCLC, oncogenic drivers, IO combinations, SCLC (including CNS), limited-stage multimodal therapy, and local control.
Presidential symposium highlights include ADAURA OS update, PAPILLON, REZILIENT 3, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, TAISHAN-302, A
5.5K impressions5 likes4 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026: THE STUDIES TO WATCH
Seoul
12-15 September 2026
Presidential symposium
01
EARLY / LOCALLY ADVANCED NSCLC
02
ADVANCED NSCLC: DRIVERS
ADAURA
PL03.01
PAPILLON
PL03.03
Osimertinib
exploratory 8-year OS
EGFR exon 20 amivantamab + chemo
os
IMpower030
OA04.03
REZILIENT 3
PL03.04
Perioperative atezolizumab + chemo
EGFR exon 20 zipalertinib + chemo
MDT-BRIDGE
ARROS-1
PL03.06
OA04.02
ROS1 zidesamtinib TKI-naive
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemo
DESTINY-Lung04
PL03.08
Adjuvant gefitinib + chemo
OA04.01
HER2-mutant
first-line T-DXd
EGFR-mutant phase III
HARMONi
0A14.05
NAUTIKA1
M006.01/ OA04.04
Post-EGFR TKI ivonescimab + chemo os
Neoadjuvant alectinib / divarasib
AMIGO-1
0A12.04
Amivantamab + lazertinib + pemetrexed
03
ADVANCED NSCLC: NO DRIVER
04
SCLC: SYSTEMIC THERAPY & CNS
HARMONi-2
OA14.01
TAISHAN-302
PL02.03
Ivonescimab vs pembrolizumab OS
Tam-Peli vs topotecan relapsed
ARTEMIS-008
PL02.04
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE D46
PL02.06
Risvutatug rezetecan vs topotecan
Sacituzumab govitecan + pembrolizumab
PD-L1 ≥50%
SWOG S1827 MAVERICK
PL02.01
Pumitamig + BNT324
0A14.02
Brain MRI surveillance ± cranial irradiation
PD-L1/VEGF-A + B7-H3
NSCLC/SCLC
DeLLphi-309
OA05.01
Tarlatamab extended-interval dosing
RC148 / ABBV-1480
OA14.04
PD-1/VEGF bispecific + chemo
DeLLphi-308
M015.07
Tarlatamab subcutaneous delivery
MAVERICK: cross-stage brain prevention.
05
LIMITED-STAGE SCLC
06
SURGERY, RADIOTHERAPY & LOCAL CONTROL
Neoadjuvant serplulimab + chemo
M015.03
Wedge vs segmentectomy
OA08.01
pathological response / MRD
GGO-dominant early NSCLC
GREAT
OA08.02
Serplulimab + concurrent CRT
P3.288
Segmentectomy VS lobectomy
followed by serplulimab phase
II
STARLORD
OA09.04
CXCL9+ DCs / CXCR3+ Tregs
M015.01
Stereotactic RT when concurrent CRT is unsuitable
treatment resistance
LONESTAR
0A14.03
Early clinical and translational signals
Local consolidation after nivolumab + ipilimumab
EMERGING SCIENCE
KRAS G12D: GFH375 / QLC1101
DLL3 CAR-T: LB2102
mRNA vaccine: BNT116
OA12.01-02
OA05.02
M006.03
Pre-congress watchlist
Not a results summary
11 Sep 2026
Source: IASLC WCLC 2026 program
wclc.iaslc.org
9ARTEMIS-008View full trial page →86.8K impressions55.6K primary · 31.2K preview248 engagements59 posts · 43 voices▾
NNoemi Reguart@NReguart
What a day for #SCLC!
Two positive phase III ADC trials today at #WCLC26 ARTEMIS-008 and TAISHAN-302— and this may be just the beginning. Look at the pipeline 👇 The ADC era has finally arrived in SCLC. Bye bye, topotecan! 🚀 https://t.co/fjXfmHC7KL
7.4K impressions44 likes18 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
PHASE 3, HEAD-TO-HEAD VS TOPOTECAN
B7-H3
I-DXd
IDeate-Lung02 (NCT06203210)
HS-20093
ARTEMIS-008 (NCT06498479)
GSK5764227
EMBOLD SCLC-301
(NCT07099898)
MHB088C
MHB088C-P-301 (NCT06954246)
YL201
TAISHAN-302 (NCT06612151)
TROP2
SG
EVOKE-SCLC-04 (NCT06801834)
EGFR X HER3
BL-B01D1
PANKU-Lung03 (NCT06500026)
DLL3
ZL-1310
DLLEVATE (NCT07218146)
SEZ6
ABBV-706
M23-384 (NCT07365241)
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. Jie Wang presents results from phase III ARTEMIS-008 trial of risvutatug rezetecan (ris-rez), a B7-H3 antibody drug conjugate (topo-1 payload) vs topotecan in relapsed SCLC at #WCLC26. Included pts with SCLC progressed after 1 line of platinum-based chemotherapy with a 1:1 randomization to ris-rez 8mg/kg q3w vs standard topotecan. Again - 30% of pts had no smoking history - different biology a
3.6K impressions6 likes5 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARTEMIS-008: A multi-center, open-label, randomized, controlled phase 3 (NCT06498479)
Key inclusion criteria
Patients aged ≥18 years
Ris-Rez (N=230)
Relapsed SCLC after first-
8.0 mg/kg, IV, Q3W
1:1
line platinum-based+/-
Treatment until disease progression
ICIs therapy
R
or other discontinuation criteria*
Measurable lesions per
were met
RECIST 1.1
Stable brain metastases
Topotecan (N=231)
were allowed
1.2 mg/m2 D1 to 5, IV, Q3W
ECOG PS 0-1
Stratification:
Primary endpoint: OS
Chemo-free interval (<90 days or >90 days)
Secondary endpoints: PFS, ORR, DCR, DoR by BICR and investigator;
Baseline brain metastases (yes or no)
Disease stage at study entry (LS or ES)
safety
os IA was pre-planned at 192 events (75% information fraction of the 256 os events at the final analysis)
Data cut-off (DCO) date: June 6, 2026
*Including adverse events, the decision of the investigator or sponsor, participant withdrawal of consent, death, loss to follow up, pregnancy, among others.
Abbreviation: BICR, blinded independent central review; CTFI, chemotherapy-free interval; D, day: DCR, disease control rate: DoR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status: IA, interim analysis: IV, intravenous
injection; ORR, objective response rate: OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; Q3W, every 3 weeks; RECIST v1.1, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1: SCLC. small cell lung cancer
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Baseline Characteristics
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
(N= 230)
(N= 231)
(N= 230)
(N= 231)
Age (years), median (range)
61.5 (31, 80)
63.0 (41,78)
Lines of prior anti-tumor therapy, n (%)
<65, n (%)
140 (60.9)
138 (59.7)
1
230 (100.0)
231 (100.0)
≥65, n (%)
90 (39.1)
93 (40.3)
Prior anti-tumor regimens, n (%)
Race, n (%)
Platinum-based
230 (100.0)
231 (100.0)
Asian
230 (100.0)
231 (100.0)
PD-(L)1 inhibitors
190 (82.6)
183 (79.2)
Sex, n (%)
Chemotherapy-free interval, n (%)
Male
192 (83.5)
190 (82.3)
<90 days
83 (36.1)
85 (36.8)
Female
38 (16.5)
41 (17.7)
â90 days
147 (63.9)
146 (63.2)
Smoking history, n (%)
Prior thoracic radiotherapy, n (%)
Never
71 (30.9)
72 (31.2)
Yes
86 (37.4)
75 (32.5)
Former
140 (60.9)
133 (57.6)
No
144 (62.6)
156 (67.5)
Current
19 (8.3)
26 (11.3)
Metastasis at baseline, n (%)
ECOG PS score, n (%)
Brain
44 (19.1)
46 (19.9)
0
44 (19.1)
35 (15.2)
Liver
49 (21.3)
64 (27.7)
1
186 (80.9)
196 (84.8)
Disease stage at study entry (VALG), n (%)
Limited stage
30 (13.0)
28 (12.1)
Extensive stage
200 (87.0)
203 (87.9)
Abbreviation: ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; PD-1, programmed death receptor 1; PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand 1; VALG, Veterans Administration Lung Study Group
5
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | ARTEMIS-008 (pre-planned interim)
🧬 Ph3: Risvutatug Rezetecan (Ris-Rez), a B7-H3–directed TOP1 ADC, vs topotecan in relapsed SCLC after 1L platinum ± IO (n=461; ~81% prior PD-(L)1)
🏆 OS: 18.5 vs 10.3 mo; HR 0.46 (95% CI 0.35–0.62, p<0.0001)
📉 PFS: 7.2 vs 3.0 mo; HR 0.33 (BICR)
🎯 ORR: 58.3% vs 12.6% | DCR: 90.4% vs 60.2%
🔎 OS benefit was consistent across predefined subgroups, inclu
3.2K impressions14 likes5 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
ILLINOIS
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARTEMIS-008: A multi-center, open-label, randomized, controlled phase 3 (NCT06498479)
Key inclusion criteria
Patients aged ≥18 years
Ris-Rez (N=230)
Relapsed SCLC after first-
8.0 mg/kg, IV, Q3W
1:1
line platinum-based+/-
Treatment until disease progression
ICIs therapy
R
or other discontinuation criteria*
Measurable lesions per
were met
RECIST 1.1
Stable brain metastases
Topotecan (N=231)
were allowed
1.2 mg/m2 D1 to 5, IV, Q3W
ECOG PS 0-1
Stratification:
Primary endpoint: OS
Chemo-free interval (<90 days or ≥90 days)
Baseline brain metastases (yes or no)
Secondary endpoints: PFS, ORR, DCR, DoR by BICR and investigator;
Disease stage at study entry (LS or ES)
safety
os IA was pre-planned at 192 events (75% information fraction of the 256 os events at the final analysis)
Data cut-off (DCO) date: June 6, 2026
*Including adverse events, the decision of the Investigator or sponsor, participant withdrawal of consent, death, loss to follow up, pregnancy, among others.
Abbreviation: BICR, blinded independent central review; CTFI, chemotherapy-free interval; D, day; DCR, disease control rate; DoR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status: IA, interim analysis: IV, intravenous
injection; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; Q3W, every 3 weeks; RECIST v1.1, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1; SCLC, small cell lung cancer
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
I
Baseline Characteristics
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
(N= 230)
(N= 231)
(N=230)
(N=231)
Age (years), median (range)
61.5 (31, 80)
63.0 (41,78)
Lines of prior anti-tumor therapy, n (%)
<65, n (%)
140 (60.9)
138 (59.7)
1
230 (100.0)
231 (100.0)
≥65, n (%)
90 (39.1)
93 (40.3)
Prior anti-tumor regimens, n (%)
Race, n (%)
Platinum-based
230 (100.0)
231 (100.0)
Asian
230 (100.0)
231 (100.0)
PD-(L)1 inhibitors
190 (82.6)
183 (79.2)
Sex, n (%)
Chemotherapy-free interval, n (%)
Male
192 (83.5)
190 (82.3)
<90 days
83 (36.1)
85 (36.8)
Female
38 (16.5)
41 (17.7)
â90 days
147 (63.9)
146 (63.2)
Smoking history, n (%)
Prior thoracic radiotherapy, n (%)
Never
71 (30.9)
72 (31.2)
Yes
86 (37.4)
75 (32.5)
Former
140 (60.9)
133 (57.6)
No
144 (62.6)
156 (67.5)
Current
19 (8.3)
26 (11.3)
Metastasis at baseline, n (%)
ECOG PS score, n (%)
Brain
44 (19.1)
46 (19.9)
0
44 (19.1)
35 (15.2)
Liver
49 (21.3)
64 (27.7)
1
186 (80.9)
196 (84.8)
Disease stage at study entry (VALG), n (%)
Limited stage
30 (13.0)
28 (12.1)
Extensive stage
200 (87.0)
203 (87.9)
Abbreviation: ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; PD-1, programmed death receptor 1; PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand 1; VALG, Veterans Administration Lung Study Group
5
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Primary Endpoint: os
At this IA (DCO June 6, 2026), there're 77 (33.5%) OS events in Ris-Rez arm and 121(52.4%) in Topotecan arm.
With a median follow-up of 12.2 months, Ris-Rez demonstrated statistically significant and clinical meaningful
improvement in OS.
100
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
N=230
N=231
Median OS, months
18.5
10.3
80
Hazard Ratio*
0.46
64.5%
(95% CI)
Overall Survival Probability (%)
(0.35,0.62)
P value*
60
<0.0001
43.3%
40
20
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
Time (Months)
No. at risk
Ris-Rez 230
220
186
127
77
43
12
0
Topotecan 231
195
146
86
50
27
11
0
*Hazard ratio and P value were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model and Log-rank test, stratified by baseline brain metastasis status, CTFI, and VALG stage at study entry.
Censoring rule for OS: patients were censored at their lost known survival time; for the 15 untreated patients who withdrew consent in topotecan group, censoring occurred at the withdrawal date.
Abbreviation: CI, confidence Interval; CTFI, chemotherapy-free interval; IA, interim analysis; OS, overall survival; VALG, Veterans Administration Lung Study Group
6
[Slide 4]
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Safety Summary
Median exposure duration was 6.9 months for Ris-Rez and 2.8 months for topotecan.
Ris-Rez demonstrated a favorable safety profile with no new safety signals and no Grade 4/5 ILD events.
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
(n= 230)
(n= 216)
TRAEs, n (%)
230 (100.0)
216 (100.0)
Leading to dose delay
88 (38.3)
86 (39.8)
Leading to dose interruption
26 (11.3)
1 (0.5)
Leading to dose reduction
47 (20.4)
82 (38.0)
Leading to treatment discontinuation
21 (9.1)
9 (4.2)
Grade ≥3
140 (60.9)
169 (78.2)
Serious TRAEs
79 (34.3)
81 (37.5)
Leading to death#
3 (1.3)
2 (0.9)
ILD events*, n (%)
27 (11.7)
4 (1.9)
Grade ≥3
9 (3.9)
2 (0.9)
"In Ris-Rez arm: pneumonia (n=1), septic shock (n=1), pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (n=1). In topotecan arm: septic shock and respiratory failure (n=1), myelosuppression (n=1).
*Search strategy for ILD: interstitial lung disease SMQ(narrow). Search results: ILD (n=19), pneumonitis (n=10), interstitial lung abnormality (n=1), immune-mediated lung disease (n=1) and lung opacity (n=1). One patient reported
two ILD events.
Abbreviation: ILD, interstitial lung disease; TRAE, treatment-related adverse event
10
ggilberto lopes@GlopesMd
Two B7-H3 ADCs presented at #WCLC26 produced very encouraging results in relapsed SCLC: ARTEMIS-008 (Ris-Rez) and TAISHAN-302 (Tam-Peli).
We put them side by side in a descriptive cross-trial comparison. https://t.co/yjHAxmq7S1
2.8K impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
B7-H3 ADCs in Relapsed SCLC
DESCRIPTIVE CROSS-TRIAL COMPARISON: ARTEMIS-008 (RIS-REZ) VS TAISHAN-302 (TAM-PELI)
SAME SCIENCE. A BRIGHTER TOMORROW FOR SCLC.
Miami
!
Not a head-to-head comparison. Differences in eligibility, case mix, follow-up, endpoint assessment, and trial conduct limit cross-trial inference.
1
TRIAL SNAPSHOT
2
ELIGIBILITY / POPULATION / BASELINE DIFFERENCES
(Experimental arms shown; control arms were similar within each study)
ARTEMIS-008
TAISHAN-302
ARTEMIS-008
TAISHAN-302
(Ris-Rez)
(Tam-Peli)
(Ris-Rez, N=230)
(Tam-Peli, N=225)
Investigation drug
Ris-Rez
Tam-Peli
Prior PD-(L)1 exposure, n (%)
190 (82.6)
194 (86.2)
(B7-H3-directed TOP1 ADC)
(B7-H3-targeted ADC with
TMALIN linker and topoisomerase-l
Brain metastases at baseline, n (%)
44 (19.1)
78 (34.7)
inhibitor payload)
Liver metastases at baseline, n (%)
49 (21.3)
72 (32.0)
Study design
Phase 3, open-label
Phase 3, open-label
randomized controlled trial
randomized controlled trial
Chemotherapy-free interval <90 days,
n (%)
83 (36.1)
110 (48.9)
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06498479
NCT06612151
Randomized (n)
230 vs 231
225 VS 226
Disease extent, n (%)
Extensive-stage
Systemic disease
200 (87.0)
218 (96.9)
Geographic scope
China-only
China-only cohort
Stable brain metastases
(100% Asian cohort)
Brain metastases eligibility
Stratified by brain
allowed
metastases (yes or no)
Data cut-off
June 6, 2026
May 20, 2026
Median follow-up
12.2 months
9.2 months (Tam-Peli arm)
Interpretation: TAISHAN-302 appears to have enrolled a somewhat higher-risk population,
9.5 months (topotecan arm)
especially for CNS and liver metastatic burden and shorter chemotherapy-free interval.
3
EFFICACY RESULTS
4
SAFETY
Outcome
ARTEMIS-008
TAISHAN-302
Hazard Ratio (95% CI)
ARTEMIS-008
TAISHAN-302
(Ris-Rez)
(Tam-Peli)
Safety outcome, n (%)
Favors ADC
Favors Topotecan
(Ris-Rez, N=230)
(Tam-Peli, N=225)
Overall survival
Grade ≥3 treatment-related
Median OS, months
13.3 vs 9.4
0.46
adverse events (TRAEs)
140 (60.9)
104 (46.4)
18.5 VS 10.3
HR (95% CI)
0.46 (0.35-0.62)
0.46 (0.35-0.62)
0.46
Serious TRAEs
79 (34.3)
58 (25.9)
Progression-free survival
Interstitial lung disease (ILD)
BICR mPFS, months
7.2 VS 3.0
-
0.33
Any grade (overall)
27 (11.7)
Not reported
HR (95% CI)
0.33 (0.25-0.42)
Grade >3
-
9 (3.9)
Not reported
Investigator mPFS, months
7.8 VS 4.0
7.4 VS 2.8
0.35
Treatment-related deaths
Not reported
0 (0.0)
HR (95% CI)
0.35 (0.28-0.45)
0.35 (0.23-0.37)
0.29
Safety definitions and exposure duration differed; comparisons are descriptive only.
Objective response rate
58.3 (51.6-64.7)
59.1 (52.4-65.6)
-
ORR, % (95% CI)
BOTTOM LINE
VS 12.6 (8.6-17.5)
VS 9.7 (6.2-14.4)
Both B7-H3 ADCs showed substantial activity versus topotecan. Similar OS
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
hazard ratios and ORRs are encouraging, but differences in enrolled populations
mPFS, median progression-free survival; ORR, objective response rate; BICR, blinded independent central review;
CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.
and follow-up prevent any firm ranking without a direct comparative study.
WCLC26
MIAMI, FLORIDA
PATIENTS FOR A BRIGHTER TOMORROW
Advancing lung cancer care worldwide.
UUğur Özkerim@UOzkerim
ARTEMIS-008 at #WCLC26
In relapsed SCLC, the B7-H3 ADC risvutatug rezetecan (Ris-Rez) significantly improved OS versus topotecan in the phase III ARTEMIS-008 trial.
Median OS: 18.5 vs 10.3 months
HR 0.46 (95% CI 0.35–0.62), P<0.0001
PFS and response outcomes also consistently favored Ris-Rez
@OncoAlert @ManuelDomine @OpenMedKate
2K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARTEMIS-008: A multi-center, open-label, randomized, controlled phase 3 (NCT06498479)
Key inclusion criteria
Patients aged â¥18 years
Ris-Rez (N=230)
Relapsed SCLC after first-
8.0 mg/kg, IV, Q3W
1:1
line platinum-based+/-
Treatment until disease progression
ICIs therapy
R
or other discontinuation criteria*
Measurable lesions per
were met
RECIST 1.1
Stable brain metastases
Topotecan (N=231)
were allowed
1.2 mg/m2 D1 to 5, IV, Q3W
ECOG PS 0-1
Stratification:
Primary endpoint: OS
Chemo-free interval (<90 days or ≥90 days)
Secondary endpoints: PFS, ORR, DCR, DoR by BICR and investigator;
Baseline brain metastases (yes or no)
Disease stage at study entry (LS or ES)
safety
os IA was pre-planned at 192 events (75% information fraction of the 256 os events at the final analysis)
Data cut-off (DCO) date: June 6, 2026
*Including adverse events, the decision of the Investigator or sponsor, participant withdrawal of consent, death, loss to follow up, pregnancy, among others.
Abbreviation: BICR, blinded Independent central review; CTFI, chemotherapy-free interval; D, day; DCR, disease control rate; DoR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; IA, interim analysis; IV, intravenous
Injection: ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; Q3W, every 3 weeks; RECIST V1.1, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1; SCLC, small cell lung cancer
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Primary Endpoint: OS
At this IA (DCO June 6, 2026), there're 77 (33.5%) OS events in Ris-Rez arm and 121 (52.4%) in Topotecan arm.
With a median follow-up of 12.2 months, Ris-Rez demonstrated statistically significant and clinical meaningful
improvement in OS.
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
100
N=230
N=231
Median OS, months
18.5
10.3
80
Hazard Ratio*
0.46
64.5%
(95% CI)
(0.35, 0.62)
Overall Survival Probability (%)
P value*
<0.0001
60
43.3%
40
20
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
Time (Months)
No. at risk
Ris-Rez 230
220
186
127
77
43
12
0
Topotecan 231
195
146
86
50
27
11
0
*Hazard ratio and P value were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model and Log-rank test, stratified by baseline brain metastasis status, CTFI, and VALG stage at study entry.
Censoring rule for OS: patients were censored at their last known survival time; for the 15 untreated patients who withdrew consent in topotecan group, censoring occurred at the withdrawal date.
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval; CTFI, chemotherapy-free interval; IA, interim analysis; OS, overall survival; VALG, Veterans Administration Lung Study Group
6
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Secondary Endpoints: PFS by BICR and investigator
BICR-assessed PFS
Investigator-assessed PFS
100
Ris-Rez
100
Topotecan
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
N=230
N=231
N=230
№231
80
mPFS, months
7.2
3.0
NO
mPFS, months
7.8
4.0
Progression-Free Survival Probability (b)
HR
0.33
59.9%
Progression-Free Survival Probability (4)
HR
0.35
(95% CI)
61.5%
(95% CI)
60
(0.25,0.42)
60
(0.28,0,45)
40
40
28.5%
30.5%
26.1%
25.5%
20
20
— Ris-Rez
5.3%
Ris-Rez
7.5%
- Topotecan
Topotecan
0
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
0
3
6
.
12
23
13
21
Time (Months)
Time (Months)
No. at risk
No. at risk
Pas Rez
230
165
108
51
24
11
2
D
in Rez
230
192
118
3
28
и
2
0
Topotecan 231
as
as
#
2
&
1
0
Topotocári 231
is
48
14
.
3
an
B
Abbreviation: BICR, blinded independent central review; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio, m, median; PFS, progression-free survival
DDr Amol Akhade@SuyogCancer
And now we have 2nd ADC in second line SCLC . ARTEMIS 008. Ris-Rez ( B7-H3 targeted ADC ) . Question will be how to choose from this ? Suddenly too many options in second line SCLC @IASLC @StephenVLiu @RManochakian @OncoAlert https://t.co/VyDbRIlBb2
1.8K impressions10 likes7 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Conclusion
At this pre-planned interim analysis, Ris-Rez demonstrated statistically significant and clinically
meaningful os benefit over topotecan in relapsed SCLC after platinum-based +/- ICIs therapy, with
consistent benefit across all pre-defined subgroups
- Median OS: 18.5 VS. 10.3 months; HR=0.46
Consistent clinical benefit across secondary efficacy endpoints, with a favorable safety profile
INSC
- Median BICR-assessed PFS, 7.2 VS. 3.0 months; HR=0.33
- Lower incidence of grade ≥3 TRAEs and no new safety signals identified
The ARTEMIS-008 trial positions Ris-Rez as a potential new standard of care for relapsed
SCLC.
Ongoing global phase 3 study (EMBOLD-SCLC-301, NCT07099898) in relapsed SCLC and Ongoing
China phase 3 study (NCT07464327) in relapsed NSQ-NSCLC reinforce the broad potential of
Ris-Rez across lung cancer settings.
Abbreviation: BICR, blinded independent central review; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; NSQ. non-squamous; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression free survival; SCLC,
small cell lung cancer; TRAEs, treatment related adverse events
Reference: 1. Cancer Res. 2026;86 (8 Suppl): Abstract nr CT038.
12
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
A
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Most Common TRAEs (≥20% of patients) and Grade ≥3 TRAEs
Anaemia
78.3/17.4
90.7/25.0
White blood cell count decreased
71.3/24.3
78.2/32.4
Neutrophil count decreased
67.4/27.0
69.0/40.7
Platelet count decreased
47.4/13.9
92.6/59.7
Decreased appetite
46.5/3.9
28.7/0.5
INSC
Nausea
39.1/0
33.3/0.5
Asthenia
32.6/4.3
25.0/2.3
Hypoalbuminaemia
32.2/0
18.1/0
Lymphocyte count decreased
31.3/16.1
21.8/10.2
Weight decreased
31.3/1.3
7.9/0
Aspartate aminotransferase increased
28.3/0.4
12.5/0
Alanine aminotransferase increased
27.8/0.9
22.2/0
Infusion related reaction
Ris-Rez
25.7/0
0/0
Topotecan
Pyrexia
All grades
All grades
grade ≥3
25.7/0.4
3.7/0
grade ≥3
100
80
60
40
20
0
20
40
60
80
100
Participants (%)
11
SCLENCE MUTUOUT DOUNDADIES UAUTIA TUE TUARICIS SAED
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Primary Endpoint: os
At this IA (DCO June 6, 2026), there're 77 (33.5%) OS events in Ris-Rez arm and 121(52.4%) in Topotecan arm.
With a median follow-up of 12.2 months, Ris-Rez demonstrated statistically significant and clinical meaningful
improvement in OS.
3
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
100
N=230
N=231
Median OS, months
18.5
10.3
80
Hazard Ratio*
0.46
INC
64.5%
(95% CI)
(0.35, 0.62)
Overall Survival Probability (%)
P value*
<0.0001
60
43.3%
40
20
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
Time (Months)
No. at risk
Ris Rez
230
220
186
127
77
43
12
0
Topotecan 231
195
146
86
50
27
11
0
"Hazard ratio and Pvalue were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model and Log-rank test, stratified by baseline brain metastasis status, CTFI, and VALG stage at study entry.
Censoring rule for OS: patients were censored at their last known survival time; for the 15 untreated patients who withdrew consent in topotecan group, censoring occurred at the withdrawal date.
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval; CTFI, chemotherapy-free interval; IA, interim analysis; OS, overall survival; VALG, Veterans Administration Lung Study Group
6
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES: UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Secondary Endpoints: PFS by BICR and investigator
BICR-assessed PFS
Investigator-assessed PFS
3
ni
F
100
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
100
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
N=230
N=231
N=230
N=231
80
mPFS, months
7.2
3.0
80
mPFS, months
7.8
4.0
TASIC
in
Progression-Fre Survival Probability (%)
HR
0.33
(95% CI)
28.5%
26.1%
Progression-Free Survival Probability (%)
HR
0.35
59.9%
61.5%
60
(0.25,0.42)
60
(95% CI)
(0.28,0.45)
40
40
30.5%
25.5%
20
20
-
Ris-Rez
5.3%
-
Ris-Rez
7.5%
-
Topotecan
Topotecan
0
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
Time (Months)
Time (Months)
No. at risk
No. risk
Rs Rez 230
185
108
51
24
11
2
0
Pas-Rez 230
192
118
64
28
12
2
0
Topotecan 231
84
38
8
2
1
1
0
Topotecan 231
$
48
14
5
1
1
0
Abbreviation: BICR, blinded independent central review; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; m, median; PFS, progression free survival
8
SCIENCE WITHOUT ROUNDARIES: UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST THORACIC CANCER
YYakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
Highlighted Studies at #WCLC26
1️⃣ HARMONi-2
In treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥1%, ivonescimab improved PFS (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) and OS (30.8 vs 22.6 months; HR 0.73) compared with pembrolizumab.
This is a genuinely positive trial, but it does not tell the same story for all PD-L1-positive patients. The OS benefit was clear in the ≥50% subgroup, whereas the HR was 0.85 with
9.1K impressions24 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC SEOUL 2026
WCLC26: KEY STUDIES
Early results key data at a glance
HARMONi-2
1
1L PD-L1 >1% advanced NSCLC
Clearly positive.
Strongest signal in PD-L1 >50%.
PFS 11.1 vs 5.8 mo
HR 0.51
In 1-49%, the control arm does
os 30.8 vs 22.6 mo
HR 0.73
not fully reflect current practice.
2
SWOG S1827 / MAVERICK
Post-treatment SCLC MRI surveillance vs MRI + PCI
With reliable MRI access, routine
PCI is now hard to justify.
Cognitive failure / death
HR 0.60
Final os is still needed before
Grade ≥3 toxicity 0.8% vs 7.9%
declaring PCI obsolete.
Interim OS and brain metastasis-free survival: no difference
TAISHAN-302
3
Relapsed SCLC B7-H3 ADC Tam-Peli vs topotecan
Clear survival gain.
A potential topotecan replacement;
os 13.3 vs 9.4 mo
HR 0.46
efficacy after tarlatamab
PFS 7.4 vs 2.8 mo
ORR 59% vs 10%
maintenance remains unknown.
ARTEMIS-008
4
Relapsed SCLC . B7-H3 ADC Ris-Rez VS topotecan
Confirms B7-H3 as a target.
No cross-trial comparison with
os 18.5 vs 10.3 mo
HR 0.46
TAISHAN; ILD and hematologic
PFS 7.2 vs 3.0 mo
ORR 58% vs 13%
toxicity may drive selection.
5
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
PD-L1 >50% metastatic NSCLC SG+pembro VS pembro
More tumor shrinkage,
ORR 56% vs 44%
similar response duration,
os 21.5 vs 22.8 mo
no OS gain:
Grade ≥3 toxicity 56% vs 17%
no role in clinical practice.
Primary PFS threshold not met
13 SEPTEMBER 2026 INTERIM CONGRESS SNAPSHOT
@dr_yakupergun
MMedJ@MedJ0401
Two Chinese phase 3 trials take B7-H3 ADCs to the WCLC 2026 Presidential Symposium: TAISHAN-302 and ARTEMIS-008 compare them with topotecan in relapsed SCLC. The focus: overall survival and safety, beyond early response rates. Full article below. https://t.co/rnhCfTAJho
8.5K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 2]
PL02.03. Tam-Peli, an Anti-B7-H3 Antibody-Drug Conjugate, Versus Topotecan in Relapsed SCLC: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 Study
L. Zhang¹, Y. Zhao¹, H. Liu², X. Meng³, Z. Liu⁴, Y. Yu5, Y. Zheng⁶, L. Sun7, R. Yang⁸, J. Liu6, Y. Zhao⁹, L. Wu¹⁰, L. Yang¹¹, Z. Zhang¹², M. Li¹³, P. Zhang¹⁴, Y.
Zhang¹⁵, H. Zhong¹⁶, J. Cui¹⁷, Z. Huang¹ Y. Yin¹⁹, M. Li20, F. Tong²¹, D. Xue²², D. Lv²³, X. Li24, X. Zhang²⁴, S. Chin²⁴, J. Cai24, T. Xue24, Y. Huang¹, H. Zhao¹
Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Cancer,
Guangzhou/CN 2Cancer Hospital of Dalian University of Technology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang/CN ³Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute,
Shandong First Medical University, Jinan/CN, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, Nanchang/CN, ⁵Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin/CN ⁶The First Affiliated
Hospital, Zhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory for Drug Evaluation and Clinical Research, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou/CN, The First Affiliated
Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang/CN The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Tumor Hospital, Kunming/CN 9The Affiliated Cancer
Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou/CN, ¹⁰Hunan Cancer Hospital/The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Xiangya School of Medicine,
Central South University, Changsha/CN, 11 Gansu Provincial Cancer Hospital, Lanzhou/CN, ¹²The First Affiliated Hospital, and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan
University of Science and Technology, Luoyang/CN, ¹³The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou/CN, 4Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital Affiliated to
Tongji University, Shanghai/CN 5West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu/CN ¹⁶Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine,
Shanghai/CN 17 The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun/CN, Clinical Oncology School of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou/CN, 19 Linyi
People's Hospital, Linyi/CN 20The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an/CN Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science
and Technology, Wuhan/CN 22Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou/CN ²³Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University,
Taizhou/CN ²⁴MediLink Therapeutics (Suzhou) Co., Ltd., Suzhou/CN 1 8:59 AM- 9:09
AM
10m
View abstract
@
Jo
View biography
[Slide 3]
PL02.04. Risvutatug Rezetecan (a B7-H3-Directed ADC) Versus Topotecan in Relapsed SCLC: Primary Results of Phase 3 ARTEMIS-008
J. Wang1, L. Wang2, J. Duan¹, H. Liu³, Q. Wang4, H. Wang2, L. Sun5, S. Huang⁶, Y. Huang⁷, F. Tong⁸, W. Zheng9, T. Chu¹⁰, Y. Fan¹¹, D. Huang¹², P. Zhang¹³, W.
Guo¹⁴, B. Liu¹⁵, J. Zhou¹⁶, Q. Li17, Y. Dong¹⁸, Q. Liu¹⁸, M. Zhang¹⁸ X. Zhang¹⁸, J. Yu2
National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Peking Union Medical College,
Beijing/CN, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University, Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan/CN 3 Jilin Cancer Hospital,
Changchun/CN 4The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Institute of Cancer Research, Henan Academy of Innovations in
Medical Science, Zhengzhou/CN ⁵The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang/CN, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University,
Zhengzhou/CN Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou/CN Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan/CN, 9Shengjing
Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang/CN, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai/CN, Zhejiang Cancer
Hospital, Hangzhou/CN 12 Cancer Institute&Hospital, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin/CN ¹³Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University, Shanghai/CN
/ 14Shanxi Provincial Cancer Hospital, Taiyuan/CN 15 Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin/CN, 16Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer
Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu/CN 17Xiangyang Center Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of
Hubei University Arts and Science, Xiangyang/CN, Shanghai Hansoh BioMedical Co., Ltd, Shanghai/CN
-
9:11 AM- 9:21 AM
10m
T
View abstract
o
View biography
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 — The Studies to Watch
Seoul, 12–15 September
A clinical map of the key questions at @IASLC WCLC 2026: early/locally advanced NSCLC, oncogenic drivers, IO combinations, SCLC (including CNS), limited-stage multimodal therapy, and local control.
Presidential symposium highlights include ADAURA OS update, PAPILLON, REZILIENT 3, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, TAISHAN-302, A
5.5K impressions5 likes4 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026: THE STUDIES TO WATCH
Seoul
12-15 September 2026
Presidential symposium
01
EARLY / LOCALLY ADVANCED NSCLC
02
ADVANCED NSCLC: DRIVERS
ADAURA
PL03.01
PAPILLON
PL03.03
Osimertinib
exploratory 8-year OS
EGFR exon 20 amivantamab + chemo
os
IMpower030
OA04.03
REZILIENT 3
PL03.04
Perioperative atezolizumab + chemo
EGFR exon 20 zipalertinib + chemo
MDT-BRIDGE
ARROS-1
PL03.06
OA04.02
ROS1 zidesamtinib TKI-naive
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemo
DESTINY-Lung04
PL03.08
Adjuvant gefitinib + chemo
OA04.01
HER2-mutant
first-line T-DXd
EGFR-mutant phase III
HARMONi
0A14.05
NAUTIKA1
M006.01/ OA04.04
Post-EGFR TKI ivonescimab + chemo os
Neoadjuvant alectinib / divarasib
AMIGO-1
0A12.04
Amivantamab + lazertinib + pemetrexed
03
ADVANCED NSCLC: NO DRIVER
04
SCLC: SYSTEMIC THERAPY & CNS
HARMONi-2
OA14.01
TAISHAN-302
PL02.03
Ivonescimab vs pembrolizumab OS
Tam-Peli vs topotecan relapsed
ARTEMIS-008
PL02.04
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE D46
PL02.06
Risvutatug rezetecan vs topotecan
Sacituzumab govitecan + pembrolizumab
PD-L1 ≥50%
SWOG S1827 MAVERICK
PL02.01
Pumitamig + BNT324
0A14.02
Brain MRI surveillance ± cranial irradiation
PD-L1/VEGF-A + B7-H3
NSCLC/SCLC
DeLLphi-309
OA05.01
Tarlatamab extended-interval dosing
RC148 / ABBV-1480
OA14.04
PD-1/VEGF bispecific + chemo
DeLLphi-308
M015.07
Tarlatamab subcutaneous delivery
MAVERICK: cross-stage brain prevention.
05
LIMITED-STAGE SCLC
06
SURGERY, RADIOTHERAPY & LOCAL CONTROL
Neoadjuvant serplulimab + chemo
M015.03
Wedge vs segmentectomy
OA08.01
pathological response / MRD
GGO-dominant early NSCLC
GREAT
OA08.02
Serplulimab + concurrent CRT
P3.288
Segmentectomy VS lobectomy
followed by serplulimab phase
II
STARLORD
OA09.04
CXCL9+ DCs / CXCR3+ Tregs
M015.01
Stereotactic RT when concurrent CRT is unsuitable
treatment resistance
LONESTAR
0A14.03
Early clinical and translational signals
Local consolidation after nivolumab + ipilimumab
EMERGING SCIENCE
KRAS G12D: GFH375 / QLC1101
DLL3 CAR-T: LB2102
mRNA vaccine: BNT116
OA12.01-02
OA05.02
M006.03
Pre-congress watchlist
Not a results summary
11 Sep 2026
Source: IASLC WCLC 2026 program
wclc.iaslc.org
10PAPILLONView full trial page →83.9K impressions39.4K primary · 44.5K preview225 engagements55 posts · 41 voices▾
UUğur Özkerim@UOzkerim
Final OS results from PAPILLON at #WCLC26
In 1L EGFR exon20ins advanced NSCLC, amivantamab + chemotherapy achieved a median OS of 34.3 vs 27.9 months with chemotherapy (HR 0.87).
With substantial crossover to amivantamab after progression (97/128; 76%), the crossover-adjusted analysis showed an OS benefit: HR 0.57
@OncoAlert @GlopesMd @ManuelDomine @StephenVLiu @weoncologists @OpenMedKate @Lung
7.1K impressions6 likes5 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
G
PAPILLON
PAPILLON: Final Overall Survival in the ITT Population
Ami-chemo in 1L
Ex20ins NSCLC
Median os (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
34.3 mo (27.0-40.8)
100
Chemotherapy
27.9 mo (24.0-32.4)
HR, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.66-1.14); P=0.307
80
Amivantamab-chemotherapy demonstrated the
Participants who are surviving (%)
66%
longest median OS reported to date in
Ex20ins-mutated advanced NSCLC
60
58%
47%
40
38%
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
20
Chemotherapy
97 of 128 (76%)
Median follow-up: 48.6 mo (range, 0.3-59.4)
participants who
discontinued due to
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
progressive disease
crossed over to
Months
No. at risk
amivantamaba
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
Chemotherapy 155
153
148
136
127
114
103
96
86
74
63
58
53
50
41
30
20
14
9
4
0
A total of 97 participants (87 participants as part of the crossover cohort plus an additional 10 participants off protocol) received 2L amivantamab monotherapy out of 128 chemotherapy-randomized participants with BICR -confirmed disease progression. 2L, second line, Ex20ins, exon 20 insertion
6
KAREN KELLY
ALEX ADVEL &
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
12
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON: Crossover-Adjusted Final Overall Survival
PAPILLO
Ami-chemo
Ex20ins NS
Inverse Probability of Censoring Weighting (IPCW)
HR (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
0.87 (0.66-1.14);
100
vs chemotherapy (ITT)
P=0.307
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
0.57 (0.39-0.82);
vs IPCW-adjusted chemotherapy®
nominal P=0.003
80
After adjustment for on-protocol crossover with
Participants who are surviving (%)
the prespecified IPCW method, amivantamab-
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
chemotherapy demonstrated a significant
60
(ITT): 34.3 mo
(95% CI, 27.0-40.8)
OS benefit versus chemotherapy
Chemotherapy (IPCW):
40
22.1 mo
(95% CI, 16.4-27.6)
20
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
Chemotherapy (IPCW)
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
No. at risk
Months
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
Chemotherapy (IPCW) 155
149
128
95
71
53
41
34
27
22
17
12
10
9
6
6
2
1
1
0
0
*Two additional recommended models' demonstrated improvement in the OS benefit consistent with IPCW: Two-Stage Estimation (TSE): HR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.35-0 77) and Rank Preserving Structural Failure Time (RPSFT): HR, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.37-1.36).
1. Question and answer on adjustment for cross-over in estimating effects in oncology trials. European Medicines Agency. Accessed August 18, 2026. https I/www
8
KAREN KELLY
CHUL KIM
RATHENOVA
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @chulkimMD from @LombardiCancer presents final OS analysis on phase III PAPILLON trial: 1L amivantamab + chemo vs chemo alone for EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC at #WCLC26. Importantly, this trial permitted crossover for patients randomized to chemotherapy alone and 76% who progressed did crossover to ami. This has a major impact on OS but really is the right thing to do. The OS here was the lon
3.5K impressions17 likes10 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON: Final Overall Survival in the ITT Population
PAPILLON
Ami-chemo in 1L
Ex20ins NSCLC
Median OS (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
34.3 mo (27.0-40.8)
100
Chemotherapy
27.9 mo (24.0-32.4)
HR, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.66-1.14); P=0.307
80
Amivantamab-chemotherapy demonstrated the
Participants who are surviving (%)
66%
longest median OS reported to date in
Ex20ins-mutated advanced NSCLC
60
58%
47%
40
38%
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
20
Chemotherapy
97 of 128 (76%)
participants who
Median follow-up: 48.6 mo (range, 0.3-59.4)
discontinued due to
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
progressive disease
crossed over to
Months
No. at risk
amivantamaba
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
Chemotherapy 155
153
148
136
127
114
103
96
86
74
63
58
53
50
41
30
20
14
9
4
0
*A total of 97 participants (87 participants as part of the crossover cohort plus an additional 10 participants off-protocol) received 2L amivantamab monotherapy out of 128 chemotherapy-randomized participants with BICR-confirmed disease progression 2L, second-line; Ex20ins, exon 20 insertion
6
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON: Crossover-Adjusted Final Overall Survival
PAPILLON
Ami-chemo in 1L
Inverse Probability of Censoring Weighting (IPCW)
Ex20ins NSCLC
HR (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
0.87 (0.66-1.14);
100
VS chemotherapy (ITT)
P=0.307
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
0.57 (0.39-0.82);
VS IPCW-adjusted chemotherapy
nominal P=0.003
80
After adjustment for on-protocol crossover with
Participants who are surviving (%)
the prespecified IPCW method, amivantamab-
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
chemotherapy demonstrated a significant
60
(ITT): 34.3 mo
(95% CI, 27.0-40.8)
OS benefit versus chemotherapy
Chemotherapy (IPCW):
40
22.1 mo
(95% CI, 16.4-27.6)
20
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
Chemotherapy (IPCW)
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
Months
No. at risk
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
Chemotherapy (IPCW) 155
149
128
95
71
53
41
34
27
22
17
12
10
9
6
6
2
1
1
0
0
*Two additional recommended models¹ demonstrated improvement in the OS benefit consistent with IPCW: Two-Stage Estimation (TSE) HR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.35-0.77) and Rank Preserving Structural Failure Time (RPSFT) HR 0.71 (95% CI, 0.37-1.36)
1. Question and answer on adjustment for cross-over in estimating effects in oncology trials European Medicines Agency Accessed August 18,
8
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON
First Subsequent Therapy
Ami-chemo in 1L
Ex20ins NSCLC
Did not receive subsequent
8%
therapy (non-PD)
18%
8%
Other
Did not receive subsequent
Chemotherapy or ICI regimens
16%
therapy (PD)
Other EGFR-targeted or
Participants (%)
TKI-based regimensᵇ
Ongoing
12%
Other
83%
Chemotherapy or ICI regimens
Amivantamab
Received a first
54%
subsequent therapy
Other EGFR-targeted or
TKI-based regimensᵇ
Amivantamab
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
(n=153)
(n=155)
The crossover design for the chemotherapy arm and lack of active 2L therapies available at the time of this trial
likely contributed to differences in rates between arms
Note: Totals may not sum to 100 due to rounding 83 participants from the amivantamab-chemotherapy arm received a subsequent therapy (Amivantamab n=2; Other EGFR-targeted or TKI-based regimens: n=31; Chemotherapy or ICI regimens n=39 Other n=11); 129 participants in the chemotherapy am received a
subsequent therapy (Amivantamab: n=97; Other EGFR-targeted or TKI-based regimens n=15; Chemotherapy or ICI regimens n=13; Other n=4) *Other therapy included antineoplastic agents, bevacizumab, cantharidin, investigational agents, other protein kinase inhibitors, and SKB 264 EGFR-targeted or TKI-based
regimens included afatinib, firmonertinib, mobocertinib, ORIC 114, osimertinib, sunvozertinib zipalertinib, and EGFR TKI combination regimens TKI in combination with chemotherapy, immunotherapy or VEGF inhibitor therapies were only counted in the TKI-based regimen category
2L, second-line; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; PD, progressive disease
9
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | PAPILLON final OS update
🧬 Ph3: 1L amivantamab + chemo vs chemo in advanced EGFR exon20ins NSCLC (n=308)
📊 Final OS (ITT):
• 34.3 vs 27.9 mo
• HR 0.87 (95% CI 0.66–1.14; p=0.307)
→ not statistically significant
🔄 Major caveat: 76% (97/128) of patients progressing on chemotherapy crossed over to 2L amivantamab
📈 Crossover-adjusted OS (IPCW):
• 34.3 vs 22.1 mo
• HR 0.57 (95% CI 0.39–0.
3K impressions8 likes1 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON: Final Overall Survival in the ITT Population
PAPILION
Ami-chemo is R
Extitins NSCLC
Median os (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
100
34.3 mo (27.0-40.8)
Chemotherapy
27.9 mo (24.0-32.4)
HR, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.66-1.14); P=0.307
80
Amivantamab-chemotherapy demonstrated the
Participants who are surviving (%)
66%
longest median OS reported to date in
Ex20ins-mutated advanced NSCLC
60
58%
47%
40
38%
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
20
Chemotherapy
97 of 128 (76%)
participants who
Median follow-up: 48.6 mo (range, 0.3-59.4)
discontinued due to
0
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
progressive disease
0
3
6
9
crossed over to
Months
No. at risk
amivantamab*
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
Chemotherapy 155
153
148
136
127
114
103
96
86
74
63
58
53
50
41
30
20
14
9
4
0
"A total of 97 participants (87 participants as part of the crossover cohort plus an additional 10 participants off protocol) received 2L amivantamab monotherapy out of 128 chemotherapy randomized participants with BICR confirmed disease progression a, second Inc, Ex20m exan 20
6
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON: Crossover-Adjusted Final Overall Survival
PAPILLON
Am-dema a n
Inverse Probability of Censoring Weighting (IPCW)
EXCORE NSCLC
HR (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
0.87 (0.66-1,14);
100
VS chemotherapy (ITT)
P=0.307
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
0.57 (0.39-0.82):
vs IPCW-adjusted chemotherapy®
nominal P=0.003
80
After adjustment for on-protocol crossover with
Participants who are surviving (%)
the prespecified IPCW method, amivantamab-
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
chemotherapy demonstrated a significant
60
(ITT): 34.3 mo
(95% CI, 27.0-40.8)
OS benefit versus chemotherapy
Chemotherapy (IPCW):
40
22.1 mo
(95% CI, 16.4-27.6)
20
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
Chemotherapy (IPCW)
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
Months
No. at risk
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
Chemotherapy (IPCW) 155
149
128
95
71
53
41
34
27
22
17
12
10
9
6
6
2
1
1
0
0
*Two additional recommended models' demonstrated improvement in the OS benefit consistent with IPCW: Two-Stage Estimation (TSE) HR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.35-0.77) and Rank Preserving Structural Failure Time (RPSFT) HR, 071 (95% a 0.37-1.36)
1. Question and answer on adjustment for cross-over in estimating effects in oncology trials. European Medicines Agency Accessed August 18, 2026 https Hwww ema europa advatment cross over entimated deb May
8
[Slide 3]
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
First Subsequent Therapy
CS
PAPILLON
Ami-cheme a 11
Ex20m NSCLC
Did not receive subsequent
18%
8%
therapy (non-PD)
8%
Other*
Did not receive subsequent
therapy (PD)
16%
Chemotherapy or ICI regimens
Other EGFR-targeted or
Participants (%)
Ongoing
TKI-based regimens
12%
Other*
83%
Chemotherapy or ICI regimens
Amivantamab
Received a first
54%
subsequent therapy
Other EGFR-targeted or
TKI-based regimensᵇ
Amivantamab
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
(n=153)
(n=155)
The crossover design for the chemotherapy arm and lack of active 2L therapies available at the time of this trial
likely contributed to differences in rates between arms
Note: Totals may not sum to 100 due to rounding 83 participants from the amivantamab-chemotherapy arm received a subsequent therapy (Amivantamab: n°2, Other EGFR targeted or TKI based regiment mJt, Chemotherapy or ICI regiments Other - mill 129 participants a be deme/berrary - received 1
subsequent therapy (Amivantamab: n=97; Other EGFR targeted or TKI based regimens: n=15; Chemotherapy or ICI regimens: nº 13, Other n=4). "Other therapy included antineoplastic agents, bevacinmed cantharide, investigational agents, other line which and SAB 254 10 carpted #
regimens included afatinib, firmonertinib, mobocertinib, ORIC 114, osimertinib, sunvozertinib, zipalertinih, and EGFR TKI combination regimens. TKI in combination with chemotherapy, inmuncify, or VEGF rhbir therapies were only counted " be TX) hand regiment category
2L, second line; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor, PD, progressive disease.
9
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PFS2: PFS From Randomization to Second Progression Eventᵃ
PAPILLON
Ami-chema in 11.
Ex20ms NSCLC
Median PFS2 (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
28.3 mo (21.8-36.2)
100
Chemotherapy
17.5 mo (15.2-21.0)
HR, 0.59 (95% CI, 0.45-0.77); nominal P<0.0001
80
Participants who are progression-free (%)
PFS2 was extended by >10 months with
amivantamab-chemotherapy
56%
60
42%
40
36%
20
19%
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
Median follow-up: 48.6 mo (range, 0.3-59.4)
Chemotherapy
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
Time from randomization
No. at risk
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
137
125
109
93
81
74
67
61
56
54
47
35
25
17
11
5
3
0
Chemotherapy 155
152
146
127
103
86
70
60
52
42
33
26
22
18
15
13
9
5
4
1
0
*Consistent with PFS2, time to treatment discontinuation and time to subsequent therapy were extended with amivantamab-chemolherapy versus chemotherapy (14 1 vs 76 mo, HR, 0.36; 95% CL 028-0 46, P<0.0001 and 16.9 vs 99 mo, MR 037, 95% a 029-0 48, Pcg 0001, respectively)
10
LLaura Alder, MD@LauraAlderMD
Phenomenal presentation by @chulkimMD on PAPILLON OS @ #WCLC26!
⭐️OS impressive improvement, 34.3 mo, (notable 76% crossover), toxicities remain challenging. Thankfully a growing field, offering this and additional options to our patients. https://t.co/eJ4eELxBR7
2.1K impressions7 likes3 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON: Final Overall Survival in the ITT Population
PAPILLON
Ami-chemo in 1L
Ex20ins NSCLC
Median OS (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
34.3 mo (27.0-40.8)
100
Chemotherapy
27.9 mo (24.0-32.4)
HR, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.66-1.14); P=0.307
80
Amivantamab-chemotherapy demonstrated the
Participants who are surviving (%)
66%
longest median OS reported to date in
Ex20ins-mutated advanced NSCLC
60
58%
47%
40
38%
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
LEEL
20
Chemotherapy
97 of 128 (76%)
Median follow-up: 48.6 mo (range, 0.3-59.4)
participants who
discontinued due to
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
progressive disease
Months
crossed over to
No. at risk
amivantamab
Amivantamab chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
Chemotherapy 155
153
148
136
127
114
103
96
86
74
63
58
53
50
41
30
20
14
9
4
0
A total of 37 participants (87 participants as part of the crossover cohort plus an additional 10 participants off protocol) received 2 anivantamab monotherapy out of 128 chemotherapy randomized participants with BICR confirmed disease progression 2L, second line Ex20ms, eaon 20 insertion
6
MMisty Dawn Shields@drshieldsmd
Dr. Chul Kim @chulkimMD expertly presenting the final OS results of PAPILLON investigating the role of amivantamab+chemo vs chemo in 1L EGFR exon 20 insertion positive NSCLC at @IASLC #WCLC26.
Not significant difference in OS due to 76% crossover, but additional IPCW-adjusted analysis with HR 0.57 (P = 0.003). Longest survival data for exon20ins EGFR to date!
@EGFRResisters @EgfrUk @jillfeldman
1.6K impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 2]
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON
Ami-chemo in 1L
PAPILLON: Phase 3 Study Design
Ex20ins NSCLC
Primary endpoint: PFS by BICR according to
RECIST v1.1°
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
Key eligibility criteria
(n=153)
Key secondary endpoint:
Treatment-naïve,ᵃ locally
NSCLC
1:1 Randomization
Protocol-specified final overall survival (OS)c
advanced or metastatic
(N=308)
Estimated to provide ~56% power to detect a
statistically significant difference in OS, with statistical
Documented EGFR Ex20ins
Chemotherapy
power further attenuated due to crossover
(n=155)
ECOG PS 0 or 1
Other prespecified endpoints reported in this
presentation:
IPCW crossover-adjusted OSᵈ
Stratification factors
PFS from randomization to second progression
ECOG PS
event (PFS2)
History of brain metastasesᵇ
Crossover to 2L amivantamab monotherapy
Safety
Prior EGFR TKI useᵃ
Crossover permitted only after BICR-confirmed
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs)
disease progression
Amivantamab monotherapy given Q3W
Dosing (in 21-day cycles)
Intravenous amivantamab: 1400 mg (1750 mg if >80 kg) for
the first 4 weeks, then 1750 mg (2100 mg if >80 kg) Q3W
starting at Week 7 (first day of Cycle 3)
Chemotherapy on the first day of each cycle:
Carboplatin: AUC5 for the first 4 cycles
Pemetrexed: 500 mg/m2 until disease progression
PAPILLON (ClinicalTrials gov identifier since 4 had pnor EGFR TKI use (brief monotherapy with common EGFR TKIs was allowed if lack of response was documented). Participants with 5 brain metastases ORR, were and eligible then OS if they were received included definitive in hierarchical treatment testing. and IPCW were asymptomatic, was a prespecified clinically model stable, for the and off
NCT04538664) enrollment period December 2020 to November 2022; clinical cut off: March 20, 2026.
Removed as treatment stratification for factor >2 weeks prior only to randomization participants Key statistical assumption: 300 participants with 200 events needed for 90% power to detect an HR of 0.625 Evaluation (estimated Criteria PFS in Solid of 8 VS Tumors months). PFS, crossover-
corticosteroid adjusted OS analysis. 2L, second line; AUC, area under the curve, Ex20ins, exon 20 insertion; IPCW, inverse probability of censoring weighting; RECIST, Response
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON
PAPILLON: Final Overall Survival in the ITT Population
Ami-chemo in 1L
Ex20ins NSCLC
Median os (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
34.3 mo (27.0-40.8)
Chemotherapy
27.9 mo (24.0-32.4)
100
HR, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.66-1.14); P=0.307
Amivantamab-chemotherapy demonstrated the
80
nerapy
upon
66%
longest median OS reported to date in
strated the
survival
Participants who are surviving (%)
Ex20ins-mutated advanced NSCLC
up of 48.6
60
58%
47%
antamab plus
40
38%
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
20
Chemotherapy
97 of 128 (76%
participants w
Median follow-up: 48.6 mo (range, 0.3-59.4)
discontinued du
0
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
progressive dis
0
3
6
9
crossed over
Months
No. at risk
amivantama
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
Chemotherapy 155
153
148
136
127
114
103
96
86
74
63
58
53
50
41
30
20
14
9
4
0
A total of 97 participants (87 participants as part of the crossover cohort plus an additional 10 participants off protocol) received 2L amivantamab monotherapy out of 128 chemotherapy randomized participants with BICR confirmed disease progression. 2L, second-line; Ex20ins, exon 20 insertion
A
i
LYOBMILA
KAREN KELLY
ALEXADJEL
CHUL KIM
DANIEL TAN
BAZHENOVA
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PAPILLON: Crossover-Adjusted Final Overall Survival
PAPILLON
Ami-chemo in 1
Ex20ins NSCLC
Inverse Probability of Censoring Weighting (IPCW)
HR (95% CI)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
0.87 (0.66-1.14);
vs chemotherapy (ITT)
P=0.307
100
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT)
0.57 (0.39-0.82);
vs IPCW-adjusted chemotherapy®
nominal P=0.003
80
After adjustment for on-protocol crossover with
the prespecified IPCW method, amivantamab-
Participants who are surviving (%)
Amivantamab-chemotherapy
chemotherapy demonstrated a significant
(ITT): 34.3 mo
60
(95% CI, 27.0-40.8)
OS benefit versus chemotherapy
Chemotherapy (IPCW):
40
22.1 mo
(95% CI, 16.4-27.6)
20
Amivantamab-chemotherapy (ITT
Chemotherapy (IPCW)
0
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60
0
3
6
9
12
Months
No. at risk
Amivantamab-chemotherapy 153
144
140
138
128
118
107
100
95
84
80
71
67
62
52
36
26
18
12
4
0
149
128
95
71
53
41
34
27
22
17
12
10
9
6
6
2
1
1
0
0
Chemotherapy (IPCW) 155
*Two additional recommended models' demonstrated improvement in the OS benefit consistent with IPCW: Two Stage Estimation (TSE): HR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.35-0.77) and Rank Preserving Structural Failure Time (RPSFT): HR, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.37-1.36).
1
Question and answer on adjustment for cross-over in estimating effects in oncology trials European Medicines Agency. Accessed August 18, 2026 https //www
8
KAREN KELLY
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
@chulkimMD presents the OS update from PAPILLON: 1L amivantamab plus chemotherapy in EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC
@IASLC #WCLC26 https://t.co/9Lgj5s4mqJ
1.5K impressions4 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
OOncology Brothers@OncBrothers
Highlights from #WCLC26 #CommunityOncology:
NSCLC
1. #ADAURA Update Adj mEGFR
2. #PAPILLON 1L EGFR Ex20
3. #DESTINYLung04 1L mHER2
4. #ARROS1 1L ROS1+
5. #HARMONi 2L mEGFR
SCLC
6. #MAVERICK @SWOG MRI surv
7. #DeLLphi Tarla SubQ & ⬇️ freq
#lcsm #OncTwitter @IASLC
1/8 https://t.co/K5kHEzMTvv
11.4K impressions10 likes9 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
THE
IASLC
2026 D
2026 World Conference
Endorsed by
Korean
Association
for
on Lung Cancer
KAL
Lung Cancer
C
SEPTEMBER 12 — 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DDr Rishabh Jain@DrRishabhOnco
🫁 EGFR at #WCLC26: 5 trials to watch 👇
1️⃣ ADAURA | PL03.01
8-year update of adjuvant osimertinib in resected EGFR-mutant NSCLC.
🔥 How durable is the survival benefit at 8 years?
2️⃣ PAPILLON | PL03.03
Amivantamab + chemotherapy vs chemotherapy in 1L EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC.
🔥 Does the PFS advantage translate into an OS benefit?
3️⃣ REZILIENT 3 | PL03.04
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy vs ch
8.2K impressions18 likes6 reposts2026-09-11
UUğur Özkerim@UOzkerim
Excellent discussion of the evolving 1L landscape for EGFR exon20ins NSCLC at #WCLC26. @LudaBazhenovaMD
A thoughtful comparison of PAPILLON, WU-KONG 28 and REZILIENT3, highlighting that treatment choice goes beyond efficacy alone—CNS disease, exon20ins subtype, toxicity, treatment burden, patient preference and subsequent therapy all matter.
Importantly, cross-trial comparisons and subgroup ana
6.2K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
What should guide our first line decision?
PAPILLON
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
WU-KONG 28
Sunvozertinib
REZILIENT3
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
EFFICACY & TOXICITY
PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
PATIENT PRIORITIES
WHAT COMES NEXT?
Depth and duration of benefit
CNS metastases
IV VS oral therapy
Treatment burden
EGFR exon 20ins subtype
Quality of life
Sequential efficacy
Adverse events
preferences
Resistance mechanisms
[Slide 2]
along
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Do subgroup analyses help us choose first-line therapy?
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT3
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
CNS mets
CNS mets
HR 0.63 (0.38-1.06)
HR 0.96 (0.44-2.08)
CNS mets
HR 0.38 (0.21-0.67)
No CNS mets
HR 0.33 (0.23-0.46)
HR 0.62 (0.47-0.83)
No CNS mets
No CNS mets
HR 0.62 (0.38-0.99)
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
Near loop
HR 0.40 (0.28-0.58)
Near loop
HR 0.59 (0.43-0.82)
Near loop
Not reported
Far loop
HR 0.19 (0.06-0.69)
Far loop
HR 0.83 (0.49-1.38)
Far loop
Not reported
CNS metastases and exon 20 insertion location are potential differentiators but subgroup data remain exploratory
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III randomized 1L trials
PAPILLON
Platinum doublet
Amivantamab
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
+
sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib +
chemotherapy
chemotherapy
PAPILLON: 47
ORR%
WU KONG 28: 31.1
73
(BIRC)
59
65
REZILIENT 3: 40
PAPILLON: 6.7
11.4
mPFS m
10.3
14.5
WU KONG 28: 7.5
0.40; 0.30 -0.53; P<0.001
HR (CI, p)
0.65; 0.50 -0.85; <0.001
0.5; 0.34-0.73; p=0.00015
REZILIENT 38.5
mOS, m
PAPILLON: 27.9 (24.0-32.4)
34.3 (27.0-40.8)
29.8 (21.8-NE)
NR
HR (Cl,p)
WU KONG 28: 28.8 (27.0-NE)
HR, 0.87 (0.66-1.14);
0.99 (0.7-1.40)
0.72 (0.42-1.23)
REZILIENT 3: NR
P=0.307
p 0.49 39% maturity
P=0.11082
PAPILLON: 68
18m-OS
WU KONG 28: 67
74
65.5
Not reported
REZILIENT 3: NR
PAPILLON: 54
24m-OS
WU KONG 28: 56.2
64
57.4
Not reported
REZILIENT 3: NR
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit interpretation.
9
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III 1L randomized trials
Platinum doublet
PAPILLON
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
Neutropenia (34%),
Diarrhea (14%),
Anemia (48.6%),
Most common
Paronychia (10%),
CK increased (20.9)
toxicity (Gr3)
anemia (13%),
Anemia (9.2%),
neutropenia (33.6),
infusion related reaction (1%)
rash (0.6%)
thrombocytopenia (30%)
rash (10.7%)
paronychia (3.7%)
GR3 AE %
75
75
81
% dose reduction*
36
41
44
% dose
11
12
17
discontinuation*
PAPILLON: 3
AE leading to
WU KONG 28: 1.3
5
4.3
9.5
death %
REZILIENT 3: 2.9
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit
interpretation.
* Targeted therapy
10
11ARROS-1View full trial page →70K impressions49.3K primary · 20.7K preview246 engagements58 posts · 43 voices▾
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @alexdrilon at #WCLC26 presents 1L cohort of ARROS-1 trial of zidesamtinib in pts with ROS1 NSCLC. What a waterfall plot. RR 94% with 15% CR. mPFS not reached, PFS at 6m was 96% and at 12m was 90%. Intracranial RR 100%. In 78 pts who did not have brain metastases at baseline, no CNS events occurred to date. These are fantastic outcomes.
10.5K impressions7 likes4 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: Objective Response in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
ROS1 TKI-Naive
Advanced ROS1+ NSCLC
± Prior Chemotherapy
RECIST v1.1 by BICR
(n = 94)
ORR, % (n/N)
a
94% (88/94)
[95% CI]
[87, 98]
CR, % (n/N)
b
15% (14/94)
Includes 1 single-timepoint PR pending confirmation in ongoing patient.
Includes 1 single-timepoint CR pending confirmation in ongoing patient with prior confirmed PR.
60
ROS1 TKI-Naive + Chemotherapy
40
+
PD
SD
uPR
PR
uCR
CR
+
Prior chemotherapy
Best % change in target lesions
20
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+++++
++++
0
-20
-40
-60
-80
C
c
-100
( CR with <100% shrinkage due to residual non-pathologic lymph node.
BICR, blinded independent central review; CR, complete response; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; RECIST, Response
Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; SD, stable disease; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; uCR, unconfirmed CR (single-timepoint CR pending confirmation in ongoing patient with prior confirmed
PR); uPR, unconfirmed PR (single-timepoint PR pending confirmation in ongoing patient).
6
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: Progression-Free Survival in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
Kaplan-Meier Plot of PFS
ROS1 TKI-Naive + Chemotherapy
ROS1 TKI-Naive
Advanced ROS1+ NSCLC
± Prior Chemotherapy
100
95%
95%
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
n = 94
90%
% PFS ≥ 6 months
95%
75
[95% CI]
[87, 98]
% PFS ≥ 9 months
95%
[95% CI]
[87, 98]
90%
Event-free probability (%)
50
% PFS ≥ 12 months
[95% CI]
[81, 95]
25
Median PFS, months
NR
[95% CI]
[NE, NE]
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
Months
No. at risk: 94
92
86
85
63
36
28
14
5
1
0
NE, not estimable; NR, not reached; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; PFS, progression-free survival; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
8
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2036
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: CNS Activity in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
CNS Response-Evaluable
ROS1 TKI-Naive
ROS1 TKI-Naive CNS Response-Evaluable
Population
a
± Prior Chemotherapy
50
IC-PR
IC-CR
+
Prior chemotherapy
RECIST v1.1 by BICR
n = 10
25
+ + +
IC-ORR, % (n/N)
100% (10/10)
[95% CI]
[69, 100]
Best % change in
IC-CR, % (n/N)
70% (7/10)
CNS target lesions
0
-25
-50
-75
%IC-DOR6 months
b
100%
-100
[95% CI]
[100, 100]
% IC-DOR ≥ 9 months
100%
Kaplan-Meier Plot of IC-DOR
ROS1 TKI-Naive CNS Response-Evaluable
[95% CI]
[100, 100]
100%
100%
% IC-DOR ≥ 12 months b
78%
100
[95% CI]
[36, 94]
78%
Median IC-DOR, months b
NR
[95% CI]
[9, NE]
a Includes patients without brain radiation within 2 months of the first dose of
zidesamtinib with measurable (>5 mm) CNS lesions at baseline by BICR.
Patients in response (%)
75
50
25
D Analyses of DOR based on Kaplan-Meier estimates.
No CNS progression events observed among the 78 ROS1 TKI-
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
naive patients who entered the study without brain metastases
Months
at baseline per BICR
No. at risk:
10
10
10
9
6
5
3
1
1
0
BICR, blinded independent central review; CNS, central nervous system; IC-CR, intracranial complete response; IC-DOR, intracranial duration of response; IC-ORR, intracranial objective response rate; IC-PR, intracranial
partial response; NE, not estimable; NR, not reached; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
9
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
@alexdrilon presents new #WCLC26 data in ROS1+ NSCLC from the ARROS-1 study, evaluating zidesamtinib in ROS1 TKI-naïve advanced NSCLC:
▫️ORR: 94% (88/94)
▫️CR: 15%
▫️Median DOR: not reached https://t.co/BBslgJ1CKy
3.9K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-14
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
For a single-arm study w/ still-maturing follow-up… 94% ORR + 90% 1-y PFS + strong CNS control is a compelling signal from ARROS-1.
However, IMO taletrectinib is still the benchmark for frontline management.
But ABSOLUTELY great to have more options for our patients. #WCLC26 https://t.co/wjHbATbyTC https://t.co/wnAGOqgoUj
3.2K impressions9 likes3 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ROS1 Inhibitor Sequencing: Cross-Trial Progression-Free Survival
Crizotinib PFS ends - 19.3 mo
TREATMENT-NAİVE / FIRST-LINE MEDIAN PFS
Crizotinib
19.3 mo¹
GEN 1
95% CI 15.2-39.1
Entrectinib
15.7 mo²
GEN 1
95% CI 11.0-21.1
Lorlatinib*
21 mo³
OFF-LABEL
TKI-naïve, n=21
Repotrectinib
31.1 mo⁴
BENCHMARK
GEN 2
95% CI 21.9-NE, n=71
Taletrectinib
46.1 mo5
GEN 2
95% CI 31.8-NR, pooled n=157
Zidesamtinib
?
GEN 3
90% PFS 12mo
SEQUENTIAL MEDIAN PFS AFTER A PRIOR ROS1 TKI (mainly post-crizotinib)
+8.5 mo 27.8 mo total³
Lorlatinib*
OFF-LABEL
post-crizotinib only, n=40
+8.6 mo
27.9 mo total4
Repotrectinib
1 prior TKI (mainly crizotinib), n=56
GEN 2
+9.7 mo
29 mo total6
Taletrectinib
TKI-pretreated, all early-gen, n=113
GEN 2
+23.8 mo
43.1 mo total⁷
Zidesamtinib
1 prior TKI (crizotinib, or entrectinib +/- chemotherapy)
GEN 3
Cross trial medians are not additive
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
5
55
60 months
0
7
haw AT et al. Ann Oncol 2019 2Dziadziuszko R et al. J Clin Oncol 2021 Shaw AT et al. Lancet Oncol 2019 Cho BC et al. J Thorac Oncol. 2025 MA02.03; Bazhenova L et al. AACR 2026 CT300 Liu G et al. AACR 2026 CT244 Drilon AF et al. WCLC 2025 PL02.
[Slide 2]
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
The end point that matters most. The human. Connection. The lives changed.
The ROS1jders
Left: Janet Freeman-Daily, patient and CO-
founder of the world's largest ROS1+
community - The ROS1ders
Uniting
for
a
ROS1
future
Mission - to improve outcomes for all with
ROS1+ cancers through community,
education and research
Pictured with patient advocate Lillian Leigh.
Lillian has been living with advanced ROS1+
NSCLC 12 years
The future is brighter for those living with, caring for, researching and treating ROS1+ NSCLC
15
Consent given to share photo
MMiguel Gonzalez Velez, MD@mgonzalezvelMD
ARROS-1 update zidesamtinib in ROS1 TKI-naive NSCLC by @alexdrilon at #WCLC26
Take: ORR 94% is possible!!! in TKI-naive patients, with 86% still in response and 90% still progression-free at 12 months.
DOR and PFS both not reached. The CNS data answers the open question from July: IC-ORR 100%, IC-CR rate 70%, median IC-DOR not reached, and no CNS progression events among patients without baselin
2.6K impressions7 likes4 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: Objective Response in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
Advanced ROS1+ NSCLC
ROS1 TKI-Naive
RECIST v1.1 by BICR
± Prior Chemotherapy
(n = 94)
ORR, % (n/N)
94% (88/94)
[95% CI]
[87,98]
CR, % (n/N)
15% (14/94)
Includes 1 single-timepoint PR pending confirmation in ongoing patient.
Includes 1 single-timepoint CR pending confirmation in ongoing patient with prior confirmed PR.
60
ROS1 TKI-Naive + Chemotherapy
40
+
PD
SD
uPR
PR
uCR
CR
+
Prior chemotherapy
Best % change in target lesions
20
+
+
+
+++
+
+
+
+++
+
++
0
+++++
++++
-20
-40
-60
-80
c
c
-100
CR with <100% central review; CR, complete response; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate; PD, progressive disease; PR, confirmation partial response; in ongoing RECIST, patient Response with prior
shrinkage due to residual non-pathologic lymph node.
Evaluation BICR, blinded Criteria independent in Solid Tumor; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; SD, stable disease; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; uCR, unconfirmed CR (single-timepoint CR pending confirmed
PR); uPR, unconfirmed PR (single-timepoint PR pending confirmation in ongoing patient).
6
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: Progression-Free Survival in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
Advanced ROS1+ NSCLC
Kaplan-Meier Plot of PFS
ROS1 TKI-Naive
ROS1 TKI-Naive + Chemotherapy
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
± Prior Chemotherapy
100
n = 94
95%
95%
90%
% PFS ≥ 6 months
95%
[95% CI]
75
[87, 98]
% PFS ≥ 9 months
95%
[95% CI]
[87, 98]
90%
Event-free probability (%)
50
% PFS ≥ 12 months
[95% CI]
[81, 95]
25
Median PFS, months
NR
[95% CI]
[NE, NE]
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
Months
No. at risk: 94
92
86
85
63
36
28
14
5
1
0
NE, not estimable; NR, not reached; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; PFS, progression-free survival; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
8
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ROS1 Inhibitor Sequencing: Cross-Trial Progression-Free Survival
Crizotinib PFS ends 19.3 mo
TREATMENT-NAÏVE Crizotinib / FIRST-LINE - MEDIAN PFS
19.3 mo¹
GEN 1
Entrectinib
95% CI 15.2-39.1
15.7 m(o2
GEN 1
Lorlatinib*
95% CI 11,0-21.1
21 mo³
OFF-LABEL
Repotrectinib
TKI-naïve, n=21
GEN 2
31.1 mo4
Taletrectinib
BENCHMARK
95% CI 21.9-NE, n=71
GEN 2
46.1 mo⁵
Zidesamtinib
95% CI 31.8-NR, pooled n=157
GEN 3
90% PFS 12mo
?
SEQUENTIAL - MEDIAN PFS AFTER A PRIOR ROS1 TKI (mainly post-crizotinib)
?
Lorlatinib*
OFF-LABEL
+8.5 mo 27.8 mo total³
Repotrectinib
post-crizotinib only, n=40
GEN 2
+8.6 mo 27.9 mo total4
Taletrectinib
1 prior TKI (mainly crizotinib), n=56
GEN 2
+9.7 mo 29 mo total⁶
Zidesamtinib
TKI-pretreated, all early-gen, n=113
GEN 3
+23.8 mo 43.1 mo total⁷
Cross trial medians are not additive
1 prior TKI (crizotinib, or entrectinib +/- chemotherapy)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60 months
'Shaw AT et al. Ann Oncol 2019 2Dziadziuszko R et al. J Clin Oncol 2021 Shaw AT et al. Lancet Oncol 2019 Cho BC et al. J Thorac Oncol. 2025 MA02.03; Bazhenova L et al. AACR 2026 CT300 *Liu G et al. AACR 2026 CT244 Drilon AE et al. WCLC 2025 PL02.
7
TThe ASCO Post@ASCOPost
🫁 New ARROS-1 data support continued study of zidesamtinib in earlier-line ROS1+ #NSCLC.
Among TKI-naive patients, ORR reached 94%, with durable responses & substantial intracranial activity.
🗣️ Presented by @alexdrilon of @MSKCancerCenter at #WCLC26
🔗 https://t.co/3ItaU2bQLx https://t.co/ro5n7nBnqa
1.8K impressions2 likes3 reposts2026-09-21
[Slide 1]
OF
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | ARROS-1
🧬 Zidesamtinib 100 mg QD in advanced ROS1+ NSCLC, focusing on ROS1 TKI-naïve patients (efficacy n=94; 27% had prior platinum ± IO)
🎯 ORR: 94% (95% CI 87–98)
• CR: 15%
• Median DoR: NR
• 86% of responses ongoing ≥12 mo
📉 Median PFS: NR
• 12-mo PFS: 90%
🧠 CNS activity:
• IC-ORR: 100% (10/10)
• IC-CR: 70%
• 12-mo IC-DoR: 78%
• No CNS progression among patients without baseline b
1.4K impressions0 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: Patient Population
ROS1 TKI-Naive
Patient Characteristic
Data cut-off: 16 April 2026
Efficacy Population
All data shown as n (%) unless otherwise specified
n = 94
Total Enrolled: N = 629
Age, median (range), years
59 (26, 87)
Any ROS1+ solid tumor, any dose
Female
55 (59%)
Phase 1+ Phase 2 pooled
Never smoker
55 (59%)
Safety Population: N = 532
Geographic region
Advanced ROS1+ NSCLC
Asia Pacific
29 (31%)
Zidesamtinib 100 mg QD (any line of therapy)
Europe
27 (29%)
North America
38 (40%)
ROS1 TKI-Naive
ECOG PS
n = 183
0
56 (60%)
1
38 (40%)
ROS1 TKI-Naive Efficacy Population:
Baseline CNS metastases
16 (17%)
n = 94
Tumor stage at study entry
with measurable disease by BICR
III
7 (7%)
Treated by 15 June 2025 (2 9 months DOR follow up)
IV
87 (93%)
Treatment History
Median duration follow-up:
Prior platinum-based chemotherapy ±
15.2 months (range 1.1 - 30.5)
d
25 (27%)
immunotherapy
Includes TKI-naive patients enrolled across any cohort. b Includes patients with <1 prior line of chemotherapy with or without immunotherapy from the registrational intent ROS1 TKI-naive cohort.
c
Measurable or non-measurable lesions by BICR. d 16/25 patients with prior chemotherapy also received prior immunotherapy.
BICR, blinded independent central review; CNS, central nervous system; DOR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; QD, once daily; NSCLC, non-small cell
lung cancer; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
5
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: Objective Response in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
ROS1 TKI-Naive
Advanced ROS1+ NSCLC
± Prior Chemotherapy
RECIST v1.1 by BICR
(n = 94)
ORR, % (n/N)
a
94% (88/94)
[95% CI]
[87, 98]
CR, % (n/N) b
15% (14/94)
Includes 1 single-timepoint PR pending confirmation in ongoing patient.
b Includes 1 single-timepoint CR pending confirmation in ongoing patient with prior confirmed PR.
60
ROS1 TKI-Naive + Chemotherapy
40
+
PD
SD
uPR
PR
/
uCR
CR
Prior chemotherapy
Best % change in target lesions
20
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+++
+
++
+++++
****
0
-20
-40
-60
-80
c
a
-100
CR with <100% shrinkage due to residual non-pathologic lymph node.
BICR, blinded independent central review; CR, complete response; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; RECIST, Response
Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; SD, stable disease; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; uCR, unconfirmed CR (single-timepoint CR pending confirmation in orgoing patient with prior confirmed
PR); uPR, unconfirmed PR (single-timepoint PR pending confirmation in ongoing patient).
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: Duration of Response in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
Kaplan-Meier Plot of DOR
ROS1 TKI-Naive + Chemotherapy
Advanced ROS1+ NSCLC
ROS1 TKI-Naive
± Prior Chemotherapy
100
96%
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
94%
n = 87
86%
% DOR ≥ 6 months
96%
75
[95% CI]
[89, 99]
% DOR ≥ 9 months
94%
[95% CI]
[86, 97]
86%
Patients in response (%)
50
% DOR ⥠12 months
[95% CI]
[75, 92]
25
Median DOR, months
NR
[95% CI]
[20, NE]
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
Months
No. at risk: 87
85
82
72
41
31
20
7
4
0
DOR, duration of response; NE, not estimable; NR, not reached; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
7
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
I
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: CNS Activity in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
CNS Response-Evaluable
ROS1 TKI-Naive
ROS1 TKI-Naive CNS Response-Evaluable
Population
± Prior Chemotherapy
50
IC-PR
IC-CR
+
Prior chemotherapy
RECIST v1.1 by BICR
n = 10
25
+
+
IC-ORR, % (n/N)
100% (10/10)
[95% CI]
70% (7/10)
Best % change in
CNS target lesions
+
0
[69, 100]
-25
IC-CR, % (n/N)
-50
-75
% IC-DOR ⥠6 months
100%
-100
[95% CI]
[100, 100]
% IC-DOR ⥠9 months
100%
Kaplan-Meier Plot of IC-DOR
ROS1 TKI-Naive CNS Response-Evaluable
[95% CI]
[100, 100]
100% 100%
% IC-DOR ⥠12 months
78%
100
[95% CI]
[36, 94]
78%
Median IC-DOR, months
NR
[95% CI]
[9, NE]
Includes patients without brain radiation within 2 months of the first dose of
zidesamtinib with measurable (>5 mm) CNS lesions at baseline by BICR.
Patients in response (%)
75
50
25
Analyses of DOR based on Kaplan-Meier estimates.
No CNS progression events observed among the 78 ROS1 TKI-
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
naive patients who entered the study without brain metastases
Months
at baseline per BICR
No. at risk: 10
10
10
9
6
5
3
1
1
0
BICR, blinded independent central review; CNS, central nervous system; IC-CR, intracranial complete response; IC-DOR, intracranial duration of response; IC-ORR, intracranial objective response rate; IC-PR, intracranial
partial response; NE, not estimable; NR, not reached; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
9
OOncology Brothers@OncBrothers
Highlights from #WCLC26 #CommunityOncology:
NSCLC
1. #ADAURA Update Adj mEGFR
2. #PAPILLON 1L EGFR Ex20
3. #DESTINYLung04 1L mHER2
4. #ARROS1 1L ROS1+
5. #HARMONi 2L mEGFR
SCLC
6. #MAVERICK @SWOG MRI surv
7. #DeLLphi Tarla SubQ & ⬇️ freq
#lcsm #OncTwitter @IASLC
1/8 https://t.co/K5kHEzMTvv
11.4K impressions10 likes9 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
THE
IASLC
2026 D
2026 World Conference
Endorsed by
Korean
Association
for
on Lung Cancer
KAL
Lung Cancer
C
SEPTEMBER 12 — 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 — The Studies to Watch
Seoul, 12–15 September
A clinical map of the key questions at @IASLC WCLC 2026: early/locally advanced NSCLC, oncogenic drivers, IO combinations, SCLC (including CNS), limited-stage multimodal therapy, and local control.
Presidential symposium highlights include ADAURA OS update, PAPILLON, REZILIENT 3, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, TAISHAN-302, A
5.5K impressions5 likes4 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026: THE STUDIES TO WATCH
Seoul
12-15 September 2026
Presidential symposium
01
EARLY / LOCALLY ADVANCED NSCLC
02
ADVANCED NSCLC: DRIVERS
ADAURA
PL03.01
PAPILLON
PL03.03
Osimertinib
exploratory 8-year OS
EGFR exon 20 amivantamab + chemo
os
IMpower030
OA04.03
REZILIENT 3
PL03.04
Perioperative atezolizumab + chemo
EGFR exon 20 zipalertinib + chemo
MDT-BRIDGE
ARROS-1
PL03.06
OA04.02
ROS1 zidesamtinib TKI-naive
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemo
DESTINY-Lung04
PL03.08
Adjuvant gefitinib + chemo
OA04.01
HER2-mutant
first-line T-DXd
EGFR-mutant phase III
HARMONi
0A14.05
NAUTIKA1
M006.01/ OA04.04
Post-EGFR TKI ivonescimab + chemo os
Neoadjuvant alectinib / divarasib
AMIGO-1
0A12.04
Amivantamab + lazertinib + pemetrexed
03
ADVANCED NSCLC: NO DRIVER
04
SCLC: SYSTEMIC THERAPY & CNS
HARMONi-2
OA14.01
TAISHAN-302
PL02.03
Ivonescimab vs pembrolizumab OS
Tam-Peli vs topotecan relapsed
ARTEMIS-008
PL02.04
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE D46
PL02.06
Risvutatug rezetecan vs topotecan
Sacituzumab govitecan + pembrolizumab
PD-L1 ≥50%
SWOG S1827 MAVERICK
PL02.01
Pumitamig + BNT324
0A14.02
Brain MRI surveillance ± cranial irradiation
PD-L1/VEGF-A + B7-H3
NSCLC/SCLC
DeLLphi-309
OA05.01
Tarlatamab extended-interval dosing
RC148 / ABBV-1480
OA14.04
PD-1/VEGF bispecific + chemo
DeLLphi-308
M015.07
Tarlatamab subcutaneous delivery
MAVERICK: cross-stage brain prevention.
05
LIMITED-STAGE SCLC
06
SURGERY, RADIOTHERAPY & LOCAL CONTROL
Neoadjuvant serplulimab + chemo
M015.03
Wedge vs segmentectomy
OA08.01
pathological response / MRD
GGO-dominant early NSCLC
GREAT
OA08.02
Serplulimab + concurrent CRT
P3.288
Segmentectomy VS lobectomy
followed by serplulimab phase
II
STARLORD
OA09.04
CXCL9+ DCs / CXCR3+ Tregs
M015.01
Stereotactic RT when concurrent CRT is unsuitable
treatment resistance
LONESTAR
0A14.03
Early clinical and translational signals
Local consolidation after nivolumab + ipilimumab
EMERGING SCIENCE
KRAS G12D: GFH375 / QLC1101
DLL3 CAR-T: LB2102
mRNA vaccine: BNT116
OA12.01-02
OA05.02
M006.03
Pre-congress watchlist
Not a results summary
11 Sep 2026
Source: IASLC WCLC 2026 program
wclc.iaslc.org
OOncUpdates@OncUpdates
⭐️ @OncBrothers deliver again!
🫁#WCLC26 #lungcancer #research highlights for #communityoncology
🤔What are your biggest takeaways?
#NSCLC
#ADAURA
#PAPILLON
#DESTINYLung04
#ARROS1
#HARMONi
#SCLC
#MAVERICK
#DeLLphi
#lcsm #OncTwitter #HemOnc #oncology #MedX @SWOG #MedEd https://t.co/oibw873u2f
1K impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
12REZILIENT3View full trial page →68.1K impressions36.9K primary · 31.2K preview182 engagements73 posts · 53 voices▾
AAlfredo Addeo MD@Alfdoc2
Great timing for our new @JCO_ASCO review on PACC mutations & EGFR exon 20 insertions in NSCLC.
“Uncommon EGFR” is no longer one disease , structure matters, and increasingly guides therapy.
And #WCLC26 provided a perfect example: REZILIENT3 showed zipalertinib + chemo significantly improved PFS in 1L EGFR Ex20ins NSCLC: 14.5 vs 8.5 mo | HR 0.50
From molecular structure → rational drug develop
2.3K impressions3 likes4 reposts2026-09-16
TTejas Patil@TejasPatilMD
😈To play devils advocate, I think FLAURA2 (for sensitizing EGFR mutations), PAPILLION, and REZILIENT3 all point towards the importance of upfront chemotherapy with EGFR inhibition.
💭My thought is that #EGFR lung cancers (esp Exon 20) really do need intensification upfront.
@EGFRResisters @EgfrUk
2.2K impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-14
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | REZILIENT-3
🧬 Ph3: 1L zipalertinib + platinum/pemetrexed vs chemo in metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon20ins (n=279)
📉 PFS: 14.5 vs 8.5 mo; HR 0.50 (95% CI 0.34–0.73; p=0.00015)
🎯 ORR: 65.0% vs 40.3% (p<0.0001)
⏳ DoR: 14.2 vs 9.9 mo
🧠 Strong benefit in baseline brain mets: PFS HR 0.38 (95% CI 0.21–0.67)
📊 OS remains immature: HR 0.72 (95% CI 0.42–1.23)
↪️ 64% of eligible patients pro
2K impressions8 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: 1L Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy VS Chemotherapy
REZILIENT Researching Zipalertinib in EGFRmt Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Tumors
Eligibility criteria:
Safety Lead-in
Randomized Phase 3 Study (NCT05973773)
(N=6)
(N=280)
Primary:
1L metastatic
NSCLC
PFS by BICR
Local testing of
Zipalertinib + Pemetrexed/Platinum
EGFRmt ex20ins for
Zipalertinib (100 mg BID)
(Carboplatin or cisplatin)
Secondary
eligibility
+
OS
R
ECOG PS 0 or 1
Pemetrexed/Platinum
PFS (investigator)
Pemetrexed/Platinum
Optional
Stable brain
(Carboplatin or cisplatin)
Zipalertinib
ORR
metastases
(Carboplatin or cisplatin)
Cross-over
DoR
permitted
Safety
Archival tissue
Safety lead-in completed:
Stratification factors:
PROs
Combination safe to proceed
ECOG PS
available
as assessed by IDMC
Brain metastases (Yes/No)
Region (Asia/Non-Asia)
122 clinical sites globally
Primary analysis: at 162 PFS events to detect HR 0.60, 2-sided a: 0.05, 90% power
Study overseen by IDMC
Pre-specified interim analysis:
At 122 PFS events (data cutoff date May 29, 2026)
If one-sided P<0.0098, superiority to be claimed
1L, first line; BICR, blinded independent central review; BID, twice daily; DoR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status;
EGFRmt, epidermal growth factor receptor mutant; ex20ins, exon 20 insertions; HR, hazard ratio; IDMC, Independent Data Monitoring Committee; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer;
ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival, PRO, patient-reported outcome; R, randomization.
4
[Slide 2]
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: Primary Endpoint PFS by BICR
Total
Events
Censored
Median 95% CI
100
Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy:
140
50
90
14.5 months (12.9, 21.4)
90
Chemotherapy:
139
72
67
8.5 months (7.0, 10.9)
80
Hazard Ratio: 0.50 (95% CI 0.34, 0.73)
P=0.00015
70
Probability of PFS
60
50
I
40
30
20
+
Censor Z+C (64.3%)
10
Censor C (48.2%)
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
Time since randomization (months)
Number at risk
140
109
81
59
40
22
7
4
0
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
139
102
73
36
20
14
6
3
1
0
BICR, blinded independent central review; C, chemotherapy; CI, confidence interval; NE, not estimable; PFS, progression-free survival; Z+C, zipalertinib + chemotherapy.
6
[Slide 3]
and
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: BICR PFS by Subgroups
Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
Subgroup
Event n/N (%)
Event n/N (%)
Hazard Ratio
HR (95% CI)
Baseline ECOG PS
0
18/58 (31.0)
24/56 (42.9)
0.56 (0.30, 1.04)
1
32/82 (39.0)
48/83 (57.8)
0.54 (0.34, 0.85)
Brain Metastases
Yes
21/44 (47.7)
30/44 (68.2)
0.38 (0.21, 0.67)
No
29/96 (30.2)
42/95 (44.2)
0.62 (0.38, 0.99)
Region
Asia
26/56 (46.4)
29/56 (51.8)
0.82 (0.48, 1.40)
ROW
24/84 (28.6)
43/83 (51.8)
0.40 (0.24, 0.66)
Sex
Male
17/48 (35.4)
29/51 (56.9)
0.39 (0.21, 0.73)
Female
33/92 (35.9)
43/88 (48.9)
0.63 (0.40, 1.00)
Age
<65
20/63 (31.7)
42/71 (59.2)
0.38 (0.22, 0.65)
≥65
30/77 (39.0)
30/68 (44.1)
0.78 (0.47, 1.30)
Smoking History
Yes
21/57 (36.8)
30/54 (55.6)
0.47 (0.27, 0.82)
No
29/83 (34.9)
42/85 (49.4)
0.60 (0.37, 0.96)
0
0.5
1
1.5
Favors Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy
Favors Chemotherapy
CI, confidence interval; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; HR, hazard ratio; ROW, rest of world.
7
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: Overall Survival
Total
Events
Censored
Median 95% CI
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy:
140
24
116
NE (NE, NE)
100
Chemotherapy:
139
31
108
NE (18.4, NE)
90
Hazard Ratio: 0.72 (95% CI, 0.42-1.23)
P=0.11082
80
Overall survival probability (%)
70
60
50
40
30
64.2 96 crossover to zipalertinib*
+
Censor Z+C
20
Median follow-up 10.9 months
Censor C
10
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
Time since randomization (months)
Number at risk
Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy
140
127
98
79
56
38
19
8
3
0
Chemotherapy
139
126
97
67
47
31
22
11
4
0
*Based on 53 patients with progressive disease, of whom 34 crossed over.
c, chemotherapy; NE, not estimable; Z+C, zipatertinib + chemotherapy.
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🔥Greatt Summary and Discussion on EGFR Ex20ins
⁉️PAPILON vs. WU KONG 28 vs. REZILIENT 3
🎙️Dr. Lyudmila Bazhenova
#WCLC26 @IASLC @OncoAlert @Exon20Group https://t.co/AikLXBxSFp
1.9K impressions8 likes4 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
What should guide our first line decision?
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT3
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
EFFICACY & TOXICITY
PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
PATIENT PRIORITIES
WHAT COMES NEXT?
Depth and duration of benefit
IV vs oral therapy
CNS metastases
Sequential efficacy
Treatment burden
Quality of life
EGFR exon 20ins subtype
Resistance mechanisms
Adverse events
preferences
7
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III 1L randomized trials
PAPILLON1,2
WU KONG 28³
REZILIENT 34\
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
Study design
PD + Amivantamab
Sunvozertinb
PD + Zipalertinib
308
76%
90%
62%
324
260
PD
PD
PD
mFU month
48.6
24
10.9
CNS mets
23%
12%
31%
CNS
Treated
Treated
Treated or asymptomatic ≤ 2cm
eligibility
EGFR ex 20
Near Loop 86%
Near loop 68%
Not reported
ins in the
Far Loop 9%
Far loop 25%
experimental
c helix 4%
c helix 1.8%
arm
Unknown 4.9%
'Zhou et al NEJM 2023; 2 Kim et al WCLC 2026; 3 Zhou et al NEJM 2026; 4 Tan et al WCLC 2026
8
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III 1L randomized trials
Platinum doublet
PAPILLON
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
Diarrhea (14%),
Neutropenia ( 34%),
Anemia (48.6%),
Most common
CK increased (20.9)
Paronychia ( 10%),
neutropenia (33.6),
Anemia (9.2%),
toxicity ( Gr3)
anemia (13%),
thrombocytopenia (30%)
rash ( 0.6%)
infusion related reaction ( 1%)
rash (10.7%)
paronychia (3.7%)
GR3 AE %
75
75
81
% dose reduction*
36
41
44
% dose
11
12
17
discontinuation*
PAPILLON: 3
AE leading to
WU KONG 28: 1.3
5
4.3
9.5
death %
REZILIENT 3: 2.9
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit
interpretation.
* Targeted therapy
10
[Slide 4]
ALL
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Do subgroup analyses help us choose first-line therapy?
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT3
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
CNS mets
CNS mets
HR 0.63 (0.38-1.06)
HR 0.96 (0.44-2.08)
CNS mets
HR 0.38 (0.21-0.67)
No CNS mets
No CNS mets
HR 0.33 (0.23-0.46)
HR 0.62 (0.47-0.83)
No CNS mets
HR 0.62 (0.38-0.99)
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
Near loop
HR 0.40 (0.28-0.58)
Near loop
HR 0.59 (0.43-0.82)
Near loop
Not reported
Far loop
HR 0.19 (0.06-0.69)
Far loop
HR 0.83 (0.49-1.38)
Far loop
Not reported
CNS metastases and exon 20 insertion location are potential differentiators but subgroup data remain exploratory
Zhou et al. NEJM 2023; Goldman et al. WCLC 2024; Zhou et al. NEJM 2026, Tan et al. WCLC 2026
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @danieltanmd presents REZILIENT 3 at #WCLC26: 1L zipalertinib + chemo vs chemo in EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC. Superior PFS 14.5 vs 8.5m (HR 0.50) with RR 65% vs 40%. https://t.co/s3yfHfyZF8
1.7K impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: 1L Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy VS Chemotherapy
REZILIENT Researching Zipalertinib in EGFRmt Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Tumors
Eligibility criteria:
Safety Lead-in
Randomized Phase 3 Study (NCT05973773)
(N=6)
(N=280)
Primary:
1L metastatic
NSCLC
PFS by BICR
Local testing of
Zipalertinib + Pemetrexed/Platinum
EGFRmt ex20ins for
Zipalertinib (100mg BID)
(Carboplatin or cisplatin)
Secondary
eligibility
+
OS
R
ECOG PS 0 or 1
Pemetrexed/Platinum
PFS (investigator)
Pemetrexed/Platinum
Optional
Stable brain
(Carboplatin or cisplatin)
Zipalertinib
ORR
metastases
(Carboplatin or cisplatin)
Cross-over
DoR
permitted
Safety
Archival tissue
Safety lead-in completed:
Stratification factors:
PROs
available
Combination safe to proceed
ECOG PS
as assessed by IDMC
Brain metastases (Yes/No)
Region (Asia/Non-Asia)
122 clinical sites globally
Primary analysis: at 162 PFS events to detect HR 0.60, 2-sided a: 0.05, 90% power
Study overseen by IDMC
Pre-specified interim analysis:
At 122 PFS events (data cutoff date May 29, 2026)
If one-sided P<0.0098, superiority to be claimed
1L, first line; BICR, blinded independent central review; BID, twice daily; DoR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status;
EGFRmt, epidermal growth factor receptor mutant; ex20ins, exon 20 insertions; HR, hazard ratio; IDMC, Independent Data Monitoring Committee; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer;
ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival, PRO, patient-reported outcome; R, randomization.
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: Primary Endpoint PFS by BICR
Total
Events
Censored
Median 95% CI
100
Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy:
140
50
90
14.5 months (12.9, 21.4)
90
Chemotherapy:
139
72
67
8.5 months (7.0, 10.9)
80
Hazard Ratio:
0.50
(95% CI 0.34, 0.73)
P=0.00015
70
Probability of PFS
60
50
40
30
20
+
Censor Z+C (64.3%)
10
Censor C (48.2%)
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
Time since randomization (months)
Number at risk
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
140
109
81
59
40
22
7
4
0
Chemotherapy
139
102
73
36
20
14
6
3
1
0
BICR, blinded independent central review; C, chemotherapy; CI, confidence interval; NE, not estimable; PFS, progression-free survival; Z+C, zipalertinib + chemotherapy.
6
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: Tumor Response by BICR
Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
Response (RECIST v1.1)
(n=140)
(n=139)
Best Overall Response, n (%)
Complete response
9 (6.4)
3 (2.2)
Partial response
82 (58.6)
53 (38.1)
Stable disease
29 (20.7)
55 (39.6)
Progressive disease
4 (2.9)
12 (8.6)
Objective Response Rate, % (95% CI)
65.0 (56.49, 72.86)a
40.3 (32.06, 48.94)
Disease Control Rate, % (95% CI)
89.3 (82.94, 93.88)
81.3 (73.81, 87.40)
Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
Duration of Response
(n=91)
(n=56)
Duration of Response, median in months (95% CI)
14.2 (10.51, NE)
9.9 (6.80, NE)
Time to Response, median in months
1.4
2.6
P-value <0.0001 VS chemotherapy alone.
BICR, blinded independent central review; CI, confidence interval; NE, not estimable; RECIST, response evaluation criteria in solid tumors.
8
TTejas Patil@TejasPatilMD
🤔The myelosuppression in REZILIENT3 is strange. This is the same platinum pemetrexed chemotherapy used in PAPILLION and FLAURA-2, but with way higher adverse event profile.
1⃣ There is a high rate of Gr≥3 cytopenias in first 4 cycles within the experimental arm. This is unusual and not what I would have predicted about the zipalertinib + platinum combo. I still don't have a great theory for
1.6K impressions0 likes1 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
REZILIENT 3: Summary of Adverse Events
Zipalertinib Chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
(n=140)
(n=136)
Adverse Event in ≥25%*, %
Any Grade
Grade ≥3
Any Grade
Grade ≥3
Anemia
80.7
48.6
50.0
12.5
Neutropeniab
50.7
33.6
40.4
22.1
Thrombocytopenia
56.4
30.0
19.9
8.1
Rash
45.7
10.7
6.6
0
Nausea
44.3
3.6
1.9
0.7
Constipation
32.1
0
30.9
0
Paronychia
31.4
1.4
0
0
Stomatitis
28.6
5.0
7.4
0.7
REZILIENT 3: Cytopenias Observed With Combination
Diarrhea
27.1
1.4
8.8
0
All-Treated Population for Zipalertinib Chemotherapy arm
Pneumonitis
5.7
2.1
2.2
1.5
100
70
First Cycles
Grade 4
60
Grade 3
"includes anemia and/or reduced red blood cells *includes neutropenia and/or decreased neutrophits includes hrombocytopenia and/or platelets decreased
"includes those with >25% and/or EGFR-associated toxicity. Pneumonits included as an EGFR-associated AE of terest though reported <25%
Percentage instients of
50
Grade 2
Grade 1
40
30
After Cycles
Grade 4
Grade 3
20
Grade 2
REZILIENT 3: Safety Summary
Grade 1
10
Zipalertinib Chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
0
(n=140), (%)
(n=136), (%)
Treatment-Related Adverse Events
138 (98.6)
120(88.2)
/
Grade 23 treatment-related adverse events
113(80.7)
55(40.4)
Serious Adverse Events
71 (50.7)
45 (33.1)
First Cycles (n=140)
After Cycles (n=113)
Treatment-related serious adverse events
55(57.9)
17(12.5)
Adverse events represent grouped terms (ether blood term or lab term decreased).
Zipalertinib
Pemetrexed
Carbo/ cisplatin
Pemetrexed
Carbo/ cisplatin
12
AE Leading to Treatment Interruption
116(82.9)
104 (74.3)
70 (50)
60 (44.1)
40(29.4)
AE Leading to Dose Reductions
(43.6)
68(48.6)
46 (32.9)
29(21.3)
(15.4)
AE Leading to Drug Discontinuation*
24(17.1)
44(31.4)
22(15.7)
16(11.8)
7(5.1)
Adverse Events With Outcome of Death
13(9.3)
4(2.9)
TRAE with outcome of death
3(2.1)
0
Sepsis/septic shock
3(2.1)
0
Chemotherapy Administration
Platinum choice: Carboplatin/cisplatin
138/4
123/14
Pemetrexed number of cycles (median range)
7(1-35)
8(1-36)
*Refers to the regimen where component was the primary reason for treatment discontinuation
"Death events were: Z+C: sepsis (3), pneumonia (1), respiratory tract infection (1), septic shock (1), acute respiratory failure (1), dyspnea (1), hemoptysis (1), respiratory failure (1), death (1),
sudden death (1), diabetic ketoacidosis (1). C: sepsis (1), pneumonia (1). acute respiratory failure (1). cerebrovascular accident (1).
"Reflects some patients received both agents.
AE, adverse event; C, chemotherapy; Carbo, carboplatin; TRAE, treatment-related adverse event; Z+C. zipalertinib chemotherapy.
10
DDr Rishabh Jain@DrRishabhOnco
🫁 EGFR at #WCLC26: 5 trials to watch 👇
1️⃣ ADAURA | PL03.01
8-year update of adjuvant osimertinib in resected EGFR-mutant NSCLC.
🔥 How durable is the survival benefit at 8 years?
2️⃣ PAPILLON | PL03.03
Amivantamab + chemotherapy vs chemotherapy in 1L EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC.
🔥 Does the PFS advantage translate into an OS benefit?
3️⃣ REZILIENT 3 | PL03.04
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy vs ch
8.2K impressions18 likes6 reposts2026-09-11
UUğur Özkerim@UOzkerim
Excellent discussion of the evolving 1L landscape for EGFR exon20ins NSCLC at #WCLC26. @LudaBazhenovaMD
A thoughtful comparison of PAPILLON, WU-KONG 28 and REZILIENT3, highlighting that treatment choice goes beyond efficacy alone—CNS disease, exon20ins subtype, toxicity, treatment burden, patient preference and subsequent therapy all matter.
Importantly, cross-trial comparisons and subgroup ana
6.2K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
What should guide our first line decision?
PAPILLON
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
WU-KONG 28
Sunvozertinib
REZILIENT3
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
EFFICACY & TOXICITY
PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
PATIENT PRIORITIES
WHAT COMES NEXT?
Depth and duration of benefit
CNS metastases
IV VS oral therapy
Treatment burden
EGFR exon 20ins subtype
Quality of life
Sequential efficacy
Adverse events
preferences
Resistance mechanisms
[Slide 2]
along
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Do subgroup analyses help us choose first-line therapy?
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT3
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
CNS mets
CNS mets
HR 0.63 (0.38-1.06)
HR 0.96 (0.44-2.08)
CNS mets
HR 0.38 (0.21-0.67)
No CNS mets
HR 0.33 (0.23-0.46)
HR 0.62 (0.47-0.83)
No CNS mets
No CNS mets
HR 0.62 (0.38-0.99)
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
Near loop
HR 0.40 (0.28-0.58)
Near loop
HR 0.59 (0.43-0.82)
Near loop
Not reported
Far loop
HR 0.19 (0.06-0.69)
Far loop
HR 0.83 (0.49-1.38)
Far loop
Not reported
CNS metastases and exon 20 insertion location are potential differentiators but subgroup data remain exploratory
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III randomized 1L trials
PAPILLON
Platinum doublet
Amivantamab
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
+
sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib +
chemotherapy
chemotherapy
PAPILLON: 47
ORR%
WU KONG 28: 31.1
73
(BIRC)
59
65
REZILIENT 3: 40
PAPILLON: 6.7
11.4
mPFS m
10.3
14.5
WU KONG 28: 7.5
0.40; 0.30 -0.53; P<0.001
HR (CI, p)
0.65; 0.50 -0.85; <0.001
0.5; 0.34-0.73; p=0.00015
REZILIENT 38.5
mOS, m
PAPILLON: 27.9 (24.0-32.4)
34.3 (27.0-40.8)
29.8 (21.8-NE)
NR
HR (Cl,p)
WU KONG 28: 28.8 (27.0-NE)
HR, 0.87 (0.66-1.14);
0.99 (0.7-1.40)
0.72 (0.42-1.23)
REZILIENT 3: NR
P=0.307
p 0.49 39% maturity
P=0.11082
PAPILLON: 68
18m-OS
WU KONG 28: 67
74
65.5
Not reported
REZILIENT 3: NR
PAPILLON: 54
24m-OS
WU KONG 28: 56.2
64
57.4
Not reported
REZILIENT 3: NR
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit interpretation.
9
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III 1L randomized trials
Platinum doublet
PAPILLON
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
Neutropenia (34%),
Diarrhea (14%),
Anemia (48.6%),
Most common
Paronychia (10%),
CK increased (20.9)
toxicity (Gr3)
anemia (13%),
Anemia (9.2%),
neutropenia (33.6),
infusion related reaction (1%)
rash (0.6%)
thrombocytopenia (30%)
rash (10.7%)
paronychia (3.7%)
GR3 AE %
75
75
81
% dose reduction*
36
41
44
% dose
11
12
17
discontinuation*
PAPILLON: 3
AE leading to
WU KONG 28: 1.3
5
4.3
9.5
death %
REZILIENT 3: 2.9
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit
interpretation.
* Targeted therapy
10
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 — The Studies to Watch
Seoul, 12–15 September
A clinical map of the key questions at @IASLC WCLC 2026: early/locally advanced NSCLC, oncogenic drivers, IO combinations, SCLC (including CNS), limited-stage multimodal therapy, and local control.
Presidential symposium highlights include ADAURA OS update, PAPILLON, REZILIENT 3, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, TAISHAN-302, A
5.5K impressions5 likes4 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026: THE STUDIES TO WATCH
Seoul
12-15 September 2026
Presidential symposium
01
EARLY / LOCALLY ADVANCED NSCLC
02
ADVANCED NSCLC: DRIVERS
ADAURA
PL03.01
PAPILLON
PL03.03
Osimertinib
exploratory 8-year OS
EGFR exon 20 amivantamab + chemo
os
IMpower030
OA04.03
REZILIENT 3
PL03.04
Perioperative atezolizumab + chemo
EGFR exon 20 zipalertinib + chemo
MDT-BRIDGE
ARROS-1
PL03.06
OA04.02
ROS1 zidesamtinib TKI-naive
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemo
DESTINY-Lung04
PL03.08
Adjuvant gefitinib + chemo
OA04.01
HER2-mutant
first-line T-DXd
EGFR-mutant phase III
HARMONi
0A14.05
NAUTIKA1
M006.01/ OA04.04
Post-EGFR TKI ivonescimab + chemo os
Neoadjuvant alectinib / divarasib
AMIGO-1
0A12.04
Amivantamab + lazertinib + pemetrexed
03
ADVANCED NSCLC: NO DRIVER
04
SCLC: SYSTEMIC THERAPY & CNS
HARMONi-2
OA14.01
TAISHAN-302
PL02.03
Ivonescimab vs pembrolizumab OS
Tam-Peli vs topotecan relapsed
ARTEMIS-008
PL02.04
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE D46
PL02.06
Risvutatug rezetecan vs topotecan
Sacituzumab govitecan + pembrolizumab
PD-L1 ≥50%
SWOG S1827 MAVERICK
PL02.01
Pumitamig + BNT324
0A14.02
Brain MRI surveillance ± cranial irradiation
PD-L1/VEGF-A + B7-H3
NSCLC/SCLC
DeLLphi-309
OA05.01
Tarlatamab extended-interval dosing
RC148 / ABBV-1480
OA14.04
PD-1/VEGF bispecific + chemo
DeLLphi-308
M015.07
Tarlatamab subcutaneous delivery
MAVERICK: cross-stage brain prevention.
05
LIMITED-STAGE SCLC
06
SURGERY, RADIOTHERAPY & LOCAL CONTROL
Neoadjuvant serplulimab + chemo
M015.03
Wedge vs segmentectomy
OA08.01
pathological response / MRD
GGO-dominant early NSCLC
GREAT
OA08.02
Serplulimab + concurrent CRT
P3.288
Segmentectomy VS lobectomy
followed by serplulimab phase
II
STARLORD
OA09.04
CXCL9+ DCs / CXCR3+ Tregs
M015.01
Stereotactic RT when concurrent CRT is unsuitable
treatment resistance
LONESTAR
0A14.03
Early clinical and translational signals
Local consolidation after nivolumab + ipilimumab
EMERGING SCIENCE
KRAS G12D: GFH375 / QLC1101
DLL3 CAR-T: LB2102
mRNA vaccine: BNT116
OA12.01-02
OA05.02
M006.03
Pre-congress watchlist
Not a results summary
11 Sep 2026
Source: IASLC WCLC 2026 program
wclc.iaslc.org
13HARMONiView full trial page →40.9K impressions34.6K primary · 6.3K preview136 engagements25 posts · 24 voices▾
EEric K. Singhi, MD@lungoncdoc
#HARMONi …. Western follow up now out to ~23 months. Reassuring that the direction and magnitude of effect have converged with the global population as the data have matured.
@IASLC #WCLC26 https://t.co/r8XYB3Zku4
8.8K impressions7 likes3 reposts2026-09-15
DDiego A. Díaz-García@diegoadiazg
🫁 HARMONi: Ivonescimab after EGFR-TKI progression.
Ph3 HARMONi evaluated ivonescimab + chemo vs chemo alone in advEGFRmut NSCLC after progression on a 3rdgen EGFR-TKI:
PFS: 6.8 vs 4.4 months
HR 0.52 (95% CI, 0.41-0.66; p<0.0001)
OS: 16.8 vs 14.0 months
HR 0.79 (95% CI, 0.62-1.01)
A significant PFS benefit, while OS remains less definitive.
📖 @TheLancetOncol
DOI 👉🏻 10.1016/S1470-2045(26)00282-
6.5K impressions22 likes10 reposts2026-09-19
[Slide 1]
A
100
Number of events/
Median progression-free
number of patients
survival, months (95% CI)
80
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
129/172
6.8 (5.7-7.1)
Progression-free survival (%)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
146/173
4.4 (4.1-5.5)
60
40
20
Stratified HR (95% CI):
0.52 (0.41-0.66), two-sided p<0.0001
HH
:
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
Time since randomisation (months)
Number at risk (censored)
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
172 (0)
134 (25)
76 (29)
48 (31)
34 (32)
24 (33)
16 (34)
10 (37)
5 (40)
0 (43)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
173 (0)
100 (23)
50 (25)
24 (25)
12 (25)
9 (25)
4 (26)
2 (26)
1 (27)
0 (27)
[Slide 2]
C
100
Number of events/
Median overall survival,
number of patients
months (95% CI)
80
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
122/219
16.8 (14.3-19.0)
Overall survival (%)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
140/219
14.0 (12.8-15.7)
60
40
20
Stratified HR (95% CI): 0.79 (0.62-1.01)
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
Time since randomisation (months)
Number at risk (censored)
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy
219 (0)
212 (1)
189 (3)
137 (29)
98 (49)
77 (56)
60 (60)
51 (60)
43 (62)
33 (66)
26 (71)
16 (81)
5 (92)
0 (97)
Placebo plus chemotherapy
219 (0)
210 (1)
186 (3)
132 (32)
92 (51)
63 (59)
52 (60)
44 (60)
38 (60)
30 (60)
18 (66)
9 (73)
0 (79)
[Slide 3]
Ivonescimab plus
Placebo plus
Treatment
p value
chemotherapy
chemotherapy
effect
group (n=219)
group (n=219)
(95% CI)*
Primary endpoints
Progression-free survival (primary
6.8
4.4
0.52
<0.0001
analysis); median (95% CI), monthst
(5.7-7.1)
(4.1-5.5)
(0-41-0.66)
Overall survival (primary analysis);
16.8
14.0
0.79
0.057
median (95% CI), months
(14.3-19.0)
(12.8-15.7)
(0-62-1.01)
Secondary endpoints
Objective response rate (95% CI) +
45% (38-52)
34% (28-41)
10% (1-20)
0.024
Duration of response; median
7.6 (5.5-10.6)
4.2 (2.9-4.7)
..
..
(95% CI), monthst
Best overall response, n (%)+ T
Complete response
4 (2%)
3 (1%)
..
..
Partial response
94 (43%)
72 (33%)
..
..
Stable disease
85 (39%)
85 (39%)
..
..
Progressive disease
13 (6%)
35 (16%)
..
..
Not evaluable
10 (5%)
14 (6%)
..
..
Not applicable
13 (6%)
10 (5%)
..
..
Exploratory endpoints
Time to response; median (95% CI),
1.45
1.45
..
..
monthst
(1.4-1.6)
(1.4-2.4)
Intracranial progression-free survival;
13.7
10.3
0.67
Exploratory
median (95% CI), monthst
(11.6-16.2)
(8.6-12-8)
(0.53-0.85)
Post-hoc endpoints
Extended progression-free survival;
6.3
4.8
0.57
Exploratory
median (95% CI), monthst
(5.6-7.1)
(4.2-5.5)
(0-46-0-71)
Extended overall survival; median
16.8
14.0
0.78
Exploratory
(95% CI), monthstt
(14.3-19.0)
(12.8-15.3)
(0-62-0-98)
Disease control rate (95% CI)+T
84% (78-88)
73% (67-79)
10% (3-18)
Exploratory
OOncology Brothers@OncBrothers
5. #HARMONi: 2L (after 3rd gen EGFRi), Ivonescimab (PD1/VEGF BsAb) + Chemo vs Chemo in EGFR+ mNSCLC:
- mOS 16.8mos vs 14.0mos (HR: 0.79, p value: 0.057)
- Ivonescimab starting to show positive data in more and more global studies.
- Refractory mEGFR is a crowded space
6/8 https://t.co/SL4VhgGU15 https://t.co/MiGqmqMJ7u
4.6K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
HARMONi Study Design1,2
Key eligibility criteria:
Ivonescimab 20 mg/kg
Treatment until:
Age ≥18 years
+ chemotherapy®IV Q3W
Intolerable toxicity, or
Locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC
ECOG PS score of 0 or 1
Randomization 1:1
Safety
(n=219)
No clinical benefit as
and
EGFR-sensitizing mutation
assessed by investigator, or
survival
Progressed on third-generation EGFR-TKI
Initiation of new antitumor
Placebo + chemotherapy® IV Q3W
follow-up
therapy, or
(n=219)
Any PD-L1 expression
24 months of treatment
N=438
Primary os analysis:
Stratification factors:
Study endpoints:
Data cutoff: April 12, 2025
Geographic region
Primary: OS, PFS by IRRC per RECIST v1.1
Median follow-up of 29.7 months
Brain metastases at baseline
Secondary: ORR by IRRC per RECIST v1.1, DoR,
(Western patients: 9.2 months;
(present or absent)
safety and tolerability
Asian patients: 32.7 months)
This updated OS analysis includes data from two separate data cutoffs:
April 12, 2025 for Asian patients (the data cutoff used for the final OS analysis; median follow-up 32.7 months)
June 30, 2026 for Western patients (to incorporate extended follow-up; median follow-up 23.2 months)
A survival status update was conducted between 15 — 30 June 2026 for Western patients
At the data cutoff, 109 deaths were reported among 165 Western patients, and 9 patients were lost to follow-up
AUC, area under the concentration-time curve; DoR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EGFR-TKI epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor; IRRC, independent radiology review committee; IV, intravenous;
NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand-1; PFS, progression-free survival; Q3W, every 3 weeks; RECIST v1.1, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Clinical Trials.gov identifier for
HARMONI: NCT06396065. "Chemotherapy was pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC 5 mg/mL/min. Carboplatin was discontinued after an induction phase of 4 cycles.
1. Goldman JW, et al. Presented at the World Congress on Lung Cancer (WCLC); September 6-9, 2025; Barcelona, Spain. LeX, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2026;27(9):1094-1109.
5
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Updated Analysis: Overall Survival
Median os was longer with ivonescimab + chemotherapy in both the Western and Asian patients
Western Patients (n=165)
Asian Patients (n=273)
100
Events
Median,
100
Events
Median,
HR (95% CI)
HR (95% CI)
(%)
mo
(%)
mo
Ivo + chemo
51 (61)
17.5
Ivo + chemo
98 (72)
16.7
80
0.76 (0.52-1.10)
80
0.76 (0.58-0.99)
Pbo + chemo
58 (71)
14.0
Pbo + chemo
117 (85)
14.0
60
60
os (%)
40.4%
os (%)
40
40
33.2%
20
20
Ivo + chemo
Ivo + chemo
28.0%
24.2%
Pbo + chemo
Pbo + chemo
0
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
No. at risk
Time (months)
No. at risk
Time (months)
0
Ivo + chemo
83
78
70
56
52
43
40
34
17
5
2
Ivo
+
chemo
136
134
120
104
86
72
60
51
43
33
26
16
5
0
Pbo + chemo 82
76
69
60
49
36
29
18
5
2
1
0
Pbo
+
chemo
137
134
117
99
82
62
52
44
38
30
18
9
0
Median follow-up: 29.9 mo overall; Western patients 23.2 mo (data cutoff June 30, 2026); Asian patients 32.7 mo (data cutoff April 12, 2025)
Chemo, chemotherapy; HR, hazard ratio; vo, ivonescimab; mo, months; OS, overall survival; pbo, placebo. Tick marks denotes censored patients.
7
YYüksel Ürün@DrYukselUrun
Ivonescimab beat pembrolizumab on overall survival in first-line PD-L1+ NSCLC!
Next chapter is longer follow-up from the separate global HARMONi study, including Western patients.
Different trial. Different population. But critical for understanding geographic translatability. @OncoAlert @OpenMedicineHQ @StephenVLiu @JackWestMD #WCLC26
3.9K impressions8 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
BBelmina Rose@bmcneely08
Two weeks ago I said the next thing I wanted from $SMMT was the actual survival data.
Now we have more of the answer.
HARMONi-2 showed median OS of 30.8 months with ivonescimab vs 22.6 months with Keytruda.
HR: 0.73.
That matters because PFS can tell you a drug delays progression.
OS tells you whether patients are actually living longer.
That is a much harder endpoint to dismiss.
The PD-L1 high
3.7K impressions14 likes12 reposts2026-09-17
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | HARMONi updated OS
🧬 Global Ph3: ivonescimab + chemo vs placebo + chemo after progression on 3rd-gen EGFR TKI in EGFR-mutated NSCLC (n=438)
📊 Updated OS: 16.8 vs 14.0 mo; HR 0.76
(95% CI 0.61–0.95; nominal p=0.0151)
🌍 Benefit was consistent by region:
• Western pts: 17.5 vs 14.0 mo; HR 0.76
• Asian pts: 16.7 vs 14.0 mo; HR 0.76
📉 Previously reported PFS: HR 0.52
🛡️ G≥3 TRAEs: 51.4%
3.4K impressions2 likes2 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
HARMONi Study Design¹
Key eligibility criteria:
Ivonescimab 20 mg/kg
Treatment until:
Age ≥18 years
+
chemotherapya IV Q3W
Intolerable toxicity, or
Locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC
Randomization 1:1
Safety
(n=219)
No clinical benefit as
and
EGFR-sensitizing mutation
assessed by investigator, or
survival
Progressed on third-generation EGFR-TKI
Initiation of new antitumor
Placebo + chemotherapy Q3W
follow-up
ECOG PS score of 0 or 1
therapy, or
(n=219)
Any PD-L1 expression
24 months of treatment
N=438
Primary os analysis:
Stratification factors:
Study endpoints:
Data cutoff: April 12, 2025
Geographic region
Primary: OS, PFS by IRRC per RECIST v1.1
Median follow-up of 29.7 months
Brain metastases at baseline
Secondary: ORR by IRRC per RECIST v1.1, DoR,
(Western patients: 9.2 months;
(present or absent)
safety and tolerability
Asian patients: 32.7 months)
This updated OS analysis includes data from two separate data cutoffs:
April 12, 2025 for Asian patients (the data cutoff used for the final OS analysis; median follow-up 32.7 months)
June 30, 2026 for Western patients (to incorporate extended follow-up; median follow-up 23.2 months)
A survival status update was conducted between 15 30 June 2026 for Western patients
At the data cutoff, 109 deaths were reported among 165 Western patients, and 9 patients were lost to follow-up
AUC, area under the concentration curve; DoR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EGFR TKI, epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor; IRRC. independent radiology review committee; IV. intravenous;
NSCLC. non-small cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate: OS, overall survival; PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand PFS. progression free survival; Q3W, every weeks; RECIST v1 Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Turnors, version 1.1. ClinicalTrials gov identifier for
HARMONE: NCT06396065 "Chemotherapy was pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC mg/mL/min. Carboplatin was discontinued after an induction phase of 4 cycles
1. Goldman IW, et al. Presented at the World Congress on Lung Cancer (WCLC); September 6-9, 2025; Barcelona, Spain. 2. Le of at Lancet Oncol 2026;27(9): 1094-1109.
5
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Updated Analysis: Overall Survival
Median os was longer with ivonescimab + chemotherapy in the ITT population
100
Events,
Median,
HR
Nominal
n (%)
mo
(95% CI)
P value
80
Ivo + chemo
149 (68)
16.8
0.76
0.0151
Pbo + chemo
175 (80)
14.0
(0.61-0.95)
60
os (%)
40
35.6%
20
27.0%
Ivo + chemo
Pbo + chemo
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
Time (months)
No. at risk
Ivo + chemo
219
212
190
160
138
115
100
85
60
38
28
16
5
0
Pbo + chemo
219
210
186
159
131
98
81
62
43
32
19
9
0
Median follow-up: 29.9 mo overall; Western patients 23.2 mo (data cutoff June 30, 2026); Asian patients 32.7 mo (data cutoff April 12, 2025)
Chemo, chemotherapy; HR, hazard ratio; ITT, intention to treat; IVD, ivonescimab; mo, months; OS, overall survival; pbo, placebo. Tick marks denote censored patients
6
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Updated Analysis: Overall Survival
Median os was longer with ivonescimab + chemotherapy in both the Western and Asian patients
Western Patients (n=165)
Asian Patients (n=273)
100
Events
Median,
100
Events
Median,
HR (95% CI)
HR (95% CI)
(%)
mo
(%)
mo
Ivo + chemo
51 (61)
17.5
Ivo + chemo
98 (72)
16.7
80
0.76 (0.52-1.10)
80
0.76 (0.58-0.99)
Pbo chemo
58 (71)
14.0
Pbo chemo
117 (85)
14.0
60
60
os (%)
40.4%
os (%)
40
40
33.2%
20
20
Ivo + chemo
Ivo + chemo
28.0%
24.2%
Pbo + chemo
Pbo + chemo
0
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
No. at risk
Time (months)
Time (months)
No. at risk
0
Ivo + chemo
83
78
70
56
52
43
40
34
17
5
2
Ivo + chemo
136
134
120
104
86
72
60
51
43
33
26
16
5
0
Pbo + chemo 82
76
69
60
49
36
29
18
5
2
1
0
Pbo
+
chemo
137
134
117
99
82
62
52
44
38
30
18
9
0
Median follow-up: 29.9 mo overall; Western patients 23.2 mo (data cutoff June 30, 2026); Asian patients 32.7 mo (data cutoff April 12, 2025)
Chemo, chemotherapy; HR, hazard ratio; ivo, ivonescimab; mo. months; OS, overall survival; pbo, placebo. Tick marks denotes censored patients.
7
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Updated Analysis: Overall Survival Subgroup Analysis
Ivonescimab + chemotherapy showed a consistent os benefit across predefined subgroups
Ivo chemo Pbo chemo
HR
Ivo chemo Pbo chemo
HR
(n/N)
(n/N)
(95% CI)
[n/N]
(n/N)
(95% CI)
Overall population
149/219
175/219
0.76(0.61-0.95)
Brain metastases prior to study entry
Age
Present
38/54
46/54
0.69 (0.45-1.07)
<65 years
99/136
108/131
0.80
(0.61-1.06)
Absent
111/165
129/165
0.78 (0.61-1.01)
a65 years
50/83
67/88
0.69 (0.48-1.00)
Smoking history
Sex
Never
98/143
123/155
0.77 (0.59-1.01)
Female
94/130
98/127
0.90(0.68-1.19)
Former/Current
51/76
52/64
0.75(0.51-1.10)
Male
55/89
77/92
0.61 (0.43-0.86)
Baseline ECOG performance status
Race
0
30/57
45/62
0.64(0.41-1.02)
Asian
108/153
129/153
0.73(0.57-0.94)
1
119/162
130/157
0.80(0.62-1.03)
White
33/51
38/54
0.80(0.50-1.29)
Baseline EGFR mutation
Geographic region
19Del
94/131
89/118
0.91 (0.68-1.22)
North America/Europe
51/83
58/82
0.76 (0.52-1.10)
L858R
44/74
79/90
0.53(0.37-0.77)
Asia
98/136
117/137
0.76 (0.58-0.99)
1790M
20/29
19/25
0.64 (0.34-1.20)
Number of distant metastases prior to study entry
Liver metastases prior to study entry
<3
91/141
111/146
0.75 (0.57-0.99)
Present
26/32
19/23
1.04 (0.57-1.90)
a3
56/75
63/71
0.76 (0.53-1.09)
Absent
123/187
156/196
0.72 (0.57-0.91)
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
0.25
0.5
2
1
Favors tvo + chemo Favors Pbo + chemo
Favors Ivo chemo Favors Pbo chemo
Median follow-up: 29.9 mo overall; Western patients 23.2 mo (data cutoff June 30, 2026); Asian patients 32.7 mo (data cutoff April 12, 2025)
CI, confidence interval; Chemo, chemotherapy; HR, hazard ratio; IVO, ivonescimab; mo, months; OS, overall survival: pbo, placebo.
8
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
🫁 Meet the HARMONi family of ivonescimab trials.
First, the naming trick:
A → HARMONi → 2 → 6
There is no “1” — HARMONi itself is the trial name.
Four Phase III stories:
🔹 HARMONi-A → EGFRm, post-TKI
🔹 HARMONi → global EGFRm, post-3rd-gen TKI
🔹 HARMONi-2 → 1L PD-L1 ≥1%, IVO vs pembrolizumab
🔹 HARMONi-6 → 1L squamous, IVO + chemo vs tislelizumab + chemo
Different settings. Same central questi
3.9K impressions63 likes18 reposts2026-09-20
[Slide 1]
THE HARMONi FAMiLY
IVONESCiMAB
PD-1 X VEGF
MV Onco
4
PUBLISHED PHASE III TRIALS
A
HARMONi
2
6
NO "1" HERE!
"HARMONi" IS THE TRIAL NAME.
HARMONi-A
PFS
7.1 vs 4.8 mo
EGFRm NSCLC
HR 0.46
IVO + CHEMO
POST-TKI
vs
OS
CHEMO
16.8 vs 14.1 mo
CHINA
EGFR RESISTANT
HR 0.74
HARMONi
PFS
6.8 vs 4.4 mo
EGFRm NSCLC
IVO + CHEMO
HR 0.52
POST-3rd GEN TKI
vs
os
CHEMO
16.8 vs 14.0 mo
GLOBAL
EGFR RESISTANT
HR 0.79
PRIMARY OS ANALYSIS
NOT SIGNIFICANT
HARMONi-2
PFS
11.1 vs 5.8 mo
1L NSCLC
IVO
HR 0.51
PD-L1 ≥1%
vs
EGFR / ALK -
OS
PEMBRO
30.8 vs 22.6 To
PD-1 x VEGF
NO CHEMO
vs PD-1 ALONE
HR 0.73
HARMONi-6
PFS
11.1 vs 6.9 mo
1L
IVO + CHEMO
HR 0.60
SQUAMOUS NSCLC
ANY PD-L1
vs
OS
EGFR / ALK EXCLUDED
TISLELIZUMAB
27.9 vs 23.7 To
SQUAMOUS
+ CHEMO
HR 0.66
+ CHEMO
A
HARMONi
2
6
REMEMBER: NO "1"
OOncUpdates@OncUpdates
⭐️ @OncBrothers deliver again!
🫁#WCLC26 #lungcancer #research highlights for #communityoncology
🤔What are your biggest takeaways?
#NSCLC
#ADAURA
#PAPILLON
#DESTINYLung04
#ARROS1
#HARMONi
#SCLC
#MAVERICK
#DeLLphi
#lcsm #OncTwitter #HemOnc #oncology #MedX @SWOG #MedEd https://t.co/oibw873u2f
1K impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
I kept searching for HARMONi-1… 🔍
Then it clicked. 😄
HARMONi-A → HARMONi → HARMONi-2 → HARMONi-6
No separate “1”.
The lowercase i fills the “1” spot — a neat little memory trick. 🎵
When the alphabet becomes the number… that’s HARMONi!
#MVOnco #HARMONi #Ivonescimab #LungCancer #NSCLC #EGFR #Oncology #MedEd
892 impressions6 likes0 reposts2026-09-20
[Slide 1]
I WAS SEARCHING FOR
HARMONi-1
MV Onco
?
WHERE'S 1?
HARMONi-A
HARMONi
HARMONi-2
HARMONi-6
THEN I REALISED
HARMONi i 1 É
I WAS SEARCHING
FOR "1"
THEN I REALISED -
THE "i"
FILLS THE
"1" SPOT!
WHEN THE ALPHABET
ITSELF BECOMES THE NUMBER
THAT'S HARMONi. 5
MEMORY HOOK
A
HARMONi
2
6
i
"1"
NO SEPARATE HARMONi-1
WHAT IS HARMONi?
Global Phase III
EGFRm NSCLC
after progression on
3rd-gen EGFR TKI
IVO + chemo vs chemo
14IMpower030View full trial page →32.2K impressions26.4K primary · 5.8K preview198 engagements22 posts · 17 voices▾
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🆙#WCLC26 #LCSM OA04.03
🔥Final Analysis of the Phase 3 IMpower030 Study: Perioperative Atezolizumab + Chemotherapy in Resectable Stage II-IIIB NSCLC
🎙️@bensolomon1
🎯EFS HR 0.77 (95%CI 0.58-1.02)
🎯OS HR 0.77 (95%CI 0.57-1.07)
🎯pCR Atezo 30.6% vs. Placebo 8.6%
🔢OA04.03
☑️NCT03456063
🔗 https://t.co/rN1vqVmvgD
@OncoAlert @Larvol @IASLC
6.7K impressions12 likes5 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - - 15, 2026
08 min 25s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study Design
Double-blind period
Open-label period
Key eligibility criteria:
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg +
Surgical
Resectable Stage II, IIIA or
platinum-based chemotherapy*
resection
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg
select IIIB (T3N2) NSCLC
(16 cycles) Q3W
(8th edition)
(4 cycles) Q3W
assessment)
Eligible for R0 resection with
curative intent
R
1:1
Adequate pulmonary and
cardiac function to
Survival follow-up
Placebo +
Surgical
undergo resection
resection
ALK WT/EGFR WT
platinum-based chemotherapy*
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Best supportive care
(4 cycles) Q3W
ECOG PS 0-1
assessment)
Stratification factors:
Primary endpoint:
Key secondary endpoints:
Tumor Stage (II VS IIIA N2- VS IIIA/B N2+)
IRF-EFS
IRF-pCR
INV-EFS
Histology (non-squamous vs squamous)
IRF-MPR
INV-DFS
OS
Safety
*Chemotherapy options: cisplatin + pemetrexed, carboplatin + pemetrexed, or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for patients with non-squamous NSCLC; cisplatin + gemcitabine or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for
patients with squamous NSCLC. Chemotherapy was administered as (per 21-day cycle): cisplatin (75 mg/m² IV) on Day 1; pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 IV) on Day 1; carboplatin (IV, initial target AUC of 6 mg/mL/min)
on Day 1; nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2 IV) on Days 1, 8, and 15; gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m² IV) on Days 1 and 8. PORT required for patients with positive margins prior to initiating post-operative atezolizumab or
best supportive care. PORT mandatory for N2+ disease in V1-6 and optional for patient with N2+ disease at resection after version 7. ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; AUC, area under the curve;
DFS, disease-free survival; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EFS, event-free survival; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; INV, investigator-assessed;
IRF, independent review facility-assessed; IV, intravenous; MPR, major pathological response; OS, overall survival; pCR, pathological complete response; PORT, post-operative radiation therapy;
Q3W, every 3 weeks; R, randomized; R0, complete resection; WT, wild-type.
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 21s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IRF-Assessed EFS
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population (primary endpoint)*
ITT-WT population$
100
100
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Median, months (95% CI)
62.8 (41.4, NE)
34.9 (24.6, 63.8)
Median, months (95% CI)
67.2 (49.1, NE)
43.9 (28.0, 63.8)
80
Stratified HR (95% CI); p value+
0.77 (0.58, 1.02); p=0.07
80
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.75 (0.57, 0.98)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
60
60
52.6%
IRF-EFS (%)
50.5%
IRF-EFS (%)
40
40
44.3%
46.0%
20
20
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
196
180
147
119
111
105
100
95
89
78
65
33
29
1
1
219
201
166
137
129
123
117
111
104
92
78
37
32
1
1
201
174
129
118
102
90
82
78
70
60
54
25
23
2
NE
221
193
144
133
117
105
96
92
84
73
64
29
26
2
NE
Statistical significance was not met in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025.
*A total of 92 (46.9%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=196) and 104 (51.7%) patients in the placebo arm (n=201) had an event; +Stratified Log-rank 2-sided p value; Versus stopping boundary of 0.04;
$A total of 99 (45.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 114 (51.6%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. EFS was defined as time from randomization to the first documented disease progression
per RECIST v1.1 that precluded surgery, local or distant disease recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC) or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. NE, not estimable.
8
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
04 min 13s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT
ITT-WT
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
(n=196)
(n=201)
(n=219)
(n=221)
IRF-pCR, n (%)
58 (29.6)
17 (8.5)
67 (30.6)
19 (8.6)
IRF-MPR, n (%)
105 (53.6)
49 (24.4)
119 (54.3)
55 (24.9)
Median INV-EFS, months
62.8
34.6
65.0
36.5
HR (95% CI)
0.70 (0.53, 0.93)
0.71 (0.55, 0.93)
Outcomes of pCR, MPR and EFS favored atezolizumab VS placebo
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025. Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested.
pCR, absence of any viable primary tumor cells at the time of surgical resection in the primary tumor and all sampled lymph nodes as assessed by central pathology laboratory;
MPR, <10% residual viable tumor cells at the time of surgical resection in the primary tumor as assessed by central pathology laboratory.
10
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
03 min 46s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Overall survival (ITT-WT population)*
Disease-free survival (ITT-WT population)+
100
100
80
80
66.0%
60
60
57.4%
OS (%)
59.9%
DFS (%)
40
40
45.9%
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
20
Median, months (95% CI)
NE (NE)
81.7 (63.8, NE)
20
Median, months (95% CI)
82.7 (54.3, NE)
54.4 (30.2, 66.0)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.77 (0.57, 1.05)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.67 (0.49, 0.90)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84 86
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
219
207
197
182
174
166
159
151
139
125
112
96
57
32
6
188
170
142
131
126
119
113
104
94
85
59
34
16
1
221
206
188
173
160
152
137
127
123
109
94
74
46
21
3
181
137
122
112
100
95
89
84
75
67
48
26
14
2
Outcomes of OS and DFS favored atezolizumab VS placebo
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025. Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested. *A total of 75 (34.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 89 (40.3%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of
median os between the atezolizumab (n=196) and placebo arms (n=201) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.79 (0.57-1.09); Patients with R0 margins after surgical resection. A total of 79 (42.0%) patients in the atezolizumab
arm (n=188) and 95 (52.5%) patients in the placebo arm (n=181) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of median DFS between the atezolizumab (n=167) and placebo arms (n=164) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.66
(0.48-0.91).OS, time from randomization to death from any cause; DFS, time from the first date of no disease (date of surgery) to local or distant recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC), or
death due to any cause, whichever occurs first.
11
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @bensolomon1 presents IMpower 030: perioperative atezolizumab + chemo in resectable NSCLC at #WCLC26. Unfortunately, EFS did not meet significance. Trends present for EFS and OS but not significant. High rates of surgery in both arms ~90% and placebo arm performed better than expected. Disappointing negative results.
4.1K impressions27 likes11 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
at
2276
on Lung Cancer
-
KALC
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
08 min 11s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study Design
Double-blind period
Open-label period
Key eligibility criteria:
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg +
Surgical
Resectable Stage II, IIIA or
platinum-based chemotherapy*
resection
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg
select IIIB (T3N2) NSCLC
(8th edition)
(4 cycles) Q3W
(16 cycles) Q3W
assessment)
Eligible for R0 resection with
curative intent
R
1:1
Adequate pulmonary and
cardiac function to
Survival follow-up
Placebo +
Surgical
undergo resection
resection
ALK WT/EGFR WT
platinum-based chemotherapy*
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Best supportive care
ECOG PS 0-1
(4 cycles) Q3W
assessment)
Stratification factors:
Primary endpoint:
Key secondary endpoints:
Tumor Stage (II VS IIIA N2- VS IIIA/B N2+)
IRF-EFS
IRF-pCR
INV-EFS
Histology (non-squamous vs squamous)
IRF-MPR
INV-DFS
OS
Safety
*Chemotherapy options: cisplatin + pemetrexed, carboplatin + pemetrexed, or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for patients with non-squamous NSCLC; cisplatin + gemcitabine or carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel for
patients with squamous NSCLC. Chemotherapy was administered as (per 21-day cycle): cisplatin (75 mg/m² IV) on Day 1; pemetrexed (500 mg/m² IV) on Day 1; carboplatin (IV, initial target AUC of 6 mg/mL/min)
on Day 1; nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m² IV) on Days 1, 8, and 15; gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m² IV) on Days 1 and 8. PORT required for patients with positive margins prior to initiating post-operative atezolizumab or
best supportive care. PORT mandatory for N2+ disease in V1-6 and optional for patient with N2+ disease at resection after version 7. ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; AUC, area under the curve;
DFS, disease-free survival; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EFS, event-free survival; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; INV, investigator-assessed;
IRF, independent review facility-assessed; IV, intravenous; MPR, major pathological response; OS, overall survival; pCR, pathological complete response; PORT, post-operative radiation therapy;
Q3W, every 3 weeks; R, randomized; R0, complete resection; WT, wild-type.
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 14s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IRF-Assessed EFS
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population (primary endpoint)*
ITT-WT population$
100
100
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Median, months (95% CI)
62.8 (41.4, NE)
34.9 (24.6, 63.8)
Median, months (95% CI)
67.2 (49.1, NE)
43.9 (28.0, 63.8)
80
Stratified HR (95% CI); p value+
0.77 (0.58, 1.02); p=0.07
80
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.75 (0.57, 0.98)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
60
60
52.6%
IRF-EFS (%)
50.5%
IRF-EFS (%)
40
40
44.3%
46.0%
20
20
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
196
180
147
119
111
105
100
95
89
78
65
33
29
1
1
219
201
166
137
129
123
117
111
104
92
78
37
32
1
1
201
174
129
118
102
90
82
78
70
60
54
25
23
2
NE
221
193
144
133
117
105
96
92
84
73
64
29
26
2
NE
Statistical significance was not met in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025.
*A total of 92 (46.9%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=196) and 104 (51.7%) patients in the placebo arm (n=201) had an event; TStratified Log-rank 2-sided p value; Versus stopping boundary of 0.04;
$A total of 99 (45.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 114 (51.6%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. EFS was defined as time from randomization to the first documented disease progression
per RECIST v1.1 that precluded surgery, local or distant disease recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC) or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. NE, not estimable.
8
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
03 min 48s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Overall survival (ITT-WT population)*
Disease-free survival (ITT-WT population)+
100
100
80
80
66.0%
60
60
57.4%
OS (%)
59.9%
DFS (%)
40
40
45.9%
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
20
Median, months (95% CI)
NE (NE)
81.7 (63.8, NE)
20
Median, months (95% CI)
82.7 (54.3, NE)
54.4 (30.2, 66.0)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.77 (0.57, 1.05)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.67 (0.49, 0.90)
Median survival follow-up in all patients: 69.3 months
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84 86
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
219
207
197
182
174
166
159
151
139
125
112
96
57
32
6
188
170
142
131
126
119
113
104
94
85
59
34
16
1
221
206
188
173
160
152
137
127
123
109
94
74
46
21
3
181
137
122
112
100
95
89
84
75
67
48
26
14
2
Outcomes of OS and DFS favored atezolizumab vs placebo
Data cut-off: 01 October 2025. Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested. *A total of 75 (34.2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 89 (40.3%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of
median OS between the atezolizumab (n=196) and placebo arms (n=201) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.79 (0.57-1.09); Patients with R0 margins after surgical resection. A total of 79 (42.0%) patients in the atezolizumab
arm (n=188) and 95 (52.5%) patients in the placebo arm (n=181) had an event. The HR (95% CI) of median DFS between the atezolizumab (n=167) and placebo arms (n=164) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0.66
(0.48-0.91).OS, time from randomization to death from any cause; DFS, time from the first date of no disease (date of surgery) to local or distant recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC), or
death due to any cause, whichever occurs first.
11
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
Two negative Phase 3 atezolizumab trials—but two very different messages.
IMpower030 missed its statistical threshold despite a strong efficacy signal. S1914 showed no survival gain and greater toxicity.
In early-stage NSCLC, context matters.
#WCLC26 #LungCancer #NSCLC #Immunotherapy
4K impressions9 likes5 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026 AND THE LANCET
BETTER
TWO NEGATIVE ATEZOLIZUMAB TRIALS
SCIENCE
A BRIGHTER
TOMORROW
FOR PATIENTS
IN EARLY STAGE NSCLC
PEOPLE
Same label Different clinical meaning
EVIDENCE
IMPACT
IMpower030
WCLC 2026 PHASE 3
SWOG NRG S1914
THE LANCET 2026 PHASE 3
Resectable stage II to IIIB
High risk T1 to T3 NO MO NSCLC
NSCLC
medically inoperable or declined surgery
N 453
Perioperative atezolizumab plus
chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone
N 417
SBRT plus atezolizumab VS SBRT alone
Median EFS
2 year OS
62.8 mo VS 34.9 mo
82% VS 82%
OS HR 1.04 95% CI 0.69 to 1.58
pCR
29.6% VS 8.5%
Grade 3 or higher AEs
12% VS 3%
PRESPECIFIED STATISTICAL
2 grade 5 respiratory events with atezolizumab
THRESHOLD NOT MET
NO SURVIVAL BENEFIT
Statistically negative clinically suggestive
MORE TOXICITY
EXPERT INTERPRETATION
SAME DRUG
DIFFERENT PATIENTS
1
A negative trial is not always a biologic failure
DIFFERENT QUESTIONS
DIFFERENT ANSWERS
2
Benefit depends on setting timing and patient selection
CONTEXT TURNS
3
Do not add atezolizumab to SBRT outside a clinical trial
DATA INTO CARE
THE LESSON IS CONTEXT NOT A CLASS EFFECT
Sources IMpower030 NCT03456063 WCLC 2026 SWOG NRG S1914 Lancet 2026
drozdogan.com
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
IMpower030 — the whole story in 3 pages 🫁
Part 1: What did they do?
Who entered → randomization → perioperative treatment → the 440 vs 397 populations.
Part 2: What happened?
EFS numerically favoured atezolizumab — 62.8 vs 34.9 months, HR 0.77 — but the primary endpoint was not statistically significant (P = 0.07).
Part 3: Why?
A simple statistics lesson: in Phase III trials, the significance t
2.4K impressions26 likes11 reposts2026-09-20
[Slide 1]
IMpower030
Part 1/3
PART 1 - WHAT DID THEY DO?
7
MV Onco
WHO ENTERED?
RANDOMIZED
RESECTABLE NSCLC
ATEZOLIZUMAB
Stage II / IIIA
PLACEBO
+ selected IIIB (T3N2)
1200 mg Q3W
+
+
PLATINUM-DOUBLET
VS
PLATINUM-DOUBLET
CHEMO
CHEMO
ECOG 0-1
X 4 cycles
X 4 cycles
MEASURABLE DISEASE
SURGERY
SURGERY
FIT FOR
RO RESECTION
ATEZOLIZUMAB
OBSERVATION /
+
x 16 cycles
BEST SUPPORTIVE
PLATINUM-DOUBLET
CARE
CHEMOTHERAPY
TWO ANALYSIS POPULATIONS
NONSQUAMOUS:
EGFR MUTATION
ITT-WT
PRIMARY EFS
STAGE IIB-IIIB WT
OR
ALK TRANSLOCATION
n = 440
n = 397
EXCLUDED
219 ATEZO
196 ATEZO
vs
vs
221 CONTROL
201 CONTROL
REMEMBER:
440
397
= ITT-WT
= PRIMARY EFS
[Slide 2]
IMpower030
PART 2- - WHAT HAPPENED? ?
MV Onco
GOAL:
Understand the results
as a SIMPLE STORY.
1
PRIMARY QUESTION
P = 0.07
PRIMARY IRF-EFS
HR 0.77
PRIMARY EFS
NOT STATISTICALLY
STAGE IIB-IIIB WT
95% CI
SIGNIFICANT
n = 397
0.58- 1.02
AND
THE TRIAL-SPECIFIC
WHAT DOES THAT SAY?
SIGNIFICANCE BOUNDARY
ATEZO vs CONTROL
WAS EVEN LOWER:
HR < 1
P < 0.04
62.8 VS 34.9
NUMERICALLY
FAVOURS ATEZO
P = 0.07
WAS HIGHER THAN
MONTHS
MONTHS
BUT
THE REQUIRED
95% CI
P < 0.04
CROSSES 1
so IT DID NOT MEET
THE SIGNIFICANCE
THRESHOLD
PRIMARY ENDPOINT
NOT MET X
2
BUT THEN
LOOK AT THE BROADER ITT-WT GROUP
n = 440
IRF-EFS
DFS
MPR
os
67.2 vs 43.9
82.7 vs 54.4
35.6%
HR 0.77
MONTHS
MONTHS
MONTHS MONTHS
vs
(0.57 - 1.05)
HR 0.75
HR 0.67
24.4%
(95% CI 0.57 - 0.98)
(0.49 0.90)
AND OTHER OUTCOMES ALSO FAVOURED ATEZO
3
NOW THE PUZZLE:
PRIMARY ENDPOINT
MULTIPLE OTHER
HOW CAN BOTH
BUT
RESULTS
NOT MET X
FAVOUR ATEZO
BE TRUE?
PART 3
[Slide 3]
Part 3/3
IMpower030
PART 3- WHY?
MV Onco
1
START FROM BASICS
3
BUT IMpower030
HAD A STRICTER BOUNDARY
In a typical
Phase III trial
Required:
we often use:
< 0.04
P < 0.05
Observed:
But what does
P = 0.07
0.05 mean?
α = 0.05
PRIMARY ENDPOINT
NOT MET
If there is really
no treatment effect
we accept a
4
"BUT DOC
WHY NOT JUST USE P < 0.10?"
5% chance
Because a higher α means
of falsely declaring
accepting more false positives.
a positive result.
a = 0.05
a = 0.10
That is:
VS
TYPE I ERROR
5%
10%
5%
FALSE-POSITIVE
FALSE-POSITIVE
=
RISK
RISK
FALSE POSITIVE
α = 0.05
HIGHER α = EASIER TO CALL
A RESULT POSITIVE
2
BUT MORE FALSE POSITIVES
NOW BACK TO IMpower030
Primary EFS:
5
so WHAT DO WE SAY ABOUT
IMpower030?
HR 0.77
Favourable numerical signal?
Favours atezo
YES
numerically.
Primary endpoint met?
NO
X
But
Both can be true.
95% CI 0.58 - 1.02
6
FINAL MEMORY LINE
CI crosses 1.
FAVOURABLE
FOR THE PRIMARY
And
QUESTION
#
THE REQUIRED
P = 0.07
STATISTICALLY
STATISTICAL BOUNDARY
SIGNIFICANT
DECIDES.
TThe ASCO Post@ASCOPost
🫁 Phase 3️⃣ IMpower030: Perioperative atezolizumab + platinum chemo yielded a median event-free survival of 62.8 vs 34.9 months with chemotherapy alone in patients with resectable stage IIB–IIIB #NSCLC.
🗣️Presented by Benjamin Solomon, MD at #WCLC26
🔗 https://t.co/Pt9gFWgLQz https://t.co/l9WcrVKgfW
1.7K impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
DDiego A. Díaz-García@diegoadiazg
🫁 IMpower030: perioperative atezolizumab did not meet its primary endpoint in resectable NSCLC. @bensolomon1
Despite numerical improvements with atezolizumab + chemotherapy:
• EFS: 62.8 vs 34.9 months
• pCR: 29.6% vs 8.5%
• MPR: 53.6% vs 24.4%
The study did not demonstrate a statistically significant EFS benefit, although other efficacy endpoints numerically favored the experimental arm.
#CánC
1.4K impressions18 likes6 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
08 min 25
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study Design
Double-blind period
Open-label period
Key eligibility criteria:
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg +
Surgical
Resectable Stage II, IIIA or
platinum-based chemotherapy*
resection
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Atezolizumab 1,200 mg
select IIIB (T3N2) NSCLC
(4 cycles) Q3W
(16 cycles) Q3W
(8th edition)
assessment)
Eligible for R0 resection with
curative intent
R
1:1
Adequate pulmonary and
cardiac function to
Survival follow-up
Placebo +
Surgical
undergo resection
ALK WT/EGFR WT
platinum-based chemotherapy*
resection
(pCR, MPR
PORT
Best supportive care
ECOG PS 0-1
(4 cycles) Q3W
assessment)
Stratification factors:
Primary endpoint:
Key secondary endpoints:
Tumor Stage (II vs IIIA N2- vs IIIA/B N2+)
IRF-EFS
IRF-pCR
INV-EFS
Histology (non-squamous vs squamous)
IRF-MPR
INV-DFS
OS
Safety
"Chemotherapy options cisplate . pemetrexed, carboplatin pernetrexed, or carboplatin . nab-pacitaxel for patients with non-squamous NSCLC. cisplatin . gemcitabine or carboplatin nab-paclitaxel for
patients with squamous NSCLC Chemotherapy was administered as (per 21-day cycle) cisplatin (75 mg/m2 IV) on Day 1; permetrexed (500 mg/m² IV) on Day 1; carboplatin (IV, initial target AUC of 6 mg/ml/min)
on Day 1; nab-packtaxel (100 mg/m2 IV) on Days 1,8, and 15; gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m2 IV) on Days 1 and 8. PORT required for patients with positive margins prior to initiating post-operative atezolizumab or
best supportive care PORT mandatory for N2+ disease in V1-6 and optional for patient with N2+ disease at resection after version 7. ALK anaplastic lymphoma knase, AUC, area under the curve,
DFS, disease froe survival, ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EFS, event free survival, EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; INV, investigator assessed,
IRF, independent review facility-assessed; IV, intravenous; MPR, major pathological response; 0S, overall survival; pCR, pathological complete response; PORT, post-operative radiation therapy,
Q3W, every 3 weeks, R, randomized; R0, complete resection, WT, wild-type
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
05 min 17
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IRF-Assessed EFS
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population (primary endpoint)*
ITT-WT population$
100
100
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Median, months (95% CI)
52.8(41.4,NE)
349(24.638)
Median, months (95% CI)
67.2(49.1,NE)
439(28,63.8)
80
Stratified HR (95% CI). P value
0.77 58 1.02) p=0 07*
80
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.75(0.57,0.98)
Median survival follow up in all patients 60 3 months
Median survival follow up in at patients 69.3 months
60
60
52.6%
IRF-EFS (%)
50.5%
IRF-EFS (%)
40
40
44.3%
46.0%
20
20
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
88
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
195
180
147
119
111
105
100
95
89
78
65
33
29
1
1
219
201
166
137
129
123
117
111
104
92
78
37
32
1
1
201
174
129
118
102
90
82
78
70
60
54
25
23
2
NE
221
193
144
133
117
105
96
a
84
73
64
29
26
2
NE
Statistical significance was not met in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population
Data cut-off 01 October 2025
"A total of 92 (46 9%) patients in the etezolizumab arm (n=196) and 104 (51 7%) patients in the placebo arm (n=201) had an event *Stratified Log rank 2. -sided P value Versus stopping boundary of 0 04;
IA total of 99 (45 2%) patients in the atezolizumab arm (n=219) and 114 (51 6%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event EFS was defined as time from randomization to the first documented disease progression
per RECIST v1 1 that precluded surgery, local or distant disease recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC) or death from any cause, whichever occurred first NE, not estimable
R
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
04 min OT
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Stage IIB-IIIB-WT
ITT-WT
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
(n=196)
(n=201)
(n=219)
(n=221)
IRF-pCR, n (%)
58 (29.6)
17 (8.5)
67 (30.6)
19 (8.6)
IRF-MPR, n (%)
105 (53.6)
49 (24.4)
119 (54.3)
55 (24.9)
Median INV-EFS, months
62.8
34.6
65.0
36.5
HR (95% CI)
0.70 (0.53, 0.93)
0.71 (0.55, 0.93)
Outcomes of pCR, MPR and EFS favored atezolizumab vs placebo
Data cut-off 01 October 2025 Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested
pCR, absence of any viable primary tumor cells at the time of surgical resection in the primary tumor and all sampled lymph nodes as assessed by central pathology laboratory
MPR, $10% residual viable tumor cells at the time of surgical resection in the primary tumor as assessed by central pathology laboratory
10
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
03 min 46
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Key Secondary Endpoints
Overall survival (ITT-WT population)*
Disease-free survival (ITT-WT population)+
100
100
80
80
66.0%
60
60
57.4%
OS (%)
59,9%
DFS (%)
40
40
45.9%
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
Atezolizumab arm
Placebo arm
20
Median, months (95% CI)
NE (NE)
81.7(63.8,NE)
20
Median months (95% CI)
82 (54 NE)
54.4(302.66)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.77 57, 1.05)
Stratified HR (95% CI)
0.67 49. 0.90)
Median survival follow- in all patients: 69 3 months
0
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
90
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
72
78
84
86
Months
Months
Patients remaining at risk
Patients remaining at risk
219
207
197
182
174
166
159
151
139
125
112
96
57
32
6
188
170
142
131
126
119
113
104
94
8.
59
34
16
1
221
200
188
173
160
152
137
127
123
109
94
74
46
21
3
181
137
122
112
100
95
89
44
75
67
48
26
14
2
Outcomes of OS and DFS favored atezolizumab vs placebo
Data cut-off 01 October 2025 Key secondary endpoints were not formally tested "A total of 75 (34 2%) patients in the atezokzumab am (n=219) and 89 (40.3%) patients in the placebo arm (n=221) had an event The HR (95% CI) of
median os between the atezolizumab (n= 196) and placebo arms (n=201) in the Stage IIB-IIIB-WT population was 0. 79 0.57-1.09) Patients with R0 margins after surgical resection A total of 79 (42 0%) patients in the atezolizumab
arm (n=188) and 95 (52 5%) patients in the placebo am (n=181) had an event The HR (95% CI) of median DFS between the atozokzumab (n= 167) and placebo arms (no 164) in the Stage IIB IIIB WT population was 0.66
(0. 48-0.91). OS, time from randomization to death from any cause, DFS, time from the first date of no disease (date of surgery) to local or distant recurrence (including occurrence of new primary NSCLC). or
death due to any cause, whichever occurs first
11
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
Perioperative IO in resectable NSCLC — the landscape at a glance. 🫁
6 Phase III trials → one simple question:
EFS benefit is common. Has OS followed?
✅ EFS positive in 5/6 trials
OS so far:
• KEYNOTE-671 (pembro): HR 0.74 ✅
• RATIONALE-315 (tisle): HR 0.65 ✅
• CheckMate 77T: HR 0.85 — interim, NS
• AEGEAN: HR 0.89 — interim, NS
• NEOTORCH: HR 0.62 — interim, NS
• IMpower030: HR 0.77 — not forma
3.6K impressions56 likes26 reposts2026-09-20
[Slide 1]
PERIOPERATIVE IO
IN RESECTABLE NSCLC
MV Onco
TRIAL
EFS
OS
PEMBRO
0.58
0.74
KEYNOTE-671
NIVO
0.61
0.85
CheckMate 77T
INTERIM- NS
DURVA
0.69
0.89
AEGEAN
INTERIM - NS
TISLE
0.58
0.65
RATIONALE-315
TORI
0.40*
0.62
NEOTORCH
INTERIM - NS
ATEZO
X
0.77
0.77
IMpowero 030
P = 0.07
NOT FORMALLY
TESTED
SIGNIFICANT OS so FAR
PEMBRO
+
TISLE
KEYNOTE-671
RATIONALE-315
EFS POSITIVE
IN 5/6 TRIALS
*
NEOTORCH HR 0.40: Stage III interim analysis.
HRs shown for EFS and OS.
IInternational Lung Cancer Summit@LungSummit
WCLC 2026 opened in Seoul on Saturday 12 September. Six studies came out of the press briefing, three of them in small cell lung cancer.
Two asked how the DLL3 bispecific is given rather than whether it works. DeLLphi-309 randomised 252 patients across three schedules: response rates of 40% at 10 mg every two weeks, 31% at 20 mg every three weeks and 27% at 30 mg every four weeks, with median ove
955 impressions6 likes2 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
ADCs . IMMUNOTHERAPIES
CONGRESS UPDATE
WCLC 2026, DAY 1: EXTENDED-
INTERVAL AND SUBCUTANEOUS
DOSING IN SCLC, AND A 70%
EARLY RESPONSE
BBioSignal@BioSignal
Atezolizumab quadrupled the pathological complete response rate in resectable lung cancer, 29.6% against 8.5%, and still missed its primary endpoint.
That is the final analysis of IMpower030, presented at the World Conference on Lung Cancer in Seoul on September 12 by Benjamin Solomon of Peter MacCallum. Perioperative Tecentriq plus platinum chemotherapy in resectable stage II to IIIB disease, 39
525 impressions5 likes0 reposts2026-09-18
15BNT327 (pumitamig)View full trial page →26.3K impressions25.3K primary · 955 preview151 engagements19 posts · 19 voices▾
GGiannis Mountzios@g_mountzios
#WCLC26 🌟First report of a combination of a #bispecific targeting PDL1 x VEGF (pumitamig) plus a B7-H3.l ( Elfie-D) #ADC in ES-SCLC, producing excellent responses in all lines of treatment and especially 1L with tolerable toxicity profile. Requires longer follow up to evaluate long-term tolerability of ADCs and the contribution of the bispecific component. Challenging to see how this combo will f
3.5K impressions21 likes12 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
wclc.iaslc.org
# 09 min 33s
f
in
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Pumitamig (PD-L1 X VEGF-A bsAb) + Elfetabart
Drozuntecan (Elfe-D, B7H3 ADC) in Patients With
Advanced/Metastatic Lung Cancer (NSCLC or SCLC)
A.J. Schoenfeld (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York/NY/USA)
L. Sun, J. Bennouna, T. Clay, T. Cil, J. Zhou, J. Shi, O. Ates, B.B. Oven, A. Liu, M. Altan, A. Spira, C. Oakman, K. Parikh, A. Lisberg, G. Ayre, E. Schenk, M. Kotlarski,
C. Lazzari, M. Forster, K. Franks, T-Y. Yang, H. Liu, O. Juan-Vidal, R. Dziadziuszko, T. Marron, E. Felip, H. Mu, W. Wu, I. Celik, C. Dalle Fratte, J. David, J. Furlanetto,
C-N. Gann, S. Helian, Q. Kang-Fortner, C. Key, Z. Mukhtar, A. O'Brate, M. Soland, M. Wenger, O. Türeci, U. Sahin, R. Tibes, L. Paz-Ares
Science Without Boundaries: Uniting the World Again
Thoracic Can
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
07 min 24s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
BNT324-01 (NCT06892548) study design
A global Phase 1b/2 study of pumitamig + elfe-D in advanced lung cancer¹²
Part 1
Part 2
KEY INCLUSION CRITERIA
Dose optimization and signal-seeking cohorts
Dose escalation (Bayesian optimal interval
(ongoing) to support optimal dose selection
Histologically or cytologically
design; complete) and backfill (ongoing)
confirmed unresectable
DO1: 1L nsqNSCLC AGA-
Dose
Elfe-D (mg/kg Q3W)
4.5
6
9
advanced/metastatic lung cancer
optimization
Pumitamig (mg/kg Q3W)
30
30
30
DO2: 2L+ SCLC (post-chemo + IO)
(SCLC or NSCLC)
Measurable disease (RECIST v1.1)
Elfe-D (mg/kg Q3W)
4.5
6
9
3: 2L+ nsqNSCLC AGA- (post-chemo ± IO)
ECOG PS 0-1
Pumitamig (mg/kg Q3W)
20
20
20
4: 1L sqNSCLC AGA-
Signal
Eligible regardless of PD-L1 status
Patients continue to receive treatment until disease
5: 2L+ sqNSCLC AGA- (post-chemo ± IO)
seeking
progression or a maximum duration of 24 months (elfe-D)
or 36 months (pumitamig)
6: 2L+ nsqNSCLC AGA+ (post-TKI)
KEY EXCLUSION CRITERIA
Patients meeting eligibility criteria for Part 2 enrolled as
7: 1L ES-SCLC
backfill after a dose level was determined to be safe
Prior treatment with B7H3
targeted therapy
History of significant hematologic
Primary endpoint:
Secondary endpoints:
toxicity to prior lines of therapy
Safety, including DLTs, and ORR
DCR, PFS, DOR, OS, PFS rate, TTR, and safety
We report the first data from this study with a focus on SCLC; efficacy in NSCLC will be reported separately
Safety presented in patients who received at least one dose of either drug.
Efficacy presented in patients with SCLC with >1 post-baseline scan or early discontinuation. Unconfirmed ORR reported. Tumor response was assessed according to RECIST v1.1.
5
JAMES YANG
A
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
03 min 38s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Efficacy in SCLC (all treatment lines)
Overall
Elfe-D 4.5 mg/kg + pumitamig 20 mg/kg
60
Elfe-D 6 mg/kg + pumitamig 20 mg/kg
(N=71)
Elfe-D 4.5 mg/kg + pumitamig 30 mg/kg
CR
1 (1.4)
40
Elfe-D 6 mg/kg + pumitamig 30 mg/kg
PR
49 (69.0)
BOR, n (%)
SD
20
16 (22.5)
PD
3 (4.2)
2 (2.8)
ORR, % (95% CI)
70.4 (58.4-80.7)
DCR, % (95% CI)
93.0 (84.3-97.7)
Percentage change from baseline (%)
0
NE/NA
-20
-40
ORR (95% CI) by smoking history:
Current/former (n=56): 73.2 (59.7-84.2)
-60
Never (n=15): 60.0 (32.3-83.7)
ORR (95% CI) by brain metastases:
-80
Patients with brain metastases (n=31): 71.0 (52.0-85.8)
Patients without brain metastases (n=40): 70.0 (53.5-3.4)
-100-
Encouraging early signs of efficacy in patients with SCLC
ORR (unconfirmed) is reported in the SCLC efficacy-evaluable population (≥1 post-baseline scan or early discontinuation). Median PFS was not yet reached. One patient previously treated with 10 is not included on the waterfall plot as they
had no post-baseline target-lesion sum of diameters reported as of the data cut-off due to a data-entry delay; their current best change from baseline is -78%.
Data cut-off: July 7, 2026.
10
JAMES YANG
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 40s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Baseline demographics and disease characteristics (n=279)
Patients with NSCLC (n=201) or SCLC (n=78)
Elfe-D (mg/kg)
4.5
6
4.5
6
Overall
Pumitamig (mg/kg)
20
20
30
30
(n=54)
(n=75)
(n=35)
(n=115)
(N=279)
Age, years
Median (range)
67.0 (42-87)
65.0 (36-86)
63.0 (39-79)
64.0 (29-87)
68.0 (29-79)
Sex, n (%)
Male
70 (60.9)
184 (65.9)
28 (51.9)
60 (80.0)
26 (74.3)
Female
26 (48.1)
15 (20.0)
9 (25.7)
45 (39.1)
95 (34.1)
Race,* n (%)
White
28 (51.9)
31 (41.3)
19 (54.3)
63 (54.8)
141 (50.5)
Asian
22 (40.7)
40 (53.3)
13 (37.1)
38 (33.0)
113 (40.5)
Asia
19 (35.2)
41 (54.7)
12 (34.3)
38 (33.0)
110 (39.4)
Region, n (%)
Europe
19 (35.2)
20 (26.7)
11 (31.4)
51 (44.3)
101 (36.2)
North America
15 (27.8)
7 (9.3)
7 (20.0)
19 (16.5)
48 (17.2)
Australia
1 (1.9)
7 (9.3)
5 (14.3)
7 (6.1)
20 (7.2)
0
ECOG PS, n (%)
12 (22.2)
16 (21.3)
6 (17.1)
37 (32.2)
71 (25.4)
1
42 (77.8)
59 (78.7)
29 (82.9)
78 (67.8)
208 (74.6)
Metastases at baseline,
Brain
4 (7.4)
26 (34.7)
12 (34.3)
29 (25.2)
71 (25.4)
n (%)
Liver
14 (25.9)
21 (28.0)
9 (25.7)
22 (19.1)
66 (23.7)
Never
18 (33.3)
14 (18.7)
6 (17.1)
26 (22.6)
64 (22.9)
Smoking history,
Former
n (%)
33 (61.1)
48 (64.0)
23 (65.7)
74 (64.3)
178 (63.8)
Current Smoker
3 (5.6)
13 (17.3)
5 (14.3)
15 (13.0)
36 (12.9)
*25 patients (9.0%) had Other race (Other, Black or African American, Unknown/missing, and Mixed race). One patient with an unknown smoking history is not shown.
Data cut-off: July 7, 2026.
6
JAMES YANG ALONA ZE
WWafik S. El-Deiry, MD, PhD, FACP@weldeiry
Impressive results in Small Cell Lung Cancer👇
“Up to 90% of patients with advanced small cell lung cancer (SCLC) responded to a PD-L1/VEGF bispecific antibody linked to an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), a preliminary trial showed.”
“Response rates ranged from 52.4% in patients who received pumitamig/elfetabart drozuntecan (elfe-D) as third-line therapy to 92.3% in those who received the novel th
2.9K impressions36 likes3 reposts2026-09-17
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🆙 #ESMO26 Rapid Oral 2: #LCSM Mets
🔥ROSETTA Lung-107: A Global Phase 2, Open-Label Trial of Pumitamig (PD-L1 × VEGF-A bsAb) + Docetaxel Post-Chemoimmunotherapy in mNSCLC
🎙️ @cbcbc1971
🔢LBA76
🔗 https://t.co/qdRXsb5w4Q
@OncoAlert @Larvol @myESMO @IASLC https://t.co/UYdMIHEwOR
1.8K impressions4 likes3 reposts2026-09-26
OOsmanKostekMD@OncologyMarwarD
WCLC 2026 | SCLC
Pumitamig + B7-H3 ADC elfe-D shows a striking early signal:
• ORR 70.4% overall
• 92.3% in 1L
• 71% with brain mets
• 87.5% after prior DLL3-TCE
Very early data with small subgroups—durability will be key.
#WCLC26 #SCLC #B7H3 @OncoAlert @BioNTech_Group https://t.co/kYiVPNa2fv
1.7K impressions3 likes3 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
$
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
07 min 56s
BNT324-01 (NCT06892548) study design
A global Phase 1b/2 study of pumitamig + elfe-D in advanced lung cancer¹²
Part 1
Part 2
KEY INCLUSION CRITERIA
Dose optimization and signal-seeking cohorts
Dose escalation (Bayesian optimal interval
(ongoing) to support optimal dose selection
Histologically or cytologically
design; complete) and backfill (ongoing)
D01: 1L nsqNSCLC AGA-
confirmed unresectable
Dose
Elfe-D (mg/kg Q3W)
4.5
6
9
Pumitamig (mg/kg Q3W)
30
30
30
DO2: 2L+ SCLC (post-chemo : IO)
optimization
advanced/metastatic lung cancer
(SCLC or NSCLC)
Elfe-D (mg/kg Q3W)
4.5
6
9
3: 2L+ nsqNSCLC AGA- (post-chemo * 10)
Measurable disease (RECIST v1.1)
Pumitamig (mg/kg Q3W)
20
20
20
ECOG PS 0-1
4: 1L sqNSCLC AGA-
Signal
Patients continue to receive treatment until disease
5: 2L+ sqNSCLC AGA- (post-chemo * IO)
Eligible regardless of PD-L1 status
seeking
progression or a maximum duration of 24 months (elfe-D)
or 36 months (pumitamig)
6: 2L+ nsqNSCLC AGA+ (post-TKI)
KEY EXCLUSION CRITERIA
Patients meeting eligibility criteria for Part 2 enrolled as
7: 1L ES-SCLC
backfill after a dose level was determined to be safe
Prior treatment with B7H3
targeted therapy
Primary endpoint:
Secondary endpoints:
History of significant hematologic
Safety, including DLTs, and ORR
DCR, PFS, DOR, OS, PFS rate, TTR, and safety
toxicity to prior lines of therapy
We report the first data from this study with a focus on SCLC; efficacy in NSCLC will be reported separately
Safety presented in patients who received at least one dose of either drug.
Data cut off: July 7,2026
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
03 min 40s
Efficacy in SCLC (all treatment lines)
Overall
Elte-D 4.5 mg/kg + pumitamig 20 mg/kg
60
(N=71)
Elte-D 6 mg/kg + pumitamig 20 mg/kg
40
Elte-D 4.5 mg/kg + pumitamig 30 mg/kg
CR
1 (1.4)
Elte-D 6 mg/kg + pumitamig 30 mg/kg
PR
49 (69.0)
20
BOR, n (%)
SD
16 (22.5)
PD
3 (4.2)
NE/NA
Percentage change from baseline (%)
0
2 (2.8)
-20
ORR, % (95% CI)
70.4 (58.4-80.7)
DCR, % (95% CI)
93.0 (84.3-97.7)
-40
ORR (95% CI) by smoking history:
-60
Current/former (n=56): 73.2 (59.7-84.2)
Never (n=15): 60.0 (32.3-83.7)
-80
ORR (95% CI) by brain metastases:
Patients with brain metastases (n=31): 71.0 (52.0-85.8)
-100
Patients without brain metastases (n=40): 70.0 (53.5-3.4)
Encouraging early signs of efficacy in patients with SCLC
ORR (unconfirmed) is reported in the SCLC efficacy-evaluable population (≥1 post-baseline scan or early discontinuation). Median PFS was not yet reached. One patient previously treated with IO is not
included on the waterfall plot as they had no post-baseline target-lesion sum of diameters reported as of the data cut-off due to a data-entry delay.
Data cut-off: July 1, 2026.
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
03 min 01s
Efficacy in SCLC by line of therapy
ORR (95% CI) by line of therapy*: - 1L (n=13): 92.3% (64.0-99.8)
2L+ SCLC
- 2L (n=21): 76.2% (52.8-91.8)
60
- 3L+ (n=21): 52.4% (29.8-74.3)
40
2L+ SCLC (n=58)*
4.5
6
4.5
Elfe-D (mg/kg)
20
20
30
30
Percentage change from
20
6
Pumitamig (mg/kg)
baseline (%)
0
-20
(n=15)
(n=15)
(n=14)
(n=14)
-40
CR
0
0
0
1 (7.1)
-60
PR
8 (53.3)
12 (80.0)
9 (64.3)
8(57.1)
-80
BOR, n (%)
SD
6 (40.0)
3 (20.0)
4 (28.6)
3 (21.4)
-100
PD
1 (6.7)
0
1 (7.1)
0
Prior 10
NE/NA
0
0
0
2 (14.3)
Prior DLL3-TCE
53.3
80.0
64.3
64.3
ORR, % (95% CI)
(26.6-78.7)
(51.9-95.7)
(35.1-87.2)
(35.1-87.2)
ORR (95% CI) prior IO (n=48): 60.4% (45.3-74.2)
93.3
100
92.9
85.7
DCR, % (95% CI)
(68.1-99.8)
(78.2-100)
(66.1-99.8)
(57.2-98.2)
ORR (95% CI) prior DLL3-TCE (n=8): 87.5% (47.4-99.7)
Encouraging ORR across lines of therapy including patients treated with the emerging standard of care
"Verification of information on specific line of therapy is ongoing in 16 patients (patients are included in the 2L+ subgroup but not yet assigned to 2L or 3L+). One patient had a dose group misassignment. Upon recategorization, ORR for elfe-D
4.5 mg/kg pumitamig 20 mg/kg was 58.5% (n=16) and for elfe-D 6 mg/kg pumitamig 20 mg/kg was 73.6% (n=14). All patients with 1L SCLC received 6 mg/kg elfe-D and 20 mg/kg pumitamig. One patient previously treated with 10 is not
included on the waterfall plot as they had no post-baseline target-lesion sum of diameters reported as of the data-cut-off due to a data-entry delay prior to baseline 76w. Data cut-off: July 1, 2026.
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
05 min 57s
Safety summary and TRAEs in the overall population (n=279)
No DLTs occurred during dose escalation
TRAEs occurring in >10% of patients
Overall
(Values in parentheses indicate the rate of Grade >3 events)
(N=279)
Nausea
40.9 (1.8)
Any
249 (89.2)
TEAEs, n (%)
Decreased appetite
22.9 (3.6)
Grade >3
90 (32.3)
Anemia
21.5 (1.4)
Any
230 (82.4)
Fatigue
19.4 (2.9)
TRAEs, n (%)
Grade >3
74 (26.5)
WBC decreased
18.6 (2.2)
Both drugs
11 (3.9)
Neutrophil count decreased
17.9 (3.9)
TRAEs leading to
Elte-D
13 (4.7)
discontinuation, n (%)
Vomiting
17.6 (1.1)
Grade 1/2
Pumitamig
17 (6.1)
Platelet count decreased
10.8 (1.4)
Grade >3
TRAEs leading to dose reduction of elte-D, n (%)
24 (8.6)
Hypertension
10.0 (3.2)
239 (85.7%) patients remain on treatment
0
20
40
60
80
100
Treatment-related proteinuria occurred in 17 (6.1%) patients
Patients (%)
ILD/pneumonitis was reported by the investigator in 8 (2.9%) patients
ILD was adjudicated as treatment-related in 5 patients; adjudication is ongoing in 3 patients
Deaths assessed by the investigator as possibly related to treatment were reported in 2 (0.7%) patients (cardiac failure and pulmonary hemorrhage)
Pumitamig + elte-D showed a manageable safety profile; TRAEs were mostly Grade 1-2 gastrointestinal or hematological events
Median duration of follow-up 2.4 months TRAEs are related to either eite and/or purnitamig. Neither death was considered treatment-related by the sponsor after comprehensive review; contributory factors included infection/ARDS in one
patient (cardiac failure, SCLC) and invasive vascular tumor progression/centrally cavitating tumor due to evolution of the disease in the other (pulmonary hemorrhage; squamous NSCLC who received 7 treatment cycles without hemoptysis).
Data July 2026.
7
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
A striking early signal from #WCLC26
Pumitamig plus elfetabart drozuntecan achieved a 70.4% response rate and 93.0% disease control in advanced SCLC
Promising but based on small cohorts and only 3.2 months of follow up
#SCLC #LungCancer #ADC #Immunotherapy https://t.co/aCuutr2E9A
1.4K impressions2 likes2 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026 PHASE 1b/2
SMALL
A NEW DUAL ATTACK
CELL LUNG
CANCER
IN SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER
BIGGER
POSSIBILITIES
Pumitamig plus elfetabart drozuntecan
AHEAD
FIRST PD-L1 X VEGF-A BISPECIFIC PLUS ADC DATA IN LUNG CANCER
PATIENT GROUP
MECHANISM OF ACTION
PUMITAMIG
ELFETABART DROZUNTECAN
PD-L1 x VEGF-A bispecific
B7-H3 directed ADC
Delivers
Binds
Binds
Unresectable advanced
PD-L1
+
cytotoxic
VEGF-A
Binds
or metastatic SCLC
payload
B7H3
ECOG 0 to 1
Across treatment lines
X
T cell
Inhibits
Regardless of PD L1
reactivation
tumor angiogenesis
Tumor cell death
N 71
efficacy evaluable
Immune reactivation plus targeted payload delivery
MAIN RESULTS
RESPONSE BY TREATMENT LINE
OBJECTIVE RESPONSE RATE
DISEASE CONTROL RATE
First line
92.3%
N 13
70.4%
93.0%
Second line
76.2%
N 21
Third line
95% CI 84.3 to 97.7
52.4%
N 21
95% CI 58.4 to 80.7
or later
!
SAFETY
Grade 3 or higher
treatment related AEs
ILD or pneumonitis
2 possibly treatment
Safety population N 279
3.2%
related deaths
26.5%
EXPERT INTERPRETATION
High activity
Response does not yet
Small cohorts no randomized
across treatment lines
prove durability or survival
control median follow up 3.2 months
STRONG EARLY SIGNAL NOT YET A STANDARD
SCIENCE
FOR A
BRIGHTER
Source WCLC 2026 BNT324-01 NCT06892548 Abstract OA14.02
drozdogan.com
TOMORROW
NNeal Asher@nealasher
Pumitamig plus elfetabart drozuntecan shows encouraging early activity in small cell lung cancer https://t.co/OJ4KrAyK5m
336 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
IInternational Lung Cancer Summit@LungSummit
WCLC 2026 opened in Seoul on Saturday 12 September. Six studies came out of the press briefing, three of them in small cell lung cancer.
Two asked how the DLL3 bispecific is given rather than whether it works. DeLLphi-309 randomised 252 patients across three schedules: response rates of 40% at 10 mg every two weeks, 31% at 20 mg every three weeks and 27% at 30 mg every four weeks, with median ove
955 impressions6 likes2 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
ADCs . IMMUNOTHERAPIES
CONGRESS UPDATE
WCLC 2026, DAY 1: EXTENDED-
INTERVAL AND SUBCUTANEOUS
DOSING IN SCLC, AND A 70%
EARLY RESPONSE
16MDT-BRIDGEView full trial page →22.6K impressions22.3K primary · 322 preview127 engagements14 posts · 14 voices▾
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. @MartinReck2 presents MDT-Bridge at #WCLC26: pts with resectable or borderline resectable NSCLC received 1-2 cycles of durvalumab + chemotherapy then surgery if resectable or CRT if not, followed by adjuvant/consolidation durvalumab. Of those with borderline resectable NSCLC, 62% underwent resection (97% R0). Overall resection rate 75% and 27% pCR rate.
7.8K impressions26 likes18 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
I
F
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
KALC
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
07 min 29s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
MDT-BRIDGE study design
Global, non-randomized, phase 2 study
Adjuvant/
Neoadjuvant period A
Neoadjuvant period B
consolidation period
Durvalumab +
MDT
Surgery
Baseline MDT
Resectable⁺
investigator's choice
Durvalumab +
reassessment
Durvalumab
resectability
of platinum-based CT
investigator's choice
Restaging/
monotherapy
assessment*
Q3W for 1-2 cycles
of platinum-based CT
optional
Q4W for 12 cycles
(resectable or
Q3W for 2 cycles
pathologic
borderline resectable)
confirmation
CRT
Unresectable
Key inclusion criteria and study requirements
Primary endpoint
Aged ≥18 years
Resection rate, defined as proportion of all patients (FAS) who underwent definitive surgery
Previously untreated
Secondary endpoints
Pathologically confirmed, resectable or borderline
Resection rate in patients deemed resectable/borderline resectable at baseline
resectable stage IIB-IIIB NSCLC (AJCC 8th edition¹)
Surgical outcomes in patients who underwent surgery
EGFR/ALK wild type (per local test)
ORR in patients deemed resectable/unresectable at MDT reassessment
WHO/ECOG PS 0-1
pCR and EFS in all patients (FAS) and patients deemed resectable at MDT reassessment
At least 1 target lesion not previously irradiated
PFS in patients deemed unresectable at MDT reassessment
Pre-operative RT not allowed
Safety
*MDT comprised a medical/pulmonary oncologist, thoracic surgeon, radiation oncologist, and pathologist at a minimum; resectable/borderline resectable status determined per MDT decision based on
baseline available assessments. Patients who were deemed eligible for surgery at MDT evaluation but then deemed unresectable/progressed locally at the pre-surgery assessments entered the unresectable
cohort. Five fractions/week for ~6 weeks (± 3 days) (total 60 Gy + 10%). Efficacy outcomes are reported, unless otherwise indicated, according to prespecified analysis populations except for pCR (assessed
per local pathology review), which was not prespecified for analysis in all patients. AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; FAS, full analysis set (i.e., all
patients who received at least one dose of study intervention); Gy, gray; ORR, objective response rate; PS, performance status; QXW, once every X weeks; RT, radiotherapy; WHO, World Health Organization.
1. Amin MB, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 8th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2017.
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 25s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Resection rates and outcomes (FAS)
The overall resection rate was 74.6% and most patients had R0 resection
100
Resection rate,
80
% (95% CI)*,⁺
60
40
20
74.6%
81.5%
62.0%
(66.7-81.6)
(72.1-88.9)
(47.2-75.3)
0
All patients
Resectable
Borderline resectable
(N=142)
at baseline (n=92)
at baseline (n=50)
2.8%
0.9%
4.0%
3.2%
(0.6-8.0) (0.0-5.1)
(0.8-11.2)
0%
(0.1-16.7)
(0.0-4.8)
0%
Resection
(0.0-11.2)
outcomes,
% (95% CI)*
96.2%
96.0%
96.8%
(90.6-99.0)
(88.8-99.2)
(83.3-99.9)
R0
R1
R2
R0
R1
R2
R0
R1
R2
Resected cohort: all patients
Resected cohort: resectable at
Resected cohort: borderline
(n=106)
baseline (n=75)
resectable at baseline (n=31)
DCO, 12 January 2026. *Defined as the proportion of patients who started resection. Cls calculated by Clopper-Pearson exact method. Percentages based on the number of patients who started
resection surgery as the denominator. CI, confidence interval.
9
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
03 min 37s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
pCR
EFS by pCR
27.3% of all patients resectable at MDT
12-month EFS was higher in patients with vs
reassessment had pCR, including 31.3%
without pCR (100% VS 89.8%)
who were resectable at baseline
Resectable at
pCR
No pCR
MDT reassessment
No. events / no. patients (%)
0/33 (0)
9/73 (12.3)
12-month EFS, % (95% CI)*
100.0 (100.0-100.0)
89.8 (79.6-95.0)
30
1.00
FAS
0.75
pCR rate, % (95% CI)*
20
Probability of EFS
0.50
10
0.25
23.2%
31.3%
18.4%
27.3%
0.00
(16.6-31.1)
(21.6-42.4)
(7.7-34.3)
(19.6-36.1)
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
0
All patients
Resectable
Borderline
Resectable
No. at risk:
Time from first dose (months)
(N=142)
at baseline
resectable at
cohort
pCR 33
33
30
19
10
0
0
0
(n=83)
baseline
(n=121)
No pCR 73
73
64
50
30
5
3
0
(n=38)
DCO, 12 January 2026. *95% Cls calculated by Clopper-Pearson exact method. Median follow-up (range) in censored patients with VS without pCR: 10.4 (5.3-14.1) VS 11.4 (4.6-20.2) months.
13
***
DDrew Moghanaki@DrewMoghanaki
Does anyone know what happened to the 11 patients who were candidates for a PACIFIC treatment regimen, recruited to participate in the MDT-BRIDGE study, and never got any local therapy?
Did 22% (11/50) of the borderline resectable cohort really get derailed by chemoIO?
@DoctorJSpicer @StephenVLiu #WCLC26
5.3K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
Changes in resectability assessments and local treatment (FAS)
After 2 cycles of neoadjuvant durvalumab + CT, most patients, including those who were borderline
resectable at baseline, were deemed resectable at MDT reassessment
MDT reassessment,
Adjuvant or consolidation
Baseline MDT
Local Tx
durvalumab
post cycle 2*
assessment
Resected
94 Adjuvant Tx
82
Resectable
92
120
106
Yi
106+
12
38
12 No adjuvant Tx
7
Borderline
CRT
50
23
23 Consolidation Tx
resectable
25
7
9
2
2 No consolidation Tx
18
11
No local Tx
Unresectable
1
20
2
11
cCRT: 21
sCRT: 4
1
2
Not reassessed
2
UUğur Özkerim@UOzkerim
#WCLC26 | MDT-BRIDGE
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + platinum-based chemotherapy in resectable/borderline resectable stage IIB–IIIB NSCLC:
• Resection rate: 74.6%
• pCR: 27.3%
• 12-month EFS: 90.1% in the resectable cohort
• 92.3% of patients underwent either surgery or CRT after neoadjuvant treatment.
An interesting MDT-based approach integrating surgery and CRT according to reassessment
@OncoAlert @
2K impressions7 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
MDT-BRIDGE study design
Global, non-randomized, phase 2 study
Adjuvant/
Neoadjuvant period A
Neoadjuvant period B
consolidation period
Durvalumab +
MDT
Surgery
Baseline MDT
Durvalumab +
reassessment
Resectable
investigator's choice
Durvalumab
resectability
of platinum-based CT
investigator's choice
Restaging/
monotherapy
assessment*
Q3W for 1-2 cycles
of platinum-based CT
optional
Q4W for 12 cycles
(resectable or
Q3W for 2 cycles
pathologic
borderline resectable)
confirmation
CRT
Unresectable
Key inclusion criteria and study requirements
Primary endpoint
Aged 2 18 years
Resection rate, defined as proportion of all patients (FAS) who underwent definitive surgery
Previously untreated
Secondary endpoints
Pathologically confirmed, resectable or borderline
Resection rate in patients deemed resectable/borderline resectable at baseline
resectable stage IIB-IIIB NSCLC (AJCC 8th edition1)
Surgical outcomes in patients who underwent surgery
EGFRIALK wild type (per local test)
ORR in patients deemed resectable/unresectable at MDT reassessment
WHO/ECOG PS 0-1
pCR and EFS in all patients (FAS) and patients deemed resectable at MDT reassessment
At least 1 target lesion not previously irradiated
PFS in patients deemed unresectable at MDT reassessment
Pre-operative RT not allowed
Safety
*MDT comprised a medical/pulmonary oncologist, thoracic surgeon, radiation oncologist, and pathologist at a minimum; resectable/borderline resectable status determined per MDT decision based on
baseline available assessments. Patients who were deemed eligible for surgery at MDT evaluation but then deemed unresectable/progressed locally at the pre-surgery assessments entered the unresectable
cohort. Five fractions/week for ~6 weeks (* 3 days) (total 60 Gy * 10%). Efficacy outcomes are reported, unless otherwise indicated, according to prespecified analysis populations except for pCR (assessed
per local pathology review), which was not prespecified for analysis in all patients. AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; FAS, full analysis set (i.e., all
patients who received at least one dose of study intervention); Gy, gray; ORR, objective response rate; PS, performance status; QXW, once every X weeks; RT, radiotherapy; WHO, World Health Organization.
1. Amin MB, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 8th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2017.
[Slide 2]
EFS and PFS in subgroups of interest
EFS in patients resectable at MDT
PFS in patients unresectable at MDT
reassessment and in resected patients
reassessment and in CRT-treated patients
Resectable
Resected
Unresectable
CRT-treated
No. events / no. patients (%)
15/121 (12.4)
9/106 (8.5)
No. events / no. patients (%)
5/21 (23.8)
6/25 (24.0)
12-month EFS, % (95% CI)*
90.1 (82.8-94.4)
92.9 (85.5-96.6)
12-month PFS, % (95% CI)**
75.1 (45.2-90.2)
85.0 (59.8-95.0)
1.00
1.00
Probability of EFS
0.75
0.75
0.50
0.25
Probability of PFS
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.00
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
No. at risk:
Time from first dose (months)
No. at risk:
Time from first dose (months)
Resectable 121
117
101
75
43
5
3
0
Unresectable 21
18
12
8
5
1
0
Resected 106
106
94
69
40
5
3
0
CRT-treated 25
22
17
12
8
1
0
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
MDT-BRIDGE: Treat First. Decide Surgery Later?
A simple but interesting concept in locally advanced NSCLC:
• Start with chemo-immunotherapy rather than locking in the local treatment upfront.
• Then reassess in the MDT.
• If resectable → surgery.
• If not resectable → definitive chemoradiotherapy.
• Continue durvalumab after either pathway.
The idea:
Treat → Reassess → Choose the best curative-
1.7K impressions5 likes5 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
MDT-BRIDGE
TREAT FIRST. DECIDE SURGERY LATER?
MV Onco
142 PATIENTS
STAGE IIB-IIIB NSCLC
EGFR / ALK WT
92 resectable
50 borderline resectable
Phase II I non-randomized
2 CYCLES
DURVALUMAB
+
CHEMOTHERAPY
MDT
REASSESSMENT
121
21
RESECTABLE
UNRESECTABLE
1-2 MORE CYCLES
DURVALUMAB + CHEMO
DEFINITIVE
SURGERY
CRT
ADJUVANT
CONSOLIDATION
DURVALUMAB
DURVALUMAB
TREAT FIRST
MDT DECIDES
SURGERY OR CRT
MDT-BRIDGE I WCLC 2026 I OA04.02 I Reck M et al.
[Slide 2]
MDT-BRIDGE
DID THE STRATEGY WORK?
MV Onco
1
DID PATIENTS REACH DEFINITIVE TREATMENT?
92.3%
received
SURGERY OR CRT
106
74.6%
96.2%
underwent surgery
of all patients
RO RESECTION
among those starting resection
2
WHAT HAPPENED AFTER MDT?
RESECTABLE AT MDT
UNRESECTABLE AT MDT
n = 121
n = 21
27.3%
pCR
75.1%
90.1%
12-MONTH PFS
12-MONTH EFS
3
WHAT ABOUT THE
50 BORDERLINE PATIENTS?
38/50
31/50
BECAME RESECTABLE
UNDERWENT RESECTION
AT MDT
TAKE-HOME
LOCAL TREATMENT
DIDN'T HAVE TO BE
LOCKED IN UPFRONT.
Induction chemo-10
MDT reassessment
surgery or definitive CRT
Promising Phase II strategy -
not a randomized surgery-VS-CRT comparison.
MDT-BRIDGE I WCLC 2026
I
OA04.02 I Reck M et al.
YYago Garitaonaindía@YGaritaonaindia
Compelling results from MDT-BRIDGE #WCLC26
Two personal takeaways/ideas
Stop calling full resectability upfront: assess it after neoadjuvant chemo-IO, when the tumour has already shown you what it does.
➕ the value is in the sequence, not just the drug. Prime with IO, let the immune response settle, then irradiate. Personal opinion: it will hold in upfront unresectable disease too (APOLO).
👇👇👇
1.1K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
DDiego A. Díaz-García@diegoadiazg
🫁 MDT-BRIDGE: a perioperative-to-definitive strategy for stage IIB-IIIB NSCLC. @MartinReck2
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemotherapy followed by surgery or CRT achieved:
• Resection rate: 74.6%
• R0 resection: 96.2%
• pCR: 27.3%
• 12-month EFS: 90.1% in resectable patients
• 12-month PFS: 75.1% in patients becoming unresectable
Overall, 92.3% received surgery or CRT, supporting multidisciplinary r
907 impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
MDT-BRIDGE study design
Global, non-randomized, phase 2 study
Adjuvant/
Neoadjuvant period A
Neoadjuvant period B
consolidation period
Durvalumab +
MDT
Surgery
Baseline MDT
Resectable
investigator's choice
Durvalumab +
reassessment
Durvalumab
resectability
of platinum-based CT
investigator's choice
Restaging/
monotherapy
assessment*
of platinum-based CT
optional
Q3W for 1-2 cycles
Q4W for 12 cycles
(resectable or
borderline resectable)
Q3W for 2 cycles
pathologic
confirmation
CRT+
Unresectable
Key inclusion criteria and study requirements
Primary endpoint
Aged >18 years
Resection rate, defined as proportion of all patients (FAS) who underwent definitive surgery
Previously untreated
Secondary endpoints
Pathologically confirmed, resectable or borderline
Resection rate in patients deemed resectable/borderline resectable at baseline
resectable stage IIB-IIIB NSCLC (AJCC 8th edition1)
Surgical outcomes in patients who underwent surgery
EGFRIALK wild type (per local test)
ORR in patients deemed resectable/unresectable at MDT reassessment
WHO/ECOG PS 0-1
pCR and EFS in all patients (FAS) and patients deemed resectable at MDT reassessment
At least 1 target lesion not previously irradiated
PFS in patients deemed unresectable at MDT reassessment
Pre-operative RT not allowed
Safety
*MDT comprised a medical/pulmonary oncologist, thoracic surgeon, radiation oncologist, and pathologist at a minimum; resectable/borderline resectable status determined per MDT decision based on
baseline available assessments, Patients who were deemed eligible for surgery at MDT evaluation but then deemed unresectable/progressed locally at the pre-surgery assessments entered the unresectable
cohort. Five fractions/week for weeks (* 3 days) (total 60 Gy 1 10%). Efficacy outcomes are reported, unless otherwise indicated, according to prespecified analysis populations except for pCR (assessed
per local pathology review), which was not prespecified for analysis in all patients. AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; FAS, full analysis set (i.e., all
patients who received at least one dose of study intervention): Gy, gray; ORR, objective response rate: PS, performance status: QXW, once every X weeks: RT, radiotherapy: WHO, World Health Organization.
Amin MB, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 8th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2017.
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
06 min 05
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Changes in resectability assessments and local treatment (FAS)
After 2 cycles of neoadjuvant durvalumab + CT, most patients, including those who were borderline
resectable at baseline, were deemed resectable at MDT reassessment
MDT reassessment,
Adjuvant or consolidation
Baseline MDT
Local Tx
durvalumab
post cycle 2*
assessment
Resected
94 Adjuvant Tx
92
82
Resectable
120
106
Y
106'
12
38
12 No adjuvant Tx
7
Borderline
CRT
50
23
23 Consolidation Tx
resectable
7
00
25
9
2
2 No consolidation Tx
18
11
No local Tx
Unresectable
1
20
2
11
cCRT: 21
sCRT: 4
1
2
Not reassessed
2
92.3% had either surgery or CRT after neoadjuvant durvalumab + CT
DCO, 12 January 2026. "Two patients discontinued and were not reassessed: one deemed resectable and one deemed borderline resectable at baseline. The patient who was resectable at baseline was
included in the 'Resectable' cohort and the patient who was borderline resectable at baseline was included in the Unresectable cohort, as prespecified in the statistical analysis plan. Two patients did not
complete surgical resection as intended due to the absence of primary tumor in the lung parenchyma; only lymph nodes were removed. c/sCRT, concurrent/sequential CRT; Tx, treatment.
ummaries of MDT cohorts and local treatment available via OR code,
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
05 min 31
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Resection rates and outcomes (FAS)
The overall resection rate was 74.6% and most patients had R0 resection
100
Resection rate,
% (95% CI)**
80
60
40
20
74.6%
81.5%
62.0%
(66.7-81.6)
(72.1-88.9)
(47.2-75.3)
0
All patients
Resectable
Borderline resectable
(N=142)
at baseline (n=92)
at baseline (n=50)
2.8%
0.9%
4.0%
3.2%
(0.6-8.0) (0.0-5.1)
(0.8-11.2)
0%
(0.1-16.7)
(0.0-4.8)
0%
Resection
(0.0-11.2)
outcomes,
% (95% CI)*
96.2%
96.0%
96.8%
(90.6-99.0)
(88.8-99.2)
(83.3-99.9)
. R0
. R1
# R2
R0 . R1 . R2
. RO . R1 . R2
Resected cohort: all patients
Resected cohort: resectable at
Resected cohort: borderline
(n=106)
baseline (n=75)
resectable at baseline (n=31)
DCO, 12 January 2026. *Defined as the proportion of patients who started resection. Cis calculated by Clopper-Pearson exact method. Percentages based on the number of patients who started
resection surgery as the denominator. CI, confidence interval.
9
****
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
03 min 20
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
pCR
EFS by pCR
27.3% of all patients resectable at MDT
12-month EFS was higher in patients with VS
reassessment had pCR, including 31.3%
without pCR (100% VS 89.8%)
who were resectable at baseline
Resectable at
pCR
No pCR
MDT reassessment
No. events / no. patients (%)
0/33 (0)
9/73 (12.3)
12-month EFS, % (95% CI)*
100.0 (100.0-100.0)
89.8 (79.6-95.0)
30
1.00-
FAS
0.75.
pCR rate, % (95% CI)*
20
Probability of EFS
0.50
10
0.25-
23.2%
31.3%
18.4%
27.3%
0.00
(16.6-31.1)
(21.6-42.4)
(7.7-34.3)
(19.6-36.1)
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
0
All patients
Resectable
Borderline
Resectable
No. at risk:
Time from first dose (months)
(N=142)
at baseline
resectable at
cohort
pCR 33
33
30
19
10
0
0
0
(n=83)
baseline
(n=121)
No pCR 73
73
64
50
30
5
3
0
(n=38)
DCO, 12 January 2026. *95% Cls calculated by Clopper-Pearson exact method. Median follow-up (range) in censored patients with vs without pCR: 10.4 (5.3-14.1 vs 11.4 (4.6-20.2) months.
13
BBhaarath PG@BhaarathP10039
@IASLC-WCLC 2026: Pre-Conf Top Abstracts
KEYNOTE-D46 | REZILIENT3 | ARTEMIS-008 | S1827 MAVERICK | PAPILLON | TAISHAN-302 | ADAURA | ARROS-1 | DESTINY-LUNG04 | MDT-BRIDGE | IMpower133 | SKYSCRAPER-02 | NAUTIKA1 | DeLLphi309 | IMpower030 | AMIGO-1 | LuCa-MERIT-1 | JS207 | GFH375 | QLC1101 | LB2102 | SYS6010 | HS-10370 | RC148 | YL201
#WCLC26 #WCLC2026 #Cancer #Oncology #LungCancer #NSCLC #SCLC #LCS
322 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
17HARMONi-6View full trial page →21.7K impressions14.4K primary · 7.3K preview14 engagements10 posts · 7 voices▾
AAdu@plainyogurt21
what is the bar $SMMT final PFS analysis.
Interesting Harmoni-2 results but Harmoni-3 diff game, Subgroup on NonSq and Low PD1.....
Harmoni 3 missed one interim, even with the most minimal alpha spend, probably needed HR < .65. What is the bar for the PFS to hit? (Harmoni 6 was PFS .6 -> OS .66)
Putting aside completely whatever science on the PD1 dependency, the competition from ADCs a
10.8K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall survival by PD-L1 expression level
OS benefit with ivonescimab was consistent in both PD-L1 High and PD-L1 Low expressors
PD-L1 High (TPS >50%)
PD-L1 Low (TPS 1-49%)
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
(n=83)
(n 85)
(n=115)
(n =115)
90
90
mOS
NR
23.2 mo
mos
28.5 mo
22.1 mo
10
#
70
63.2%
10
53.4%
60
60
54.1%
(%)50
50
os (74) OS(%)
50
49.7%
38.6%
46.8%
40
#
30
HR = 0.58 (95% CI 0.38 0.89)
30
HR = 0.85 (95% CI 0.61 - 1.18)
34.1%
31.3%
20
20
+
Censered
+
Centred
10
Ivenescimab
10
Pembrolizanab
Pentrolemal
0
I
0
2
I
6
$
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
12
0
1
-
6
$
10
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
12
Time (months)
Time(neaths)
Number disk
Subsidisk
I
tronescient 1)
"
"
"
"
53
"
11
5)
.
"
43
19
"
20
113
106
1
19
#
13
II
74
M
16
56
61
56
11
if
42
#
*
15
N
27
26
21
11
11
Personal
in
103
*
.
"
77
7)
#
51
"
%
.
4)
0
#
18
14
22
12
The subgroup analysis was descriptive and not formally powered.
11
Caicun Zhou I HARMONi-2
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall survival by histology
OS benefit with ivonescimab was consistent in both squamous and non-squamous histology
Squamous
Non-Squamous
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
100
Ivonescimab
Pembrolizumab
(n=90)
(n=91)
(n 108)
(n 109)
99
90
mOS
30.5 mo
19.3 mo
mos
33.6 mo
25.6 mo
#
#
70
70-
58.3%
60
60
57.5%
OS(%)
I
50
41.0%
48.2%
50
52.8%
-
40
40-
42.4%
38.3%
30
HR = 0.65 (95% CI 0.45 - 0.95)
30-
HR = 0.79 (95% CI 0.55 - 1.14)
26.9%
20
20
+
Censered
Censed
10
Presescinab
10-
Ironescinab
Pentrolization
0
0
0
2
6
10
12
14
16
=
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
#)
0
0
:
6
I
10
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
31
40
42
Time(months)
Time (nonths)
Numbership
Nutritisk
Insured 90
"
"
#
%
"
41
"
"
11
N
N
"
#
#
18
N
a
14
.
I
-
N
1
"
#
"
Internal #1
15
12
%
11
17
43
51
12
45
40
is
15
11
a
24
2)
#
"
,
-
102
15
1)
3
"
a
1)
N
16
11
et
"
a
41
"
2
11
The subgroup analysis was descriptive and not formally powered.
12
Caicun Zhou | HARMONi-2
[Slide 2]
100
78.9%
Ivonescimab
Tislelizumab
90
+ chemo
+ chemo
80
64.7%
(N=266)
(N=266)
70
72.2%
mOS, months
27.89
23.69
Overall Survival (%)
60
(95% CI)
(27.89, NE)
(20.11, NE)
50
48.6%
Stratified HR
0.66
40
(95% CI)
(0.50, 0.87)
30
p-value
0.0017
20
OS significance boundary: 0.0049
10
0
The median OS in the ivonescimab group would
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
have not been reached without the last single event
Months
No. at risk (censored)
Ivonescimab
266(0)
252(0)
238(0)
224(0)
202(8)
152(46)
119(73)
85(100)
49(135)
15(168)
0(182)
+Chemo
Tislelizumab
266(0)
257(0)
238(0)
211(0)
186(6)
142(36)
113(55)
80(77)
43(107)
12(136)
0(146)
+Chemo
Data cutoff date: Feb 27, 2026
Abbreviation: mOS, median overall survival; NE, not estimable; HR,
Median Follow-up: 21.36 months
ASCO 2026 Plenary Session
hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval
[Slide 3]
2026
2027
2H26
HARMONi-3
Final PFS data readout in 1L
Final PFS data readout in
Final os data readout in 1L
Timeline
squamous NSCLC (2H26)
1L non-squamous NSCLC
squamous NSCLC (2027)
(1H27)
Text
Physician's
sq PFS HR ≤ 0.70
Non-sq PFS HR ≤ 0.70
os HR ≤ 0.75
Expectation
Early trend of OS benefits
Early trend of os benefits
[Slide 4]
An interim analysis of progression-free survival was planned when approximately 208 (70%) progression-free
survival events as assessed by the IRRC were observed. To strictly control the overall type 1 error at a one-sided
alpha level of 0.025, we used a hierarchical testing procedure for the primary endpoint (progression-free survival)
and the key secondary endpoint (overall survival). Overall survival would only be tested if progression-free survival
was found to be significant. The Lan-DeMets spending function with O'Brien-Fleming boundary was used to control
the type 1 error for both endpoints at the interim and final analyses. In April, 2024, the protocol was amended to
adjust the sample size from 396 to 528 participants, taking into account the consideration of overall survival in the
sample size estimation. Correspondingly, the number of events needed for the interim analysis on the primary
endpoint increased from 186 to 208.
TTejas Patil@TejasPatilMD
2. HARMONi-2
⭐️HARMONi-6, presented @ASCO earlier this year showed an OS benefit favoring ivonesicimab, a PD1+VEGF bispecific, relative to pembrolizumab in squamous NSCLC
📖Previously published data showed a PFS advantage (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) favoring ivonesicimab. Though even in this study, there were some peculiar findings, like the remarkably poor PFS seen in the pembrolizumab arm for P
1.2K impressions4 likes1 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
A
B
Number of events/
Median PFS
Number of events/
Median PFS
number of patients
Months (95% CI)
number of patients Months (95% CI)
Ivonescimab
72/198
11-1 (7-3 to NE)
Ivonescimab
25/83
11-1 (9.7 to NE)
Pembrolizumab
112/200
5.8 (5.0 to 8.2)
Pembrolizumab
45/85
8.2 (5-5 to 9.8)
100
90
80
70
60
PFS (%)
50
40
30
20
Stratified hazard ratio (95% CI): 0.51 (0.38 to 0.69),
Unstratified hazard ratio (95% CI): 0.48 (0.29 to 0.79)
10
one-sided p: <0.0001
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Number at risk
(number censored)
Ivonescimab
198
189
175
156
148
128
99
68
59
38
11
83
77
73
66
64
61
45
34
31
23
8
7
(0)
(3)
(13)
(26)
(32)
(44)
(50)
(60)
(67)
(68)
(71)
(0)
(2)
(5)
(11)
(12)
(14)
(16)
(19)
(21)
(21)
(24)
(24)
Pembrolizumab
200
187
141
121
119
103
74
53
45
25
5
85
79
69
59
58
53
37
29
24
12
7
4
(0)
(9)
(52)
(69)
(70)
(81)
(95)
(101)
(102)
(106)
(112)
(0)
(5)
(15)
(22)
(23)
(27)
(37)
(38)
(39)
(43)
(45)
(45)
NNugget Research@nuggetresearch
I start with HARMONi-6. It's the closest trial to HARMONi-3: first-line, squamous, a PD-1 drug + chemo as control, OS as an endpoint.
With 532 patients in China, the HR was 0.66. An HR under 1 means fewer deaths on ivonescimab.
At 2 years, 64.7% vs 48.6% were still alive.
111 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-25
NNugget Research@nuggetresearch
What would change my number? It rests on two judgment calls. Here's how far each must move to drop the odds below 50%:
1. Less than ~60% of the HARMONi-6 effect carries over.
2. You start out believing ivonescimab adds nothing over a PD-1 drug (48.5%). https://t.co/g6T2TrZ4OB
101 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-25
[Slide 1]
What it takes to push my odds below 50%
Chance of winning on OS if PFS passes
50%
My base case
80.6%
If less of the HARMONi-6 effect carries over
90% carries over
74.7%
80% carries over
67.3%
~60% carries over
50.0%
If you start out more skeptical
Start at HR 0.82
70.2%
Start at HR 0.89
61.6%
Start at no benefit (1.0)
48.5%
NNugget Research@nuggetresearch
@Explainbiotech One thing to add, in HARMONi-2, OS HR was 0.65 in squamous but 0.79 in non-squamous, with the CI crossing 1. HARMONi-6 is all squamous and got 0.66. Squamous is where the drug looks strongest. Non-squamous is the bigger market and the harder test.
54 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-10-01
MMinhua Chu@chuminhua432
🇨🇳RemeGen & $ABBV 's PD-1/VEGF bispecific antibody RC148 (ABBV-1480) delivered an oral presentation at #WCLC2026 with first-line combo data in NSCLC (RC148-C002, NCT06883630).
RemeGen also presented a poster on the Phase 3 trial design for RC148 in first-line squamous NSCLC (RC148-C301, NCT07416474) on Sept 14.
📊 Phase II results (data cutoff March 22, 2026; 61 sq-NSCLC + 60 nsq-NSCLC
2.3K impressions3 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
Table 1. Clinical Efficacy Data.
Cohort 1 (sq-NSCLC)
Cohort 2 (nsq-NSCLC)
RC148 (10 mg/kg) +
RC148 (20 mg/kg) +
RC148 (10 mg/kg) +
RC148 (20 mg/kg) +
Carboplatin + Paclitaxel
Carboplatin + Paclitaxel
Carboplatin + Pemetrexed
Carboplatin + Pemetrexed
(N=30)
(N=31)
(N=30)
(N=30)
Median follow-up, months
8.7
9.1
27/30
22/28
22/29
11/28
ORR*, n/N (%; 95% CI)
(90.0; 73.5-97.9)
(78.6; 59.0-91.7)
(75.9; 56.5-89.7)
(39.3; 21.5-59.4)
DoR
Median (95% CI),
NR
7.2 (4.1-NR)
NR
NR
months
6-month DoR rate, %
66.5 (41.9-82.6) /8
64.6 (37.4-82.4) /9
80.2 (55.4, 92.1) /8
90.0 (47.3, 98.5) /8
(95% CI)/number at risk
9-month DoR rate, %
NR
46.0 (18.2, 70.1) /2
80.2 (55.4, 92.1) /3
90.0 (47.3, 98.5) /4
(95% CI)/number at risk
PFS
Median (95% CI),
10.8 (6.9-NR)
8.5 (5.4-NR)
NR
10.4 (6.7-NR)
months
6-month PFS rate, %
80.0 (58.4-91.1) /20
60.5 (38.7-76.6) /14
82.8 (63.4-92.4) /24
73.2 (51.8-86.2) /18
(95% CI)/number at risk
9-month PFS rate, %
67.8 (45.7-82.4) /6
42.5 (20.2-63.3) /4
68.0 (47.3-82.0) /7
57.4 (34.4-74.9) /5
(95% CI)/number at risk
OS
Median (95% CI),
NR
NR
NR
NR
months
9-month OS rate, %
87.0 (64.1-95.7) /12
79.0 (58.8-90.1) /10
90.0 (72.1-96.7) /15
85.4 (65.4-94.3) /15
(95% CI)/number at risk
Subgroup Analysis
PD-L1 TPS <1%
14/15
7/9
10/14
4/16
(ORR*, n/N (%; 95%
(93.3; 68.1-99.8)
(77.8; 40.0-97.2)
(71.4; 41.9-91.6)
(25.0; 7.3-52.4)
CI))
PD-L1 TPS ≥1%
12/14
13/16
10/13
7/11
(ORR*, n/N (%; 95%
(85.7; 57.2-98.2)
(81.3; 54.4-96.0)
(76.9; 46.2-95.0)
(63.6; 30.8-89.1)
CI))
*Analyzed in patients with ≥1 post-baseline tumor assessment. NR=not reached.
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
🫁 Meet the HARMONi family of ivonescimab trials.
First, the naming trick:
A → HARMONi → 2 → 6
There is no “1” — HARMONi itself is the trial name.
Four Phase III stories:
🔹 HARMONi-A → EGFRm, post-TKI
🔹 HARMONi → global EGFRm, post-3rd-gen TKI
🔹 HARMONi-2 → 1L PD-L1 ≥1%, IVO vs pembrolizumab
🔹 HARMONi-6 → 1L squamous, IVO + chemo vs tislelizumab + chemo
Different settings. Same central questi
3.9K impressions63 likes18 reposts2026-09-20
[Slide 1]
THE HARMONi FAMiLY
IVONESCiMAB
PD-1 X VEGF
MV Onco
4
PUBLISHED PHASE III TRIALS
A
HARMONi
2
6
NO "1" HERE!
"HARMONi" IS THE TRIAL NAME.
HARMONi-A
PFS
7.1 vs 4.8 mo
EGFRm NSCLC
HR 0.46
IVO + CHEMO
POST-TKI
vs
OS
CHEMO
16.8 vs 14.1 mo
CHINA
EGFR RESISTANT
HR 0.74
HARMONi
PFS
6.8 vs 4.4 mo
EGFRm NSCLC
IVO + CHEMO
HR 0.52
POST-3rd GEN TKI
vs
os
CHEMO
16.8 vs 14.0 mo
GLOBAL
EGFR RESISTANT
HR 0.79
PRIMARY OS ANALYSIS
NOT SIGNIFICANT
HARMONi-2
PFS
11.1 vs 5.8 mo
1L NSCLC
IVO
HR 0.51
PD-L1 ≥1%
vs
EGFR / ALK -
OS
PEMBRO
30.8 vs 22.6 To
PD-1 x VEGF
NO CHEMO
vs PD-1 ALONE
HR 0.73
HARMONi-6
PFS
11.1 vs 6.9 mo
1L
IVO + CHEMO
HR 0.60
SQUAMOUS NSCLC
ANY PD-L1
vs
OS
EGFR / ALK EXCLUDED
TISLELIZUMAB
27.9 vs 23.7 To
SQUAMOUS
+ CHEMO
HR 0.66
+ CHEMO
A
HARMONi
2
6
REMEMBER: NO "1"
JJoshua Reuss@Joshua_Reuss
Dr. @jennifermarksmd presents updates in adv NSCLC at Yellowstone 2026 Best of @ASCO including HARMONi-6, WU-KONG28 and OptiTROP-Lung05. Will be impt to see how these agents perform in global studies and in case of sunvo, would just like ACCESS to drug! Hopefully coming soon!! https://t.co/BtDvg1flYb
1.3K impressions10 likes0 reposts2026-10-03
[Slide 1]
WYOMING
BEST OF ASCO
ISCO
MONTANA
STATE DGY
can
SOS
SOCIETY
OFFICIALLY LICENSED
YELLOWSTONE 2026
Best of ASCO
KIIX
[Slide 2]
Concerns with VEGF Blockade in Squamous NSCLC
2004
2006
2014
NSCLC using
Bevacizumab
Ramucirumab was
Bevacizumab
approved for non-
approved in
excluded squamous
squamous NSCLC in
combination with
histology due to life-
combination with
docetaxel for 2L
threatening risk of
carboplatin/paclitaxel
NSCLC
bleeding
Johnson, JCO 2004; Sandler, NEJM 2006; Garon, Lancet 2014; Brahmer, ASCO 2026
MONTANA
STATE ONCOLOGY SOCIETY
[Slide 3]
TAKEAWAYS: WU-KONG28
Positive randomized phase 3 of an oral agent in EGFRex20ins NSCLC:
mPFS 10.3 VS 7.5 months (HR 0.65), ORR 58.9% VS 31.1%, DoR 11.2 VS 7.1 months
PFS2 21.7 VS 15.5 months (HR 0.70) despite 91% in chemo arm crossing over to sunvozertinib
Comparator is no longer our 1L Standard of care:
Control arm was platinum doublet alone; SOC is amivantamab + carboplatin/pemetrexed (PAPILLON)
Benefit not uniform: Asian HR 0.56 (0.41-0.77) versus non-Asian HR 0.93 (0.58-1.48), n=120; (Underpowered)
No real signal in brain metastases: n=41, HR 0.96 (0.44-2.08) and only 12.9% of enrollees had baseline CNS
disease
Dose here is 300 mg (not FDA accelerated approval dose of 200mg)
Toxicities: Diarrhea 84% (13.5% grade ≥3), CPK elevation 55% (20.2% grade >3), rash 52%, paronychia 49%,
and 40.5% requiring dose reduction
Heymach, ASCO 2026; Zhou, NEJM 2023;Yang, JCO 2025
MONTANA
STATE ONCOLOGY SOCIETY
[Slide 4]
TAKEAWAYS: OptiTROP-Lung05
First Phase 3 to show benefit of ADC + ICI in 1L NSCLC:
PFS HR 0.35 (0.26-0.47), ORR 70.2% VS 42.0%, os trend is encouraging
Benefit is largest where the control is weakest:
TPS 1-49%: HR 0.28, with pembrolizumab monotherapy mPFS of 4.3 months
TPS >50%: HR 0.47, with pembrolizumab mPFS of 9.5 months
A responsive population overall: Pembrolizumab monotherapy produced a 60.5% ORR in TPS ≥50%; higher
than in KEYNOTE-024
Sixty percent had TPS 1-49%: pembrolizumab monotherapy is not our standard here
Open-label, single-country, PFS-primary. All sites in China.
Toxicity is not trivial; Watch for pneumonitis with combination: 12.5% versus 7.4% all-grade (2.9% VS 1.0%
grade >3)
Zhou, ASCO 2026; Reck, NEJM 2016
*
MONTANA
STATE ONCOLOGY SOCIETY
JJennifer A. Marks, MD@jennifermarksmd
Grateful for the opportunity to present HARMONi-6, WU-KONG28, and OptiTROP-Lung05 at #Yellowstone2026 Best of @ASCO. Beautiful views and #mini @LombardiCancer reunion with @Joshua_Reuss. #lcsm #nsclc #jacksonhole Thanks again #MSOS #ISCO #WSOS ❤️ https://t.co/8Y3k7YcSNv
1.2K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-10-03
[Slide 1]
ST OF ASCO
WYOMING
ISCO
MONTANA
STATE
BLLY LICENSED
PRODUCT
WSOS
ONCOLOGY
SOCIETY
ELLOWSTONE 2026
est of ASCO
[Slide 2]
small cell,
racic cancers
E. Reuss, MD
sor of Medicine
town University
MONTANA
ONCOLOGY SOCIETY
18WU-KONG28View full trial page →19.1K impressions2.8K primary · 16.4K preview17 engagements11 posts · 11 voices▾
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🔥Greatt Summary and Discussion on EGFR Ex20ins
⁉️PAPILON vs. WU KONG 28 vs. REZILIENT 3
🎙️Dr. Lyudmila Bazhenova
#WCLC26 @IASLC @OncoAlert @Exon20Group https://t.co/AikLXBxSFp
1.9K impressions8 likes4 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
ASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
What should guide our first line decision?
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT3
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
EFFICACY & TOXICITY
PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
PATIENT PRIORITIES
WHAT COMES NEXT?
Depth and duration of benefit
IV vs oral therapy
CNS metastases
Sequential efficacy
Treatment burden
Quality of life
EGFR exon 20ins subtype
Resistance mechanisms
Adverse events
preferences
7
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III 1L randomized trials
PAPILLON1,2
WU KONG 28³
REZILIENT 34\
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
Study design
PD + Amivantamab
Sunvozertinb
PD + Zipalertinib
308
76%
90%
62%
324
260
PD
PD
PD
mFU month
48.6
24
10.9
CNS mets
23%
12%
31%
CNS
Treated
Treated
Treated or asymptomatic ≤ 2cm
eligibility
EGFR ex 20
Near Loop 86%
Near loop 68%
Not reported
ins in the
Far Loop 9%
Far loop 25%
experimental
c helix 4%
c helix 1.8%
arm
Unknown 4.9%
'Zhou et al NEJM 2023; 2 Kim et al WCLC 2026; 3 Zhou et al NEJM 2026; 4 Tan et al WCLC 2026
8
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III 1L randomized trials
Platinum doublet
PAPILLON
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
Diarrhea (14%),
Neutropenia ( 34%),
Anemia (48.6%),
Most common
CK increased (20.9)
Paronychia ( 10%),
neutropenia (33.6),
Anemia (9.2%),
toxicity ( Gr3)
anemia (13%),
thrombocytopenia (30%)
rash ( 0.6%)
infusion related reaction ( 1%)
rash (10.7%)
paronychia (3.7%)
GR3 AE %
75
75
81
% dose reduction*
36
41
44
% dose
11
12
17
discontinuation*
PAPILLON: 3
AE leading to
WU KONG 28: 1.3
5
4.3
9.5
death %
REZILIENT 3: 2.9
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit
interpretation.
* Targeted therapy
10
[Slide 4]
ALL
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Do subgroup analyses help us choose first-line therapy?
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT3
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
CNS mets
CNS mets
HR 0.63 (0.38-1.06)
HR 0.96 (0.44-2.08)
CNS mets
HR 0.38 (0.21-0.67)
No CNS mets
No CNS mets
HR 0.33 (0.23-0.46)
HR 0.62 (0.47-0.83)
No CNS mets
HR 0.62 (0.38-0.99)
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
Near loop
HR 0.40 (0.28-0.58)
Near loop
HR 0.59 (0.43-0.82)
Near loop
Not reported
Far loop
HR 0.19 (0.06-0.69)
Far loop
HR 0.83 (0.49-1.38)
Far loop
Not reported
CNS metastases and exon 20 insertion location are potential differentiators but subgroup data remain exploratory
Zhou et al. NEJM 2023; Goldman et al. WCLC 2024; Zhou et al. NEJM 2026, Tan et al. WCLC 2026
OOncLive.com@OncLive
📢 A new contender in first line setting for mEGFR exon 20 insertions- Zipalertinib plus chemotherapy 📢. 31% with brain mets. Improvement in PFS over chemotherapy but significant cytopenias, more deaths(almost double rate of death seen in PAPILLON, WU-KONG28). GCSF likely needs to be included in this regimen. Presented by @danieltanmd . #WCLC26 @FionnualaCrowle
868 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: Safety Summary
Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
(n=140), n (%)
(n=136), n (%)
Treatment-Related Adverse Events
138 (98.6)
120 (88.2)
Grade >3 treatment-related adverse events
113 (80.7)
55 (40.4)
Serious Adverse Events
71 (50.7)
45 (33.1)
Treatment-related serious adverse events
53 (37.9)
17 (12.5)
Zipalertinib
Pemetrexed
Carbo/ cisplatin
Pemetrexed
Carbo/ cisplatin
AE Leading to Treatment Interruption
116 (82.9)
104 (74.3)
70 (50)
60 (44.1)
40 (29.4)
AE Leading to Dose Reductions
61 (43.6)
68 (48.6)
46 (32.9)
29 (21.3)
21 (15.4)
AE Leading to Drug Discontinuation*
24 (17.1)
44 (31.4)
22 (15.7)
16 (11.8)
7 (5.1)
Adverse Events With Outcome of Death
13 (9.3)
4(2.9)
TRAE with outcome of death
3 (2.1)
0
Sepsis/septic shock
3 (2.1)
0
Chemotherapy Administration
Platinum choice: Carboplatin/cisplatin
138/4°
123/14°
Pemetrexed number of cycles (median, range)
7 (1-35)
8 (1-36)
"Refers to the regimen where a component was the primary reason for treatment discontinuation.
Death events were: Z+C: sepsis (3), pneumonia (1), respiratory tract infection (1), septic shock (1), acute respiratory failure (1), dyspnea (1), hemoptysis (1), respiratory failure (1), death (1).
sudden death (1), diabetic ketoacidosis (1). C: sepsis (1), pneumonia (1), acute respiratory failure (1), cerebrovascular accident (1).
Reflects some patients received both agents.
AE, adverse event; C, chemotherapy; Carbo, carboplatin; TRAE, treatment-related adverse event; Z+C, zipalertinib chemotherapy.
10
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: BICR PFS by Subgroups
Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
Subgroup
Event n/N (%)
Event n/N (%)
Hazard Ratio
HR (95% CI)
Baseline ECOG PS
0
18/58 (31.0)
24/56 (42.9)
0.56 (0.30, 1.04)
1
32/82 (39.0)
48/83 (57.8)
0.54 (0.34, 0.85)
Brain Metastases
Yes
21/44 (47.7)
30/44 (68.2)
0.38 (0.21, 0.67)
No
29/96 (30.2)
42/95 (44.2)
0.62 (0.38, 0.99)
Region
Asia
26/56 (46.4)
29/56 (51.8)
0.82 (0.48, 1.40)
ROW
24/84 (28.6)
43/83 (51.8)
0.40 (0.24, 0.66)
Sex
Male
17/48 (35.4)
29/51 (56.9)
0.39 (0.21, 0.73)
Female
33/92 (35.9)
43/88 (48.9)
0.63 (0.40, 1.00)
Age
<65
20/63 (31.7)
42/71 (59.2)
0.38 (0.22, 0.65)
>65
30/77 (39.0)
30/68 (44.1)
0.78 (0.47, 1.30)
Smoking History
Yes
21/57 (36.8)
30/54 (55.6)
0.47 (0.27, 0.82)
No
29/83 (34.9)
42/85 (49.4)
0.60 (0.37, 0.96)
0
0.5
1
1.5
Favors Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy
Favors Chemotherapy
CI, confidence interval; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; HR, hazard ratio; ROW, rest of world.
7
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: Primary Endpoint PFS by BICR
Total
Events
Censored
Median 95% CI
100
Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy:
140
50
90
14.5 months (12.9, 21.4)
90
Chemotherapy:
139
72
67
8.5 months (7.0, 10.9)
80
Hazard Ratio:
0.50 (95% CI 0.34, 0.73)
P=0.00015
70
Probability of PFS
60
50
40
30
20
+
Censor Z+C (64.3%)
10
Censor C (48.2%)
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
Time since randomization (months)
Number at risk
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
140
109
81
59
40
22
7
4
0
Chemotherapy
139
102
73
36
20
14
6
3
1
0
BICR, blinded independent central review; C, chemotherapy; CI, confidence interval; NE, not estimable; PFS, progression-free survival; Z+C, zipalertinib + chemotherapy.
6
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
REZILIENT 3: Overall Survival
Total
Events
Censored
Median 95% CI
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy:
140
24
116
NE (NE, NE)
100
Chemotherapy:
139
31
108
NE (18.4, NE)
90
Hazard Ratio: 0.72 (95% CI, 0.42-1.23)
P=0.11082
80
Overall survival probability (%)
70
60
50
40
30
64.2 % crossover to zipalertinib®
+
Censor Z+C
20
Median follow-up 10.9 months
Censor C
10
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
Time since randomization (months)
Number at risk
Zipalertinib + Chemotherapy
140
127
98
79
56
38
19
8
3
0
Chemotherapy
139
126
97
67
47
31
22
11
4
0
Based on 53 patients with progressive disease, of whom 34 crossed over.
c, chemotherapy; NE, not estimable; Z+C, zipalertinib + chemotherapy.
9
UUğur Özkerim@UOzkerim
Excellent discussion of the evolving 1L landscape for EGFR exon20ins NSCLC at #WCLC26. @LudaBazhenovaMD
A thoughtful comparison of PAPILLON, WU-KONG 28 and REZILIENT3, highlighting that treatment choice goes beyond efficacy alone—CNS disease, exon20ins subtype, toxicity, treatment burden, patient preference and subsequent therapy all matter.
Importantly, cross-trial comparisons and subgroup ana
6.2K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
What should guide our first line decision?
PAPILLON
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
WU-KONG 28
Sunvozertinib
REZILIENT3
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
EFFICACY & TOXICITY
PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
PATIENT PRIORITIES
WHAT COMES NEXT?
Depth and duration of benefit
CNS metastases
IV VS oral therapy
Treatment burden
EGFR exon 20ins subtype
Quality of life
Sequential efficacy
Adverse events
preferences
Resistance mechanisms
[Slide 2]
along
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Do subgroup analyses help us choose first-line therapy?
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT3
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
CNS mets
CNS mets
HR 0.63 (0.38-1.06)
HR 0.96 (0.44-2.08)
CNS mets
HR 0.38 (0.21-0.67)
No CNS mets
HR 0.33 (0.23-0.46)
HR 0.62 (0.47-0.83)
No CNS mets
No CNS mets
HR 0.62 (0.38-0.99)
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
Near loop
HR 0.40 (0.28-0.58)
Near loop
HR 0.59 (0.43-0.82)
Near loop
Not reported
Far loop
HR 0.19 (0.06-0.69)
Far loop
HR 0.83 (0.49-1.38)
Far loop
Not reported
CNS metastases and exon 20 insertion location are potential differentiators but subgroup data remain exploratory
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III randomized 1L trials
PAPILLON
Platinum doublet
Amivantamab
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
+
sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib +
chemotherapy
chemotherapy
PAPILLON: 47
ORR%
WU KONG 28: 31.1
73
(BIRC)
59
65
REZILIENT 3: 40
PAPILLON: 6.7
11.4
mPFS m
10.3
14.5
WU KONG 28: 7.5
0.40; 0.30 -0.53; P<0.001
HR (CI, p)
0.65; 0.50 -0.85; <0.001
0.5; 0.34-0.73; p=0.00015
REZILIENT 38.5
mOS, m
PAPILLON: 27.9 (24.0-32.4)
34.3 (27.0-40.8)
29.8 (21.8-NE)
NR
HR (Cl,p)
WU KONG 28: 28.8 (27.0-NE)
HR, 0.87 (0.66-1.14);
0.99 (0.7-1.40)
0.72 (0.42-1.23)
REZILIENT 3: NR
P=0.307
p 0.49 39% maturity
P=0.11082
PAPILLON: 68
18m-OS
WU KONG 28: 67
74
65.5
Not reported
REZILIENT 3: NR
PAPILLON: 54
24m-OS
WU KONG 28: 56.2
64
57.4
Not reported
REZILIENT 3: NR
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit interpretation.
9
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III 1L randomized trials
Platinum doublet
PAPILLON
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
Neutropenia (34%),
Diarrhea (14%),
Anemia (48.6%),
Most common
Paronychia (10%),
CK increased (20.9)
toxicity (Gr3)
anemia (13%),
Anemia (9.2%),
neutropenia (33.6),
infusion related reaction (1%)
rash (0.6%)
thrombocytopenia (30%)
rash (10.7%)
paronychia (3.7%)
GR3 AE %
75
75
81
% dose reduction*
36
41
44
% dose
11
12
17
discontinuation*
PAPILLON: 3
AE leading to
WU KONG 28: 1.3
5
4.3
9.5
death %
REZILIENT 3: 2.9
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit
interpretation.
* Targeted therapy
10
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
EGFR exon 20 insertion: the 1L landscape is getting crowded.
Three Phase III strategies, three different stories:
• PAPILLON → highest ORR + strongest PFS HR; OS interpretation complicated by high crossover
• WU-KONG28 → oral, chemo-free strategy
• REZILIENT3 → longest median PFS + encouraging CNS subgroup signal
⚠️ Cross-trial comparison only — not head-to-head.
#MVOnco #WCLC2026 #LungCancer
2.6K impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
EGFR EXON 20 INSERTION:
3 FIRST-LINE PHASE III STRATEGIES
MV Onco
WHAT?
PAPILLON
WU-KONG28
REZILIENT3
TREATMENT
AMIVANTAMAB
SUNVOZERTINIB
ZIPALERTINIB
+ CHEMO
ALONE
+ CHEMO
ORR
73%
59%
65%
PFS
11.4 To
10.3 To
14.5 To
PFS HR
0.40
0.65
0.50
34.3 To
HR 0.87
29.8 To
NR
P = 0.307
NS
HR 0.99
HR 0.72
OS
76% CROSSOVER
39% MATURITY
30% MATURITY
PRESPECIFIED
IMMATURE
IMMATURE
CROSSOVER-ADJUSTED
HR 0.57
MODEL-BASED ANALYSIS
31%
23%
12-13%
BASELINE CNS METS
CNS EVIDENCE
BASELINE CNS METS
BASELINE CNS METS
TREATED OR
ASYMPTOMATIC ≤2 cm
TREATED
TREATED
BRAIN-MET PFS
HR 0.38
PFS SUBGROUP
NEUTROPENIA 34%
CK 20.9%
ANEMIA 48.6%
ANEMIA 13%
DIARRHEA 14%
KEY >G3 AE
PARONYCHIA 10%
ANEMIA 9.2%
NEUTROPENIA 33.6%
IRR 1%
PARONYCHIA 3.7%
THROMBOCYTOPENIA 30%
RASH 10.7%
RASH 0.6%
GRADE ≥3 AE
75%
75%
81%
HIGHEST ORR
+
ORAL
LONGEST PFS
KEY POINT
STRONGEST PFS HR
+
+
ITT OS NS
CHEMO-FREE
CNS SIGNAL
HIGH CROSSOVER
PAPILLON
WU-KONG28
REZILIENT3
HIGHEST ORR
STRONGEST PFS HR
CHEMO-FREE
LONGEST PFS
+ CNS SIGNAL
CROSS-TRIAL COMPARISON ONLY
NOT HEAD-TO-HEAD
DIFFERENCES IN ELIGIBILITY, FOLLOW-UP AND SAFETY REPORTING LIMIT DIRECT COMPARISON
ggilberto lopes@GlopesMd
Three positive first-line phase III trials now shape EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC:
• PAPILLON: amivantamab + chemo
• WU-KONG 28: sunvozertinib
• REZILIENT 3: zipalertinib + chemo
No head-to-head winner. No clear OS winner yet. https://t.co/0jo6u0aVJa
2.1K impressions5 likes4 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
SYLVESTER THORACIC WORKING GROUP AT WCLC26
SCIENCE
PEOPLE
EGFR Exon 20 Insertions:
PERSPECTIVE
A BRIGHTER
TOMORROW
Three Positive First-Line Trials -
Putting the Landscape Into Context
No head-to-head winner yet. More options now require better selection and sequencing.
Progress
Together
1
Three first-line options
DIFFERENT APPROACHES. A SHARED GOAL: MORE OPTIONS FOR PATIENTS.
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
Amivantamab + platinum/pemetrexed
Sunvozertinib monotherapy
Zipalertinib + platinum/pemetrexed
KEY EFFICACY
KEY EFFICACY
KEY EFFICACY
ORR: 73% VS 47%
ORR: 59% VS 31.1%
ORR: 65% VS 40%
mPFS: 11.4 VS 6.7 months
mPFS: 10.3 VS 7.5 months
mPFS: 14.5 VS 8.5 months
HR 0.40 (95% CI 0.30-0.53)
HR 0.65 (95% CI 0.50-0.85)
HR 0.50 (95% CI 0.34-0.73)
mOS: 34.3 VS 27.9 months
mOS: 29.8 vs 28.8 months
OS immature / no clear separation yet
OS HR 0.87 (0.66-1.14)
OS HR 0.99 (0.70-1.40)
OS HR 0.72 (0.42-1.23)
39% OS maturity
IV antibody + chemotherapy
Oral monotherapy
Oral TKI + chemotherapy
2
What limits direct comparison?
IMPORTANT CONTEXT FOR INTERPRETATION.
No head-to-head comparison.
Cross-trial comparisons are descriptive only.
All three phase III programs included crossover; none has shown a statistically significant OS advantage so far.
Differences in eligibility, follow-up, CNS inclusion, and safety reporting limit indirect ranking.
3
Practical differentiators
INTERPRETIVE SUMMARY - CONSERVATIVE BY DESIGN.
FACTOR
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
Treatment burden
Highest
Lowest
Intermediate
Chemotherapy exposure
Yes
No
Yes
CNS data
Exploratory
Exploratory
Exploratory
Need for proven combo
Convenience / oral
Strong PFS signal with
Likely use driver
approach
preference
combination strategy
4
Clinical perspective
PATIENT-CENTERED. EVIDENCE-INFORMED. LOOKING AHEAD.
All three are reasonable first-line options. In real-world practice, sunvozertinib may become the preferred
DIFFERENT
choice for many oncologists and patients because it offers meaningful efficacy as an oral monotherapy
PATIENTS
with lower treatment burden. That is a likely practice pattern - not a proven evidence-based ranking.
DIFFERENT PATHS
A SHARED
Combination approaches remain strong options, especially when clinicians prioritize the available combination-trial
PURPOSE
data or specific patient/disease features.
5
Takeaway
No OS winner yet. More options benefit patients.
MORE
The next challenge is choosing and sequencing them well.
SAME
ANSWERS
PATIENTS
BRIGHTER
Broad NGS remains essential to identify the full spectrum of EGFR exon 20 insertion variants.
A BRIGHTER
TOMORROWS
TOMORROW
PROGRESS IN THORACIC ONCOLOGY LIVES IN A BRIGHTER TOMORROW
19SAFFRONView full trial page →17K impressions16.2K primary · 864 preview61 engagements3 posts · 3 voices▾
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
1/4
🔥 #ESMO26
Lung Cancer Presidential Highlights
🇪🇸 Madrid | October 24–25, 2026
Three major Phase 3 lung cancer LBAs, each with potential to reshape treatment paradigms:
🎙️ LBA3 | DeLLphi-305
🎙️ LBA5 | KRASCENDO 1
🎙️ LBA6 | SAFFRON
Three Phase 3 readouts to watch closely at #ESMO26 👀
@myESMO @OncoAlert @Larvol
16.2K impressions36 likes9 reposts2026-09-23
[Slide 1]
ESMO 2026
MADRID SPAIN
23-27 OCTOBER 2026
Lung Cancer Presidential Highlights
Presidential Symposium presentations
Based on current official programme.
Presidential Symposium I
Presidential Symposium II
Sat, 24 Oct 2026
Sun, 25 Oct 2026
L
16:30-18:15
L
16:30-18:15
Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6
ALICANTE
Alicante Auditorium - - Hall 6
ALICANTE
SPAIN 2026
SPAIN 2026
01
02
03
LBA3 DeLLphi-305
LBA5
Krascendo 1
LBA6 SAFFRON
Tarlatamab + durvalumab
Divarasib vs sotorasib
Osimertinib + savolitinib
vs durvalumab
or adagrasib
vs platinum-pemetrexed
1L maintenance after
Previously treated
EGFR-mutant MET-overexpressed
durvalumab + platinum/
advanced/metastatic
and/or amplified advanced
etoposide in ES-SCLC
KRAS G12C NSCLC
NSCLC post-osimertinib
Phase 3
|
Primary endpoint: OS
Phase 3
|
Primary endpoint: PFS
Phase 3
I
Primary endpoint: PFS
Presenter: Ferdinandos
Presenter: Jacob Sands
Presenter: Shun Lu
Skoulidis
Presidential Symposium I
Presidential Symposium II
Presidential Symposium II
Sat, 24 Oct 2026
Sun, 25 Oct 2026
Sun, 25 Oct 2026
16:30-18:15 | Hall 6
16:30-18:15 | Hall 6
16:30-18:15 | Hall 6
congress
MADRID
2026
ESMO
MADRID
SPAIN
OOncoDaily Lung@OncodailyLung
🫁✨ ESMO 2026 is shaping up to be a major meeting for lung cancer, and these are the 10 abstracts I’ll be watching most closely.
From first-line SCLC maintenance to KRAS G12C head-to-head data, post-osimertinib resistance strategies, and a wave of next-generation ADCs, this year’s programme is heavily focused on one question:
👉 What should come next, and for which patient?
🔥 Top studies to watch
842 impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-10-01
[Slide 1]
ESMO 2026
OncoDaily Lung
Top 10
Lung
Cancer
Abstracts to Watch
JJustin Austin@ConferenceHype
#ESMO26 @myESMO @AstraZeneca Three Presidential Symposium wins headed to Madrid: HUTCHMED/AZ SAFFRON beats chemo after osimertinib resistance, Roche's divarasib beats sotorasib/adagrasib in KRAS G12C NSCLC, and AZ VOLGA =durva to bladder cancer. Watch: https://t.co/WiCRrBxsIN
22 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-27
20DeLLphi-30913.1K impressions11.8K primary · 1.3K preview82 engagements21 posts · 15 voices▾
TThe ASCO Post@ASCOPost
💉Could less frequent tarlatamab dosing offer flexibility in #SCLC?
In DeLLphi-309, 20 mg every 3 weeks and 30 mg every 4 weeks showed efficacy and safety consistent with the approved every-2-week regimen.
🗣️ Presented by Jonathan Goldman, MD at #WCLC26
🔗 https://t.co/qUkXCv082g https://t.co/1sisPx1LwL
2.3K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
GA Realth
MMiguel Gonzalez Velez, MD@mgonzalezvelMD
DeLLphi-309 (Ph2) extended-interval tarlatamab dosing in SCLC, presented by Jonathan Goldman at #WCLC2026.
Take: Take: ORR declined across arms: 40% (10mg Q2W) vs 31% (20mg Q3W) vs 27% (30mg Q4W).
Median PFS followed the same gradient: 4.2 vs 4.1 vs 2.7 months.
OS not yet mature (~9mo follow-up). CRS trended higher with extended intervals but overall similar.
Side effects and logistics are
2.1K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
f
in
#WCLC26
wclc.iaslc.org
IASLC
2026 DI
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
I
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Tarlatamab Extended-Interval Dosing Regimens
in Patients With SCLC: The Randomized
Phase 2 DeLLphi-309 Study
Jonathan Goldman, MD
University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
September 13, 2026
cience Without Boundaries: Uniting the World Against Thoracic Cancer
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
07 min 54s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DeLLphi-309: Randomized, Phase 2 Study Evaluating Tarlatamab
Extended-Interval Dosing Regimens in SCLC (NCT06745323)
Screening
Open-Label Treatment Period
Tarlatamab 10 mg IV Q2W (n = 83)
Adults (Z 18 years) with SCLC whose
(1 mg on C1D1, 10 mg on C1D8 and C1D15, and Q2W thereafter in 28-day cycles)
disease progressed on or recurred after 1L
platinum-based chemotherapy®
1:1:1
Tarlatamab 20 mg IV Q3W (n = 84)
ECOG PS 0 or 1
(N = 252)
(1 mg on C1D1, 20 mg on C1D8 and C2D1, and Q3W thereafter in 21-day cycles)
Asymptomatic, treated or untreated brain
metastases permitted
Stratification:
Tarlatamab 30 mg IV Q4W (n = 85)
1L Platinum sensitivity
(1 mg on C1D1, 30 mg on C1D8 and C2D1, and Q4W thereafter in 28-day cycles)
(2 90 days VS < 90 days)
Primary Endpoint: ORR based on BICR per RECIST 1.1
Statistical Considerations: Analyses were descriptive;
no hypotheses were formally tested
Secondary Endpoints:
- Efficacy: ORR (investigator); DOR, DCR, DODC, PFS (BICR and investigator); OS
- Pharmacokinetics
Monitoring:
- Safety: TEAEs and TRAEs
10 mg Q2W: 1-2-hour monitoring first 2 doses
20 mg Q3W & 30 mg Q4W: 6-8 hours monitoring first 3 doses
Primary analysis: 240 patients enrolled with the opportunity for ⥠24 weeks of follow-up from the first post-baseline tumor assessment.
ountries st-line; BICR, where blinded SOC 1L systemic treatment for SCLC consists of a platinum-based chemotherapy plus a PD-(L)1 inhibitor, the subjects must have either experienced treatment failure or deemed ineligible for PD-(L)1 inhibitor therapy.
independent central fligand) review; DEC C, cycle; D, Day: DOR, duration of response; DCR, disease control rate; DODC, duration of disease control; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status;
DDr. Estela Rodriguez@Latinamd
Say not more. Being able to give a #tarlatamab for #SCLC without requiring an overnight admission will be a game changer for patients and increase access treatment .
(There is still a lot of time toxicity w 6-8 hrs observations- #DeLLphi309 data presented at #WCLC26 on extended treatment intervals is welcomed)
1.6K impressions7 likes2 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
AMGEN
FDA
APPROVES
REDUCED
MONITORING
TIME FOR
FIRST TWO
DOSES OF
IMDELLTRA
®
Update Supports Broader
Access to IMDELLTRA in
Community Settings for
People Living with Extensive-
Stage Small Cell Lung
Cancer
THOUSAND OAKS, Calif., Sept.
14 2026 /PRNewswire/
LLaura Alder, MD@LauraAlderMD
Dr Goldman #WCLC26 presenting DeLLphi-309 interval dosing of Tarlatamab: q2 vs q3 vs q4 week. Minor imbalances of patient characteristics.
⭐️Overall similar PFS, OS, and tox. Provides promising early data to support more flexible dosing!
@IASLC @BZhangMD @SclcSMASHERS @drshieldsmd
1K impressions11 likes4 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 30s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Progression-Free Survival by Blinded Independent Central Review
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
1.0
10 mg Q2W
20 mg Q3W
30 mg Q4W
0.9
(N = 83)
(N 84)
(N = 85)
Median PFS,
months (95% CI)
4.2 (2.6-5.6)
4.1 (2.8-4.7)
2.7 (1.6-4.2)
0.8
Progression-Free Survival Probability
HR (95% CI) VS 10 mg Q2W
-
1.03 (0.73-1.47)
1.23 (0.87-1.75)
0.7
Median FU, months
8.3
8.5
9.5
0.6
0.5
34%
0.4
31%
0.3
0.2
10 mg Q2W
24%
0.1
20 mg Q3W
0.0
30 mg Q4W
0
3
6
9
12
15
Months
Number of participants at risk:
10 mg Q2W
83
43
26
6
1
0
84
43
24
6
0
20 mg Q3W
30 mg Q4W
85
33
17
11
0
cutoff: 7 May 2026. "Analysis was descriptive. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the median PFS and percentiles with 95% Cls calculated using the Brookmeyer and Crowley method. For milestone PFS estimates, 95% CI values
onfidence interval; using FU, follow-up; HR, hazard ratio; PFS, progression-free survival; Q2W, every 2 weeks; Q3W, every 3 weeks; Q4W, every 4 weeks.
calculated Kalbfleisch and Prentice method.
an Goldman, MD I Tarlatamab Extended-Interval Dosing Regimens in Patients With SCLC: The Randomized Phase 2 DeLLphi-309 Study
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
04 min 59s
Overall Survival Was Favorable Across Dosing Regimens
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
10 mg Q2W
20 mg Q3W
30 mg Q4W
(N 83)
(N 84)
(N = 85)
Median os,
months (95% CI)
11.2 (9.4-NE)
NE
NE
HR (95% CI) vs
-
10 mg Q2W
0.59 (0.34-1.03)
1.03 (0.62-1.69)
1.0
85%
0.9
Median FU, months
9.1
9.0
9.1
72%
0.8
0.7
Survival Probability
0.6
69%
0.5
0.4
0.3
10 mg Q2W
0.2
20 mg Q3W
0.1
0.0
30 mg Q4W
0
3
6
9
12
15
Number of participants at risk:
Months
10 mg Q2W
83
68
59
29
3
0
84
75
66
35
2
0
20 mg Q3W
85
64
55
31
3
0
30 mg Q4W
off: 7 May 2026. Analysis was descriptive. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the median OS and percentiles with 95% CI calculated using the Brookmeyer and Crowley method. For milestone OS estimates, 95% CI values were
ed using Kalbfleisch and Prentice method.
dence interval; FU, follow-up; HR, hazard ratio; NE, not estimable; OS, overall survival; Q2W, every 2 weeks; Q3W, every 3 weeks; Q4W, every 4 weeks.
Celdman MD Tarlatamah Extended-Interval Dosing Regimens in Patients With SCLC: The Randomized Phase 2 DeLLphi-309 Study
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Treatment-Related CRS and ICANS
03 min 41s
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
10 mg Q2W
Tarlatamab
20 mg Q3W
(n = 83)
30 mg Q4W
Tarlatamab
(n = 84)
Tarlatamab
(n = 85)
10 mg Q2W
Tarlatamab
CRS, n (%)
20 mg Q3W
(n = 83)
30 mg Q4W
50 (60.2)
59 (70.2)
(n = 84) =
55 (64.7)
(n=85)
Grade ≥ 3
ICANS, n (%)
5(6.0)
2 (2.4)
5(6.0)
1 (1.2)
10(11.8)
2 (2.4)
Grade ≥ 3
Fatal
1(1.2)
3(3.6)
0
1(1.2)
0
0
Fatal
0
0
Serious
1(1.2)a
15 (18.1)
23 (27.4)
21 (24.7)
Serious
3(3.6)
4(4.8)
8(9.4)
Leading to interruption
2 (2.4)
2 (2.4)
0
Leading to interruption
2(2.4)
1(1.2)
3(3.5)
Leading to discontinuation
0
2 (2.4)
1 (1.2)
Leading to discontinuation
0
2(2.4)
1(1.2)
Treatment-related CRS was higher in the extended-interval dosing regimens; majority of events were Grade 1 or 2
Treatment-related ICANS was higher with 30 mg Q4W
One Grade 3 ICANS event was associated with a fatal outcome in the 30 mg Q4W group; the investigator determined
that the cause of death was likely due to cardiac arrhythmia
3 7 ICANS May 2026. event CRS was and documented ICANS, ICANS immune events with are fatal effector-cell graded outcome; according associated the investigator to Lee neurotoxicity DW, determined et al. Biol syndrome; Blood the cause Marrow Q2W, of death Transplant. every to 2 weeks; be likely 2019;25:625-638. Q3W, due to every cardiac 3 weeks; arrhythmia Q4W, in every the setting 4 weeks. of metabolic and Study electrolyte abnormalities.
Goldman, release syndrome; MD / Tarlatamab Extended-Interval Dosing Regimens in Patients With SCLC: The Randomized Phase 2 DeLLphi-309
DDr Riyaz Shah@DrRiyazShah
DeLLphi-309; RP2; testing q3 and q4; n252; PK similar; efficacy similar; more low grade ICANS at q4 but generally not much in it. #WCLC26 https://t.co/ZLEahkYITR
823 impressions5 likes3 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
08 min 36s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DeLLphi-309: Randomized, Phase 2 Study Evaluating Tarlatamab
Extended-Interval Dosing Regimens in SCLC (NCT06745323)
Screening
Open-Label Treatment Period
Tarlatamab 10 mg IV Q2W (n = 83)
Adults (2 18 years) with SCLC whose
(1 mg on C1D1, 10 mg on C1D8 and C1D15, and Q2W thereafter in 28-day cycles)
disease progressed on or recurred after 1L
platinum-based chemotherapy®
1:1:1
Tarlatamab 20 mg IV Q3W (n = 84)
ECOG PS 0 or 1
(N = 252)
(1 mg on C1D1, 20 mg on C1D8 and C2D1, and Q3W thereafter in 21-day cycles)
Asymptomatic, treated or untreated brain
metastases permitted
Stratification:
Tarlatamab 30 mg IV Q4W (п = 85)
1L Platinum sensitivity
(1 mg on C1D1, 30 mg on C1D8 and C2D1, and Q4W thereafter in 28-day cycles)
(2 90 days VS < 90 days)
Primary Endpoint: ORR based on BICR per RECIST 1.1
Statistical Considerations: Analyses were descriptive;
no hypotheses were formally tested
Secondary Endpoints:
- Efficacy: ORR (investigator); DOR, DCR, DODC, PFS (BICR and investigator); OS
- Pharmacokinetics
Monitoring:
- Safety: TEAEs and TRAEs
10 mg Q2W: 1-2-hour monitoring first 2 doses
20 mg Q3W & 30 mg Q4W: 6-8 hours monitoring first 3 doses
Primary analysis: 240 patients enrolled with the opportunity for ≥ 24 weeks of follow-up from the first post-baseline tumor assessment.
*In countries where SOC 1L systemic treatment for SCLC consists of a platinum-based chemotherapy plus a PD-(L)1 inhibitor, the subjects must have either experienced treatment failure or deemed ineligible for PD-(L)1 inhibitor therapy.
1L, first-line; BICR, blinded independent central review; C, cycle; D, Day: DOR, duration of response; DCR, disease control rate; DODC, duration of disease control; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status;
V. intravenous; PD-(L)1, programmed death (ligand) 1; PFS, progression-free survival; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; Q2W, every 2 weeks; Q3W, every 3 weeks; Q4W, every 4 weeks; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in
olid Tumors: SCLC, small cell lung cancer; SOC, standard of care; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event; TRAE, treatment-related adverse event.
4
an Goldman, MD I Tarlatamab Extended-Interval Dosing Regimens in Patients With SCLC: The Randomized Phase 2 DeLLphi-309 Study
[Slide 2]
26
0
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 46s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Geometric Mean Steady-State Exposures Were Comparable Across the
Tarlatamab Dosing Regimens
100
10 mg Q2W
20 mg Q3W
30 mg Q4W
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
PK parameter
Tarlatamab Serum Concentration
10
10 mg Q2W
20 mg Q3W
30 mg Q4W
(µg/mL)
0.425 (54%)
0.406 (41%)
0.383 (44%)
Ctrough µg/mL (% CV)ᵃ
n = 47
n = 53
n = 45
1
Cavg, µg/mL (% CV)ᵇ
1.37 (42%)
1.78 (31%)
1.84 (42%)
n=9
n = 12
n = 19
Comparable trough concentrations
0.1
0
7
14
21
28
Time Post Steady State Dose (days)
*Data gimen, are Cycle presented 3 Day for 1 interval Cycle 4 for Day 20 1 mg pre-dose Q3W and across 30 mg tarlatamab Q4W regimens. dosing regimens; "Cavg is calculated by dividing the AUC by the respective dosing interval duration in hours; Cavg is calculated from Cycle 2 Day 15 interval for 10 mg Q2W
to pharmacokinetics; represents geometric Q2W, mean every (% 2 CV). weeks; AUC, Q3W, area every under 3 weeks; the concentration-time Q4W, every 4 weeks. curve; Cevg average steady-state drug concentration over a dosing interval; Ctrough serum drug concentration prior to dosing: CV, coefficient of variation;
an Goldman, MD | Tarlatamab Extended-Interval Dosing Regimens in Patients With SCLC: The Randomized Phase 2 DeLLphi-309 Study
6
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
3002
on Lung Cancer
06 min 22s
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Extended-Interval Responses Dosing Regimens Demonstrated Durable Objective
Tarlatamab
Duration of Response by BICR
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
10 mg Q2W
20 mg Q3W
30 mg Q4W
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
(n = 83)
(n = 84)
(n = 85)
10 mg Q2W
20 mg Q3W
30 mg Q4W
100
Best Overall Response by BICR, n (%)
91%
Median DOR
8.3
5.6
NE
90
(95% CI)c, months
(5.6-NE)
(4.1-NE)
(4.2-NE)
89%
Complete response
80
Median FU, months
7.0
7.0
8.3
4 (4.8)
4(4.8)
0
86%
29 (34.9)
22 (26.2)
23 (27.1)
17 (20.5)
33 (39.3)
25(29.4)
Responders Without Progression
70
Partial response
60
Stable disease
Progressive disease
or Death (%)
50
40
25 (30.1)
21 (25.0)
25(29.4)
30
Not evaluable
20
2 (2.4)
0
1 (1.2)
10
10 mg Q2W
No post-baseline scan
6 (7.2)
4(4.8)
0
20 mg Q3W
11 (12.9)
30 mg Q4W
ORR by BICR, % (95% CI)ᵃ
39.8 (29.2-51.1)
31.0 (21.3-42.0)
27.1 (18.0-37.8)
0
3
6
9
Odds Ratio (95% CI)ᵇ
12
15
-
0.68 (0.36-1.29)
0.56 (0.30-1.08)
Number of Participants at Risk:
Time From Initial Response (months)
DCR by BICR, % (95% CI)ᵃ
60.2 (48.9-70.8)
70.2 (59.3-79.7)
56.5 (45.3-67.2)
10 mg Q2W 33
30
14
2
1
0
ORR by Investigator, % (95% CI)ᵃ
36.1 (25.9-47.4)
20 mg Q3W 26
36.9 (26.6-48.1)
23
30.6 (21.0-41.5)
8
0
30 mg Q4W 23
18
10
4
0
Data aplan-Meier sponse cutoff: 7 survival May 2026. estimate *95% Cls by for Brookmeyer ORR and and DCR Crowley are estimated method. using BICR, Clopper blinded Pearson independent method. central Analysis review; was CI, descriptive. confidence cmDOR interval; was DCR, estimated disease using control Kaplan-Meier rate; DOR, method duration and of response; 95% Cls of FU, median follow-up; are estimated NE, using log-log transformation of
rate; Q2W, every 2 weeks; Q3W, every 3 weeks; Q4W, every 4 weeks.
not
estimable;
ORR,
objective
an Goldman, MD I Tarlatamab Extended-Interval Dosing Regimens in Patients With SCLC: The Randomized Phase 2 DeLLphi-309 Study
7
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 27s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Progression-Free Survival by Blinded Independent Central Review
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
Tarlatamab
1.0
10 mg Q2W
20 mg Q3W
30 mg Q4W
(N = 83)
(N = 84)
(N = 85)
0.9
Median PFS,
months (95% CI)
4.2 (2.6-5.6)
4.1 (2.8-4.7)
2.7 (1.6-4.2)
0.8
Progression-Free Survival Probability
HR (95% CI) vs 10 mg Q2W
-
1.03 (0.73-1.47)
1.23 (0.87-1.75)
0.7
Median FU, months
8.3
8.5
9.5
0.6
0.5
34%
0.4
31%
0.3
0.2
10 mg Q2W
24%
0.1
20 mg Q3W
0.0
30 mg Q4W
0
3
6
9
12
15
Number of participants at risk:
Months
10 mg Q2W
83
43
26
6
1
0
20 mg Q3W
84
43
24
6
0
30 mg Q4W
85
33
17
11
0
ata cutoff: 7 May 2026. "Analysis was descriptive. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the median PFS and percentiles with 95% Cls calculated using the Brookmeyer and Crowley method. For milestone PFS estimates, 95% CI values
ere calculated using Kalbfleisch and Prentice method.
confidence interval; FU, follow-up: HR, hazard ratio; PFS, progression-free survival; Q2W, every 2 weeks; Q3W, every 3 weeks; Q4W, every 4 weeks.
8
an Goldman, MD | Tarlatamab Extended-Interval Dosing Regimens in Patients With SCLC: The Randomized Phase 2 DeLLphi-309 Study
DDr. Estela Rodriguez@Latinamd
From #WCLC26 🇰🇷: #Tarlatamab continues to evolve in SCLC. DeLLphi-309 supports longer dosing intervals, while recent FDA update allows shorter observation rather than routine overnight hospitalization.
Sometimes improving cancer care isn’t just about a better drug—it’s about making the drug easier for patients to receive. #LCSM https://t.co/THX88W5nyS
631 impressions13 likes4 reposts2026-09-19
IInternational Lung Cancer Summit@LungSummit
WCLC 2026 opened in Seoul on Saturday 12 September. Six studies came out of the press briefing, three of them in small cell lung cancer.
Two asked how the DLL3 bispecific is given rather than whether it works. DeLLphi-309 randomised 252 patients across three schedules: response rates of 40% at 10 mg every two weeks, 31% at 20 mg every three weeks and 27% at 30 mg every four weeks, with median ove
955 impressions6 likes2 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
ADCs . IMMUNOTHERAPIES
CONGRESS UPDATE
WCLC 2026, DAY 1: EXTENDED-
INTERVAL AND SUBCUTANEOUS
DOSING IN SCLC, AND A 70%
EARLY RESPONSE
BBhaarath PG@BhaarathP10039
@IASLC-WCLC 2026: Pre-Conf Top Abstracts
KEYNOTE-D46 | REZILIENT3 | ARTEMIS-008 | S1827 MAVERICK | PAPILLON | TAISHAN-302 | ADAURA | ARROS-1 | DESTINY-LUNG04 | MDT-BRIDGE | IMpower133 | SKYSCRAPER-02 | NAUTIKA1 | DeLLphi309 | IMpower030 | AMIGO-1 | LuCa-MERIT-1 | JS207 | GFH375 | QLC1101 | LB2102 | SYS6010 | HS-10370 | RC148 | YL201
#WCLC26 #WCLC2026 #Cancer #Oncology #LungCancer #NSCLC #SCLC #LCS
322 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
21DeLLphi-3089.6K impressions8.6K primary · 955 preview28 engagements7 posts · 5 voices▾
TThe ASCO Post@ASCOPost
🫁 In DeLLphi-308, subcutaneous tarlatamab showed a favorable safety profile and preliminary antitumor activity in previously treated ES-SCLC.
➡️ Objective response rates were 20% at 10 mg and 30% at 15 mg.
🗣️ Presented by @pedrofsrocha at #WCLC26
🔗 https://t.co/ide6tk5sV3 https://t.co/Y12H0c4ldF
3.5K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-16
[Slide 1]
OF
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
#WCLC26 | DeLLphi-308
💉 Ph1b: subcutaneous tarlatamab in previously treated ES-SCLC (N=60); 15 mg SC Q2W selected for expansion.
📈 15 mg SC achieved exposure comparable to 10 mg IV Q2W
💡 CRS: 38%, all G1–2
• G≥3 CRS: 0%
• ICANS: 0%
↪️ historical IV CRS: 56%
🎯 Antitumor activity maintained:
• ORR: 30%
• DCR: 55%
• median DoR: NR
• mPFS: 3.7 mo
• mOS: 11.7 mo
🛡️ Overall ≧Gr3 TRAEs: 13%
Treatmen
2.9K impressions8 likes1 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
DeLLphi-308: Subcutaneous Tarlatamab in Previously Treated ES-SCLC
Phase 1b dose-exploration and expansion study; first clinical evaluation of subcutaneous tarlatamab (NCT06598306)
Eligibility
Part 1: Dose Exploration
Part 2: Dose Expansion
Previously treated ES-SCLC after
(24h post-dose monitoring on
(1-2h
no post-dose monitoring on
platinum-based chemotherapy
C1D1 and C1D8)
C1D1 and C1D8)
ECOG PS 0-1
Treated, asymptomatic
Cohort 1-2
Cohort 2
Dose
brain metastases permitted
1 mg step dose 15 mg SC Q2W
selected
1 mg step dose 15 mg SC Q2W
(n = 20)
(n = 20)
Primary objective:
Safety and Tolerability
Secondary objectives:
Cohort 1-1
Part 3: Alternative dosing
PK, Antitumor Activity,
1 mg step dose 10 mg SC Q2W
(Evaluation of Q3W and Q4W schedules)
Immunogenicity
(n = 20)
Not included in this presentation
Building on the established clinical activity of IV tarlatamab, DeLLphi-308 evaluates whether subcutaneous
administration can lower C max to potentially reduce CRS and enable shorter post-dose monitoring
C1D1, cycle 1 day 1; C1D8, cycle 1 day 8; Cmast peak serum concentration; CRS, cytokine release syndrome; ECOG PS. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; ES-SCLC, extensive-stage small cell lung cancer; IV, intravenous;
PK, pharmacokinetics; Q2W, every 2 weeks; Q3W, every 3 weeks; Q4W. every 4 weeks; SC. subcutaneous.
3
Pedro Rocha, MD, PhD I Subcutaneous Tarlatamab in Patients With ES-SCLC: DeLLphi-308 Phase 1b Study
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Subcutaneous Administration at 15 mg Q2W Achieved Exposure Comparable to
10 mg IV Q2W With Low Rates of CRS
Steady-State Exposure Over Time
Key Treatment-Related Adverse Events by Grade
5
15 mg Q2W SC-treated patients (n = 40)
4
Historical 10 mg IV Q2W
Tarlatamab Serum Concentration
10 mg SC Q2W
15 mg SC Q2W
TRAE, n (%)
G1
G2
≥ G3
Overall
3
(µg/mL)
CRS
11 (28)
4 (10)
0
15 (38)
2
ICANS
0
0
0
0
1
0
Injection site
18 (45)
2 (5)
0
20 (50)
reactions
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Dysgeusia
14 (35)
5 (13)
0
19 (48)
Time After Dose (Days)
Parameter,
Neutropenia
2 (5)
2 (5)
0
4 (10)
10 mg IV Q2W
10 mg SC Q2W
15 mg SC Q2W
Geometric mean (% CV)
289 (44%)
228 (42%)
336 (42%)
CRS- IV, historical
AUCtau hr*ug/mL
107 (42)
32 (13)
3 (1)
142 (56)
n 41
n 14
n 27
DeLLphi-304 (n = 252)
Data cutoff: 10 June 2026. For the PK analysis, the bioavailability of SC tarlatamab was assessed and compared with historical PK data following IV administration from the DeLLphi-300 study (18 Oct 2024); data cutoff for the PK analysis from
DeLLphi-308 was 6 May 2026. AUC area under the concentration-time curve over the dosing interval; CRS, cytokine release syndrome; CV, coefficient of variation; G, grade; ICANS, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome;
IV, intravenous; PK, pharmacokinetics; Q2W. every 2 weeks; SC, subcutaneous; TRAE, treatment-related adverse event. 1. Mountzios G, et al. N Engl Med. 2025;393:349-361.
5
Pedro Rocha, MD, PhD I Subcutaneous Tarlatamab in Patients With ES-SCLC: DeLLphi-308 Phase 1b Study
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Tarlatamab 15 mg SC Q2W Demonstrated Antitumor Activity With Ongoing
Responses in Previously Treated ES-SCLC
Treatment Response at 15 mg Q2W (n = 40)
ORR, n (%)
12 (30)
CR
0
PR
12 (30)
SD, n (%)
10 (25)
PD, n (%)
13 (33)
Partial Response
Stable Disease
Not evaluable, n (%)
3 (8)
Progressive Disease
No post-baseline assessment, n (%)
2 (5)
Not Evaluable
First PD
DCR, n (%)
22 (55)
Ongoing Treatment
Mean TTR, months
1.8
Median DOR, months (95% CI)ᵃ
NE (4.1, NE)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Median FU for DOR, months (95% CI)ᵃ
9.4
(5.6,
11.1)
Duration of Treatment (Weeks) and Best Overall Response
Tarlatamab 15 mg SC Q2W showed promising anticancer activity with ORR of 30% in previously treated ES-SCLC
The median PFS was 3.7 months (95% CI: 1.9, 7.0; median follow-up 7.7 months), and median os was 11.7 months (95% Cl: 5.4, NE;
median follow-up 9.5 months)
"Median values are estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and their 95% CI are estimated by Brookmeyer and Crowley method. Data cutoff: 10 June 2026. Treatment response was assessed using RECIST 1.1 guidelines.
CI, confidence interval; CR, complete response; DCR, disease control rate; DOR, duration of response; ES-SCLC, extensive-stage small cell lung cancer; FU, follow-up; NE, not estimable; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PD. progressive disease;
PFS, progression-fr survival; PR, partial response; Q2W. every 2 weeks; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; SC, subcutaneous; SD, stable disease; TTR. time to response.
6
Pedro Rocha, MD, PhD I Subcutaneous Tarlatamab in Patients With ES-SCLC: DeLLphi-308 Phase 1b Study
OOncLive.com@OncLive
💉 A subcutaneous option for tarlatamab? 15 mg SC matched IV exposure with a 30% ORR and zero grade ≥3 CRS in previously treated ES-SCLC per the DeLLphi-308 trial👇 @IASLC @vallhebron #WCLC26 #lcsm https://t.co/DfBF3ahcOO
1.6K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-13
MMedthority@Medthority
📊 In DeLLphi-308, 15 mg SC tarlatamab Q2W achieved serum exposure comparable to historical 10 mg IV Q2W, with lower peak concentrations supporting its selection for dose expansion @pedrofsrocha #WCLC26 #LCSM #ES-SCLC #OncTwitter #MedEd
219 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
MMedthority@Medthority
@pedrofsrocha presents first clinical data from DeLLphi-308, evaluating SC tarlatamab in previously treated ES-SCLC. The study asks whether SC delivery can reduce peak exposure, CRS and post-dose monitoring #WCLC26 #LCSM #LungCancer #ES-SCLC #MedEd
185 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
MMedthority@Medthority
Upcoming at #WCLC2026: New insights in ES-SCLC, from DeLLphi-308 Phase 1b results of subcutaneous tarlatamab presented by @pedrofsrocha to research from @LukasDelasos exploring whether CT radiomic and vascular features can predict CRS and ICANS risk #LCSM
184 impressions0 likes1 reposts2026-09-15
IInternational Lung Cancer Summit@LungSummit
WCLC 2026 opened in Seoul on Saturday 12 September. Six studies came out of the press briefing, three of them in small cell lung cancer.
Two asked how the DLL3 bispecific is given rather than whether it works. DeLLphi-309 randomised 252 patients across three schedules: response rates of 40% at 10 mg every two weeks, 31% at 20 mg every three weeks and 27% at 30 mg every four weeks, with median ove
955 impressions6 likes2 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
ADCs . IMMUNOTHERAPIES
CONGRESS UPDATE
WCLC 2026, DAY 1: EXTENDED-
INTERVAL AND SUBCUTANEOUS
DOSING IN SCLC, AND A 70%
EARLY RESPONSE
22Iza-Bren (OA10.01)9K impressions6.5K primary · 2.5K preview19 engagements10 posts · 9 voices▾
TThe ASCO Post@ASCOPost
🧬 An EGFR x HER3 bispecific ADC is moving forward in EGFR-mutated #NSCLC.
Phase I data support advancing izalontamab brenitecan at 2.5 mg/kg in the global phase III IZABRIGHT-Lung01 trial.
🗣️ Presented by @AlexSpiraMDPhD at #WCLC26
Learn more ➡️ https://t.co/3p21ScM9oj https://t.co/T646dEcBbW
2K impressions6 likes4 reposts2026-09-18
WWoong@woongworks
Nice to see the EGFR×HER3 bispecific ADC izalontamab brenitecan advance 2.5 mg/kg into global Phase III IZABRIGHT-Lung01 after WCLC26 dose-expansion. For EGFR-mutated NSCLC progressing after a third-gen TKI, which single Phase III endpoint will you watch first for practice change — PFS versus platinum-pemetrexed, or whether intracranial control holds up in the osimertinib-failure setting?
4 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-28
OOncLive.com@OncLive
🔬 33% ORR and 6.9-month PFS at the recommended phase 3 dose: izalontamab brengitecan shows activity after osimertinib in EGFR-mutated NSCLC 👇 @AlexSpiraMDPhD @VCSpecialists @IASLC #WCLC26 #lcsm https://t.co/nWzs1H7PPZ
1.6K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
OOncLive.com@OncLive
"By targeting something downstream of EGFR, [you're] hopefully able to overcome resistance patterns." @AlexSpiraMDPhD, of @VCSpecialists, on new phase 1 dose-optimization data with iza-bren, an EGFR x HER3 ADC, in EGFR-mutated NSCLC #WCLC26 #lcsm https://t.co/zribCTJ6vS
1.3K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
MMinhua Chu@chuminhua432
#WCLC2026 🇨🇳Biokin (SystImmun) updates global Phase 1 data for EGFR/HER3 bispecific ADC iza-bren (izalontamab brenitecan, BL-B01D1).
Iza-bren pairs an EGFR×HER3 bsAb with a novel TOP1i payload (Ed-04) via a stable cleavable tetrapeptide linker.
OA10.01 Phase 1 Global Study of Iza-Bren in Patients With Metastatic EGFR-mutated NSCLC: Results of the Randomized Dose Expansion Cohort
Dose-randomiza
947 impressions0 likes1 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
Total
D1D8 Q3W 1.5
D1D8 Q3W 2.0
D1D8 Q3W 2.5
Table 1
(N = 80)
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
(N = 26)
(N = 27)
(N = 27)
BOR, n
PR
23
6
8
9
cPR
19
5
6
8
PR pending confirmation
2
1
0
1
SD
35
13
10
12
PD
20
6
9
5
NE
2
1
0
1
ORR, %
28.8
23.1
29.6
33.3
cORR, %
23.8
19.2
22.2
29.6
DCR, %
72.5
73.1
66.7
77.8
mDOR, mo (95% CI)
5.7 (3.0, NR)
5.7 (4.0, NR)
3.0 (2.8, NR)
NR (4.1, NR)
mPFS, mo (95% CI)
5.4 (2.9, 7.8)
5.4 (2.0, NR)
2.9 (1.4, 7.8)
6.9 (4.0, NR)
Median follow up, mo (95% CI)
5.5 (5.3, 7.0)
6.7 (5.1, 8.5)
5.5 (3.5, NR)
5.4 (2.9, 8.1)
BOR: best overall response; PR: partial response; cPR: confirmed partial response; PD: progressive disease; SD: stable disease; NE: not
evaluable; DCR: disease control rate; DOR: duration of response; PFS: progression-free survival.
VVJ Oncology@VJOncology
At #WCLC26, @AlexSpiraMDPhD shares dose expansion results of iza-bren in EGFR-mutated #NSCLC 🫁
The 2.5mg/kg dose showed a slightly higher PFS and DOR, and will be used in an upcoming randomized trial comparing iza-bren to #chemotherapy post-osimertinib 📈💪
Watch: https://t.co/zPRYyWP0gJ
#Oncology #LungCancer #TrialUpdate #ImmunoOnc @IASLC
This video is available on the Lung Cancer Channel on VJ
501 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
IInternational Lung Cancer Summit@LungSummit
WCLC 2026 opened in Seoul on Saturday 12 September. Six studies came out of the press briefing, three of them in small cell lung cancer.
Two asked how the DLL3 bispecific is given rather than whether it works. DeLLphi-309 randomised 252 patients across three schedules: response rates of 40% at 10 mg every two weeks, 31% at 20 mg every three weeks and 27% at 30 mg every four weeks, with median ove
955 impressions6 likes2 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
ADCs . IMMUNOTHERAPIES
CONGRESS UPDATE
WCLC 2026, DAY 1: EXTENDED-
INTERVAL AND SUBCUTANEOUS
DOSING IN SCLC, AND A 70%
EARLY RESPONSE
OOncoDaily Lung@OncodailyLung
🫁✨ ESMO 2026 is shaping up to be a major meeting for lung cancer, and these are the 10 abstracts I’ll be watching most closely.
From first-line SCLC maintenance to KRAS G12C head-to-head data, post-osimertinib resistance strategies, and a wave of next-generation ADCs, this year’s programme is heavily focused on one question:
👉 What should come next, and for which patient?
🔥 Top studies to watch
842 impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-10-01
[Slide 1]
ESMO 2026
OncoDaily Lung
Top 10
Lung
Cancer
Abstracts to Watch
BBioSignal@BioSignal
The Phase 3 behind Bristol Myers Squibb's latest $250 million to SystImmune has an estimated primary completion date of December 2031.
Sichuan Biokin (688506 SH), SystImmune's parent, said on Monday that IZABRIGHT-Lung02 had reached a milestone, without naming it. National Business Daily reported it as the first patient dosed. A month earlier, the US trial registry listed it as not yet
751 impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-23
23OptiTROP-Lung05View full trial page →8.8K impressions6K primary · 2.9K preview34 engagements7 posts · 7 voices▾
AAya Mohamed | MSc, MD 🎗@Dr_Oncologista
OptiTROP-Lung05: 🫁
A strong phase 3 signal for ADC + immunotherapy in 1L PD-L1+ advanced NSCLC.
Sac-TMT + pembrolizumab vs pembrolizumab:
• PFS: NR vs 5.7 months; HR 0.35
• ORR: 70.2% vs 42.0%
https://t.co/XDvBtfRXXA
@OncoAlert #lcsm #LungCancer https://t.co/heBozvKuxF
3.8K impressions17 likes3 reposts2026-10-02
[Slide 1]
THE LANCET
o(
Search for
Q
ARTICLES Volume 407, Issue 10548, P2607-2619, June
27, 2026
Download Full Issue
Sacituzumab tirumotecan plus
pembrolizumab versus
pembrolizumab in PD-L1-
positive advanced non-small-
cell lung cancer (OptiTROP-
Lung05): interim analysis of a
randomised, open-label, phase 3
trial
[Slide 2]
A Progression-free survival
100
Sac-TMT plus
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
80
62 (54-70)
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
29 (22-37)
Sac-TMT plus
66/208 (32%)
NR (13-6-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
128/205 (62%)
5.7 (4.3-7.0)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.35 (95% CI, 0.26-0.47) p<0.0001
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Time (months)
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
208
208
195
187
182
164
144
126
120
90
62
47
20
18
1
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(9)
(23)
(36)
(38)
(59)
(82)
(97)
(123)
(125)
(141)
(142)
Pembrolizumab
205
195
149
129
127
108
84
67
61
46
28
24
9
8
1
0
(0)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(11)
(21)
(26)
(28)
(39)
(51)
(55)
(69)
(70)
(76)
(77)
A Tumour proportion score of 1 to 49%
Number of events/
Median progression-
100
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
40/125 (32%)
NR (11.1-NE)
pembrolizumab
80
Pembrolizumab
84/123 (68%)
43 (2.9-5.5)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.28 (95% CI, 0.19-0.41)
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
20
Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
125
125
117
113
108
97
84
73
69
48
34
25
11
10
1
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(8)
(17)
(26)
(27)
(42)
(53)
(62)
(75)
(76)
(84)
(85)
Pembrolizumab
123
117
81
67
66
53
38
27
24
16
11
10
2
1
0
..
(0)
(3)
(4)
(4)
(5)
(7)
(12)
(17)
(19)
(24)
(29)
(30)
(37)
(38)
(39)
(..)
[Slide 3]
C
Non-squamous NSCLC
100
Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
80
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
29/123 (24%)
NR (13-6-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
70/124 (56%)
6.6 (4.3-8.7)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.28 (95% CI, 0.18-0.43)
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
123
123
118
114
110
104
88
73
69
51
35
26
11
11
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(1)
(4)
(17)
(30)
(32)
(47)
(60)
(69)
(84)
(84)
(94)
(-)
Pembrolizumab
124
116
89
76
75
66
51
38
34
25
15
12
4
4
1
0
(0)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(8)
(18)
(23)
(25)
(33)
(39)
(42)
(50)
(50)
(53)
(54)
D
Squamous NSCLC
100
80
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
37/85 (44%)
NR (8.3-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
58/80 (73%)
5-5 (4.1-7.0)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.44 (95% CI, 0.29-0.66)
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Time (months)
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
85
85
77
73
72
60
56
53
51
39
27
21
9
7
1
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(5)
(6)
(6)
(6)
(12)
(22)
(28)
(39)
(41)
(47)
(48)
Pembrolizumab
80
78
59
52
51
42
33
29
27
21
13
12
5
4
0
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(5)
(11)
(12)
(18)
(19)
(22)
(..)
[Slide 4]
B
Tumour proportion score of 50% or greater
100
80
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
26/83 (31%)
NR (NE-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
44/82 (54%)
9.5 (6.9-13.8)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.47 (95% CI, 0.29-0.77)
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Time (months)
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
83
83
78
74
74
67
60
53
51
42
28
22
9
8
0
:.
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(1)
(6)
(10)
(11)
(17)
(29)
(35)
(48)
(49)
(57)
(··)
Pembrolizumab
82
78
68
62
61
55
46
40
37
30
17
14
7
7
1
0
(0)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(3)
(4)
(9)
(9)
(9)
(15)
(22)
(25)
(32)
(32)
(37)
(38)
WWoong@woongworks
@Dr_Oncologista @OncoAlert OptiTROP-Lung05’s Sac-TMT + pembro PFS signal in 1L PD-L1+ NSCLC is hard to ignore if it holds under broader TROP2 selection. In practice, do you see the bigger question as who still needs chemo-IO first, or how to sequence after TROP2 ADC exposure when EGFR/ALK lanes open later?
2 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-10-02
JJacob Plieth@JacobPlieth
@adamfeuerstein OS data in Optitrop-Lung05 were immature, and with mOS for Keytruda control of just 14.5mth I'm not sure what to make of that.
1.8K impressions4 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
OOncoDaily Lung@OncodailyLung
🫁🔥 Could an ADC + immunotherapy combination reshape first-line treatment for PD-L1-positive NSCLC?
The phase III OptiTROP-Lung05 interim analysis, published in The Lancet, reports a striking PFS benefit with sacituzumab tirumotecan (sac-TMT) + pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab alone.
📊 Overall population
➡️ Median PFS: not reached vs 5.7 months
➡️ HR 0.35
➡️ 65% lower risk of progression or de
427 impressions4 likes0 reposts2026-10-02
[Slide 1]
OncoDaily Lung
Sac-TMT +
Pembrolizumab
A New First-Line ADC
Strategy in NSCLC?
JJoshua Reuss@Joshua_Reuss
Dr. @jennifermarksmd presents updates in adv NSCLC at Yellowstone 2026 Best of @ASCO including HARMONi-6, WU-KONG28 and OptiTROP-Lung05. Will be impt to see how these agents perform in global studies and in case of sunvo, would just like ACCESS to drug! Hopefully coming soon!! https://t.co/BtDvg1flYb
1.3K impressions10 likes0 reposts2026-10-03
[Slide 1]
WYOMING
BEST OF ASCO
ISCO
MONTANA
STATE DGY
can
SOS
SOCIETY
OFFICIALLY LICENSED
YELLOWSTONE 2026
Best of ASCO
KIIX
[Slide 2]
Concerns with VEGF Blockade in Squamous NSCLC
2004
2006
2014
NSCLC using
Bevacizumab
Ramucirumab was
Bevacizumab
approved for non-
approved in
excluded squamous
squamous NSCLC in
combination with
histology due to life-
combination with
docetaxel for 2L
threatening risk of
carboplatin/paclitaxel
NSCLC
bleeding
Johnson, JCO 2004; Sandler, NEJM 2006; Garon, Lancet 2014; Brahmer, ASCO 2026
MONTANA
STATE ONCOLOGY SOCIETY
[Slide 3]
TAKEAWAYS: WU-KONG28
Positive randomized phase 3 of an oral agent in EGFRex20ins NSCLC:
mPFS 10.3 VS 7.5 months (HR 0.65), ORR 58.9% VS 31.1%, DoR 11.2 VS 7.1 months
PFS2 21.7 VS 15.5 months (HR 0.70) despite 91% in chemo arm crossing over to sunvozertinib
Comparator is no longer our 1L Standard of care:
Control arm was platinum doublet alone; SOC is amivantamab + carboplatin/pemetrexed (PAPILLON)
Benefit not uniform: Asian HR 0.56 (0.41-0.77) versus non-Asian HR 0.93 (0.58-1.48), n=120; (Underpowered)
No real signal in brain metastases: n=41, HR 0.96 (0.44-2.08) and only 12.9% of enrollees had baseline CNS
disease
Dose here is 300 mg (not FDA accelerated approval dose of 200mg)
Toxicities: Diarrhea 84% (13.5% grade ≥3), CPK elevation 55% (20.2% grade >3), rash 52%, paronychia 49%,
and 40.5% requiring dose reduction
Heymach, ASCO 2026; Zhou, NEJM 2023;Yang, JCO 2025
MONTANA
STATE ONCOLOGY SOCIETY
[Slide 4]
TAKEAWAYS: OptiTROP-Lung05
First Phase 3 to show benefit of ADC + ICI in 1L NSCLC:
PFS HR 0.35 (0.26-0.47), ORR 70.2% VS 42.0%, os trend is encouraging
Benefit is largest where the control is weakest:
TPS 1-49%: HR 0.28, with pembrolizumab monotherapy mPFS of 4.3 months
TPS >50%: HR 0.47, with pembrolizumab mPFS of 9.5 months
A responsive population overall: Pembrolizumab monotherapy produced a 60.5% ORR in TPS ≥50%; higher
than in KEYNOTE-024
Sixty percent had TPS 1-49%: pembrolizumab monotherapy is not our standard here
Open-label, single-country, PFS-primary. All sites in China.
Toxicity is not trivial; Watch for pneumonitis with combination: 12.5% versus 7.4% all-grade (2.9% VS 1.0%
grade >3)
Zhou, ASCO 2026; Reck, NEJM 2016
*
MONTANA
STATE ONCOLOGY SOCIETY
JJennifer A. Marks, MD@jennifermarksmd
Grateful for the opportunity to present HARMONi-6, WU-KONG28, and OptiTROP-Lung05 at #Yellowstone2026 Best of @ASCO. Beautiful views and #mini @LombardiCancer reunion with @Joshua_Reuss. #lcsm #nsclc #jacksonhole Thanks again #MSOS #ISCO #WSOS ❤️ https://t.co/8Y3k7YcSNv
1.2K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-10-03
[Slide 1]
ST OF ASCO
WYOMING
ISCO
MONTANA
STATE
BLLY LICENSED
PRODUCT
WSOS
ONCOLOGY
SOCIETY
ELLOWSTONE 2026
est of ASCO
[Slide 2]
small cell,
racic cancers
E. Reuss, MD
sor of Medicine
town University
MONTANA
ONCOLOGY SOCIETY
BBioSignal@BioSignal
Merck sponsored the Phase 3 that failed to beat Keytruda alone with Gilead's Trodelvy added. It is running the same test with a TROP2 drug it licensed from China, built on the same antibody, and this time overall survival is the only primary endpoint.
EVOKE-03 enrolled 620 patients with untreated metastatic lung cancer and PD-L1 of 50% or more. It was stopped in June on the data monitoring c
389 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-25
24NAUTIKA1View full trial page →8.7K impressions8.4K primary · 322 preview61 engagements12 posts · 11 voices▾
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 closes with a landmark result: #ivonescimab became the first PD-1 × VEGF bispecific to beat pembrolizumab on overall survival in Phase 3.
Gotistobart, NAUTIKA1, AMIGO-1 and early mesothelioma data offer four more signals to watch.
#LungCancer #NSCLC https://t.co/rIaGuOGGBQ
3.6K impressions13 likes6 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
SEOUL
FINAL DAY
15 SEPTEMBER 2026
CTLA-4
WCLC 2026
PD-1
ALK
FINAL READOUTS
VEGF
EGFR
ONE LANDMARK RESULT FOUR SIGNALS TO WATCH
HARMONi-2
PHASE 3
FIRST-LINE PD-L1 ≥1% ADVANCED NSCLC
CHINA
n=398
36-MONTH FOLLOW-UP
FIRST PHASE 3 os WIN FOR A PD-1 X VEGF BISPECIFIC
VERSUS PEMBROLIZUMAB
IVONESCIMAB vs PEMBROLIZUMAB
OVERALL SURVIVAL
PROGRESSION-FREE SURVIVAL
30.8 VS 22.6 months
11.1 VS 5.8 months
HR 0.73
P=0.009
HR 0.51
+8.2 MONTHS
KEY SUBGROUPS
PD-L1 ≥50%
PD-L1 1-49%
SQUAMOUS
NON-SQUAMOUS
(OS)
HR 0.58
HR 0.85
HR 0.65
HR 0.79
PD-1 x VEGF IS NOW PHASE 3 os VALIDATED
!
LIMITS
SINGLE-COUNTRY STUDY
PEMBROLIZUMAB ALONE IS NOT THE IDEAL GLOBAL CONTROL FOR PD-L1 1-49%
No clear excess bleeding signal reported in the squamous subgroup
THE FINAL 24 HOURS
IMPORTANT BUT NOT EQUAL EVIDENCE
PRESERVE-003
PHASE 3 STAGE 1
NAUTIKA1
PHASE 2
GOTISTOBART REVIVES CTLA-4
ALK TARGETING MOVES BEFORE SURGERY
PRETREATED SQUAMOUS NSCLC AFTER CHEMOTHERAPY AND IMMUNOTHERAPY
RESECTABLE ALK-POSITIVE STAGE IB-IIIB NSCLC
os 18.5 VS 10.0 months
MPR 61%
pCR 25%
HR 0.56
Gotistobart vs docetaxel
Neoadjuvant alectinib
!
Strong signal
Stage 1 dataset n=87
!
Single-arm
Not practice-changing yet
AMIGO-1
PHASE 2
PUMITAMIG
PHASE 2
A PLATINUM-FREE EGFR TRIPLET
A NEW MESOTHELIOMA SIGNAL
FIRST-LINE EGFR-MUTANT METASTATIC NSCLC
FIRST-LINE UNRESECTABLE PLEURAL OR PERITONEAL MESOTHELIOMA
AMIVANTAMAB
+
LAZERTINIB
+
PEMETREXED
MEDIAN PFS 16.6 MONTHS
Chemotherapy-light intensification
PD-L1 x VEGF-A bispecific + platinum/pemetrexed
!
Single-arm proof of concept
!
China
Single-arm
Early
EXPERT
1
HARMONi-2 is the
Gotistobart reopens the
The other signals move therapy
2
3
TAKE
practice-defining biologic proof
CTLA-4 conversation after prior IO
earlier or chemotherapy-light
but still need confirmation
THE DIRECTION IS CLEAR
THE EVIDENCE IS NOT YET EQUAL
Sources
IASLC WCLC 2026
HARMONi-2
PRESERVE-003
NAUTIKA1
AMIGO-1
Pumitamig Phase 2
drozdogan.com
UUrs Weber MD@UrsWeberMD
Primary analysis of periop alectinib in resectable stage IB-IIIB NSCLC (NAUTIKA1) at @IASLC #WCLC26. pCR rate of 19%. 31% down-staging to ypN0. High rates of ctDNA clearance, which correlated with pathologic response. 2-year EFS 90%. Periop TKI might be the way to go. https://t.co/fNmk2VvkBb
730 impressions7 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
04 min 21s
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
IASLC
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
on Lung Cancer
NAUTIKA1: study schema and baseline characteristics
Phase II umbrella study of targeted neoadjuvant tx in patients
with early-stage NSCLC harbouring study-eligible oncogenic drivers¹
We present the primary analysis of the ALK+ cohortᵃ
Key eligibility criteria
Surgery and
Adjuvant tx
ALK+ cohort
Stage IB-IIIA/select IIIBᵇ
Neoadjuvant
pathologic
$4 cycles SOC
(T3N2 only) NSCLC
alectinib
response
platinum-based
ALK+
assessment
(600 mg BID;
chemotherapy,ᵃ
Eligible for R0 resection
8 weeks)
by local
then ≤2 years
Local molecular testing
review
alectinib
Key Endpoints
Primary: MPR Secondary: MPR, pCR, pathologic regression," ORR, DFS, EFS,
OS, nodal downstaging, ctDNA clearance rate'
Exploratory: ctDNA status over time, correlation with outcomes
NCT04302025. *Fully
enrolled
ALK+
cohort
Centrally treatment due assessed to adverse by lab consensus event via fluorescence AI committee. the cutoff, <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< chemotherapy then cells; alectinib Prior to while surgery *American patients Joint - point. ALK, anaplastic One patient as lymphoma lessing Canical Laborgion <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
[Slide 2]
02 min 56s
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
2026 World Conference
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
IASLC
on Lung Cancer
Pathologic and radiographica responses and 2-year
time-to-event outcomesᵇ
Weighted percentage pathologic regression (n=40)h
-
1
an
5
Response endpoint
MR
%
43ᵈ
&
%
an
BA
Pathological response, n°
BL disease stage
M
%
PR
80
09
MPR, n (%) [95% CI]
24 (56) [40, 71]
BL nodal stage
&
%
8 (19) [8, 33]
Histology
FR
E
PR
PR
FR
PR
pCR, n (%) [95% CI]
Neoadjuvant BOR'
45°
PD
Radiographic response, n
0
ORR, n (%) [95% CI]
27 (60) [44, 74]
27 (60) [44, 74]
-20
PR
16 (36) [22, 51]
SD
PD, n (%) [95% CI]
Percentage value
-40
1 (2) [<1, 12]
1 (2)
-60
pCR
NE,¹ n (%)
MPR
-80
Non-MPR
2-year event rates, % (95% CI)
90 (81, 99)
-100
EFS (n=45)
Patients
DFS (n=39)⁹
97 (91, 100)
TP63
-
-
-
-
-
-
ALKVP
OS rate (n=45)
98 (93, 100)
Not reported/not done
Median follow-up: 23.0 months
Robust pathologic regression and radiographic responses were observed with neoadjuvant alectinib
Data
resection without AE. in 3 patients adverse snapshot: R0 and resection (7%). were 30 Locally June deemed set 2026. to non-MPR. assessed. disease-free. Among variant Included Assessed all Nn treated, the baseline: all pathologic in eligible treated, eligible BOR patients. eligible efficacy-evaluable response best patients overall From analysis neoadjuvant who patients; population; either NE. underwent unconfirmed. alectinib weighted evaluable: initiation post-neoadjuvant % One viable NSQ. through patient tumour non-souamous: surgery, with surgery regression BOR then of (with NE PR adjuvant values or had partial without SD were treatment response: at resection) cycle set to with 2 "missing" day so. or chemotherapy discontinued 1 but for no patients pre-surgery and due who alectinib to AE did scan. or not in PD #Efficacy-evaluable have 33 with patients primary pathologic (73%) tumour response population and RO chemotherapy resection for who patients had only RO
stable
S
TP53
[Slide 3]
01 min
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026 World Conference
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
LASLC
on Lung Cancer
Surgical outcomes, safety and nodal downstaging
Pathologic nodal downstaging post surgery (n=45)
Post-surgical N staging
n=42
Clinical staging at BL
1 ypN3
Surgical outcomes
Median time (range). days
1 (1-49)
Last neoadjuvant tx to surgery
10
Surgical delays, n (%)ᵃ
2 (5)ᵇ I 3 (7)
10 ypN2
AEs
Scheduling
cN2 26
3
224 (60-659)
Surgery duration, median (range), min
9
3 (0-13)
Days in hospital, median (range) (n=41)
Resection, n (%)
40 (95) I 2° (5)
9 ypN1
R0 No resection
1 (2)ᵈ
Intraoperative complications, n (%)
5
Upstaged
Peri-hilar/lobar adhesions, n (%)
6 (14)
cN1 11
5
Stable
Alectinib safety, n (%)
Neoadjuvant (N=48)
Adjuvant (n=33)
Downstaged
Any-grade TRAE
43 (90)
30 (91)
20 ypN0
Grade 3/4
3 (6)
3 (9)
cN0 8
6
SAE
1 (2)
1 (3)
Dose reduction/Interruption
15 (31)
14 (42)
Treatment discontinuation
3 (6)°
4 (12)
14/45 pts (31%) downstaged to ypNO
R0 resection rates were high and
ethanol-induced *Surgery after Day 67 from start of neoadjuvant treatment was considered delayed. "Pneumonitis (n=1);
neoadjuvant alectinib was well tolerated
surgery (n=1). Other pancreatitis (n=1). Required pneumonectomy (n=1), pleural disease found at time
ypN0, pathologically negative nodes.
clinically negative lymph injury, nodes; *Included SAE, serious pneumonitis AE; TRAE, after completion treatment-related of necadjuvant AE; alectinib (n=1). CNO, of
[Slide 4]
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
IASLC
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
on Lung Cancer
ctDNA clearance status post neoadjuvant tx and
pathologic/clinical outcomes
Neoadjuvant ctDNA status and outcomesb.c
Plasma-only/tumour-agnost ctDNA was analysed by
PredicineWES+ (BL) and PredicineBEACON (MRD) with
ctDNA- at BL
ctDNA cleared
ctDNA persistent
Event
whole blood germline control subtraction
CIDNA+
(n=4)
(n=4)
- BEPᵃ included 39/45 patients (87% of eligible and
Non-MPR
efficacy-evaluable patients)
(n=18)
Censored
- 77% of BEP (30/39) was ctDNA+ at BL
Number of patients
CIDNA+
(n=17)*
(n=28)
- ALK fusions detected in 26% of BEP (10/39)
CIDNA-
(n=33)
ctDNA clearance prior to surgery was observed in 86% of
patients (24/28) who were ctDNA+ at BL
MPR
(n=13)
All patients who had MPR (n=13) or pCR (n=6) were either
No event
ctDNA- at BL or cleared ctDNA prior to surgeryᵇ
CIDNA-
(n=16)
All patients who were event free at 2 years (n=16) were either
(n=9)
pCR
(n=6)
ctDNA- at BL or cleared ctDNA prior to surgery
BL
Last sample
Pathologic
EFS at
pre-surgery*
response
2 years
These data suggest that ctDNA MRD clearance after neoadjuvant alectinib
may be associated with favourable outcomes
*Includes
patients
who
had
BL
ctDNA
data.
"
patient
was
excluded
not BEP, been biomarker-evaluable 2 years since first population; treatment date, MRD, but molecular they were residual event-free disease. from at the outcomes time of the analysis snapshot. due "Last to missing sample MPR/pCR. collected Includes post-BL, during patients neoadjuvant who had BL phase and longitudinal before surgery, clDNA 2 patients data. Patients' only had last Cycle disease 2 Day assessment 1 sample.
date
has
6
TTom Newsom-Davis@tnewsomdavis
NAUTIKA1: neo-adj divarasib KRAS G12C
👉 Ph2 ☂️
👉 Adj chemo/diva (PDL1-) or atezo (PDL1+)
👉 n=19
🔺16% pCR, 42% MPR
✅35% nodal downstaging
✅100% R0 rate, proves feasibility
✅TRAEs good
🤔
?best pathology marker: MPR pCR?
Neo-adj chemoIO + adj Diva likely better
#WCLC26 https://t.co/YuknqVv5HD
700 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
07 min
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study design
Neoadjuvant treatment
Adjuvant treatment
PD-L1 TC <1%:
Key eligibility
Chemotherapy followed by ≤3 years
Stage IB, IIA, IIB, IIIA, or
of divarasib 400 mg, QD
select IIIB (T3N2 only)
Divarasib
OR ≤3 years of divarasib 400 mg, QD only
NSCLC per AJCC 8th edition
Surgery and pathological
OR SoC*
Eligible for R0 resection
(400 mg, QD;
response assessment
8 weeks)
(by local review)
ECOG PS 0/1
PD-L1 TC ≥1%:
KRAS G12C+
Chemotherapy followed by atezolizumab
OR SoC*
Primary endpoints: safety and feasibility of neoadjuvant divarasib
Secondary endpoints: MPR, pCR, ORR, and nodal downstaging
Exploratory endpoints: pharmacokinetics
KRAS G12C mutation and PD-L1 expression determined by any FDA-approved assay performed in a CLIA-certified laboratory. "As per investigator's choice
CLIA, QD, clinical laboratory improvement amendments; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, FDA, food and drug administration, MPR, major pathological response; ORR, overall response rate; pCR, pathological complete response;
once daily, RO, complete resection with negative margins; SoC, standard of care, TC, turnor cell
1. Amin, et al. Springer 2017.
[Slide 2]
IASLC
06 min 02S
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Antitumor activity with neoadjuvant divarasib
Pathological response, n (%) [95% CI]
n=19*
MPR
8 (42) [20-67]
pCR
3 (16) [3-40]
Radiographic response, n (%)
n=20+
ORR (by investigator), n (%) [95% CI]
11 (55) [32-77]
Complete response
1 (5)
Partial response
10 (50)
Stable disease
9 (45)
Progressive disease
0
Neoadjuvant divarasib demonstrated promising antitumor activity
Data snapshot: June 30, 2026.
"Pathological response was assessed locally The pathological response analysis population was defined as all eligible and treated patients who either underwent post-neoadjuvant surgery (with or without resection), or discontinued due to an adverse event or disease
progression with pathological response for patients without RO resection set to non-MPR Assessed in efficacy-evaluable patients, unconfirmed response
CI, confidence interval
[Slide 3]
IASLC
04
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Best percent change in SLD from baseline with
neoadjuvant divarasib
Stage
IB
IIA
IIB
IB
ILA
IIB
DB
IIIA
IIIA
IIA
IB
IIIA
118
IIIB
IIIA
IIA
IIA
IIB
IIIA
IIIA
Nodal stage
NO
N2
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
N2
N2
N2
N2
N2
NO
N2
NO
N1
N2
NO
NO
N2
Histology
SQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
SQ
NSQ
SQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
NSQ
10
Best overall response*
0
SD
SD
-20
SD
Best improvement
from baseline in SLD %
SD
SD
SD
SD
SQ
-40
SD
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
CR
PR
PR
-60
PR
-80
-100
Pathological response:
pCR
MPR
non-MPR
NE
Patients
PD-L1 expression
<1
21
<1
<1
1
>50
<1
<1
≥1
1
1
1
<1
>50
>50
<1
>50
<1
>50
1
TP53 mutation detected
Y
N
N
N
N
INNYMNYNNNNNYNNN
STK11 mutation detected
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
n/a
N
n/a
N
N
N
Y
n/a
N
N
N
KEAP1 mutation detected
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
n/a
N
n/a
N
Y
N
n/a
n/a
N
N
N
Tumor regression was observed across PD-L1, TP53, and STK11 status
Data snapshot: June 30, 2026. "Per investigator
CR, complete response, N. no, NE, not evaluable, NSQ, non-squamous PR, partial response, SD, stable disease, SLD, sum of longest diameters, SQ, squamous, Y, yes.
[Slide 4]
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Safety and feasibility of neoadjuvant and adjuvant divarasib
n (%)
Neoadjuvant divarasib
Adjuvant divarasib
Any grade AE
(n=20)
(n=6)
20 (100)
6 (100)
Grade 3/4
Serious AE
3 (15.0)
1 (16.7)
2 (10.0)
1 (16.7)
Any grade TRAE
20 (100)
5 (83.3)
Grade 3/4
1 (5.0)
0
Serious AE
1 (5.0)
0
AE leading to interruption
2 (10.0)*
2 (33.3)+
AE leading to dose reduction
1 (5.0)
0
AE leading to treatment discontinuation
0
0
Most AEs were Grade 1-2 and manageable; no patients discontinued treatment due to an AE
No surgical delays occurred due to AEs
Median duration of adjuvant divarasib was 80 weeks (range: 12-117)
The most common AE was diarrhea (mostly Grade 1-2 events) in both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings
Data snapshot: June 30, 2026.
"Drug-related Grade 3 nausea (n=1) and non-drug-related Grade 3 pneumonia (n=1) in the same patient, and non-drug-related Grade 4 hyponatremia (n=1), Drug-related Grade 2 diarrhea (n=1) and non-drug-related Grade 3 abdominal pain
and Grade 2 COVID-19 (n=1), Drug-related Grade 3 nausea (n=1)
AE, adverse event, TRAE, treatment-related adverse event
DDiego A. Díaz-García@diegoadiazg
🫁 NAUTIKA1: neoadjuvant divarasib shows activity in KRAS G12C+ NSCLC. @ChaftJamie
In this phase II cohort:
• MPR: 42%
• pCR: 16%
• ORR: 55%
• Pathologic nodal downstaging: 37%
• R0 resection: 100%
Divarasib was feasible without surgical delays or treatment discontinuations due to AEs. Most toxicities were grade 1-2.
These results support further evaluation of KRAS G12C inhibition in resectable
676 impressions5 likes3 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
08 min 03
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study design
Neoadjuvant treatment
Adjuvant treatment
PD-L1 TC <1%:
Key eligibility
Chemotherapy followed by ≤3 years
Stage IB, IIA, IIB, IIIA, or
of divarasib 400 mg, QD
select IIIB (T3N2 only)
Divarasib
OR ≤3 years of divarasib 400 mg, QD only
Surgery and pathological
NSCLC per AJCC 8th edition
OR SoC*
(400 mg, QD;
response assessment
Eligible for R0 resection
8 weeks)
(by local review)
ECOG PS 0/1
PD-L1 TC ≥1%:
KRAS G12C+
Chemotherapy followed by atezolizumab
OR SoC*
Primary endpoints: safety and feasibility of neoadjuvant divarasib
Secondary endpoints: MPR, pCR, ORR, and nodal downstaging
Exploratory endpoints: pharmacokinetics
KRAS G12C mutation and PD-L1 expression determined by any DA-approved assay performed in a CLIA certified laboratory "As per investigator's choice
CLIA clinical laboratory improvement amendments ECOG PS Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, FDA food and drug administration MPR major pathological response, ORR, overall response rate, pCR, pathological complete response,
QD: once daily, R0, complete resection with negative margins; SoC. standard of care, TC, tumor cell
1. Amin, et al. Springer 2017
4
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
05 min 52
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Antitumor activity with neoadjuvant divarasib
Pathological response, n (%) [95% CI]
n=19*
MPR
8 (42) [20-67]
pCR
3 (16) [3-40]
Radiographic response, n (%)
n=20t
ORR (by investigator), n (%) [95% CI]
11 (55) [32-77]
Complete response
1 (5)
Partial response
10 (50)
Stable disease
9 (45)
Progressive disease
0
Neoadjuvant divarasib demonstrated promising antitumor activity
Data snapshot: June 30, 2026.
"Pathological response was assessed locally The pathological response analysis population was defined as all eligible and treated patients who other underwent post necadjuvant surgery (with or without resection) or discontinued due to an adverse event or disease
progression with pathological response for patients without R0 resection set to non-MPR; Assessed in efficacy evaluable patients; unconfirmed response
CI, confidence interval
6
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
04 min 27
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Clinical and nodal downstaging with neoadjuvant divarasib
Clinical downstaging
Nodal downstaging*
Baseline
Post-neoadjuvant divarasib
Baseline
Surgery
Stage IIIB 2
1 Stage IIIB
2
N2
9
2 N2
5
6
Stage IIIA
9
6 Stage IIIA
2
N1
1
2 N1
Stage IIB 4
3 Stage IIB
Stage IIA 2
3 Stage IIA
1
Stage IB 3
3 Stage IB
NO
10
9
15 NO
2 Stage IA3
2 Stage 1A2
Downstaging status Stable Downstaged = Upstaged
Clinical downstaging was observed in
Pathological nodal downstaging occurred in 35% (7/20) of
45% (9/20) of patients
patients, with downstaging to NO in 30% (6/20) of patients
Data snapshot: June 30. 2026.
"One patient with baseline stage N2 did not have surgery pathological staging evaluated
8
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
01 min 55
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Krascendo 3: phase III study of adjuvant divarasib VS pembrolizumab or
nivolumab in resected early-stage KRAS G12C+ NSCLC (NCT07541170)
Key eligibility criteria
Enrollment
after surgery
Divarasib 400 mg QD for 3 years
KRAS G12C+ NSCLC
Resected (R0) stage IIA, IIB,
IIIA, and IIIB NSCLC
3-4
(AJCC 9th edition)
cycles
Non-
Surgery
1:1
Follow-up
Received neoadjuvant
chemo-
pCR
(DFS and OS)
pembrolizumab or nivolumab
immunotherapy
with platinum-based
Pembrolizumab Q3W
chemotherapy without pCR
n=400
OR nivolumab Q4W for
PD-L1 all-comers
up to 13 cycles
ECOG PS 0/1
OR observation*
Stratification factors
Primary endpoint
PD-L1 status
DFS
Disease stage
SoC option
Enrollment for the Krascendo 3 trial is ongoing
"Patients who receive necadjuvant nivolumab may receive either adjuvant nivolumab or observation
DFS, disease- free survival, Q3W, three times a week Q4W, four times week
13
DDr Riyaz Shah@DrRiyazShah
NAUTIKA1; KRAS G12C Divarasib neoadjuvant for 8w: n=20; pCR 16% MPR 42%; ORR 55%. Nodal downstaging seems significant: does not look good enough for SOC> reflected in KRASCENDO3 adjuvant P3 #WCLC26 https://t.co/Xklb91rdsC
616 impressions7 likes1 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
07 min 48s
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Study design
Neoadjuvant treatment
Adjuvant treatment
PD-L1 TC <1%:
Key eligibility
Chemotherapy followed by ≤3 years
Stage IB, IIA, IIB, IIIA, or
of divarasib 400 mg, QD
select IIIB (T3N2 only)
OR ≤3 years of divarasib 400 mg, QD only
Divarasib
Surgery and pathological
OR SoC*
NSCLC per AJCC 8th edition
(400 mg, QD;
response assessment
Eligible for R0 resection
8 weeks)
(by local review)
ECOG PS 0/1
PD-L1 TC ≥1%:
KRAS G12C+
Chemotherapy followed by atezolizumab
OR SoC*
Primary endpoints: safety and feasibility of neoadjuvant divarasib
Secondary endpoints: MPR, pCR, ORR, and nodal downstaging
Exploratory endpoints: pharmacokinetics
KRAS G12C mutation and PD-L1 expression determined by any FDA-approved assay performed in a CLIA-certified laboratory. "As per investigator's choice.
CLIA, clinical laboratory improvement amendments; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; FDA, food and drug administration; MPR, major pathological response; ORR, overall response rate; pCR, pathological complete respons
QD, once daily; RO, complete resection with negative margins; SoC, standard of care; TC, turnor cell.
1. Amin, el al. Springer 2017.
PEI-JYE VOON
IASLC
[Slide 2]
06 min 24s
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Patient disposition and baseline characteristics
Enrolled as of
N=20
Characteristic, n (%) unless specified
September 24, 2025
(N=20)
70 (53-84)
Median age, years (range)
Completed 8 weeks
Sex: female / male
8 (40) / 12 (60)
of neoadjuvant therapy
(n=20)
Tobacco use: current / former / never
2 (10) / 17 (85) / 1 (5)
Underwent surgery
Patient opted not
ECOG PS at baseline: 0/1
10 (50.0) / 10 (50.0)
(n=19)
to undergo surgery
(n=1)
Histology:
Non-squamous / squamous
17 (85) /3 (15)
Received adjuvant therapy
Patient opted
Clinical staging (AJCC 8ᵗʰ edition):
(n=15)
for no adjuvant
IB / IIA / IIB /
3 (15) / 2 (10) / 4 (20) /
n=4 divarasib only
therapy (n=4)
IIIA / IIIB*
9 (45) / 2 (10)
n=2 chemotherapy - divarasib
n=2 atezolizumab
n=5 chemotherapy - atezolizumab
Lymph node stage: NO / N1 / N2
10 (50) / 1(5)/9(45)
n=1 chemotherapy - immunotherapy
n=1 chemotherapy
Primary tumor: TO / T1b / T1c /
1 (5) / 1 ( / 3 (15) /
T2a / T2b / T3 / T4
3 (15) /4(20)/5(25)/3(15)
Data snapshot: June 30, 2026; median follow-up: 14.8 months
"Select IIIB (T3N2 only).
PEIJYE VOON
VANES
[Slide 3]
05 min 57s
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
NM
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Antitumor activity with neoadjuvant divarasib
Pathological response, n (%) [95% CI]
n=19*
MPR
8 (42) [20-67]
pCR
3 (16) [3-40]
Radiographic response, n (%)
n=20+
ORR (by investigator), n (%) [95% CI]
11 (55) [32-77]
Complete response
1 (5)
Partial response
10 (50)
Stable disease
9 (45)
Progressive disease
0
Neoadjuvant divarasib demonstrated promising antitumor activity
Data snapshot: June 30, 2026.
"Pathological response was assessed locally. The pathological response analysis population was defined as all eligible and treated patients who either underwent post-neoadjuvant surgery (with or without resection), or discontinued due to an adverse event ease
progression with pathological response for patients without R0 resection set to non-MPR; Assessed in efficacy-evaluable patients; unconfirmed response.
CI, confidence interval.
PEI-JYE VOON
VANES
ME
IASLC
[Slide 4]
IASLC
04 min 19s
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
MN
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Clinical and nodal downstaging with neoadjuvant divarasib
Clinical downstaging
Nodal downstaging*
Baseline
Post-neoadjuvant divarasib
Baseline
Surgery
Stage IIIB 2
1 Stage IIIB
2
F
2
N2
N2
9
5
6
Stage IIIA 9
6 Stage IIIA
2
N1
2
N1
Stage IIB 4
1
F
2
3 Stage IIB
Stage IIA 2
B
1
3 Stage IIA
11
Stage IB 3
1
2
3 Stage IB
NO
10
15 NO
9
2 Stage IA3
2 Stage IA2
Downstaging status
Stable
Downstaged
Upstaged
Clinical downstaging was observed in
Pathological nodal downstaging occurred in 35% (7/20) of
45% (9/20) of patients
patients, with downstaging to NO in 30% (6/20) of patients
Data snapshot: June 30, 2026.
"One patient with baseline stage N2 did not have surgery pathological staging evaluated.
PEI-JYE VOON
VANE
IASLC
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
KRAS G12C BEFORE SURGERY: TARGET FIRST, OPERATE NEXT?
NAUTIKA1 explores a simple concept:
• Resectable KRAS G12C+ NSCLC
→ treat the driver before surgery with divarasib
→ then operate and look at what is actually left in the tumor.
The signal is encouraging: 42% MPR and 16% pCR, with 19/20 patients undergoing surgery and no AE-related surgical delays.
Take-home: KRAS G12C inhibition may have a
489 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
KRAS G12C BEFORE SURGERY
CAN TARGETED THERAPY WORK?
MV Onco
NAUTIKA1 I DIVARASIB
20 PATIENTS
RESECTABLE
KRAS G12C+ NSCLC
Stage IB-IIIB
BEFORE SURGERY
DIVARASIB
400 mg DAILY
for
8 WEEKS
SURGERY
WHAT WAS FOUND AT SURGERY?
42%
16%
MPR
PCR
≤10% viable tumor
no viable tumor
55%
19/20
NO AE-RELATED
RADIOLOGICAL
UNDERWENT
SURGICAL DELAYS
RESPONSE
SURGERY
TAKE-HOME:
TARGET KRAS EARLY?
Promising pathological activity
before surgery.
Early data I only 20 patients
Not yet practice-changing.
NAUTIKA1 I WCLC 2026 I OA04.04
Chaft JE et al.
MV Onco
BBhaarath PG@BhaarathP10039
@IASLC-WCLC 2026: Pre-Conf Top Abstracts
KEYNOTE-D46 | REZILIENT3 | ARTEMIS-008 | S1827 MAVERICK | PAPILLON | TAISHAN-302 | ADAURA | ARROS-1 | DESTINY-LUNG04 | MDT-BRIDGE | IMpower133 | SKYSCRAPER-02 | NAUTIKA1 | DeLLphi309 | IMpower030 | AMIGO-1 | LuCa-MERIT-1 | JS207 | GFH375 | QLC1101 | LB2102 | SYS6010 | HS-10370 | RC148 | YL201
#WCLC26 #WCLC2026 #Cancer #Oncology #LungCancer #NSCLC #SCLC #LCS
322 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
25GFH375 (KRAS G12D)7.9K impressions3.2K primary · 4.7K preview2 engagements3 posts · 2 voices▾
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🔥Phase 1: GFH375 (KRAS G12D ON/OFF inhibitor) in KRASG12D-mutant advanced solid tumors
🆙 @NatureMedicine
🎯Dual ON/OFF state targeting offers novel mechanism
🎯N=74 (PDAC 43, NSCLC 16, CRC 10)
🎯RP2D 600mg QD; no DLT; grade ≥3 TRAEs 36.5%
🎯PDAC ORR 35.1%; NSCLC ORR 35.7%
🎙Dr. Xinghao Ai & Dr. Shun Lu
#LCSM #WCLC26 @OncoAlert @Larvol @KRASKickers
https://t.co/U3rORv3q3A
3.2K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-16
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🆙#WCLC26 #LCSM Oral Session
🔥Efficacy and Safety of GFH375 in Advanced KRASG12D Mutant NSCLC Patients
🎙️Dr. Ziming Li
🔢OA12.01
🎯At RP2D 600mg QD, Confirmed ORR 49.1%, DCR 90.6%
🎯Median PFS 8.1m, OS 15.4m
🎯Grade≥3 TRAEs in 33.3%
☑️NCT06500676
🔗 https://t.co/tHSHNAWldb
@OncoAlert @Larvol @IASLC @KRASKickers
4.3K impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Background
GFH375 is a potent, highly selective, orally administrated KRASG¹²D inhibitor that targets both the "ON" (GTP-bound) and
"OFF" (GDP-bound) states.
Preliminary clinical data of GFH375 had shown encouraging anti-tumor activity and good tolerability in NSCLC1, PDAC²,
CRC and cholangiocarcinoma³ in the first-in-human study conducted in China (NCT06500676).
Here we present the updated data of GFH375 monotherapy in KRASG¹²D mutant NSCLC.
Phase I: Dose escalation and expansion
Phase II: Indication expansion
Key eligibility criteria
Advanced solid tumors
900mg QD
Cohort 1: NSCLC
with KRASG12D mutation
750mg QD
Previously treated with
600mg QD
300mg BID
Cohort 2: PDAC
standard therapies
400mg QD
RP2D
NSCLC previously treated
Cohort 3: CRC
200mg QD
with ICI and/or platinum-
Treatment until disease progression,
intolerable toxicity or other reasons
based chemo therapies
100mg QD
Cohort 4: Other solid tumors
ECOG PS 0 1
Escalate with accelerated titration and BOIN
design + backfilling
Abbreviations: BID, twice daily; BOIN, Bayesian optimal interval; CRC, colorectal cancer; ECOG PS, eastern cooperative oncology group performance status; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer;
PDAC, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; QD, once daily; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose.
Lu S, et al. MA02.07. Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 20, S59-S60. 2Zhou A, et al. LBA84. Annals of Oncology, 36S1626. 3Zhu L, et al. J Clin Oncol 44, 3008-3008(2026).
3
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Objective Response
Among the 71 patients with at least one post-treatment efficacy
Median (range) time to response: 1.4 months (1.4-8.3 months)
evaluation, ORR was 59.2% (42/71), confirmed ORR was 52.1% (37/71).
Median duration of response: 8.3 months (95% Cl: 6.3, NA)
Among the 9 patients with brain metastases and at least one post-
treatment evaluation, ORR was 55.6% (5/9).
100
NSCLC at 600 mg
(n=71)*
Confirmed ORR (95% CI)
52.1% (39.9%, 64.1%)
50
Unconfirmed ORR (95% CI)
59.2% (46.8%, 70.7%)#
BM
Best percentage change from baseline (%)
DCR (95% CI)
93.0% (84.3%, 97.7%)
0
Prior lines of therapy
PR
SD
PD
NE
Death
1
Ongoing
die
de
-50
PR
UP
de
-100
3
3
2
2
2
4
10
12
14
16
18
20
Prior lines of therapy
Duration of treatment (months)
Data cut-off date: 04 Sep 2026.
* Four patient dropped out early without post-baseline tumor assessment (2 due to death, 1 due to patient's global deterioration of health, and 1 due to physician's decision), 3 among whom had baseline brain metastases.
#
One was ongoing and pending for confirmed PR. Four patients achieved PR but discontinued before response confirmation: 1 dropped out due to AE (G4 hepatic function abnormal and recovered after discontinuation), 2 had disease
progression at the second assessment, and 1 had stable disease at the later assessments.
&
No cerebral metastatic lesions were chosen as target lesions among the patients.
Abbreviation: BM, brain metastases; CI, confidence interval; cPR, confirmed partial response; DCR, disease control rate; NE, not evaluable; ORR, objective response rate; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease. 5
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
PFS and OS
Median PFS was 8.3 months (95% Cl: 6.8, NA) with median follow-up time 11.0 months.
Among taxane-naive patients, median PFS was 9.6 months (95% Cl: 6.7, NA)
Among taxane-pretreated patients, median PFS was 8.1 months (95% Cl: 5.5, NA)
Median OS was not reached (95% Cl: 15.4 m, NA) with median follow-up time 11.2 months. 12-months OS rate was 77.0%
(95% Cl: 66.9%, 88.7%).
Taxane-naive
Taxane-pretreated
600mg QD (N=75)
1.00
Event, n(%)
40 (53.3)
1.00
Disease Progression
35 (46.7)
Death
5 (6.7)
0.75
Censor, n(%)
35 (46.7)
0.75
On study, no event
30 (40.0)
PFS probability
Off study, no event
5 (6.7)
0.50
PFS probability
0.50
0.25
0.25
0.00
0.00
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Follow up time (months)
Follow up time (months)
Number at risk
Number at risk
75
74
62
55
52
48
38
30
30
22
17
16
11
9
5
5
3
Taxane-naive
46
45
40
34
32
29
24
19
19
15
11
10
7
6
2
2
2
Taxane-pretreated
29
29
22
21
20
19
14
11
11
7
6
6
4
3
3
3
1
Data cut-off date: 04 Sep 2026.
6
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Safety in Patients with NSCLC
Treatment-Emergent AE
Treatment-Related AE
GFH375 presented a manageable safety profile in pretreated NSCLC patients.
Diarrhoea
The safety profile was consistent with prior reports¹⁻³, without new safety signals.
Vomiting
Nausea
Common TRAEs were gastrointestinal, hematological AEs and transaminitis;
Aspartateaminotransferase increased
most were grade 1 or 2 and recovered with supportive treatment.
Anaemia
Hypertriglyceridaemia
Adverse events, n(%)
600 mg QD (N=75)
Alanineaminotransferase increased
TEAEs
Neutrophilcount decreased
Decreased appetite
All grades
75 (100)
Amylase increased
Grade ≥3
42 (56.0)
Proteinuria
Leading to discontinuation
6 (8.0)
Hyponatraemia
Whitebloodcellcount decreased
Leading to reduction
19 (25.3)
Hypoalbuminaemia
Leading to interruption
33 (44.0)
Asthenia
SAE
27 (36.0)
Weight decreased
Leading to death
5 (6.7)
Hyperglycaemia
Gamma-glutamy/transferase increased
TRAEs
Bloodcreatinine increased
All grades
75 (100)
Lymphocytecount decreased
Grade ≥3
31 (41.3)
80
60
40
20
0
20
40
60
80
Leading to discontinuation
3 (4.0)
Grade 1/2
Grade x
Grade 1/2
Grade >
Leading to reduction
19 (25.3)
Leading to interruption
28 (37.3)
TEAEs and TRAEs occurred in >15% of patients
SAE
16 (21.3)
The median exposure time to GFH375 in all NSCLC patients at 600 mg was 5.3 months (range: 0.5-16.1) by the cut-off date. The
mean relative dose intensity was 89.8%.
Leading to death
0
Abbreviations: SAE, serious adverse event; TEAE, treatment emergent adverse event; TRAE, treatment related adverse event.
Lu S, et al. MA02.07. Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 20, S59-S60. Zhou A, et al. LBA84. Annals of Oncology, 36S1626.³Zhu L, et al.
Data cut-off date: 17 June 2026.
J Clin Oncol 44, 3008-3008(2026).
7
BBhaarath PG@BhaarathP10039
@IASLC-WCLC 2026: Pre-Conf Top Abstracts
KEYNOTE-D46 | REZILIENT3 | ARTEMIS-008 | S1827 MAVERICK | PAPILLON | TAISHAN-302 | ADAURA | ARROS-1 | DESTINY-LUNG04 | MDT-BRIDGE | IMpower133 | SKYSCRAPER-02 | NAUTIKA1 | DeLLphi309 | IMpower030 | AMIGO-1 | LuCa-MERIT-1 | JS207 | GFH375 | QLC1101 | LB2102 | SYS6010 | HS-10370 | RC148 | YL201
#WCLC26 #WCLC2026 #Cancer #Oncology #LungCancer #NSCLC #SCLC #LCS
322 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
26sac-TMTView full trial page →7.8K impressions5.9K primary · 2K preview45 engagements8 posts · 6 voices▾
AAya Mohamed | MSc, MD 🎗@Dr_Oncologista
OptiTROP-Lung05: 🫁
A strong phase 3 signal for ADC + immunotherapy in 1L PD-L1+ advanced NSCLC.
Sac-TMT + pembrolizumab vs pembrolizumab:
• PFS: NR vs 5.7 months; HR 0.35
• ORR: 70.2% vs 42.0%
https://t.co/XDvBtfRXXA
@OncoAlert #lcsm #LungCancer https://t.co/heBozvKuxF
3.8K impressions17 likes3 reposts2026-10-02
[Slide 1]
THE LANCET
o(
Search for
Q
ARTICLES Volume 407, Issue 10548, P2607-2619, June
27, 2026
Download Full Issue
Sacituzumab tirumotecan plus
pembrolizumab versus
pembrolizumab in PD-L1-
positive advanced non-small-
cell lung cancer (OptiTROP-
Lung05): interim analysis of a
randomised, open-label, phase 3
trial
[Slide 2]
A Progression-free survival
100
Sac-TMT plus
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
80
62 (54-70)
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
29 (22-37)
Sac-TMT plus
66/208 (32%)
NR (13-6-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
128/205 (62%)
5.7 (4.3-7.0)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.35 (95% CI, 0.26-0.47) p<0.0001
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Time (months)
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
208
208
195
187
182
164
144
126
120
90
62
47
20
18
1
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(9)
(23)
(36)
(38)
(59)
(82)
(97)
(123)
(125)
(141)
(142)
Pembrolizumab
205
195
149
129
127
108
84
67
61
46
28
24
9
8
1
0
(0)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(11)
(21)
(26)
(28)
(39)
(51)
(55)
(69)
(70)
(76)
(77)
A Tumour proportion score of 1 to 49%
Number of events/
Median progression-
100
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
40/125 (32%)
NR (11.1-NE)
pembrolizumab
80
Pembrolizumab
84/123 (68%)
43 (2.9-5.5)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.28 (95% CI, 0.19-0.41)
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
20
Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
125
125
117
113
108
97
84
73
69
48
34
25
11
10
1
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(8)
(17)
(26)
(27)
(42)
(53)
(62)
(75)
(76)
(84)
(85)
Pembrolizumab
123
117
81
67
66
53
38
27
24
16
11
10
2
1
0
..
(0)
(3)
(4)
(4)
(5)
(7)
(12)
(17)
(19)
(24)
(29)
(30)
(37)
(38)
(39)
(..)
[Slide 3]
C
Non-squamous NSCLC
100
Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
80
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
29/123 (24%)
NR (13-6-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
70/124 (56%)
6.6 (4.3-8.7)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.28 (95% CI, 0.18-0.43)
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
123
123
118
114
110
104
88
73
69
51
35
26
11
11
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(1)
(4)
(17)
(30)
(32)
(47)
(60)
(69)
(84)
(84)
(94)
(-)
Pembrolizumab
124
116
89
76
75
66
51
38
34
25
15
12
4
4
1
0
(0)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(8)
(18)
(23)
(25)
(33)
(39)
(42)
(50)
(50)
(53)
(54)
D
Squamous NSCLC
100
80
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
37/85 (44%)
NR (8.3-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
58/80 (73%)
5-5 (4.1-7.0)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.44 (95% CI, 0.29-0.66)
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Time (months)
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
85
85
77
73
72
60
56
53
51
39
27
21
9
7
1
0
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(5)
(6)
(6)
(6)
(12)
(22)
(28)
(39)
(41)
(47)
(48)
Pembrolizumab
80
78
59
52
51
42
33
29
27
21
13
12
5
4
0
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(5)
(11)
(12)
(18)
(19)
(22)
(..)
[Slide 4]
B
Tumour proportion score of 50% or greater
100
80
Progression-free survival (%)
60
40
Number of events/
Median progression-
patients (%)
free survival (95% CI)
Sac-TMT plus
26/83 (31%)
NR (NE-NE)
20
pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
44/82 (54%)
9.5 (6.9-13.8)
Hazard ratio for disease progression or death,
0.47 (95% CI, 0.29-0.77)
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Time (months)
Number at risk
(censored)
Sac-TMT plus
83
83
78
74
74
67
60
53
51
42
28
22
9
8
0
:.
pembrolizumab
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(1)
(6)
(10)
(11)
(17)
(29)
(35)
(48)
(49)
(57)
(··)
Pembrolizumab
82
78
68
62
61
55
46
40
37
30
17
14
7
7
1
0
(0)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(3)
(4)
(9)
(9)
(9)
(15)
(22)
(25)
(32)
(32)
(37)
(38)
EElvina Almuradova@Dr_ElvinaA
#WCLC26: Sac-TMT showed promising activity in previously treated NSCLC with actionable alterations beyond classic EGFR.
ORR 34.4% | mDOR 12.7 mo
Activity across EGFR uncommon/Ex20ins, ALK, KRAS, ROS1/RET.
No treatment-related deaths.
#LCSM #NSCLC @Larvol @OncoAlert https://t.co/4bwstqcMMA
1K impressions7 likes4 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
07 min 31s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
OptiTROP-Lung03 Study Design
Phase 2, open-label, multicohort study (NCT05631262)
Key Eligibility for Cohort 5
Advanced NSCLC harboring other
Primary Endpointa
AGAs, including:
ORR
- non-classic EGFR mutations, such as
EGFR 18exonG719X, 20exonS7681,
Safety
21exonL861Q mutations;
Treatment until no clinical
- EGFR 20 exon insertion mutation;
Sac-TMT
benefit, intolerable toxicity,
Secondary endpointsᵃ
- ALK fusion;
5 mg/kg IV, Q2W
patient withdrawal or any other
DCR, DOR, TTR
- KRAS mutation;
reason for discontinuation
PFS
-
ROS1/RET fusion, MET ex14 skipping
OS
mutation, BRAF V600E mutation, ect.
Tumor assessment
Progression after standard treatment
Every 8 weeks for the first 48 weeks, and every 12 weeks thereafter
ECOG score 0 or 1
a Tumor response was assessed using RECIST version 1.1.
ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; KRAS, kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog; ROS1, ROS proto-oncogene 1 receptor tyrosine kinase; RET, proto-oncogene tyrosine-protein kinase receptor Ret; MET, mesenchymal-epithelial
transition factor; BRAF, v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; IV, intravenous; ORR, objective response rate; DCR, disease control rate; DOR, duration of response; TTR, time to
response; PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors.
5
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 48s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Efficacy Summary
EGFR
EGFR
ALK
KRAS
ROS1/RET fusion, MET
Overall
non-classic
ex20ins
fusion
mutation
ex14 skipping, or
(n=90)
(n=23)
(n=20)
(n=20)
(n=16)
BRAF V600E (n=11)
21.5
21.8
22.7
19.2
22.4
21.2
Median follow-up (95% CI), mo
(19.9, 22.8)
(17.3, 22.6)
(18.9, 24.4)
(14.9, 21.2)
(20.0, NE)
(20.1, 22.2)
39.1
35.0
40.0
25.0
27.3
34.4
ORR (95% CI), %
(19.7, 61.5)
(15.4, 59.2)
(19.1, 63.9)
(7.3, 52.4)
(6.0, 61.0)
(24.7, 45.2)
91.3
75.0
95.0
75.0
90.9
85.6
DCR (95% CI), %
(72.0, 98.9)
(50.9, 91.3)
(75.1, 99.9)
(47.6, 92.7)
(58.7, 99.8)
(76.6, 92.1)
12.7
12.8
7.6
NR
14.7
12.7
Median DOR (95% CI), mo
(7.4, NE)
(3.9, NE)
(0.6, NE)
(3.9, NE)
(2.4, NE)
(7.6, 14.9)
10.9
9.0
9.4
9.6
7.1
9.4
Median PFS (95% CI), mo
(5.6, 19.3)
(1.9, 13.7)
(3.7, NE)
(1.7, 16.6)
(1.7, 19.1)
(5.7, 11.5)
45.5
37.9
43.0
28.1
33.8
38.9
12-mo PFS rate (95% CI), %
(24.4, 64.3)
(17.3, 58.5)
(19.8, 64.4)
(6.8, 55.0)
(8.0, 62.7)
(28.0, 49.5)
NR
21.3
23.3
12.3
NR
NR
Median OS (95% CI), mo
(19.7, NE)
(15.7, NE)
(8.0, NE)
(7.6, NE)
(8.6, NE)
(19.1, NE)
78.3
74.3
60.0
47.1
54.5
64.7
18-mo OS rate (95% CI), %
(55.4, 90.3)
(48.7, 88.4)
(35.7, 77.6)
(21.6,69.1)
(22.9, 78.0)
(53.7, 73.7)
mo, month; NR, not reached; NE, evaluable.
8
TTejas Patil@TejasPatilMD
HONORABLE MENTIONS
1⃣PL03.08 - Ran out of time, but this is obviously a MAJOR study looking at front line T-Dxd in #HER2 #NSCLC. Big question will be positioning given approval of zongertinib in 1L setting.
2⃣OA07.02 - Ambient air pollution exposure and lung cancer prognosis. Builds on prior studies showing a concerning relationship between air quality and lung cancer prognosis.
3⃣OA13.01 - I
627 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
WWoong@woongworks
@Dr_Oncologista @OncoAlert OptiTROP-Lung05’s Sac-TMT + pembro PFS signal in 1L PD-L1+ NSCLC is hard to ignore if it holds under broader TROP2 selection. In practice, do you see the bigger question as who still needs chemo-IO first, or how to sequence after TROP2 ADC exposure when EGFR/ALK lanes open later?
2 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-10-02
OOncoDaily Lung@OncodailyLung
🫁🔥 Could an ADC + immunotherapy combination reshape first-line treatment for PD-L1-positive NSCLC?
The phase III OptiTROP-Lung05 interim analysis, published in The Lancet, reports a striking PFS benefit with sacituzumab tirumotecan (sac-TMT) + pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab alone.
📊 Overall population
➡️ Median PFS: not reached vs 5.7 months
➡️ HR 0.35
➡️ 65% lower risk of progression or de
427 impressions4 likes0 reposts2026-10-02
[Slide 1]
OncoDaily Lung
Sac-TMT +
Pembrolizumab
A New First-Line ADC
Strategy in NSCLC?
OOncoDaily Lung@OncodailyLung
🫁✨ ESMO 2026 is shaping up to be a major meeting for lung cancer, and these are the 10 abstracts I’ll be watching most closely.
From first-line SCLC maintenance to KRAS G12C head-to-head data, post-osimertinib resistance strategies, and a wave of next-generation ADCs, this year’s programme is heavily focused on one question:
👉 What should come next, and for which patient?
🔥 Top studies to watch
842 impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-10-01
[Slide 1]
ESMO 2026
OncoDaily Lung
Top 10
Lung
Cancer
Abstracts to Watch
BBioSignal@BioSignal
The Phase 3 behind Bristol Myers Squibb's latest $250 million to SystImmune has an estimated primary completion date of December 2031.
Sichuan Biokin (688506 SH), SystImmune's parent, said on Monday that IZABRIGHT-Lung02 had reached a milestone, without naming it. National Business Daily reported it as the first patient dosed. A month earlier, the US trial registry listed it as not yet
751 impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-23
BBioSignal@BioSignal
Merck sponsored the Phase 3 that failed to beat Keytruda alone with Gilead's Trodelvy added. It is running the same test with a TROP2 drug it licensed from China, built on the same antibody, and this time overall survival is the only primary endpoint.
EVOKE-03 enrolled 620 patients with untreated metastatic lung cancer and PD-L1 of 50% or more. It was stopped in June on the data monitoring c
389 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-25
27FLAURA2View full trial page →6.4K impressions5.6K primary · 751 preview7 engagements5 posts · 4 voices▾
TTejas Patil@TejasPatilMD
😈To play devils advocate, I think FLAURA2 (for sensitizing EGFR mutations), PAPILLION, and REZILIENT3 all point towards the importance of upfront chemotherapy with EGFR inhibition.
💭My thought is that #EGFR lung cancers (esp Exon 20) really do need intensification upfront.
@EGFRResisters @EgfrUk
2.2K impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-14
TTejas Patil@TejasPatilMD
🤔The myelosuppression in REZILIENT3 is strange. This is the same platinum pemetrexed chemotherapy used in PAPILLION and FLAURA-2, but with way higher adverse event profile.
1⃣ There is a high rate of Gr≥3 cytopenias in first 4 cycles within the experimental arm. This is unusual and not what I would have predicted about the zipalertinib + platinum combo. I still don't have a great theory for
1.6K impressions0 likes1 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
REZILIENT 3: Summary of Adverse Events
Zipalertinib Chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
(n=140)
(n=136)
Adverse Event in ≥25%*, %
Any Grade
Grade ≥3
Any Grade
Grade ≥3
Anemia
80.7
48.6
50.0
12.5
Neutropeniab
50.7
33.6
40.4
22.1
Thrombocytopenia
56.4
30.0
19.9
8.1
Rash
45.7
10.7
6.6
0
Nausea
44.3
3.6
1.9
0.7
Constipation
32.1
0
30.9
0
Paronychia
31.4
1.4
0
0
Stomatitis
28.6
5.0
7.4
0.7
REZILIENT 3: Cytopenias Observed With Combination
Diarrhea
27.1
1.4
8.8
0
All-Treated Population for Zipalertinib Chemotherapy arm
Pneumonitis
5.7
2.1
2.2
1.5
100
70
First Cycles
Grade 4
60
Grade 3
"includes anemia and/or reduced red blood cells *includes neutropenia and/or decreased neutrophits includes hrombocytopenia and/or platelets decreased
"includes those with >25% and/or EGFR-associated toxicity. Pneumonits included as an EGFR-associated AE of terest though reported <25%
Percentage instients of
50
Grade 2
Grade 1
40
30
After Cycles
Grade 4
Grade 3
20
Grade 2
REZILIENT 3: Safety Summary
Grade 1
10
Zipalertinib Chemotherapy
Chemotherapy
0
(n=140), (%)
(n=136), (%)
Treatment-Related Adverse Events
138 (98.6)
120(88.2)
/
Grade 23 treatment-related adverse events
113(80.7)
55(40.4)
Serious Adverse Events
71 (50.7)
45 (33.1)
First Cycles (n=140)
After Cycles (n=113)
Treatment-related serious adverse events
55(57.9)
17(12.5)
Adverse events represent grouped terms (ether blood term or lab term decreased).
Zipalertinib
Pemetrexed
Carbo/ cisplatin
Pemetrexed
Carbo/ cisplatin
12
AE Leading to Treatment Interruption
116(82.9)
104 (74.3)
70 (50)
60 (44.1)
40(29.4)
AE Leading to Dose Reductions
(43.6)
68(48.6)
46 (32.9)
29(21.3)
(15.4)
AE Leading to Drug Discontinuation*
24(17.1)
44(31.4)
22(15.7)
16(11.8)
7(5.1)
Adverse Events With Outcome of Death
13(9.3)
4(2.9)
TRAE with outcome of death
3(2.1)
0
Sepsis/septic shock
3(2.1)
0
Chemotherapy Administration
Platinum choice: Carboplatin/cisplatin
138/4
123/14
Pemetrexed number of cycles (median range)
7(1-35)
8(1-36)
*Refers to the regimen where component was the primary reason for treatment discontinuation
"Death events were: Z+C: sepsis (3), pneumonia (1), respiratory tract infection (1), septic shock (1), acute respiratory failure (1), dyspnea (1), hemoptysis (1), respiratory failure (1), death (1),
sudden death (1), diabetic ketoacidosis (1). C: sepsis (1), pneumonia (1). acute respiratory failure (1). cerebrovascular accident (1).
"Reflects some patients received both agents.
AE, adverse event; C, chemotherapy; Carbo, carboplatin; TRAE, treatment-related adverse event; Z+C. zipalertinib chemotherapy.
10
OOncLive.com@OncLive
🎯 TP53 co-mutations predicted worse PFS/OS in FLAURA2, but osimertinib plus platinum-pemetrexed beat osimertinib alone regardless of TP53 status. New #WCLC26 exploratory analysis 👇 @IASLC #lcsm https://t.co/C7IK9aQwXa
1.7K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-16
IIndian Pharma Post@indpharmapost
AstraZeneca’s Tagrisso delivers strong phase 3 results in early stage lung cancer
https://t.co/RhGI3JiqKi
#AstraZeneca #Tagrisso #osimertinib #ADAURA
#EGFR-mutatedNSCLC #lungcancer #overall #survival
#FLAURA2 #WCLC2026 #targetedtherapy
@indpharmapost
109 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
BBioSignal@BioSignal
The Phase 3 behind Bristol Myers Squibb's latest $250 million to SystImmune has an estimated primary completion date of December 2031.
Sichuan Biokin (688506 SH), SystImmune's parent, said on Monday that IZABRIGHT-Lung02 had reached a milestone, without naming it. National Business Daily reported it as the first patient dosed. A month earlier, the US trial registry listed it as not yet
751 impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-23
28PACIFIC5.7K impressionsall primary7 engagements3 posts · 3 voices▾
DDrew Moghanaki@DrewMoghanaki
Does anyone know what happened to the 11 patients who were candidates for a PACIFIC treatment regimen, recruited to participate in the MDT-BRIDGE study, and never got any local therapy?
Did 22% (11/50) of the borderline resectable cohort really get derailed by chemoIO?
@DoctorJSpicer @StephenVLiu #WCLC26
5.3K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
Changes in resectability assessments and local treatment (FAS)
After 2 cycles of neoadjuvant durvalumab + CT, most patients, including those who were borderline
resectable at baseline, were deemed resectable at MDT reassessment
MDT reassessment,
Adjuvant or consolidation
Baseline MDT
Local Tx
durvalumab
post cycle 2*
assessment
Resected
94 Adjuvant Tx
82
Resectable
92
120
106
Yi
106+
12
38
12 No adjuvant Tx
7
Borderline
CRT
50
23
23 Consolidation Tx
resectable
25
7
9
2
2 No consolidation Tx
18
11
No local Tx
Unresectable
1
20
2
11
cCRT: 21
sCRT: 4
1
2
Not reassessed
2
ggilberto lopes@GlopesMd
Creating Multisectoral Coalitions for Local Adaptation: ASPIRE’s Agenda for Change in the Asia-Pacific https://t.co/bzJuIKeaWV
@iaslc #WCLC26 @oncoalert @oncodaily @larvol @tribeMDUS @sylvestercancer @oncbrothers @chinmay @Jani_Chinmay @latinamd @colazagasti @openmedicineHQ @asco @myesmo @openmedkate @openmedben @chadinabhan @YoungLungCancer @lungoncdoc @OncodailyLung @ClinicalLung #LCSM @LungPol
366 impressions3 likes1 reposts2026-09-12
29AEGEANpreview onlyView full trial page →5K impressionsno primary data posted yet5 posts · 4 voices▾
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
Perioperative IO in resectable NSCLC — the landscape at a glance. 🫁
6 Phase III trials → one simple question:
EFS benefit is common. Has OS followed?
✅ EFS positive in 5/6 trials
OS so far:
• KEYNOTE-671 (pembro): HR 0.74 ✅
• RATIONALE-315 (tisle): HR 0.65 ✅
• CheckMate 77T: HR 0.85 — interim, NS
• AEGEAN: HR 0.89 — interim, NS
• NEOTORCH: HR 0.62 — interim, NS
• IMpower030: HR 0.77 — not forma
3.6K impressions56 likes26 reposts2026-09-20
[Slide 1]
PERIOPERATIVE IO
IN RESECTABLE NSCLC
MV Onco
TRIAL
EFS
OS
PEMBRO
0.58
0.74
KEYNOTE-671
NIVO
0.61
0.85
CheckMate 77T
INTERIM- NS
DURVA
0.69
0.89
AEGEAN
INTERIM - NS
TISLE
0.58
0.65
RATIONALE-315
TORI
0.40*
0.62
NEOTORCH
INTERIM - NS
ATEZO
X
0.77
0.77
IMpowero 030
P = 0.07
NOT FORMALLY
TESTED
SIGNIFICANT OS so FAR
PEMBRO
+
TISLE
KEYNOTE-671
RATIONALE-315
EFS POSITIVE
IN 5/6 TRIALS
*
NEOTORCH HR 0.40: Stage III interim analysis.
HRs shown for EFS and OS.
BBioSignal@BioSignal
Atezolizumab quadrupled the pathological complete response rate in resectable lung cancer, 29.6% against 8.5%, and still missed its primary endpoint.
That is the final analysis of IMpower030, presented at the World Conference on Lung Cancer in Seoul on September 12 by Benjamin Solomon of Peter MacCallum. Perioperative Tecentriq plus platinum chemotherapy in resectable stage II to IIIB disease, 39
525 impressions5 likes0 reposts2026-09-18
30MARIPOSAView full trial page →4.9K impressions4.2K primary · 751 preview30 engagements3 posts · 3 voices▾
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Update on COPERNICUS study from @BalazsHalmosMD at #WCLC26 shows impact of supportive care strategies from COCOON with 1L subcutaneous amivantamab + lazertinib for EGFR mt NSCLC.
Compared to published MARIPOSA results, rate paronychia was 35% from 50%, rash 25% from 55%, VTE 3% from 23%, IRR 3% from 55%. Discontinuation of amivantamab in the first year due to AESI was < 1% (vs 9% in MARIPOSA)
3.8K impressions14 likes4 reposts2026-09-27
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Adverse Events of Special Interest
COPERNICUS
Paronychia, rash, VTE, and ARRs/IRRs during the first 4 months of treatment were reduced in COPERNICUS versus MARIPOSA
In COPERNICUS, 1 participant each discontinued amivantamab due to rash and VTE in the first 4 months; none discontinued due to ARRs
1-year cumulative incidence of amivantamab discontinuations due to selected AESIs was <1% in COPERNICUS versus 9% in MARIPOSA
Selected AESIs in the first 4 months of treatment
Cumulative incidence of IRR/ARR, VTE, and rash
leading to amivantamab discontinuation
COPERNICUS: grade 1-2
MARIPOSA: grade 1-2
COPERNICUS: grade >3
MARIPOSA: grade >3
0.15
1%
4%
Paronychia
35%
50%
25%
55%
incidence of AEs
0.10
MARIPOSA
3%
Rash
7%
Cumulative
0.05
<1%
COPERNICUS
VTE
3%
6%
23%
0.00
1
29
57
85
113
141
169
197
225
253
281
309
337
<1%
MARIPOSA
Days
No. risk
421
408
397
379
367
358
349
341
331
325
319
313
301
ARR/IRR
3%
5%
55%
Events
11
15
17
17
21
23
26
28
29
29
31
34
36
COPERNICUS
No. at risk
274
274
250
219
198
178
158
140
118
102
86
70
52
60%
40%
20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
Events
0
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
"No formal, head-to-head statistical comparison was performed Because follow-up in COPERNICUS is limited these results are presented for contextual reference only and should not be used for direct comparison. Follow-up durations were different between studies. "Analysis includes al participants treated, including those
who did not receive amivantamab for 24 months (COPERNICUS, N=274; MARIPOSA n=421). Preferred term. Grouped term. "The term ARR was used in COPERNICUS and the term IRR was used in MARIPOSA due to different routes of administration
AE, adverse event; AESI, adverse event of special interest; ARR, administration-rela reaction; IRR, infusion-related reaction; VTE, venous thromboembolism
6
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
VTE
COPERNICUS
Incidence of VTE during the first 4 months of
Incidence of VTE by cycle (28 days)
treatment was reduced in COPERNICUS versus
15
MARIPOSA
COPERNICUS
MARIPOSA (3% vs 23%)a
Grade 3-4
No grade ≥3 bleeding events were reported in
Grade 2
COPERNICUS¹
10.2%
Grade 1
10
In COPERNICUS, rates of VTE were similar across
Incidence of VTE (%)
7.0%
age subgroupsᵇ
5
4.3%
2.8%
1.6%
0%
0.5%
0.5%
0
n=421
n=214
n=421
n=214
n=412
n=207
n=390
n=190
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
No formal, head-to-head statistical comparison was performed. Because follow-up in COPERNICUS is limited, these results are presented for contextual reference only and should not be used for direct comparison. Follow-up durations were different between studies. VTE incidence was similar across age subgroups
(3.2% VS 2.5% in <65 vs >65 years, respectively). These data are not based on a formal subgroup comparison.
VTE, venous thromboembolism.
1. Goldberg SB, et al. Presented at: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting: May 29-June 2, 2026; Chicago, IL, USA.
7
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Rashᵃ
COPERNICUS
Incidence of rash during the first 4 months of treatment was lower in COPERNICUS versus MARIPOSA (25% VS 55%),b with lower incidence
over time
In COPERNICUS, overall incidence of rash during the first 4 months of treatment was similar across age subgroups
Compared with MARIPOSA, COPERNICUS demonstrated a meaningful reduction in grade ≥2 rash occurring in the first 4 months, with a
lower cumulative incidence by 1 yeard
Incidence of rash by cycle (28 days)e
Cumulative incidence of grade ≥2 rashe
50
0.5
MARIPOSA
COPERNICUS
41%
Grade 3
0.4
40
Grade 2
Incidence of rash (%)
incidence of AEs
MARIPOSA
Grade 1
Cumulative
0.3
30
0.2
19%
20
15%
14%
14%
0.1
COPERNICUS
10
7%
7%
0.0
4%
0
28
56
84
112
140
168
196
224
252
280
308
336
364
0
Days
MARIPOSA
n=421
n=214
n=421
n=214
n=412
n=207
n=390
n=190
No risk
421
358
320
281
259
244
231
222
210
203
200
197
191
182
Events
0
63
94
114
129
139
145
153
154
159
160
162
165
168
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
COPERNICUS
No at risk
274
265
235
200
179
161
137
119
101
88
72
57
40
33
Events
0
9
18
24
25
29
30
33
33
34
34
34
35
35
"Preferred term. No formal, head-to-head statistical comparison was performed Because follow-up in COPERNICUS is limited, these results are presented for contextual reference only and should not be used for direct comparison Follow-up durations were different between studies. Rash incidence was similar across age
subgroups (24% vs 25% in <65 vs >65 years, respectively). These data are not based on a formal subgroup comparison. Analysis includes al participants treated, including those who did not receive amivantamab for 24 months (COPERNICUS, N=274; MARIPOSA, n=421). "No grade 4 or grade 5 rash occurred in either study.
AE, adverse event
8
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Safety Profile
COPERNICUS
Cohort 1 (n=214)
TEAEs by preferred term (>20%), n (%)
All grades
Grade ≥3
Majority of TEAEsᵃ were grade 1-2, with no new safety
EGFR-related
signals compared with previous reports¹,²
Dermatitis acneiform
85 (40)
8 (4)
Stomatitis
82 (38)
6 (3)
Incidence of grade ≥3 dermatologic TEAEs was low
Paronychia
74 (35)
3 (1)
(dermatitis acneiform, 4%; rash, 3%; maculopapular
Rash
53 (25)
6 (3)
rash, 3%; paronychia, 1%; pruritus, <1%)
Pruritus
50 (23)
1 (<1)
Maculopapular rash
46 (21)
6 (3)
Incidence of any TEAE with onset during the first
MET-related
4 months and leading to discontinuation of both
Peripheral edema
80 (37)
3 (1)
amivantamab + lazertinib was 8%
Hypoalbuminemia
69 (32)
5 (2)
Other
TEAEs leading to dose reduction and dose
Fatigue
101 (47)
10 (5)
interruption of any study drug were 20% and
Nausea
93 (43)
2 (1)
46%, respectively
Diarrhea
64 (30)
5 (2)
Constipation
59 (28)
0
Increased ALT
55 (26)
9 (4)
Decreased appetite
50 (23)
1 (<1)
Myalgia
48 (22)
0
"Defined as any new or worsening AE occurring at or after the initial administration of any study treatment through the day of last dose
Vomiting
46 (21)
2 (1)
plus 30 days or prior to the start of subsequent systemic anticancer therapy, whichever is earlier.
AE, adverse event; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event.
1. Cho BC, et al. N Engl Med. 2024,391(16):1486-1498.2 Yang JCH, et al. N Engl Med. 2025;393(17):1681-1693.
9
AAltis Labs@altislabs
We are excited to announce our $25 million Series A led by Tal Zaks at @OrbiMed and Anna French at @QimingUS
Read more about the news here: https://t.co/cOaoZoqqxs
The reason this matters was presented in Seoul this week:
At the World Conference on Lung Cancer, Johnson & Johnson presented a post-hoc analysis of their Phase 3 MARIPOSA trial, showing that IPRO Response Rate, our AI endpoin
339 impressions3 likes0 reposts2026-09-17
[Slide 1]
Led by:
orbimed
ALTIS LABS
IMING VENTURE PARTNERS
$25M
Participation from:
innovation
endeavors
BENCHSTRENGTH
Series A
Fusion
Fund
LUMIRA
VENTURES
BBioSignal@BioSignal
The Phase 3 behind Bristol Myers Squibb's latest $250 million to SystImmune has an estimated primary completion date of December 2031.
Sichuan Biokin (688506 SH), SystImmune's parent, said on Monday that IZABRIGHT-Lung02 had reached a milestone, without naming it. National Business Daily reported it as the first patient dosed. A month earlier, the US trial registry listed it as not yet
751 impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-23
31CheckMate-77Tpreview onlyView full trial page →4.5K impressionsno primary data posted yet4 posts · 3 voices▾
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
Perioperative IO in resectable NSCLC — the landscape at a glance. 🫁
6 Phase III trials → one simple question:
EFS benefit is common. Has OS followed?
✅ EFS positive in 5/6 trials
OS so far:
• KEYNOTE-671 (pembro): HR 0.74 ✅
• RATIONALE-315 (tisle): HR 0.65 ✅
• CheckMate 77T: HR 0.85 — interim, NS
• AEGEAN: HR 0.89 — interim, NS
• NEOTORCH: HR 0.62 — interim, NS
• IMpower030: HR 0.77 — not forma
3.6K impressions56 likes26 reposts2026-09-20
[Slide 1]
PERIOPERATIVE IO
IN RESECTABLE NSCLC
MV Onco
TRIAL
EFS
OS
PEMBRO
0.58
0.74
KEYNOTE-671
NIVO
0.61
0.85
CheckMate 77T
INTERIM- NS
DURVA
0.69
0.89
AEGEAN
INTERIM - NS
TISLE
0.58
0.65
RATIONALE-315
TORI
0.40*
0.62
NEOTORCH
INTERIM - NS
ATEZO
X
0.77
0.77
IMpowero 030
P = 0.07
NOT FORMALLY
TESTED
SIGNIFICANT OS so FAR
PEMBRO
+
TISLE
KEYNOTE-671
RATIONALE-315
EFS POSITIVE
IN 5/6 TRIALS
*
NEOTORCH HR 0.40: Stage III interim analysis.
HRs shown for EFS and OS.
UUrs Weber MD@UrsWeberMD
Atezo fails where durva, nivo, and pembro all succeeded. This is surprising given the remarkably consistent results that we’ve seen in AEGEAN, KEYNOTE-671, CheckMate 816, and CheckMate 77T. #WCLC26 https://t.co/hQHcHxtWLp
486 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
VVenkatP@VenkatP1359
NSCLC — Neoadj Immunotx the landscape at a glance. 🫁
KEYNOTE-671 — pembrolizumab. Stage II–IIIB resectable NSCLC; pembrolizumab + cisplatin-based chemotherapy ×4 → surgery → pembrolizumab. pCR 18.1% vs 4.0%. EFS was strongly positive: initial HR 0.58, with the 4-year update showing median EFS 57.1 vs 18.4 months; HR 0.57. Most importantly, this is one of the perioperative trials with proven OS be
351 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-20
32KEYNOTE-671preview onlyView full trial page →4.5K impressionsno primary data posted yet4 posts · 3 voices▾
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
Perioperative IO in resectable NSCLC — the landscape at a glance. 🫁
6 Phase III trials → one simple question:
EFS benefit is common. Has OS followed?
✅ EFS positive in 5/6 trials
OS so far:
• KEYNOTE-671 (pembro): HR 0.74 ✅
• RATIONALE-315 (tisle): HR 0.65 ✅
• CheckMate 77T: HR 0.85 — interim, NS
• AEGEAN: HR 0.89 — interim, NS
• NEOTORCH: HR 0.62 — interim, NS
• IMpower030: HR 0.77 — not forma
3.6K impressions56 likes26 reposts2026-09-20
[Slide 1]
PERIOPERATIVE IO
IN RESECTABLE NSCLC
MV Onco
TRIAL
EFS
OS
PEMBRO
0.58
0.74
KEYNOTE-671
NIVO
0.61
0.85
CheckMate 77T
INTERIM- NS
DURVA
0.69
0.89
AEGEAN
INTERIM - NS
TISLE
0.58
0.65
RATIONALE-315
TORI
0.40*
0.62
NEOTORCH
INTERIM - NS
ATEZO
X
0.77
0.77
IMpowero 030
P = 0.07
NOT FORMALLY
TESTED
SIGNIFICANT OS so FAR
PEMBRO
+
TISLE
KEYNOTE-671
RATIONALE-315
EFS POSITIVE
IN 5/6 TRIALS
*
NEOTORCH HR 0.40: Stage III interim analysis.
HRs shown for EFS and OS.
UUrs Weber MD@UrsWeberMD
Atezo fails where durva, nivo, and pembro all succeeded. This is surprising given the remarkably consistent results that we’ve seen in AEGEAN, KEYNOTE-671, CheckMate 816, and CheckMate 77T. #WCLC26 https://t.co/hQHcHxtWLp
486 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
VVenkatP@VenkatP1359
NSCLC — Neoadj Immunotx the landscape at a glance. 🫁
KEYNOTE-671 — pembrolizumab. Stage II–IIIB resectable NSCLC; pembrolizumab + cisplatin-based chemotherapy ×4 → surgery → pembrolizumab. pCR 18.1% vs 4.0%. EFS was strongly positive: initial HR 0.58, with the 4-year update showing median EFS 57.1 vs 18.4 months; HR 0.57. Most importantly, this is one of the perioperative trials with proven OS be
351 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-20
33LONESTAR4.4K impressions3K primary · 1.5K preview17 engagements6 posts · 6 voices▾
KKenn Samala@KSamalaMD
#LONESTAR study #WCLC26 https://t.co/xCKKUnVZEG
346 impressions2 likes2 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
wclc.iaslc.org
f
in
09 min 43s
IASLC
2026 D
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
|
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Clinical Outcomes of the Randomized Phase III Lonestar Trial: Local
Consolidation Therapy After Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in NSCLC
Mehmet Altan, S. Gandhi, M.B. Antonoff, N. Vokes, S.G. Swisher, H.T. Tran, J. Tu, J.V. Pozadzides, J.J. Zhang, G.
Blumenschein, T. Cascone, Y. Elamin, C.M. Gay, D.L. Gibbons, L.A. Byers, F.V. Fossella, X. Le, M.V. Negrao, A.
Tsao, F. Skoulidis, B. Zhang, C. Bueno Hume, E.K. Singhi, M. Hernandez, J.J. Lee, B. Carter, J. Welsh, Z. Liao, M.
O'Reilly, M.S. Ning, A. Chen, S.G. Chun, Q-N. Nguyen, J.Y. Chang, S.H. Lin, J.V. Heymach
MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston/TX/USA
Cancer
UT MD Anderson
Science Without Boundaries: Uniting the World Against Thoracic Cancer
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
06 min 59s
LONESTAR study, single-center, open-label, randomized controlled study
(NCT03391869)
Main inclusion criteria
Ipi+Nivo
-Immunotherapy naïve
(up to 2 years)
Stage IV NSCLC
(N=108)
-EGFR/ALK wild type
-With adequate end
Ipilimumab 1mg/kg q 6 wk
Non-progressive disease
Nivolumab 3mg/kg q 2 wk*
(RECIST v1.1)
organ function
For 12 weeks
RANDOMIZATION
LCT (Radiation
Ipi+Nivo
to at least 1
site +/- surgery)
(up to 2 years)
Co-Primary Endpoints:
Stratification:
(N=108)
1) OS in the overall population
- Sq VS Non-Sq
2) OS in the oligometastatic (≤3 metastatic lesions)
- Number of mets: oligo VS poly
subgroup (if no significant difference in the full study
- Prior therapy: naïve VS prior chemo
population)
Secondary Endpoints:
* Protocol was updated for Nivolumab 360mg q3wk
1) PFS in the overall group and in oligometastatic group
2)
PFS and OS in Sq and non-Squamous histology
3) Safety and tolerability ipi nivo W and wo LCT
6
Altan M. et al. 2026 WCLC
OOncLive.com@OncLive
📉 Added local consolidative therapy did not beat nivolumab/ipilimumab alone in the phase 3 LONESTAR trial in metastatic NSCLC, resulting in early closure for futility @UTMDAnderson @IASLC #WCLC26 #lcsm 👇https://t.co/Io8GpzMs5q
1.4K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
LLung Cancer Europe@LungCancerEu
🆕 More treatment does not always mean better outcomes.
New Phase 3 LONESTAR trial results presented at #WCLC2026 found that adding local consolidative therapy, using radiotherapy or surgery, after nivolumab + ipilimumab did not improve overall survival or progression-free survival in people with metastatic NSCLC, including those with oligometastatic disease.
Negative trial results can be useful
1.1K impressions7 likes0 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
EurekAlert!
NEWS RELEASE 12-SEP-2026
Local consolidative therapy
does not improve survival
after dual immunotherapy
in metastatic NSCLC
Phase III LONESTAR trial finds adding radiation or surgery after
nivolumab plus ipilimumab did not improve overall or
progression-free survival
(SEOUL, Republic of Korea - - Saturday, September 12th, 6:15
p.m. Korea Standard Time) - Adding local consolidative therapy
(LCT) after induction treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab
did not improve overall survival or progression-free survival in
patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC),
including those with oligometastatic disease, according to
results presented at the International Association for the
Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) 2026 World Conference on Lung
Cancer (WCLC).
LLung Cancers Today@Lung_Cancers
🫁 What's the latest on the LONESTAR trial?
🌟 Don't miss this interview with @maraantonoff, who joined us at #WCLC26 to share her insights on new data from the phase 3 trial!
➡️ Watch: https://t.co/cgihLqsORI https://t.co/FwUxN11k82
87 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-10-03
[Slide 1]
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
C2
IASIC
LUNG
CANCERS
TODAY
#WCLC26
ference
#WCL
SLIC OF KOREA
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPT
2026
)
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
#WCL
#WCLC2
ASIC
IInternational Lung Cancer Summit@LungSummit
WCLC 2026 opened in Seoul on Saturday 12 September. Six studies came out of the press briefing, three of them in small cell lung cancer.
Two asked how the DLL3 bispecific is given rather than whether it works. DeLLphi-309 randomised 252 patients across three schedules: response rates of 40% at 10 mg every two weeks, 31% at 20 mg every three weeks and 27% at 30 mg every four weeks, with median ove
955 impressions6 likes2 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
ADCs . IMMUNOTHERAPIES
CONGRESS UPDATE
WCLC 2026, DAY 1: EXTENDED-
INTERVAL AND SUBCUTANEOUS
DOSING IN SCLC, AND A 70%
EARLY RESPONSE
BBioSignal@BioSignal
Atezolizumab quadrupled the pathological complete response rate in resectable lung cancer, 29.6% against 8.5%, and still missed its primary endpoint.
That is the final analysis of IMpower030, presented at the World Conference on Lung Cancer in Seoul on September 12 by Benjamin Solomon of Peter MacCallum. Perioperative Tecentriq plus platinum chemotherapy in resectable stage II to IIIB disease, 39
525 impressions5 likes0 reposts2026-09-18
34STARLORD3.9K impressionsall primary68 engagements2 posts · 2 voices▾
SShankar Siva@_ShankarSiva
Stage III #lungcancer receives the STARLORD treatment at #WCLC26.
〰️SABR to nodes up to 40Gy
〰️SABR to primary up to 50Gy
〰️adjuvant immunotherapy
Preliminary follow up, n=26, but appears to be a feasible approach. 8% acute G3 Adverse events
🤔I am curious about this - - but
More follow up required… certainly patient friendly short schedule #lcsm
3.2K impressions28 likes14 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
#WCLCZ6
in
wclc.iaslc.org
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Stereotactic Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung
Cancer Unfit for Concurrent Chemoradiation: The STARLORD study
ДБВ
Order C% Crisitine -
Francesco Cuccia, MD, MSc
Radiation Oncology - ARNAS Civico Hospital, Palermo, Italy
Science Without Boundaries: Uniting the World Against Thoracic Cancer
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 58s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Characteristics
N or percentage
Number of patients
26
May
Median age
75.5 years (range, 68-83 years)
2024
Smoking status
Current=23%; Former=76%
Gender
M=76%;F=23%
TNM 8° edition staging
stagellIB=84.6%; stagellIC=15.4%
ECOG Performance Status
PS1=30.7%; PS2=57.7%;PS3=11.6%
Primary histology
Adenocarcinoma=42.3%; squamous
cell=42.3%; large cell
neuroendocrine=15.4%
PD-L1 status
PD-L1 negative=23%; PD-L1>50%=27%; PD-
L1<50%=50%
Median T size
4.55 cm (range, 3.6-7 cm)
Median SBRT dose for T
45 Gy/5 fx (range, 45-50 Gy/5 fx)
Median SBRT dose for N
35 Gy/5 fx (range, 30-40 Gy/5 fx)
ФВ
Order
6
VVivian Tan MD@drviviantan
🚀 STARLORD presented at #WCLC2026 adds to growing phase II literature that SABR may be a safe and feasible treatment option for frail locally advanced NSCLC unfit for chemoRT
26 patients, up to 50 Gy to primary and 40 Gy to nodes
17 months of follow-up to date https://t.co/E276HKa8Ce
766 impressions5 likes3 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- - 15, 2026
-02 min 43s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Stereotactic Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung
Cancer Unfit for Concurrent Chemoradiation: The STARLORD study
DB
Similar Studies Confirming Safety
Francesco Cuccia, MD, MSc
CN 2019, Cong et al (N=51)
PMID 31187604
Radiation Oncology-ARNAS
Civico Hospital, Palermo, Italy
CN 2023, Jie et al (N=213)
PMID 37620952
IT 2026, Arcidiacono et al (N=50)
PMID 40992670
Chemotherapy
SBRT for T & N
Safety with immunotherapy
US 2018, Luke et al (N=79)
PMID 29437535
N=26
US 2022, Bestvina et al (N=37)
PMID 34500113
Median follow-up = 17 months
Acute G3 AE = 8%
Late G3 AE = 0%
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
HOU. REPUBLIC MCNULA
35IMpower1333.2K impressions2.9K primary · 322 preview27 engagements4 posts · 4 voices▾
오오창명@changmyung1981
🫁🧬 Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is notorious for silencing MHC-I and escaping conventional CD8⁺ T-cell recognition. But what if another T-cell population can see—and kill—SCLC without needing MHC-I at all?
A compelling 2026 Cancer Cell study identifies γδ T cells, particularly Vδ2⁺ cells, as an underappreciated immune effector population in SCLC and shows three potentially actionable therapeutic
698 impressions10 likes5 reposts2026-09-19
[Slide 1]
Cancer Cell
2026
Volume 44, 1-18
Beyond MHC.
Published online: October 12, 2026
A new immune opportunity
A Cell Press journal
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccell.2026.08.015.
in small cell lung cancer.
yδ T cells modulate anti-tumor
Key takeaways
1
yδ T cell infiltration is associated with
better outcomes in SCLC patients treated
immunity in small cell lung cancer
with anti-PD-L1.
2
yδ T cells are effective at tarlatamab
(DLL3-CD3 BiTE)-redirected SCLC killing.
yδ T cells infiltrate SCLC, exhibit potent anti-tumor activity, and can be
3
Zoledronate sensitizes SCLC cells to
harnessed through multiple therapeutic strategies, including tarlatamab
Vδ2+ cell-mediated killing.
and zoledronate, via an MHC-independent mechanism involving BTN2A1.
4
BTN2A1 is required by Vδ2+ cells to recognize
and kill SCLC independent of MHC-I.
5
Multiple strategies can harness yδ T cells
as a new therapeutic avenue in SCLC.
1. yδ T cells infiltrate SCLC and predict better outcomes
2. Tarlatamab redirects yδ T cells to kill SCLC
3. Zoledronate enhances yδ T cell recognition
Single-cell analysis of SCLC patient samples (n = 12)
DLL3 X CD3 bispecific T-cell engager (tarlatamab)
Mevalonate pathway and BTN2A1-dependent activation
T cells
Higher yo T cell infiltration
Myeloid cells
Yδ T cell
Tumor cell killing
BTN2A1/BTN3A1
(including YO T cells)
improved survival
(Vδ2+)
Zoledronate
Vδ2+
with anti-PD-L1
100
n.s.
(bisphosphonate)
yδTcell
(IMpower133)
1.0
80
CD3
UMAP2
Overall survival pnobability
yδ cell high
yo cell low
Specific lysis (%)
TCR
60
Phosphoantigens
Tarlatamab
FDPS
(IPP/DMAPP)
MHC-independent
40
B cells
0.5
recognition
p < 0.0001
DLL3
20
Mevalonate
and killing
NK cells
pathway
Perforin
0
0
GZMB
UMAP1
0
6
12
18
24
SCLC cell
CD8+
Vδ2+
Cytokines
T
cells
yo T cells
SCLC cell
Time (months)
yo T cells are present in the SCLC tumor microenvironment,
Vδ2+ yδ T cells are as effective as CD8+ T cells
Zoledronate increases phosphoantigen levels, sensitizing SCLC cells
and high levels are associated with better responses to anti-PD-L1.
at tarlatamab-mediated SCLC killing.
to V52+ yo T cell-mediated killing via BTN2A1.
4. BTN2A1 is required for yδ T cell killing
5. Therapeutic potential in patient-derived models
6. Clinical implications
CRISPR knockout of BTN2A1 in SCLC cells
Patient-derived SCLC organoids
yo T cell infiltration may serve as a biomarker
Vδ2+ yδ T cells
+ Tarlatamab
for benefit from anti-PD-L1 in SCLC.
Killing
Patient tumor
V82+ yo cells
Control
(expanded)
Tarlatamab can harness yo T cells for targeted
(SCLC cell)
Increased killing
SCLC killing.
BTN2A1+
+
Zoledronate (clinically available) may
Reduced killing
Zoledronate
sensitize SCLC to yo T cell-mediated immunity.
BTN2A1 KO
(SCLC cell)
Combination and yo T cell-based strategies
Increased killing
deserve further clinical investigation.
BTN2A1-
BTN2A1 is essential for Vδ2+ cell recognition and killing of SCLC,
Both tarlatamab and zoledronate enhance killing of
Provides a new immune avenue for a disease
independent of MHC-I.
patient-derived SCLC organoids by yδ T cells.
with high unmet need.
yδ T cells: a new immunity against small cell lung cancer.
Ng et al. 2026 Cancer Cell 44, 1-18
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2026.08.015
OOncoAlert@OncoAlert
The OncoAlert #WCLC26 🇰🇷 Top 10 Deep Dive! Abstract to be presented
MO15.05 Expression and Prognostic Impact of B7-H3 in Patients With Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer
🫁 Biomarker analysis of 462 pretreatment ES-SCLC samples from IMpower133 and SKYSCRAPER-02, characterising B7-H3 expression and its prognostic impact.
➡️ B7-H3 prevalent by IHC (>80%) and consistent across all four SCLC m
2K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-10
[Slide 2]
ONCOALERT TOP 10 ABSTRACTS
#WCLC26
12-15 SEP 2026
METHODS
ASSAYS
SOURCE
Chromogenic IHC on 5-micron paraffin
Tumour samples from patients with ES-SCLC
sections and bulk RNA sequencing;
enrolled in IMpower133 (NCT02763579) and
molecular subsets defined per Nabet et al,
SKYSCRAPER-02 (NCT04256421).
Cancer Cell 2024.
TREATMENT
ANALYSIS
Patients received carboplatin/etoposide (CE) or
Samples dichotomised to high or low B7-
atezolizumab plus CE (ACE).
H3 by median gene expression; studies
combined using batch correction.
Based on publicly released #WCLC26 abstract — preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/IASLC.
OncoAlert
360
Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues
To be presented by:
Dr. Stephen Liu
Georgetown University
[Slide 3]
ONCOALERT TOP 10 ABSTRACTS
OF
#WCLC26
12-15 SEP 2026
RESULTS
EXPRESSION
462 pretreatment samples formed the RNA-
CORRELATIONS
seq biomarker-evaluable population. B7-H3
No correlation with transcription factors or cell
expression was prevalent by IHC (>80%), with
surface targets at the RNA level, and no
RNA expression consistent across all four
correlation between B7-H3 RNA expression
SCLC molecular subtypes.
and PD-L1 by IHC.
ACE ARMS
IMpower133 (n=132): mPFS 5.5 VS 4.4 months
CE ARM
(HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53-1.09);
IMpower133 (n=139): mPFS 4.4 VS 4.3 months
mOS 12.6 VS 9.6 (HR 0.72, 0.48-1.06).
(HR 1.0, 0.71-1.41); mOS 9.7 VS 10.1 (HR 1.12,
SKYSCRAPER-02 (n=110): mPFS 5.7 VS 4.4 (HR
0.77-1.62).
0.98, 0.65-1.49);
mOS 12.9 VS 11.5 (HR 0.79, 0.51-1.22).
Based on publicly released #WCLC26 abstract - preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/IASLC.
OncoAlert
360
To be presented by:
Dr. Stephen Liu
Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues
Georgetown University
[Slide 4]
ONCOALERT TOP 10 ABSTRACTS
#WCLC26
12-15 SEP 2026
CONCLUSION
B7-H3 Is Widely Expressed but
///
Not Prognostic in SCLC
B7-H3 is highly expressed in SCLC, with similar expression across all four
SCLC molecular subtypes. B7-H3 expression is not strongly correlated
with SCLC transcription factors or canonical surface antigens, suggesting
broad expression across disease subsets. B7-H3 expression is also not a
%
prognostic factor for PFS or os in patients from the IMpower133 and
SKYSCRAPER-02 studies.
SA
Based on publicly released #WCLC26 abstract — preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/IASLC.
OncoAlert
360
To be presented by:
Dr. Stephen Liu
Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues
Georgetown University
OOncoDaily Lung@OncodailyLung
🫁 What if one way around immune resistance in SCLC is to use T cells that do not depend on MHC-I in the first place?
A new Cancer Cell study identifies γδ T cells as a potentially important component of antitumor immunity in small cell lung cancer.
Single-cell profiling showed that γδ T cells infiltrate SCLC and maintain a cytotoxic phenotype despite PD-1 expression. Retrospective analyses of IM
197 impressions2 likes1 reposts2026-09-21
[Slide 1]
OncoDaily Lung
Gamma
Delta T Cells
SCLC 2026
Powerful New
Immunotherapy Insights
BBhaarath PG@BhaarathP10039
@IASLC-WCLC 2026: Pre-Conf Top Abstracts
KEYNOTE-D46 | REZILIENT3 | ARTEMIS-008 | S1827 MAVERICK | PAPILLON | TAISHAN-302 | ADAURA | ARROS-1 | DESTINY-LUNG04 | MDT-BRIDGE | IMpower133 | SKYSCRAPER-02 | NAUTIKA1 | DeLLphi309 | IMpower030 | AMIGO-1 | LuCa-MERIT-1 | JS207 | GFH375 | QLC1101 | LB2102 | SYS6010 | HS-10370 | RC148 | YL201
#WCLC26 #WCLC2026 #Cancer #Oncology #LungCancer #NSCLC #SCLC #LCS
322 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
HHidehito HORINOUCHI@HHorinouchi
🆙 #ESMO26 #LCSM Proffered Paper Session
🔥DeLLphi-304: Tarlatamab in Previously Treated SCLC: Extended Follow-Up of Overall Survival From the Phase 3 Trial
🎙️ @charlesrudin
🔢3808O
🎯Primary Analysis: Median OS 13.6 vs 8.3mo (HR 0.60)
☑️NCT05740566
🔗 https://t.co/grEfaUchKN
@OncoAlert @Larvol @myESMO @IASLC
2.7K impressions4 likes1 reposts2026-09-23
MMeDucation@MeDucationai
FDA cut tarlatamab's post-infusion monitoring for the first 2 doses from 22 to 24 h down to 6 to 8 h, plus a next-day check (Sept 14).
DeLLphi-304: median OS 13.6 vs 8.3 months vs chemo. This one is about access, not efficacy.
#HemOnc https://t.co/apsJQelWjm
38 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-23
37RAPHAEL2.7K impressionsall primary17 engagements5 posts · 4 voices▾
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
Dr. Beung Chul Ahn at #WCLC26 presents results from RAPHAEL trial (KM-07, LU15-12): a phase III study of adjuvant gefitinib intercalated with chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone for resected EGFR+ NSCLC. Improved DFS (59m vs 42m) with greatest signal in stage III and del19. Will not impact SOC with ADAURA in place, but interesting strategy and will yield important correlative results in the future.
2K impressions9 likes3 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
08 min 13s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Method
Multicenter, Randomized, Phase III trial
Arm A: Intercalating arm
Pemetrexed (D1) + Cisplatin (D1)
Gefitinib (D5-18), q3wks X 4 cycles
Eligibility:
Completely Resected
pStage II-IIIB
Intercalating phase
Gefitinib maintenance
Treatment continues until:
(excluding N3)
1:1
(3week * 4 cycle)
1 year
Disease recurrence
R
Treatment completed
Non-squamous NSCLC
Two-sided a = 0.05 and 80% power, N=102 in each arm
Discontinuation criterion met
EGFR mutation:
E19del or L858R
Vinorelbine (D1,8) + Cisplatin (D1)
q3wks X 4 cycles
Stratified by
Arm B: Chemotherapy arm
-pStage (II or III)
-exon 19del vs. L858R
Exploratory Analysis
Chemotherapy
Gefitinib
Exploration of biomarkers predictive of recurrence using next-generation
sequencing (NGS) of surgical tumor specimens
Primary endpoint : Disease-free survival
Longitudinal assessment of changes in EGFR mutation patterns in cell-free DNA
Secondary endpoints : Overall survival, safety & tolerability
Blood-based analysis of inflammatory biomarkers
Optional acquisition of tumor tissue at recurrence to investigate mechanisms of
resistance using NGS
4
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
04 min 33s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Results
Disease-Free Survival
Median DFS, months
Treatment Arm
100
(95% CI)
Intercalation
58.8 (41.9-NR)
Chemo alone
41.9 (21.9-NR)
75
p-value = 0.0359
DFS Probability (%)
50
25
Arm A Intercalation
Median Follow-up duration : 41.8 months
Arm B Chemotherapy alone
0
0
12
24
36
48
60
72
Time (Months)
Arm A Intercalation
100
87
59
33
17
2
0
Arm B Chemotherapy alone
88
61
38
26
12
2
0
7
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
02 min 42s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Safety
Intercalating
Chemotherapy
(N = 102)
(N = 91)
Any Grade
Grade ≥ 3
Any Grade
Grade ≥ 3
Nausea
72 (70.59) [146]
6 (5.88) [10]
58 (63.74) [103]
8 (8.79) [10]
Constipation
38 (37.25) [45]
-
30 (32.97) [32]
-
Decreased appetite
36 (35.29) [47]
-
24 (26.37) [35]
1 (1.10) [1]
Dermatitis acneiform
44 (43.14) [83]
4 (3.92) [5]
-
-
Alanine aminotransferase increased
28 (27.45) [39]
2 (1.96) [2]
10 (10.99) [13]
-
Diarrhoea
24 (23.53) [39]
1 (0.98) [1]
11 (12.09) [13]
1 (1.10) [1]
Stomatitis
28 (27.45) [36]
-
7 (7.69) [8]
-
Aspartate aminotransferase increased
28 (27.45) [36]
1 (0.98) [1]
5 (5.49) [8]
-
Neutropenia
18 (17.65) [26]
7 (6.86) [12]
44 (48.35) [84]
33 (36.26) [49]
Dyspepsia
18 (17.65) [24]
-
15 (16.48) [17]
-
Anaemia
11 (10.78) [18]
2 (1.96) [2]
21 (23.08) [33]
2 (2.20) [2]
Fatigue
14 (13.73) [20]
3 (2.94) [3]
16 (17.58) [20]
1 (1.10) [1]
Vomiting
15 (14.71) [24]
4 (3.92) [5]
14 (15.38) [19]
4 (4.40) [6]
Alopecia
10 (9.80) [10]
-
13 (14.29) [15]
-
Paresthesia
15 (14.71) [16]
-
8 (8.79) [11]
-
Any-grade and grade ≥3 AEs are presented as n (%) [number of events]
9
DDr Riyaz Shah@DrRiyazShah
RAPHAEL trial: IIT RP2 adjuvant gefitinib + chemo vs chemo in resected II-IIIB EGFR(common); n202; 60%del19 where most benefit sits (also stage 3): no unexpected toxicities. Looking at curves benefit seems maintained post the 1y of TKI. #WCLC26 https://t.co/427bA8QXOg
256 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
08 min 18s
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Method
Multicenter, Randomized, Phase III trial
Arm A: Intercalating arm
Pemetrexed (D1) + Cisplatin (D1)
Eligibility:
Gefitinib (D5-18), q3wks X 4 cycles
Completely Resected
pStage II-IIIB
Intercalating phase
Gefitinib maintenance
Treatment continues until:
(excluding N3)
1:1
(3week * 4 cycle)
1 year
Disease recurrence
Non-squamous NSCLC
R
Treatment completed
Two-sided a = 0.05 and 80% power, N=102 in each arm
Discontinuation criterion met
EGFR mutation:
E19del or L858R
Vinorelbine (D1,8) + Cisplatin (D1)
q3wks X 4 cycles
Stratified by
Arm B: Chemotherapy arm
-pStage (II or III)
-exon 19del vs. L858R
Exploratory Analysis
Chemotherapy
Gefitinib
Exploration of biomarkers predictive of recurrence using next-generation
sequencing (NGS) of surgical tumor specimens
Primary endpoint : Disease-free survival
Longitudinal assessment of changes in EGFR mutation patterns in cell-free DNA
Secondary endpoints : Overall survival, safety & tolerability
Blood-based analysis of inflammatory biomarkers
Optional acquisition of tumor tissue at recurrence to investigate mechanisms of
resistance using NGS
[Slide 2]
04 min 47s
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Results
Baseline Characteristics
Intercalating
Chemotherapy
(N = 102)
(N = 91)
Age
Median
62
62
Sex, n(%)
Male
33 (32.4)
27 (29.7)
Female
69 (67.6)
64 (70.3)
ECOG, n(%)
0
56 (54.9)
53 (58.2)
1
46 (45.1)
38 (41.8)
EGFR, n(%)
Exon 19 del
62 (60.8)
53 (58.2)
L858R
40 (39.2)
38 (41.8)
Stage, AJCC 8ᵗʰ, n(%)
IIA
7 (6.9)
8 (8.8)
IIB
40 (39.2)
33 (36.3)
IIIA
47 (46.1)
45 (49.4)
IIIB
8 (7.8)
5 (5.5)
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
04 min 24s
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
HR
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Results
Disease-Free Survival
Median DFS, months
100
Treatment Arm
(95% CI)
Intercalation
58.8 (41.9-NR)
Chemo alone
41.9 (21.9-NR)
75
p-value = 0.0359
DFS Probability (%)
50
25
Arm A Intercalation
Median Follow-up duration : 41.8 months
Arm B Chemotherapy alone
0
0
12
24
36
48
60
72
Time (Months)
Arm A Intercalation
100
87
59
33
17
2
0
Arm B Chemotherapy alone
88
61
38
26
12
2
0
[Slide 4]
04 min 00s
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Results
Stage II
Median DFS, months
Treatment Arm
Median DFS, months
930
Stage III
Treatment Arm
(95% CI)
(95% CI)
100
Intercalation
NR (41.9-NR)
Intercalation
42.0 (25.0-NR)
NR (41.9-NR)
Chemo alone
21.2 (13.6-42.7)
I
Chemo alone
75
Probabler 5% (s)
50
p-value = 0.4547
Probably 0F3 E
p-value = 0.0211
50
25
25
0
0
12
24
36
c
60
12
48
no
72
0
12
24
36
41
Time (Months)
Time (Months)
Am
45
41
32
18
Are B alone
2
0
Are Internation
55
as
27
15
9
0
o
B
41
31
22
95
9
2
47
30
>s
10
)
0
0
o
Exon19del
L858R
Median DFS, months
Median DFS, months
Treatment Arm
100
Treatment Arm
930
(95% CI)
(95% CI)
Intercalation
NR (41.9-NR)
Intercalation
42.0 (28.4-NR)
TO
x
Chemo alone
21.2 (14.4-NR)
Chemo alone
42.7 (24.2-NR)
5/3 2
Probablery 2 0*3
50
50
p-value = 0.9036
p-value = 0.0096
25
25
Am
Инсавы
Am Chemotherapy alone
0
0
0
12
24
x
48
00
72
0
12
N
30
48
60
72
Time (Months)
Time (Months)
Am Internation
40
31
22
12
4
1
0
Arn
00
50
32
21
to
1
D
Am B alone
37
30
20
13
5
0
o
An D Cherretter LANE
51
31
18
13
7
2
D
PEI-JYE VOON
VANES
TTom Newsom-Davis@tnewsomdavis
RAPHAEL: Adjuvant gefitinib
St II-IIIB, EGFRmut
Korean IIS
👉Vin/Cis vs Pem/Cis/Gefitinib
✅🔼 DFS 58 v 41m
❌Not significant in stage II or L858R
❌DFS benefit < osimertinib
❓details pre-op staging
❗️1yr TKI seems too little
🔸Interesting, not clinically relevant now
#WCLC26 https://t.co/JmUslk2SBt
251 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
TASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER - IS,
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Method
Multicenter, Randomized, Phase III trial
Arm A: Intercalating arm
Pemetrexed (D1) + Cisplatin (D1)
Eligibility:
Gefitinib (D5-18), q3wks X 4 cycles
Completely Resected
pStage II-IIIB
Intercalating phase
Gefitinib maintenance
(excluding N3)
Treatment continues until:
1:1
(3week * 4 cycle)
1 year
Disease recurrence
Non-squamous NSCLC
R
Treatment completed
Two-sided a = 0.05 and 80% power, N=102 in each arm
Discontinuation criterion met
EGFR mutation:
E19del or L858R
Vinorelbine (D1,8) + Cisplatin (D1)
q3wks X 4 cycles
Stratified by
Arm B: Chemotherapy arm
-pStage (II or III)
-exon 19del vs. L858R
Exploratory Analysis
Chemotherapy
Gefitinib
Exploration of biomarkers predictive of recurrence using next-generation
sequencing (NGS) of surgical tumor specimens
Primary endpoint : Disease-free survival
Longitudinal assessment of changes in EGFR mutation patterns in cell-free DNA
Secondary endpoints : Overall survival, safety & tolerability
Blood-based analysis of inflammatory biomarkers
Optional acquisition of tumor tissue at recurrence to investigate mechanisms of
resistance using NGS
[Slide 2]
04 min
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Results
Disease-Free Survival
Median DFS, months
100
Treatment Arm
(95% CI)
Intercalation
58.8 (41.9-NR)
Chemo alone
41.9 (21.9-NR)
75
p-value = 0.0359
DFS Probability (%)
50
25
Arm A Intercalation
Median Follow-up duration : 41.8 months
Arm B Chemotherapy alone
0
0
12
24
36
48
60
72
Time (Months)
Arm A Intercalation
100
87
59
33
17
2
0
Arm B Chemotherapy alone
88
61
38
26
12
2
0
[Slide 3]
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
03 min 04s
Results
Stage II
Treatment Arm
Median DFS, months
(95% CI)
Stage III
Median OF & months
Treatment Arm
Intercalation
(95% CI)
NR (41.9-NR)
Intercation
42.0 (25 0-NR)
Chemo alone
NR (41.9-NR)
Chemo alone
21.2(13.6-42.7)
-
p-value = 0.4547
& I .
-
p-value = 0.0211
-
-
-
i
.
.
-
Exon19del
L858R
Treatment Ann
Median DFS, months
Median DFS, months
(95% CI)
Treatment Arm
(95% CI)
Intercation
NR (41.9-NR)
Intercalation
42.0 (28.4-NR)
Chemo alone
21.2 (14.4-NR)
Chemo alone
42.7(24.2-NR)
-
$ .
-
$
p-value = 0.9036
p-value = 0.0096
.
.
:
-
-
.
.
-
-
[Slide 4]
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Safety
Intercalating
Chemotherapy
(N = 102)
(N = 91)
Any Grade
Grade ≥ 3
Any Grade
Grade ≥ 3
Nausea
Constipation
72 (70.59) [146]
6 (5.88) [10]
58 (63.74) [103]
8 (8.79) [10]
38 (37.25) [45]
-
30 (32.97) [32]
-
Decreased appetite
36 (35.29) [47]
-
24 (26.37) [35]
1 (1.10) [1]
Dermatitis acneiform
44 (43.14) [83]
4 (3.92) [5]
-
-
Alanine aminotransferase increased
28 (27.45) [39]
2 (1.96) [2]
10 (10.99) [13]
-
Diarrhoea
24 (23.53) [39]
1 (0.98) [1]
11 (12.09) [13]
1 (1.10) [1]
Stomatitis
28 (27.45) [36]
7 (7.69) [8]
-
-
Aspartate aminotransferase increased
28 (27.45) [36]
1 (0.98) [1]
5 (5.49) [8]
-
Neutropenia
18 (17.65) [26]
7 (6.86) [12]
44 (48.35) [84]
33 (36.26) [49]
Dyspepsia
18 (17.65) [24]
-
15 (16.48) [17]
-
Anaemia
11 (10.78) [18]
2 (1.96) [2]
21 (23.08) [33]
2 (2.20) [2]
Fatigue
14 (13.73) [20]
3 (2.94) [3]
16 (17.58) [20]
1 (1.10) [1]
Vomiting
15 (14.71) [24]
4 (3.92) [5]
14 (15.38) [19]
4 (4.40) [6]
Alopecia
10 (9.80) [10]
-
13 (14.29) [15]
I
Paresthesia
15 (14.71) [16]
-
8 (8.79) [11]
-
Any-grade and grade ≥3 AEs are presented as n (%) [number of events]
KKenn Samala@KSamalaMD
#RAPHAEL trial -role of Gefitinib + chemo in resected NSCLC #WCLC26 https://t.co/qmoKuMOqRn
120 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
09 mi
wclc.iaslc.org
f
in
#WCLC
IASLC
2026 World Conference
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
A Randomized Phase III Multicenter Trial of Adjuvant
Gefitinib Plus Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy in
EGFR-Mutant NSCLC: RAPHAEL Trial (KM-07, LU15-12)
Beung Chul Ahn, Jii Bum Lee, Youngjoo Lee, Min Hee Hong, Joo-Hwan Park, Seoyoung Lee, Yoon-Gyu Lee, Eun
Joo Kang, Joo Hang Kim, Byoung Yong Shim, Tae Hwan Kim, Young Joo Min, Yoon Ho Ko, Ki Hyeong Lee, Joo
Young Jung, So Yeon Oh, Sung Sook Lee, Seung Taek Lim, Byoung Chul Cho, Ji-Youn Han, Sun Min Lim
Republic of Korea
Science Without Boundaries: Uniting the World Against Thoracic Canc
PEI-J
KKenn Samala@KSamalaMD
#RAPHAEL trial baseline characteristics
#WCLC26 https://t.co/Jmqg0P1Pvs
64 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
05 min 07s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Results
Baseline Characteristics
Intercalating
Chemotherapy
(N = 102)
(N = 91)
Age
Median
62
62
Sex, n(%)
Male
33 (32.4)
27 (29.7)
Female
69 (67.6)
64 (70.3)
ECOG, n(%)
0
56 (54.9)
53 (58.2)
1
46 (45.1)
38 (41.8)
EGFR, n(%)
Exon 19 del
62 (60.8)
53 (58.2)
L858R
40 (39.2)
38 (41.8)
Stage, AJCC 8th, n(%)
IIA
7 (6.9)
8 (8.8)
IIB
40 (39.2)
33 (36.3)
IIIA
47 (46.1)
45 (49.4)
IIIB
8 (7.8)
5 (5.5)
6
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
Easy memory hook to remember osimertinib studies in NSCLC
FL + AURA = FLAURA → First line
AD + AURA = ADAURA → Adjuvant
LA + AURA = LAURA → Locally advanced
One drug. Three settings. The AURA of osimertinib.
#NSCLC #EGFR #Osimertinib #FLAURA #ADAURA #LAURA #MVOnco https://t.co/IR7D9VQmIk
2.6K impressions17 likes1 reposts2026-09-23
[Slide 1]
THE AURA OF OSIMERTINIB
IN EGFR-MUTANT NSCLC
MV Onco
OSIMERTINIB
FL = FIRST LINE
FL + AURA = FLAURA
Advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC
AD = ADJUVANT
AD + AURA = ADAURA
After complete tumour resection
LA = LOCALLY ADVANCED
LA + AURA = LAURA
Unresectable Stage III,
after chemoradiotherapy
ONE DRUG. THREE SETTINGS.
THE AURA OF OSIMERTINIB.
KKenn Samala@KSamalaMD
#ElfeD with #Pumitamig #BNT32401 for mNSCLC #WCLC26
(SCLC focus) https://t.co/kbQO9LBzGR
307 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
wclc.iaslc.org
f
in
09 min 52s
IASLC
2026 )
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
|
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Pumitamig (PD-L1 X VEGF-A bsAb) + Elfetabart
Drozuntecan (Elfe-D, B7H3 ADC) in Patients With
Advanced/Metastatic Lung Cancer (NSCLC or SCLC)
A.J. Schoenfeld (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York/NY/USA)
L. Sun, J. Bennouna, T. Clay, T. Cil, J. Zhou, J. Shi, O. Ates, B.B. Oven, A. Liu, M. Altan, A. Spira, C. Oakman, K. Parikh, A. Lisberg, G. Ayre, E. Schenk, M. Kotlarski,
C. Lazzari, M. Forster, K. Franks, T-Y. Yang, H. Liu, O. Juan-Vidal, R. Dziadziuszko, T. Marron, E. Felip, H. Mu, W. Wu, I. Celik, C. Dalle Fratte, J. David, J. Furlanetto,
C-N. Gann, S. Helian, Q. Kang-Fortner, C. Key, Z. Mukhtar, A. O'Brate, M. Soland, M. Wenger, O. Türeci, U. Sahin, R. Tibes, L. Paz-Ares
Science Without Boundaries: Uniting the World Against Thoracic Cancer
MMinhua Chu@chuminhua432
#WCLC2026
Late-Breaking Oral (Sept 15):
🇨🇳DualityBio & $BNTX will unveil clinical data on B7-H3 ADC elfetabart drozuntecan (Elfe-D; BNT324/DB-1311) + pumitamig in advanced lung cancer.
Abstract: OA14.02 Pumitamig (PD-L1×VEGF-A bsAb) + Elfe-D (B7-H3 ADC) in Advanced/Metastatic Lung Cancer (NSCLC/SCLC)
BNT324-01 is an ongoing global Phase 1b/2 trial (NCT06892548) evaluating pumitamig+Elfe-D
2.3K impressions1 likes1 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
Table. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurring ≥10% patients
(DCO 02-Jun-2026)
Elfe-D dose (mg/kg Q3W)
4.5
6
4.5
6
Pumitamig dose (mg/kg Q3W)
20
20
30
30
N=42
N=58
N=27
N=66
TRAE Grade
Any
≥3
Any
≥3
Any
≥3
Any
≥3
37
15
47
17
17
5
45
8
TRAEs, n (%)
(88.1)
(35.7)
(81.0)
(29.3)
(63.0)
(18.5)
(68.2)
(12.1)
18
1
33
3
4
22
1
Nausea
0
(42.9)
(2.4)
(56.9)
(5.2)
(14.8)
(33.3)
(1.5)
9
3
14
4
13
1
Anemia
0
0
(21.4)
(7.1)
(24.1)
(14.8)
(19.7)
(1.5)
8
19
4
7
10
1
Decreased appetite
0
0
(19.0)
(32.8)
(6.9)
(25.9)
(15.2)
(1.5)
10
2
11
1
7
1
8
1
WBC count decreased
(23.8)
(4.8)
(19.0)
(1.7)
(25.9)
(3.7)
(12.1)
(1.5)
9
2
12
4
4
1
8
1
Neutrophil count decreased
(21.4)
(4.8)
(20.7)
(6.9)
(14.8)
(3.7)
(12.1)
(1.5)
10
1
10
2
4
3
8
Fatigue
0
(23.8)
(2.4)
(17.2)
(3.4)
(14.8)
(11.1)
(12.1)
9
13
1
1
8
1
Vomiting
0
0
(21.4)
(22.4)
(1.7)
(3.7)
(12.1)
(1.5)
7
10
2
3
1
6
Platelet count decreased
0
0
(16.7)
(17.2)
(3.4)
(11.1)
(3.7)
(9.1)
[Slide 2]
Introduction: Here we report the first data of pumitamig, an investigational PD-L1*VEGF-A bispecific antibody (bsAb), combined with
elfetabart drozuntecan (elfe-D; BNT324/DB-1311), an investigational B7H3 ADC, with a focus in SCLC.
Methods: BNT324-01 is an ongoing global phase 1b/2 trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of pumitamig+elfe-D in advanced/metastatic
lung cancer (SCLC/NSCLC) with Part 1 dose escalation/backfill and Part 2 dose expansion to support optimal dose selection (NCT06892548;
Schoenfeld WCLC 2025). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) are evaluated during cycle 1 of dose escalation. Primary endpoints are objective
response rate (ORR) and safety. ORR (unconfirmed) is reported in the SCLC efficacy-evaluable population (≥1 post-baseline scan or early
discontinuation). NSCLC data are still immature and will be reported separately. ctDNA analyses used FoundationOne® Liquid CDx. Here we
present efficacy and ctDNA analyses in SCLC that together with safety from the overall population provide guidance for pivotal study
development.
Results: 193 patients with SCLC or NSCLC had received pumitamig+elfe-D by the 02-Jun-2026 data cut-off. Median age was 64 years (range
29-87); 122 (63.2%) patients were male, 97 (50.3%) were Asian, 148 (76.7%) had ECOG PS 1, and 141 (73.1%) had a smoking history.
No DLTs occurred during dose escalation. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 163 (84.5%) patients, that were related
(TRAEs) to either drug in 146 (75.6%) patients and were Grade ≥3 TRAEs in 45 (23.3%). TRAEs led to a dose reduction of elfe-D in 16 (8.3%)
patients and to discontinuation in 10 (5.2% [elfe-D: n=7/3.6%, pumitamig: n=10/5.2%]). The most common TRAEs were gastrointestinal or
hematological, mostly Grade 1-2. Safety was comparable across doses (Table). Updated data will be presented.
Table. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurring ≥10% patients
(DCO 02-Jun-2026)
Elfe-D dose (mg/kg Q3W)
4.5
6
4.5
6
Pumitamig dose (mg/kg Q3W)
20
20
30
30
N=42
N=58
N=27
N=66
TRAE Grade
Any
>3
Any
≥3
Any
≥3
Any
≥3
37
15
47
17
17
5
45
8
TRAEs, n (%)
(88.1)
(35.7)
(81.0)
(29.3)
(63.0)
(18.5)
(68.2)
(12.1)
18
1
33
3
4
22
1
Nausea
0
(42.9)
(2.4)
(56.9)
(5.2)
(14.8)
(33.3)
(1.5)
9
3
14
4
13
1
Anemia
0
0
(21.4)
(7.1)
(24.1)
(14.8)
(19.7)
(1.5)
8
19
4
7
10
1
Decreased appetite
0
0
(19.0)
(32.8)
(6.9)
(25.9)
(15.2)
(1.5)
10
2
11
1
7
1
8
1
WBC count decreased
(23.8)
(4.8)
(19.0)
(1.7)
(25.9)
(3.7)
(12.1)
(1.5)
9
2
12
4
4
1
8
1
Neutrophil count decreased
(21.4)
(4.8)
(20.7)
(6.9)
(14.8)
(3.7)
(12.1)
(1.5)
10
1
10
2
4
3
8
Fatigue
0
(23.8)
(2.4)
(17.2)
(3.4)
(14.8)
(11.1)
(12.1)
9
13
1
1
8
1
Vomiting
0
0
(21.4)
(22.4)
(1.7)
(3.7)
(12.1)
(1.5)
7
10
2
3
1
6
Platelet count decreased
0
0
(16.7)
(17.2)
(3.4)
(11.1)
(3.7)
(9.1)
There were 71 efficacy-evaluable patients with SCLC at the efficacy data cut-off of 07-Jul-2026. Best objective response was CR (n=1), PR
(n=49), SD (n=16), PD (n=3), NE/NA (n=2) for an overall ORR of 70.4% (95%CI 58.4-80.7) and DCR of 93.0% (95%CI 84.3-97.7) across all doses.
By treatment line, ORR was 92.3% (95%CI 64.0-99.8) in 1L SCLC, 77.3% (95%CI 54.6-92.2) in 2L SCLC, 52.4% (95%CI 29.8-74.3) in 3L+ SCLC,
and 70.0% (95%CI 34.8-93.3) post-DLL3-targeting agents. Baseline ctDNA detection rate was 93% (26/28 patients with available ctDNA data).
At C3D1, 96% (22/23) evaluable patients had confirmed ctDNA reduction vs baseline, with a ctDNA clearance rate of 39% (9/23).
Conclusions: In these first data reporting on a PD(L)1xVEGF bsAb + ADC in lung cancer, pumitamig+elfe-D showed a manageable safety
profile with encouraging early efficacy in SCLC, supporting further clinical development.
40SKYSCRAPER-022.3K impressions2K primary · 322 preview2 engagements2 posts · 2 voices▾
OOncoAlert@OncoAlert
The OncoAlert #WCLC26 🇰🇷 Top 10 Deep Dive! Abstract to be presented
MO15.05 Expression and Prognostic Impact of B7-H3 in Patients With Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer
🫁 Biomarker analysis of 462 pretreatment ES-SCLC samples from IMpower133 and SKYSCRAPER-02, characterising B7-H3 expression and its prognostic impact.
➡️ B7-H3 prevalent by IHC (>80%) and consistent across all four SCLC m
2K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-10
[Slide 2]
ONCOALERT TOP 10 ABSTRACTS
#WCLC26
12-15 SEP 2026
METHODS
ASSAYS
SOURCE
Chromogenic IHC on 5-micron paraffin
Tumour samples from patients with ES-SCLC
sections and bulk RNA sequencing;
enrolled in IMpower133 (NCT02763579) and
molecular subsets defined per Nabet et al,
SKYSCRAPER-02 (NCT04256421).
Cancer Cell 2024.
TREATMENT
ANALYSIS
Patients received carboplatin/etoposide (CE) or
Samples dichotomised to high or low B7-
atezolizumab plus CE (ACE).
H3 by median gene expression; studies
combined using batch correction.
Based on publicly released #WCLC26 abstract — preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/IASLC.
OncoAlert
360
Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues
To be presented by:
Dr. Stephen Liu
Georgetown University
[Slide 3]
ONCOALERT TOP 10 ABSTRACTS
OF
#WCLC26
12-15 SEP 2026
RESULTS
EXPRESSION
462 pretreatment samples formed the RNA-
CORRELATIONS
seq biomarker-evaluable population. B7-H3
No correlation with transcription factors or cell
expression was prevalent by IHC (>80%), with
surface targets at the RNA level, and no
RNA expression consistent across all four
correlation between B7-H3 RNA expression
SCLC molecular subtypes.
and PD-L1 by IHC.
ACE ARMS
IMpower133 (n=132): mPFS 5.5 VS 4.4 months
CE ARM
(HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53-1.09);
IMpower133 (n=139): mPFS 4.4 VS 4.3 months
mOS 12.6 VS 9.6 (HR 0.72, 0.48-1.06).
(HR 1.0, 0.71-1.41); mOS 9.7 VS 10.1 (HR 1.12,
SKYSCRAPER-02 (n=110): mPFS 5.7 VS 4.4 (HR
0.77-1.62).
0.98, 0.65-1.49);
mOS 12.9 VS 11.5 (HR 0.79, 0.51-1.22).
Based on publicly released #WCLC26 abstract - preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/IASLC.
OncoAlert
360
To be presented by:
Dr. Stephen Liu
Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues
Georgetown University
[Slide 4]
ONCOALERT TOP 10 ABSTRACTS
#WCLC26
12-15 SEP 2026
CONCLUSION
B7-H3 Is Widely Expressed but
///
Not Prognostic in SCLC
B7-H3 is highly expressed in SCLC, with similar expression across all four
SCLC molecular subtypes. B7-H3 expression is not strongly correlated
with SCLC transcription factors or canonical surface antigens, suggesting
broad expression across disease subsets. B7-H3 expression is also not a
%
prognostic factor for PFS or os in patients from the IMpower133 and
SKYSCRAPER-02 studies.
SA
Based on publicly released #WCLC26 abstract — preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/IASLC.
OncoAlert
360
To be presented by:
Dr. Stephen Liu
Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues
Georgetown University
BBhaarath PG@BhaarathP10039
@IASLC-WCLC 2026: Pre-Conf Top Abstracts
KEYNOTE-D46 | REZILIENT3 | ARTEMIS-008 | S1827 MAVERICK | PAPILLON | TAISHAN-302 | ADAURA | ARROS-1 | DESTINY-LUNG04 | MDT-BRIDGE | IMpower133 | SKYSCRAPER-02 | NAUTIKA1 | DeLLphi309 | IMpower030 | AMIGO-1 | LuCa-MERIT-1 | JS207 | GFH375 | QLC1101 | LB2102 | SYS6010 | HS-10370 | RC148 | YL201
#WCLC26 #WCLC2026 #Cancer #Oncology #LungCancer #NSCLC #SCLC #LCS
322 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
41ABBV-14802.3K impressionsall primary3 engagements1 posts · 1 voices▾
MMinhua Chu@chuminhua432
🇨🇳RemeGen & $ABBV 's PD-1/VEGF bispecific antibody RC148 (ABBV-1480) delivered an oral presentation at #WCLC2026 with first-line combo data in NSCLC (RC148-C002, NCT06883630).
RemeGen also presented a poster on the Phase 3 trial design for RC148 in first-line squamous NSCLC (RC148-C301, NCT07416474) on Sept 14.
📊 Phase II results (data cutoff March 22, 2026; 61 sq-NSCLC + 60 nsq-NSCLC
2.3K impressions3 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
Table 1. Clinical Efficacy Data.
Cohort 1 (sq-NSCLC)
Cohort 2 (nsq-NSCLC)
RC148 (10 mg/kg) +
RC148 (20 mg/kg) +
RC148 (10 mg/kg) +
RC148 (20 mg/kg) +
Carboplatin + Paclitaxel
Carboplatin + Paclitaxel
Carboplatin + Pemetrexed
Carboplatin + Pemetrexed
(N=30)
(N=31)
(N=30)
(N=30)
Median follow-up, months
8.7
9.1
27/30
22/28
22/29
11/28
ORR*, n/N (%; 95% CI)
(90.0; 73.5-97.9)
(78.6; 59.0-91.7)
(75.9; 56.5-89.7)
(39.3; 21.5-59.4)
DoR
Median (95% CI),
NR
7.2 (4.1-NR)
NR
NR
months
6-month DoR rate, %
66.5 (41.9-82.6) /8
64.6 (37.4-82.4) /9
80.2 (55.4, 92.1) /8
90.0 (47.3, 98.5) /8
(95% CI)/number at risk
9-month DoR rate, %
NR
46.0 (18.2, 70.1) /2
80.2 (55.4, 92.1) /3
90.0 (47.3, 98.5) /4
(95% CI)/number at risk
PFS
Median (95% CI),
10.8 (6.9-NR)
8.5 (5.4-NR)
NR
10.4 (6.7-NR)
months
6-month PFS rate, %
80.0 (58.4-91.1) /20
60.5 (38.7-76.6) /14
82.8 (63.4-92.4) /24
73.2 (51.8-86.2) /18
(95% CI)/number at risk
9-month PFS rate, %
67.8 (45.7-82.4) /6
42.5 (20.2-63.3) /4
68.0 (47.3-82.0) /7
57.4 (34.4-74.9) /5
(95% CI)/number at risk
OS
Median (95% CI),
NR
NR
NR
NR
months
9-month OS rate, %
87.0 (64.1-95.7) /12
79.0 (58.8-90.1) /10
90.0 (72.1-96.7) /15
85.4 (65.4-94.3) /15
(95% CI)/number at risk
Subgroup Analysis
PD-L1 TPS <1%
14/15
7/9
10/14
4/16
(ORR*, n/N (%; 95%
(93.3; 68.1-99.8)
(77.8; 40.0-97.2)
(71.4; 41.9-91.6)
(25.0; 7.3-52.4)
CI))
PD-L1 TPS ≥1%
12/14
13/16
10/13
7/11
(ORR*, n/N (%; 95%
(85.7; 57.2-98.2)
(81.3; 54.4-96.0)
(76.9; 46.2-95.0)
(63.6; 30.8-89.1)
CI))
*Analyzed in patients with ≥1 post-baseline tumor assessment. NR=not reached.
42EMPOWER-Lung 11.8K impressionsall primary8 engagements2 posts · 1 voices▾
OOncLive.com@OncLive
Day 1 of #WCLC2026 is here and we’re ready to kick things into high gear! Starting the day off strong with @drgandara on EMPOWER-Lung 1 #lcsm @UCDavisHealth @UCD_Cancer https://t.co/MtKoNTKpo3
1.6K impressions6 likes1 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
S
I ma
HII North
SAFETY
If 7
I
DUI SECURITY & SAFETY
Y& SAFETY
FETY
cier
WTC Seoul SECURITY & SAFETY
NIT
nora
a
[Slide 2]
Si
-
O
I i I
I
Room 105, Grand Ballroom, IF
I
as
[Slide 3]
C2
C2
Hall
Welcome to the 2026 IASLC World Conference on Lung Cancer
DISCOVER
EXHIBITS & POSTERS
2026
1
+
who
[Slide 4]
GRAND BALLRO
Sci
2026 World Conference
UN
IASLC
on Lung Cancer
2026
Cancer
e.
IASLC
2026 World
MUNITY
2026
on Lung Can
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
LASIC
2026 World Conference
$
on Lung Cancer
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST THORACIC CANCER
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPU
Association
SEPTEMBER 12- 15,2026
Endorsed By KALC Lung Cancer
1
ANC , 2026 #WCLC26
OOncLive.com@OncLive
Day 1 of #WCLC26 is here and we’re ready to kick things into high gear! Starting the day off strong with @drgandara on EMPOWER-Lung 1 #lcsm @UCDavisHealth @UCD_Cancer https://t.co/tgLTwVUxYd
159 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
S
I ma
HII North
SAFETY
If 7
I
DUI SECURITY & SAFETY
Y& SAFETY
FETY
cier
WTC Seoul SECURITY & SAFETY
NIT
nora
a
[Slide 2]
Si
-
O
I i I
I
Room 105, Grand Ballroom, IF
I
as
[Slide 3]
C2
C2
Hall
Welcome to the 2026 IASLC World Conference on Lung Cancer
DISCOVER
EXHIBITS & POSTERS
2026
1
+
who
[Slide 4]
GRAND BALLRO
Sci
2026 World Conference
UN
IASLC
on Lung Cancer
2026
Cancer
e.
IASLC
2026 World
MUNITY
2026
on Lung Can
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
LASIC
2026 World Conference
$
on Lung Cancer
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST THORACIC CANCER
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPU
Association
SEPTEMBER 12- 15,2026
Endorsed By KALC Lung Cancer
1
ANC , 2026 #WCLC26
43HARMONi-71.7K impressions1.3K primary · 389 preview8 engagements8 posts · 6 voices▾
MMV Chandrakanth@ChandrakanthMv
HARMONi-2: PFS ✓ OS ✓ — but global standard yet? Not quite.
China-only data, an unpowered PD-L1 ≥50% OS subgroup, comparator questions in PD-L1 1–49%, and higher VEGF-related toxicity still matter.
🌍 HARMONi-7: Global Phase III, PD-L1 TPS ≥50% — the validation to watch.
#HARMONi2 #HARMONi7 #Ivonescimab #NSCLC #LungCancer #Oncology #MVOnco
579 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-21
[Slide 1]
HARMONi-2:
MV Onco
WHY NOT A GLOBAL
PFS
NEW STANDARD YET?
OS
so
WHAT STILL MAKES US PAUSE?
1
CHINA ONLY
GLOBAL
GENERALIZABILITY?
2
PD-L1 ≥50%
BUT
DESCRIPTIVE
OS HR 0.58
UNPOWERED
VERY EXCITING
SUBGROUP
3
PD-L1 1-49%
AND
CHEMO + IO
OS HR 0.85
PEMBRO ALONE
is the more relevant
WAS THE COMPARATOR
comparator for many
CI CROSSES 1
1-49% patients
4
TOXICITY PRICE
PROTEINURIA
MORE
HYPERTENSION
!
VEGF-RELATED
TOXICITY
GRADE ≥3 TRAEs
5
WHAT NEXT?
GLOBAL PHASE III
PD-L1 TPS ≥50%
HARMONi-7
GLOBAL VALIDATION
BOTTOM LINE:
BEFORE GLOBAL
POSITIVE
REPLACEMENT OF PEMBRO
BUT
PFS + OS
WE NEED
GLOBAL CONFIRMATION
A BROADER VIEW
FOR BRIGHTER ANSWERS
SCIENCE TODAY.
IN ONCOLOGY
BETTER TOMORROW.
NNugget Research@nuggetresearch
2/9 SMMT is a single-asset company valued around $14 billion (2026-09-09), and that valuation is a bet on whether ivonescimab can beat pembrolizumab (Keytruda) in HARMONi-3 and HARMONi-7.
What the FDA reviews on Nov 14 is not these two trials. It is a much smaller later-line indication: EGFR-mutated non-squamous NSCLC after third-generation TKI, in combination with carboplatin plus pemetrexed. Th
165 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-22
NNugget Research@nuggetresearch
The subgroup highlighted here (TPS ≥50%, HR 0.58) is the one that maps onto the US: it's HARMONi-7's population, the global ivo vs pembro monotherapy trial in high PD-L1. HARMONi-2 is China-only, which FDA won't lean on alone. But still a good prior for HARMONi-7 and $SMMT https://t.co/QWzkokkHVS
158 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-18
SSanthosh Ambika@RenoHemonc
@Dr_ElvinaA @OncoAlert @Larvol @OncBrothers Until HARMONI 7 comes out FDA not gonna approve in this setting..
149 impressions3 likes0 reposts2026-09-16
NNugget Research@nuggetresearch
@ChandrakanthMv Great post. Each has a global twin run by $SMMT : A → HARMONi (PDUFA Nov 14), 2 → HARMONi-7 (TPS>50%), 6 → HARMONi-3 (adds non-sq). HARMONI-A and HARMONi overlap: HARMONi's 273 Chinese pts came from HARMONi-A, so only the 165 Western pts are the new data.
59 impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-20
JJacob Plieth@JacobPlieth
@SuyogCancer @3A_3Lo_ Well, clearly it's a doctor's decision what to give, but Keytruda monoRx is "acceptable" (per the US label) as low as PD-L1 1%. I guess the key is Harmoni-7, which sets 50% PD-L1 cutoff to reflect US practice.
98 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-14
BBioSignal@BioSignal
Merck sponsored the Phase 3 that failed to beat Keytruda alone with Gilead's Trodelvy added. It is running the same test with a TROP2 drug it licensed from China, built on the same antibody, and this time overall survival is the only primary endpoint.
EVOKE-03 enrolled 620 patients with untreated metastatic lung cancer and PD-L1 of 50% or more. It was stopped in June on the data monitoring c
389 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-25
RRaj Singh, MD@Raj_Singh_MD
@TugceKutukMD @HardenedBeam @OhioStateRadOnc @joshuapalmermd @HaleyPerlow Agree. MAVERICK w/ limitation that enrolled patients prior to IO being incorporated into LS-SCLC management with improved OS.
ADRIATIC did show superior OS for patients getting PCI in the IO arm vs no PCI, but ofc observational subgroup analysis so hard to draw conclusions from
132 impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-10
MMark Storey@ProtonStorey
@PDBrownOnc @TonyFelefly @DrewMoghanaki @StephenVLiu And regardless, both curves have moved up quite a bit - more in line with ADRIATIC even for the pooled. Great results showing real improvement over the decades.
45 impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
OOncLive.com@OncLive
.@StephenVLiu, of @Georgetown @MedStarGUH @LombardiCancer, reviews the ADRIATIC trial (NCT03703297: OS HR, 0.73; PFS HR, 0.76) and previews how tarlatamab, a DLL3xCD3 bispecific, might build on durvalumab consolidation in limited-stage SCLC #BTGLung2026 #lcsm https://t.co/1RTXdcwaYn
1.3K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-12
HHenry C Fung| MM, lymphoma, leukemia & CART@HenrychihangFu1
🫁 FIG 5 | LOCAL TUMOR OR SYSTEMIC DISEASE?
We call it early-stage because of where we can see it.
But what if some oncogene-driven NSCLC is biologically systemic before it becomes anatomically obvious?
ADAURA, ALINA, LIBRETTO-432 and NeoADAURA are steadily moving targeted therapy earlier in the disease course.
The next frontier may not be more treatment.
It may be:
🧬 Find the driver earlier
712 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-29
[Slide 1]
Same organ.
FIGURE 5 — ONCOGENE-DRIVEN EARLY-STAGE NSCLC:
Different
biology.
LOCAL TUMOR OR SYSTEMIC DISEASE?
Earlier detection therap.
Different
world
What if some apparently localized driver-defined lung cancers already harbor systemic disease?
treatments.
NSCLC?
A different future
A hypothesis: treat the biology early, then ask how much conventional local therapy is truly necessary.
for
1
TODAY: AN ANATOMIC MODEL
2
A BIOLOGIC HYPOTHESIS
3
MOVING EARLIER:
4
THE VISION:
Visible localized tumor
SYSTEMIC THERAPY FIRST
Some oncogene-driven NSCLC may be
A CHEMOTHERAPY-FREE WORLD?
local therapy
adjuvant targeted therapy (when indicated)
biologically systemic earlier than
NeoADAURA: proof of concept in resectable
Earlier detection of driver-defined NSCLC
anatomic stage suggests.
EGFR-mutated NSCLC (phase III)
Systemic targeted therapy earlier
Brain
Osimertinib + chemo
Osimertinib alone
Chemo alone
Less chemotherapy
Primary
(micrometastases)
(n 121)
(n = 117)
(n 120)
Individualized local therapy (surgery or RT)
tumor
40
(visible)
Blood / ctDNA
Long-term disease control with minimal therapy
Surgery
Adjuvant
(circulating clones)
30
26%
25%
Early-stage
(or definitive RT
driver-targeted
% 20
± chemotherapy
Bone
9%
EARLY
NSCLC
therapy
10
as appropriate)
(micrometastases)
2%
4%
DETECTION
(when indicated)
0%
0
DRIVER-
Liver
Major pathologic response (MPR)
Pathologic complete response (pCR)
DIRECTED
Local therapy remains the curative
(micrometastases)
THERAPY
RESPONSE-
backbone today.
EFS: immature. Surgery remained part of the protocol.
ADAPTED
LOCAL THERAPY
Other organs
LONG-TERM
KEY EVIDENCE FOR ADJUVANT/NEOADJUVANT TARGETED THERAPY
(micrometastases)
CAN WE ELIMINATE CHEMOTHERAPY
CONTROL
IN SOME PATIENTS?
MINIMAL
EGFR — ADAURA
ALK - ALINA
RET - LIBRETTO-432
TREATMENT
SYSTEMIC CLONAL DISEASE MODEL
(adjuvant)
(adjuvant)
(adjuvant)
A future, response-adapted approach (investigational)
- conceptual analogy to lymphoma
Osimertinib
Alectinib
Selpercatinib
The visible tumor may be the dominant site,
(stage IB-IIIA)
(stage II-IIIA)
(stage II-IIIA)
not the entire disease.
Early dissemination may occur even in
KEY QUESTIONS TO BE PROVEN
Serial
Established standard
Established standard
2-year EFS 91.5%
"early-stage" disease.
Driver-targeted
Tailored local
Continued
molecular
VS 61.1%
Systemic targeted therapy treats the biology
therapy
therapy
driver-targeted
Can we safely omit chemotherapy in selected patients?
DFS benefit
Major DFS benefit
(HR 0.172)
everywhere.
(+ short course
response
(surgery or RT)
therapy and
Which patients can avoid or reduce surgery/RT based on
assessment
(HR 0.24)
chemo, selected)
- de-escalate
surveillance
molecular response?
OS benefit
Practice-changing
Different drivers have different risks and
(ctDNA/MRD)
when possible
Trend toward OS
Durable EFS and OS with de-escalation strategies?
(longer follow-up)
new standard of care
patterns of spread (e.g., CNS).
benefit (maturing)
(ASCO 2026)
Validated ctDNA/MRD and imaging endpoints?
HYPOTHESIS, NOT ESTABLISHED EQUIVALENCE.
MRD/ctDNA is NOT yet validated to omit surgery or radiation.
Optimal sequencing and duration of targeted therapy?
Adjuvant FDA indication for selpercatinib
De-escalation strategies must be tested prospectively.
in NSCLC has not yet been established (as of Sept 2026).
NSCLC is not lymphoma.
Can we eradicate residual clones and achieve cure?
TODAY:
NOW:
MOVING EARLIER:
FUTURE:
GOAL:
Local first
Adjuvant targeted therapy
Neoadjuvant targeted therapy
Response-adapted local therapy
A chemotherapy-free world
(anatomic stage)
(when indicated)
(± chemo, selected)
(de-escalate when possible)
for oncogene-driven NSCLC?
FIND THE DRIVER EARLY. TREAT THE BIOLOGY EARLY.
Different drivers.
Precision today.
A brighter tomorrow
THEN ASK HOW MUCH LOCAL THERAPY IS REALLY NECESSARY.
Different patients.
Different treatments.
for lung cancer patients.
The destination is not more treatment. It is the minimum treatment required for cure.
A brighter future.
LLilly Oncology Medical@LillyOncMed
We're presenting at #WCLC26 on the efficacy & safety of adjuvant RET kinase inhibitor in patients with RET+ NSCLC, featuring China subpopulation results from LIBRETTO-432.
Poster P1.386 | Sept. 13 | 10:30 AM-12 PM. Program: https://t.co/5MeraVCyVu
#LCSM #NSCLC #RETKinaseInhibitor
456 impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026
Lilly
PRESENTATIONS
A MEDICINE COMPANY
Poster P1.386
Efficacy and Safety of
Adjuvant Selpercatinib in
0
Exhibits and Posters,
Patients with RET + NSCLC:
Hall C, 3F
China Subpopulation
Sunday, September 13
Results from
L
10:30 AM - 12:00PM
LIBRETTO-432
Resectable NSCLC (Stages I-III)
For US Healthcare Professionals Only
46TRIDENT-3961 impressionsall primary7 engagements1 posts · 1 voices▾
DDr Riyaz Shah@DrRiyazShah
ARROS-1 update in TKI NAÏVE: Zidesamtinib P1/2; n629 enrolled, 183 TKI naïve; ORR 94%; CR 15%; mDOR NR, mPFS NR; ic-ORR 100%; tox data looks ok; Looks like the drug to give but trident 3 might make regulators push repo. #WCLC26 https://t.co/mMizXdTBEZ
961 impressions2 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: Patient Population
ROS1 TKI-Naive
Patient Characteristic
Efficacy Population
Data cut-off: 16 April 2026
All data shown as n (%) unless otherwise specified
n = 94
Total Enrolled: N = 629
Age, median (range), years
59 (26, 87)
Any ROS1+ solid tumor, any dose
Female
55 (59%)
Phase 1 + Phase 2 pooled
Never smoker
55 (59%)
Safety Population: N = 532
Geographic region
Advanced ROS1+ NSCLC
Asia Pacific
29 (31%)
Zidesamtinib 100 mg QD (any line of therapy)
Europe
27 (29%)
North America
38 (40%)
ROS1 TKI-Naive
a
ECOG PS
n = 183
0
56 (60%)
1
38 (40%)
ROS1 TKI-Naive Efficacy Population: b
Baseline CNS metastases
16 (17%)
n = 94
Tumor stage at study entry
with measurable disease by BICR
III
7 (7%)
Treated by 15 June 2025 (2 9 months DOR follow up)
IV
87 (93%)
Treatment History
Median duration follow-up:
15.2 months (range 1.1 30.5)
Prior platinum-based chemotherapy ±
immunotherapy
25 (27%)
Includes TKI-naive patients enrolled across any cohort. b Includes patients with s1 prior line of chemotherapy with or without immunotherapy from the registrational intent ROS1 TKI-naive cohort.
c Measurable or non-measurable lesions by BICR. d 16/25 patients with prior chemotherapy also received prior immunotherapy.
BICR, blinded independent central review; CNS, central nervous system; DOR, duration of response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; QD, once daily; NSCLC, non-small cell
lung cancer; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
5
KAREN KELLY
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: Duration of Response in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
Kaplan-Meier Plot of DOR
ROS1 TKI-Naive + Chemotherapy
Advanced ROS1+ NSCLC
ROS1 TKI-Naive
± Prior Chemotherapy
100
96%
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
94%
n = 87
86%
% DOR ≥ 6 months
96%
75
[95% CI]
[89, 99]
% DOR ≥ 9 months
94%
[95% CI]
[86, 97]
86%
Patients in response (%)
50
% DOR ⥠12 months
[95% CI]
[75, 92]
25
Median DOR, months
NR
[95% CI]
[20, NE]
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
Months
No. at risk: 87
85
82
72
41
31
20
7
4
0
DOR, duration of response; NE, not estimable; NR, not reached; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
7
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
I
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: Objective Response in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
Advanced ROS1+ NSCLC
ROS1 TKI-Naive
± Prior Chemotherapy
RECIST v1.1 by BICR
(n = 94)
ORR, % (n/N) a
94% (88/94)
[95% CI]
[87, 98]
CR, % (n/N) b
15% (14/94)
Includes 1 single-timepoint PR pending confirmation in ongoing patient.
Includes 1 single-timepoint CR pending confirmation in ongoing patient with prior confirmed PR.
60
ROS1 TKI-Naive + Chemotherapy
40
+
PD
SD
uPR
PR
uCR
CR
+ Prior chemotherapy
Best % change in target lesions
20
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+++
+
++
+++++
0
++++
-20
-40
-60
-80
c
c
-100
CR with <100% shrinkage due to residual non-pathologic lymph node.
BICR, blinded independent central review; CR, complete response; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; ORR, objective response rate; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; RECIST, Response
Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor; ROS1, c-ros oncogene 1; SD, stable disease; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; uCR, unconfirmed CR (single-timepoint CR pending confirmation in ongoing patient with prior confirmed
PR); uPR, unconfirmed PR (single-timepoint PR pending confirmation in ongoing patient).
6
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ARROS-1: CNS Activity in ROS1 TKI-Naive Patients with NSCLC
CNS Response-Evaluable
ROS1 TKI-Naive
Population
ROS1 TKI-Naive CNS Response-Evaluable
± Prior Chemotherapy
50
RECIST v1.1 by BICR
IC-PR
IC-CR
+
n = 10
Prior chemotherapy
25
IC-ORR, % (n/N)
+
100% (10/10)
+
[95% CI]
[69, 100]
Best % change in
CNS target lesions
+
0
-25
IC-CR, % (n/N)
70% (7/10)
-50
% IC-DOR ≥ 6 months b
-75
100%
[95% CI]
-100
[100, 100]
% IC-DOR ≥ 9 months b
100%
Kaplan-Meier Plot of IC-DOR
[95% CI]
[100, 100]
ROS1 TKI-Naive CNS Response-Evaluable
% IC-DOR ⥠12 months
100% 100%
78%
100
[95% CI]
[36, 94]
78%
Median IC-DOR, months
NR
[95% CI]
Patients in response (%)
75
[9, NE]
50
Includes patients without brain radiation within 2 months of the first dose of
zidesamtinib with measurable (25 mm) CNS lesions at baseline by BICR.
25
Analyses of DOR based on Kaplan-Meier estimates.
No CNS progression events observed among the 78 ROS1 TKI-
0
naive patients who entered the study without brain metastases
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
at baseline per BICR
Months
No. at risk: 10
10
10
9
6
5
3
1
1
0
BICR, blinded independent central review; CNS, central nervous system; IC-CR, intracranial complete response; IC-DOR, intracranial duration of response; IC-ORR, intracranial objective response rate; IC-PR, intracranial
partial response; NE, not estimable; NR, not reached; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor; ROS1, C-ros oncogene 1; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
9
47FURVENT1 impressionsall primary0 engagements1 posts · 1 voices▾
Deep dives from the meeting
Key Discussions
Multi-part threads and discussions from global KOLs during conference week, captured as complete conversation trees — the substance sits in the middle parts, which carry no hashtag.
MAVERICK aftermath — Drew Moghanaki's slide walk-through, co-PI Paul Brown answering
MRI surveillance vs PCI · rad-onc debate: Siva, Palmer, Willers, Felefly, Kasibhatla · primary + cognition slides in-thread
1
In my opinion, this presentation at #WCLC26 immortalizes Dr. Chad Rusthoven in the radiation oncology archives and elevates him to the status of hero among SCLC patient advocates. https://t.co/ZKRaUnuPN4
8.6K impressions · view on X ↗2
https://t.co/P1sASmmddC
857 impressions · view on X ↗3
Key slide (primary outcome) https://t.co/sxzo9UCTLo
454 impressions · view on X ↗4
Reassuring slide (secondary outcome) https://t.co/AZgnR515cj
443 impressions · view on X ↗5
Great discussion followed clarifying that despite an adjusted sample size, the study is appropriately powered to compare OS once the pre-specified number of events occur. @PDBrownOnc https://t.co/7Unsgr0L8X
482 impressions · view on X ↗6
@_ShankarSiva Here’s the best person on X to answer that: @PDBrownOnc
668 impressions · view on X ↗7
@TonyFelefly @_ShankarSiva This cumulative incidence curve confirms pts harbor invisible disease in the brain that needs to be monitored carefully. Which of course enables early SRS for those brain mets that eventually appear and are quite small at the time of MRI detection. @rickysavjani
232 impressions · view on X ↗17 replies in the thread
SShankar Siva @_ShankarSiva
P@DrewMoghanaki Great study, great work. I’m curious that the brain met free survival was not much different between arms… any discussion/explanation about this?
PDBrown @PDBrownOnc
RGood question & complicated. IMO looking at Cumulative incidence of brain metastases S1827 PCI did NOT move the needle as much as prior trials (Slotman for example) likely due to improving systemic therapy. Next there is no PFS diff on S1827 due to "squeezing the ballo
Ralph Weichselbaum @rweichselbaum
H@DrewMoghanaki Great guy we had a great time in 2014 in Las Vegas with Chris Rose and Les Botnick. He’s a star.
HardenedBeam @HardenedBeam
P@DrewMoghanaki PCI DIES TODAY. GOODNIGHT.
PDBrown @PDBrownOnc
T@TonyFelefly @DrewMoghanaki @StephenVLiu We are still early on OS. Median OS is 30 mos. We will certainly conduct an interaction analysis for OS Tony. Saying that no indication of OS difference to date https://t.co/aFDSMFc49J
Tony Felefly @TonyFelefly
J@DrewMoghanaki Thanks for sharing!!! Did they report an interaction analysis for OS x disease stage, or subgroup analysis for OS for limited vs extensive? We already know MRI is good for Extensive. I was hoping we will get more granular results for Limited stage. @StephenVLiu @
JFC @jfcdrr
J@DrewMoghanaki Great! So, AS with MRI can be considered as the new SoC ?. Thanks
Joshua D. Palmer, MD @joshuapalmermd
T@_ShankarSiva @DrewMoghanaki Seems to support that the old theory that there were subclinical brain Mets and pci was treating may be false.
Tony Felefly @TonyFelefly
M@_ShankarSiva @DrewMoghanaki The cumulative incidence of BM was higher with MRI-only. My guess is BMFS was overwhelmed by deaths events rather than brain mets events. One of the reasons why it would be interesting to know the data for limited-stage (less deaths than ES) as a subg
Mohit Kasibhatla @MohitKasibhatla
M@DrewMoghanaki Treatment of brain metastases only improves OS in 1 scenario - single brain met. PCI goal is prevention of brain metastases and 18% to 5% is 2/3 reduction in likelihood of mets. Mitigate the toxicity using pharmacologic interventions but PCI works.
Mark Storey @ProtonStorey
M@PDBrownOnc @DrewMoghanaki @_ShankarSiva I had prior OS at ~0.38 2 yr - here looks closer to .55 (right at top end of 95 CI prior). I think that alter in base outcome is a primary takehome of the trial (along with the likely end of WB/PCI). Only going to move higher faster moving
Mark Storey @ProtonStorey
M@PDBrownOnc @TonyFelefly @DrewMoghanaki @StephenVLiu I know that the below is "estimated" - but the clin gov page updated in June - Just looking at my predictions vs. reality - events - percents great but absolute differ as this is less than 1/2 of clin gov site? Is tot
Mark Storey @ProtonStorey
T@PDBrownOnc @TonyFelefly @DrewMoghanaki @StephenVLiu Thanks. Obviously I missed on the power calc prediction side of things due to this massive discrepancy - crazy (and sad) that clinicaltrials would be that wrong. Might be good for co-op groups to periodically help verify. Again
Tony Felefly @TonyFelefly
P@PDBrownOnc @DrewMoghanaki @StephenVLiu Thank you!!! Looking forward to it!! Congrats for the huge work!!
PDBrown @PDBrownOnc
MThe Clin Gov must be outdated. 300 is the planned total accrual. Background: S1827 accrual was initially slower than expected noting the trial opened to accrual January 2020 right at the start of COVID. With the slower accrual the trial was amended to make CFFS the primary en
Mark Storey @ProtonStorey
H@PDBrownOnc @TonyFelefly @DrewMoghanaki @StephenVLiu And regardless, both curves have moved up quite a bit - more in line with ADRIATIC even for the pooled. Great results showing real improvement over the decades.
Henning Willers, MD, FASTRO @HenningWillers
Ok, but let's be fair here!! No surprise that PCI is worse for neurocognition than no RT! 23% had no hippocampal sparing and age of median 67yo and up to 90yo is not great for any kind of whole brain approach!! The real question is whether the increase in brain mets you a
Tejas Patil's abstracts mega-thread — his top 10 for WCLC26
MAVERICK · HARMONi-2 · B7-H3 ADCs · REZILIENT3 · ARROS-1 · DLL3 CAR-T · MDT-BRIDGE · NAUTIKA-1 + honorable mentions
1
1. SWOG S1827 MAVERICK
⭐️Perhaps my TOP pick for most important study that will be presented at #WCLC26
🧠PCI reduces brain metastases in SCLC by about 50%, based on older studies that did not mandate MRI surveillance. In the Takahasi et al study, the OS benefit was less clear whe modern MRI surveillance + SRS techniques were used. Add to that the integration of immunotherapy (both PD1 and DLL3 TCE), and the role of PCI will be put to the test.
🧑⚖️MAVERICK will finally adjudicate the decades old question around the role of PCI among patients with #SCLC.
SOURCES
👉🏽https://t.co/0jTayyrCXp
👉🏽https://t.co/PuLS2Gdg4R
👉🏽https://t.co/mfZh0P4FFj
👉🏽https://t.co/CNQCIy0Zps [FANTASTIC REVIEW]
@SclcSMASHERS @lcsmchat @OncoAlert @OncLive @Onco_Nexus @MedwatchHQ
2
2. HARMONi-2
⭐️HARMONi-6, presented @ASCO earlier this year showed an OS benefit favoring ivonesicimab, a PD1+VEGF bispecific, relative to pembrolizumab in squamous NSCLC
📖Previously published data showed a PFS advantage (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) favoring ivonesicimab. Though even in this study, there were some peculiar findings, like the remarkably poor PFS seen in the pembrolizumab arm for PDL1≥50% (which was nearly half of what was seen in KEYNOTE-24)
🤔But the real question was always OS and dissecting the data here will be key. Like HARMONi-6, I will also want to see these studies replicated on a global scale.
SOURCES
👉🏽https://t.co/RO52xemiP6
👉🏽https://t.co/8XI8aKCfq9
@lcsmchat @OncoAlert @OncLive @Onco_Nexus @LungCancerEu @Lung_Cancers @MedwatchHQ
3
3. B7H3 ADCs in SCLC
⭐️Perhaps the first cytotoxic agent to displace topotecan for relapsed refractory #SCLC.
❗️There has NOT been a single study where topotecan demonstrated an OS benefit when compared to another chemotherapy agent. The only study that showed an OS benefit was the O'Brien 2006 study where it was compared to best supportive care (ie, doing nothing)
‼️The truth is that NO chemotherapy (CAV, ambirubicin, topotecan, irinotecan, lurbinectidin, paclitaxel, temozolomide) has show OS superiority when compared to another cytotoxic in the relapsed / refractory #SCLC.
⚡️The B7H3 ADCs stand to be potentially disruptive in this rapidly evolving space!
SOURCES:
👉🏽https://t.co/bd7wKTW83V
👉🏽https://t.co/L1R1RiyOIK [FANTASTIC review]
@SclcSMASHERS @lcsmchat @OncoAlert @OncLive @LungCancerEu @Lung_Cancers
4
4. REZILIENT 3
🤓 Permit me to nerd out for a bit. Why are #EGFR Exon 20 insertions so hard to target? On a high level, there are TWO reasons.
1⃣Steric hinderance: #EGFR Exon 20 insertions disrupt the drug-binding pocket, with a shift ofthe αC-helix into the pocket owing to the C-terminal insertions.
2⃣Preserved ATP affinity (main reason): In contrast to sensitizing #EGFR mutations (exon 19 del, L858R, L861Q), ex20ins can INCREASE ATP affinity. This creates a pharmacologic problem because the TKI must compete with abundant intracellular ATP.
📋 The PAPILLION trial showed a PFS advantage with ami+chemo vs chemo alone (HR 0.40). REZILIENT-3 may build on this and potentially show that a zipalertinib+chemo > chemo alone.
❓Questions (if trial is positive): When should we use ami+chemo over zipalertinib+chemo? What is CNS efficacy? How does the HR benefit here stack up against sunvozertinib?
SOURCES
👉🏽https://t.co/o2ArNSPS68
👉🏽https://t.co/dUCJIPglGY
👉🏽https://t.co/3cIkbcceIV [GREAT review article on EGFR and HER2 biology]
@EGFRResisters @EgfrUk @Exon20Group @EGFRSummit @lcsmchat @OncoAlert @OncLive @Onco_Nexus @OncogeneCancer @Lung_Cancers @LungCancerEu @YoungLungCancer
5
5. ARROS-1
⭐️ The #ROS1 #lungcancer space is getting very competitive! @nuvalent will present data on zidesamtinib in TKI-NAIVE patients with metastatic #ROS1 #NSCLC.
1⃣The main published datasets are from TRIDENT-1 (repotrectinib) and the TRUST studies (taletrectinib) with an ORR of 79% and 89% respectively
2⃣The main benchmarks here will be ORR, CNS-ORR, acquired resistance coverage, and AE (which will be main differentiator for zidesamtinib, given minimal TRK binding)
SOURCES
👉🏽https://t.co/q3EWgaDdMw
👉🏽https://t.co/PyebcLDjyn
👉🏽https://t.co/9KpMEtimar
@ros1cancer @lcsmchat @OncoAlert @OncLive @OncogeneCancer @YoungLungCancer
6
6. DLL3 CAR-T in SCLC
⭐️ Very early data, but extremely intriguing. LB2102, a DLL3-targeted CAR-T armored with dnTGFBR2, showed 20% ORR / 70% DCR in R/R SCLC/LCNEC.
1⃣CAR-T expansion was consistent, with higher exposure associated with response.
2⃣CRS (n=6, 30%) and ICANS (n=2, 15%), w/ majority being Gr 1-2 and not leading to discontinuation of drug
3⃣Lower pre-infusion lymphocyte count (p=0.04) and higher levels of IL15 on Day 1 was associated with better clinical response (p=0.02).
4⃣Most pts ( 76%, 13/17) had DLL3 expression >90%. How does this change post DLL3 TCE exposure?
SOURCES
👉🏽https://t.co/2KADkSTpcy - EXCELLENT overview of CAR T cell therapies in solid tumors and drug development space
@SclcSMASHERS @lcsmchat @OncoAlert @OncLive @MedwatchHQ
7
7. Small cell transformation in EGFR NSCLC
⭐️OA05.03 is a fascinating translational presentation describing the "neuroendocrine plastic (NEP)" stage
1⃣Through elegant methods of lineage tracing and multiomic analyses, the authors identified an NEP state
2⃣KEY TAKEAWAY is that over-expression of E2F1 via epigenetic remodeling (↑H3K27ac, ↓H3K27me3) at NE loci redirects E2F1 away from cell-cycle programs toward ASCL1/NE lineage programming and this is a crucial step in driving SCLC transformation.
3⃣Identification of an NEP state allows for a window of opportunity to re-direct cells before irreversible lineage commitment!
SOURCES
👉🏽https://t.co/naIxUmgu1i
@EGFRResisters @EgfrUk @EGFRSummit @SclcSMASHERS @lcsmchat @OncoAlert @OncogeneCancer @YoungLungCancer
8
8. MDT-BRIDGE
⭐️Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemo --> followed by serial MDT reassessment allowed 92.3% of patients to receive to curative-intent surgery or CRT, even with nearly a third of pts having borderline resectable disease
🗝️ KEY INSIGHTS:
- 74.6% overall resection rate (n = 142)
- 96.2% R0 resection
- 27.3% pCR among patients remaining resectable
- 90.1% 12-mo EFS in the resectable cohort
- 75.1% 12-mo PFS in those converted to CRT
⚡️The interesting concept here isn't prior neoadjuvant exposure. Rather it’s the dynamic treatment strategy, allowing patients to transition from surgery to definitive CRT rather than abandoning curative intent when resectability changes. This will be a heavily debated study.
@lcsmchat @OncoAlert @OncLive @LungCancerEu @Lung_Cancers @MedwatchHQ
9
9. NAUTIKA-1: divarasib cohort
⭐️ This is a very interesting dataset looking at neoadjuvant divarasib for stage IB-IIIB (T3N2 only; per KRAS G12C+ NSCLC
🗝️ KEY INSIGHTS: Among 20 patients enrolled, there was 42% MPR, 16% pCR, 55% ORR, and 100% R0 resection
🤔 The data are small, but provocative. For whom should we prioritize the KRAS G12Ci approach in the neoadjuvant setting, since many of these patients do respond quite well to neoadjuvant chemoIO? Should we consider KRAS G12Ci for PDL1 < 1%? Those with KEAP1 alterations? Those who are chemotherapy ineligible? Should there be a perioperative component? Should we combine with KRAS G12Ci with IO (or chemoIO)? This is hypothesis generating data!
@KRASKickers @lcsmchat @YoungLungCancer @OncoAlert @MedwatchHQ
10
10. IRAE prediction using machine learning
⭐️ The ENTIRE OA11 session is filled with incredible presentations, but this one really caught my eye. Can we predict who will develop severe toxicity from neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in NSCLC?
1⃣In a multicenter cohort of 947 patients, grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 46%.
2⃣An explainable ML framework identified CatBoost as the top-performing model (AUC 0.824 in model)
3⃣Patients with Gr ≥3 TRAEs had higher MPR rates in both discovery (p=0.005) and validation (p=0.030), suggesting a potential association between TRAE severity and response!
🎯These kind of analyses are very useful for pretreatment risk stratification and adverse event monitoring! This will be need prospective validation, but is really provocative!
@lcsmchat @OncoAlert @Lung_Cancers @LungCancerEu @Onco_Nexus @MedwatchHQ @LungCancerRx
11
HONORABLE MENTIONS
1⃣PL03.08 - Ran out of time, but this is obviously a MAJOR study looking at front line T-Dxd in #HER2 #NSCLC. Big question will be positioning given approval of zongertinib in 1L setting.
2⃣OA07.02 - Ambient air pollution exposure and lung cancer prognosis. Builds on prior studies showing a concerning relationship between air quality and lung cancer prognosis.
3⃣OA13.01 - Intracranial Responders in Cerebrospinal Fluid and Peripheral-Intracranial Immune Linkage During ICI Therapy in NSCLC Brain Metastases. First, it is amazing that the authors were able to generate this dataset given complexity of acquisition and analyses involved. Will be very interesting to see the details!
4⃣OA14.05 - Ivonescimab-Chemo vs Placebo-Chemo in EGFR-TKI-Resistant, EGFR-Mutated NSCLC (HARMONi): Updated Overall Survival Analysis. Interesting study and devil will be in details given that prior IO studies (KEYNOTE-789) were negative.
5⃣OA10.03 - Sac-TMT in patients with previously treated NSCLC with alterations other than EGFR. Will be an interesting dataset to compare with TROPION-Lung05.
While I won't be in lovely Seoul 🇰🇷 - I'll be appreciating the hard work of all the @IASLC organizers and presenters from afar!!
@lcsmchat @OncoAlert @OncLive @Onco_Nexus @LungCancerEu @Lung_Cancers @OncogeneCancer @ALKPositiveinc @ros1cancer @EGFRResisters @KRASKickers @SclcSMASHERS @YoungLungCancer @LungCancerRx @MedwatchHQ
Lopes' 1L exon 20 insertion verdict — three trials, no head-to-head
PAPILLON · WU-KONG 28 · REZILIENT3 · “all 3 are reasonable 1L options” · sunvozertinib may be preferred for treatment burden
1
Three positive first-line phase III trials now shape EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC:
• PAPILLON: amivantamab + chemo
• WU-KONG 28: sunvozertinib
• REZILIENT 3: zipalertinib + chemo
No head-to-head winner. No clear OS winner yet. https://t.co/0jo6u0aVJa
2
My read: all 3 are reasonable 1L options.
In practice, sunvozertinib may become preferred for many oncologists and patients because it offers meaningful efficacy as oral monotherapy with lower treatment burden.
3
That is a likely practice pattern—not a proven evidence-based ranking.
Combination strategies remain strong options, especially when clinicians prioritize combination-trial data or particular patient/disease features.
4
@IASLC @OncoAlert @oncodaily @Larvol @TribeMDUS @SylvesterCancer @OncBrothers @chinmay @Jani_Chinmay @Latinamd @COlazagasti @openmedicineHQ @asco @myesmo @openmedkate @openmedben @chadinabhan @YoungLungCancer @lungoncdoc @OncodailyLung @ClinicalLung #LCSM @LungPolicy @dan_morgen
303 impressions · view on X ↗The intensification debate — Patil's devil's advocate vs Marks on toxicity
quote-tweet of Lopes' verdict · FLAURA2/PAPILLON/REZILIENT3 as the upfront-intensification signal · “I'd rather use ami + chemo”
1
😈To play devils advocate, I think FLAURA2 (for sensitizing EGFR mutations), PAPILLION, and REZILIENT3 all point towards the importance of upfront chemotherapy with EGFR inhibition.
💭My thought is that #EGFR lung cancers (esp Exon 20) really do need intensification upfront.
@EGFRResisters @EgfrUk
2
@jennifermarksmd 1️⃣ You are still offering EGFR inhibition + chemo with Ami/chemo, which is the larger principle.
2️⃣I do think pts with EGFR NSCLC specifically benefit from intensification upfront. Chemo is one way. I’m agnostic to whether it is the ONLY way (ami/laz) but combos needed IMO
2 replies in the thread
JJennifer A. Marks, MD @jennifermarksmd
J@TejasPatilMD But do you actually though? Perhaps I’m still not over the 1L zipalertinib + chemo toxicity being what it is. I’d rather use ami + chemo.
Jennifer A. Marks, MD @jennifermarksmd
@TejasPatilMD The biology/binding pocket is clearly different for exon20ins. I’m not sure the data can justify tki +chemo for the sake of toxicity at this time. Would have been helpful to see 1L monotherapy from zipalertinib.
Singhi's lorlatinib clinic pearls — 7-year CROWN, applied
toxicity plateaus after year 2 · manage don't abandon (6% TRAE discontinuation) · ask what patients don't volunteer · plus a patient's alectinib→lorlatinib experience in the replies
1
1. Toxicity doesn’t necessarily keep accumulating with time.
Most selected TRAEs emerged in the first 2 years, with relatively few new events thereafter. https://t.co/ZRzPZg47JE
2
2. Manage toxicity rather than reflexively abandoning therapy.
Only 6% discontinued for TRAEs.
Dose reductions occurred in ~26%.
Exploratory analyses found no apparent PFS or brain-progression disadvantage across dose levels. https://t.co/nxSWCrI6Lg
3
3. Ask about what patients may not volunteer.
Cognition, mood, weight, edema and lipids all deserve proactive monitoring. https://t.co/T3MUnrqCew
4
Oh and one bonus signal for thought: hypercholesterolemia was associated with improved PFS (HR 0.50), raising the hypothesis that it could be an on-target pharmacodynamic marker.
Interesting, but exploratory. https://t.co/pvgLD0gZvu
2 replies in the thread
KKevin Wimer @kevinace
K@lungoncdoc @IASLC @ALKPositiveinc Day 45 of Loratinib for me after 18 months on Alectinib. Near zero side effects and have so much energy when compared to Alectinib. Let’s hope it does its thing with keeping the cancer under control!
Kevin Wimer @kevinace
Not a doctor. Patient. I’ve asked many doctors and oncologists about this and they all said no. My theory is that patients experienced a traumatic life event (surprise, you have cancer!) and use food as a coping mechanism and simply overeat. Or believe “well I have cancer and
Every slide, tagged & searchable
Conference Slides & Data
Slides and data graphics shared by global KOLs during the meeting, mirrored to our own CDN and tagged by the trials and themes their post names. Expand the library, then filter by tag or search by trial, drug or author. High-volume roundup accounts (e.g. OncoAlert) are grouped together at the end. Conference branding and ticker charts are excluded.
Browse the full slide library →3022 conference-week slides + 408 pre-meeting slides — tagged, searchable, with OCR
Highest reach this week
Top Posts — Conference Week
Primary content from conference week — results, releases and commentary on a specific readout.
BBrad Loncar@bradloncar
When I spoke with Pascal Soriot shortly after ASCO, he didn’t seem 100% convinced about the ivonescimab data. But I think you essentially have to do a deal like this at this point or risk missing out. https://t.co/57SMg3axGW
43.6K impressions62 likes2 reposts2026-09-29
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
EVOKE-03 did not meet the primary endpoint.
PFS 11.8 vs 7.7m, HR 0.81 but did not meet threshold for statistical significance. Consistent across subgroups. No difference in OS: 21.5 vs 22.8m, HR 1.07. #WCLC26 https://t.co/j3v6jr8N7H
32.9K impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Progression-Free Survival in the ITT Population - Primary Analysis
100
SG + Pembro
Pembro
90
Endpoint
(n=311)
(n=309)
PFS, median (95% CI), moᵃ.ᵇ
11. 8 (8.9; 14.5)
7.7 (5.6; 9.7)
80
Hazard ratio (95% CI)c
0.81 (0.66; 1.00)
70
P-valued
0.0252
PFS Probability, %
60
PFS rate at 12 mo (95% CI), mo
48.3 (42.1; 54.1)
36.9 (30.9; 42.9)
PFS rate at 18 mo (95% CI), mo
36.0 (29.7; 42.2)
29.9 (24.0; 36.1)
50
PFS events, 367; maturity, 59%; statistical boundary, 0.007
40
30
20
10
Median follow-up was 14.8 months for SG + pembro
0
and 14.4 months for pembro monotherapy
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro
311
235
170
141
103
78
56
41
30
20
11
3
0
0
Pembro mono
309
204
138
106
70
56
41
32
21
16
8
3
1
0
BICR, blinded independent centralized review; mono, monotherapy; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score: ITT. intention-to-treat; mo, months; pembro, pembrolizumab; PFS, progression-free survival;
RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
"Per RECIST v1.1 by BICR. Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored data. Estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS
Western Europe/North America/Australia vs rest of world). "One-sided P-value based on log-rank test stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North
America/Australla VS rest of world).
6
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Progression-Free Survival Sub-Group Analyses
#Events/N
Hazard Ratio
#Events/N
Hazard Ratio
SG + Pembro
Pembro mono
(95% CI)
SG + Pembro
Pembro mono
(95% CI)
Overall
179/311
188/309
0.81 (0.66; 1.00)
Predominant Tumor Histology
Age, years
Squamous
69/96
61/96
1.11 (0.78; 1.56)
<65
68/126
75/120
0.65 (0.47; 0.91)
Non-squamous
110/215
127/213
0.70 (0.54; 0.90)
≥65
111/185
113/189
0.91 (0.70; 1.18)
Smoking Status
Sex
Never smoker
34/52
41/53
0.59 (0.37; 0.93)
Male
129/219
138/224
0.83 (0.66; 1.06)
Former/current smoker
145/259
147/256
0.85 (0.67; 1.07)
Female
50/92
50/85
0.70 (0.47; 1.04)
Baseline Brain Metastasis Status
Race
Yes
19/27
17/30
White
109/176
104/168
0.89 (0.68; 1.16)
No
160/284
171/279
0.77 (0.62; 0.95)
All others
70/135
84/141
0.69 (0.51; 0.96)
Baseline Liver Metastasis Status
Geographic Region
Yes
38/49
33/49
0.92 (0.58; 1.47)
East Asia
59/114
67/116
0.68 (0.48; 0.97)
No
141/262
155/260
0.76 (0.61; 0.96)
Western Europe/
41/60
33/58
North America/Australia
1.20 (0.76; 1.89)
Rest of the world
79/137
88/135
0.76 (0.56; 1.03)
0.1
1
10
SG + pembro
Pembro mono
Baseline ECOG PS
Favor
0
46/107
56/108
0.73 (0.50; 1.08)
1
133/204
132/201
0.81 (0.64; 1.03)
0.1
1
10
SG + pembro
Pembro mono
Favor
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score; ITT, intention-to-treat; mo, months; mono, monotherapy; pembro, pembrolizumab; SG, sacituzumab govitecan. Analysis is based on Cox regression model with Efron's
method of tie handling with treatment as a covariate stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North America/Australia vs rest of world). Subgroup
analyses are based on unstratified Cox regression model with Efron's method of tie handling with treatment as a covariate. Subgroup analyses were not performed for categories representing fewer than 10% of the ITT population.
7
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Overall Survival in the ITT Population - Interim Analysis
100
Endpoint
SG + Pembro (n=311)
Pembro (n=309)
90
OS, median (95% CI), moᵃ
21.5 (18.5; 26.7)
22.8 (18.7; 29.0)
Hazard ratio (95% CI)ᵇ
1.07 (0.85; 1.35)
80
P-valueᶜ
0.7155
70
OS events, 294; maturity, 47%; information fraction, 80%; statistical boundary, 0.008
OS Probability, %
60
50
40
30
20
10
Median follow-up was 14.8 months for SG + pembro
0
and 14.4 months for pembro monotherapy
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
At Risk
Time, mo
SG + pembro
311
282
243
214
180
153
123
95
71
46
27
14
1
0
Pembro mono
309
272
237
205
178
148
120
91
69
47
29
11
1
0
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score; ITT, intention-to-treat; mo, months; mono, monotherapy; pembro, pembrolizumab; OS, overall survival; SG, sacituzumab govitecan.
Based on Kaplan-Meier method for censored data. Estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous), ECOG PS (0 VS 1), and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North America/
Australia VS rest of world). One-sided P-value based on log-rank test stratified by histology (squamous VS non-squamous). ECOG PS (0 VS 1). and geographic region (East Asia VS Western Europe/North America/Australia vs rest of world).
8
PPaolo Tarantino@PTarantinoMD
2019: AstraZeneca made a multibillion-dollar bet on a novel Asia-developed drug called T-DXd. The rest is history.
2026: AstraZeneca made a multibillion-dollar bet on a novel Asia-developed drug called Ivonescimab.
History repeating itself?
https://t.co/5QxvEAHT2A https://t.co/s6qJ8pyLSL
32.1K impressions80 likes11 reposts2026-09-29
[Slide 1]
Q
=
AstraZeneca
AstraZeneca announces
strategic equity investment and
clinical collaboration with
Summit Therapeutics to
advance leading ADC
combination strategy in cancer
PUBLISHED
28 September 2026
SSamuel Hume@DrSamuelBHume
This week in medicine
1. Scholar Rock’s myostatin inhibitor, apitegromab, gets FDA-approved for spinal muscular atrophy!
2. MediLink/Roche’s new B7-H3 antibody-drug conjugate, tambotatug pelitecan, beats topotecan in relapsed small-cell lung cancer - in a phase 3 trial in China.
3. Baylor College of Medicine researchers report complete regression of a rare pediatric cancer, metastatic hepatobla
28.2K impressions256 likes32 reposts2026-09-13
MMedJ@MedJ0401
Just in from WCLC 2026 @IASLC 🔥 HARMONi-2 has delivered its OS readout—and it’s a striking one. Ivonescimab reached 30.8 vs 22.6 months with pembrolizumab in 1L PD-L1+ advanced NSCLC (HR 0.73; P=0.009). Presented by Prof. Caicun Zhou.
27K impressions3 likes0 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
I
KALC
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
SCIENCE WITHOUT BOUNDARIES:
UNITING THE WORLD AGAINST
THORACIC CANCER
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
01 min 00s
Conclusions
Ivonescimab significantly improved clinical outcomes in PD-L1-positive advanced NSCLC
mOS:
30.8 mo VS 22.6 mo (HR 0.73; p=0.009)
3-years OS rate:
45.0% VS 33.1%
mPFS:
11.1 mo VS 5.8 mo (HR 0.51; p<0.0001)
ORR:
50.0% VS 38.5%
With longer follow-up, ivonescimab maintained a favorable and manageable safety profile, with no
new safety signals
The findings support ivonescimab as a standard-of-care in first-line PD-L1+ NSCLC in China
A global phase 3 trial of ivonescimab versus pembrolizumab in PD-L1-high metastatic NSCLC
(HARMONi-7) is ongoing, to provide a potential chemo-free regimen for patients worldwide
16
Caicun Zhou I HARMONi-2
[Slide 3]
IASLC
ASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
04 min 56s
Overall survival
Ivonescimab demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in os with a median follow-up of 36.0 months
Data cutoff date: Aug 20, 2026
130
vonescimab
Pembrolizumab
198)
(n 200)
90
30.8 mo
mos (95% ci)
22.6 mo
(25.4 37.8)
(17.8-26.5)
%
Stratified HR (95% Ci)
0.73 (0.57 0.95)
KN-042
HARMONI-2
e
p-value
0.009
China study
os rate (%)
60
vonescimab
Pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab
/
(n - 198)
(n=200)
128)
8
R
57.9%
45.0%
24-mo
57.9%
48.0%
43.8%
a
48.0%
a
33.1%
36-mo
45.0%
33.1%
28.1%
a
15.
Promitment
I
:
I
$
$
If
e
14
.
a
a
11
of
S
a
.
N
a
*
a
80
e
1. Yitong WU If If Five year outcomes of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in
Chinese patients with non-smalf-cell lung cancer and programmed cell death ligand
numer proportion score a KEYNOTE-042 China study. Int. 1. Cancer.
2026 158.2429-2439
mick a
.
-
-
A
-
5
-
31
88
-
-
IN
BE
-
y
ES
RU
-
-
R11
.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
9
Caicun Zhou HARMONi-2
TANG
MMedJ@MedJ0401
At WCLC 2026, Li Zhang's team at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center reported a 76.7% confirmed ORR for first-line RC148 plus chemotherapy in squamous NSCLC—an early signal for PD-1/VEGF blockade across PD-L1 levels. 🔬 Phase 1b, uncontrolled; OS immature. https://t.co/0NzP4WyiqT
25.7K impressions1 likes0 reposts2026-09-16
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
06 min 40s
Baseline characteristics were typical of locally advanced/
metastatic NSCLC populations
Squamous NSCLC
Non-squamous NSCLC
RC148 (10 mg/kg) +
RC148 (20 mg/kg)
RC148 (10 mg/kg) +
RC148 (20 mg/kg)
Carboplatin + Paclitaxel
Carboplatin + Paclitaxel
Carboplatin + Pemetrexed
Carboplatin . Pemetrexed
(N=30)
(N=31)
(N=30)
(N=30)
Age (years)
Median (IQR)
67.0 (60.0-71.0)
65.0 (59.0-70.0)
63.0 (57.0-69.0)
63.0 (58.0-69.0)
<65
10 (33.3)
15 (48.4)
15 (50.0)
18 (60.0)
>65
20 (66.7)
16 (51.6)
15 (50.0)
12 (40.0)
Sex, (%)
Male
28 (93.3)
24 (77.4)
19 (63.3)
19 (63.3)
Female
2 (6.7)
7 (22.6)
11 (36.7)
11 (36.7)
ECOG PS score, n (%)
0
5 (16.7)
6 (19.4)
5 (16.7)
8 (26.7)
1
25 (83.3)
25 (80.6)
25 (83.3)
22 (73.3)
PD-L1 TPS, n (%)
<1%
15 (50.0)
10 (32.3)
15 (50.0)
18 (60.0)
>1%
14 (46.7)
16 (51.6)
13 (43.3)
11 (36.7)
Unknown
1 (3.3)
5 (16.1)
2 (6.7)
1 (3.3)
Site of metastatic lesion, n (%)
>3 Metastatic lesions
10 (33.3)
12 (38.7)
17 (56.7)
12 (40.0)
Liver metastases
0
8 (25.8)
8 (26.7)
6 (20.0)
Brain metastases
0
0
3 (10.0)
1 (3.3)
IQR, interquartile range; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; TPS, tumor proportion score.
5
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
04 min 51s
Robust and durable anti-tumor activity in squamous NSCLC
As of the data cutoff date, the median follow-up was 11.7 months (95% Cl: 11.0-12.3); 12 (52.2%) of 23 responders remained on treatment.
RC148 (10 mg/kg) + Carboplatin + Paclitaxel
TPS<1%
TPS >1%
Age <65 years
Age 265 years
Overall
(N=15)
(N=14)
(N=10)
(N=20)
(N=30)
Unconfirmed ORR, % (95% CI)
93.3 (68.1-99.8)
85.7 (57.2-98.2)
90.0 (55.5-99.7)
90.0 (68.3-98.8)
90.0 (73.5-97.9)
Confirmed ORR, % (95% CI)
86.7 (59.5-98.3)
64.3 (35.1-87.2)
60.0 (26.2-87.8)
85.0 (62.1-96.8)
76.7 (57.7-90.1)
Confirmed best overall
Partial response
13 (86.7)
9 (64.3)
6(60.0)
17 (85.0)
23 (76.7)
response, n (%)
Stable disease
2 (13.3)
5(35.7)
4 (40.0)
3 (15.0)
7 (23.3)
Progressive disease
0
0
0
0
0
DoR
Median (95% CI), month
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
20
30
Treatment ongoing
10
20
0
Best tumor change from baseline (%)
10
-10
-20
-30
Change in target lesion from baseline (%)
0
-10
-20
-40
-30
-50
-40
-60
-50
-70
-60
80
-70
TPS <1%
-90
TPS >1%
cORR: 76.7% (95% Cl: 57.7-90.1)
-80
-100
-90
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
PD-L1 TPS status was unknown in one patient. NR, not reached; CORR, confirmed ORR
Time since first dose (months)
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
03 min 27s
Encouraging trends in PFS and OS were observed in
squamous NSCLC, although outcomes remain immature
Progression-free Survival
Overall Survival
RC148 (10 mg/kg) + Carboplatin + Paclitaxel
RC148 (10 mg/kg) + Carboplatin + Paclitaxel
(N=30)
(N=30)
Events, n (%)
12 (40.0)
Events, n (%)
4 (13.3)
Median PFS (95% CI), mo
11.8 (6.9-NR)
Median os (95% CI), mo
NR
100
#
100
90
90
80
80
PFS probability (%)
70
60
os probability (%)
70
8
50
50
40
40
30
30
20
20
10
10
0
10mg/kg Q3W
0
10mgkg Q3W
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Time since randomization (months)
Time since randomization (months)
Number at risk
Number at risk
10 mg/kg Q3W 30
30
29
26
24
23
20
17
17
16
10
7
1
1
10 mg/kg Q3W 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 29 28 27 27 19 11 6 3 1
9
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
03 min 00s
Robust and durable anti-tumor activity in non-squamous
NSCLC
As of the data cutoff, the median follow-up was 12.3 months (95% CI: 11.5-12.8); 11 (52.4%) of 21 responders remained on treatment.
RC148 (10 mg/kg) + Carboplatin + Pemetrexed
TPS <1%
TPS ≥1%
Age <65 years
Age 265 years
Overall
(N=14)
(N=13)
(N=15)
(N=14)
(N=29)*
Unconfirmed ORR, % (95% CI)
71.4 (41.9-91.6)
76.9 (46.2-95.0)
53.3 (26.6-78.7)
100 (76.8-100)
75.9 (56.5-89.7)
Confirmed ORR, % (95% CI)
64.3 (35.1-87.2)
76.9 (46.2-95.0)
53.3 (26.6-78.7)
92.9 (66.1-99.8)
72.4 (52.8-87.3)
Confirmed best overall
Partial response
9 (64.3)
10 (76.9)
8 (53.3)
13 (92.9)
21 (72.4)
response, n (%)
Stable disease
4 (28.6)
3 (23.1)
6 (40.0)
1 (7.1)
7(24.1)
Progressive disease
1 (7.1)
0
1 (6.7)
0
1(3.4)
DoR
Median (95% CI), month
8.6 (3.3-NR)
NR
NR
7.2 (4.1-9.7)
9.7 (5.7-NR)
20
20
10
10
Treatment ongoing
0
0
Best tumor change from baseline (%)
10
20
-30
Change in target lesion from baseline (%)
-10
-20
-30
40
-40
-50
-50
:
-60
-60
-70
-70
-80
TPS <1%
-80
-90
cORR: 72.4% (95% Cl: 52.8-87.3)
TPS >1%
-90
-100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
"Tumor response was assessed in patients with at least one post baseline assessment PD-L1 TPS status was unknown in two patients.
Time since first dose (months)
40
DDr. Pat Soon-Shiong@DrPatrick
Our @ImmunityBio team is having great reception at World Conference Lung Cancer (WCLC26) in Seoul Korea discussing ReQ201A-NSCLC (Phase 3).
The world is waking up to the fact that ALC (absolute lymphocyte count) and Natural Killer (NK) cells matter to prolong life. The conclusion from the Chudzik abstract is consistent with what we saw in QUILT-3.055
https://t.co/WOe5Chw2sW
Abstract: P3.175: Pe
22.7K impressions458 likes77 reposts2026-09-16
[Slide 1]
P3.175 Peripheral Blood Immunophenotyping Reveals Patterns of Short and Durable Immunotherapy Response
MEDIC INIVERSITY
in NSCLC
Natalia Krzyzanowska Robert Chudzik Kamila Wojas-Krawczyk!, Tomasz Kucharczyk Izabela Chmielewska¹, Magdalena Wojcik-Superczynska Tomasz Jankowski Pawel Krawczyk Janusz Milanowski
IASLC 2026 World
Chair and Department of Pneumonology, Oncology and Allergology, Medical University of Lublin, Poland Chair and Department of Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Lublin, Poland
Conference on Lung Cancer
Presenting author: Robert Chudzik
robert.chudzk@umlub.edu.pl
SEPTEMBER 12 15. 2026
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
INTRODUCTION
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
RESULTS
immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting PD-1 and PD-L1 are now a
An immunosuppressive systemic environment
central component of treatment for non-small cell ung cancer
41/40
HR 0.23
5
High proportions of monocytes and neutrophils appear to indicate an
(NSCLC).
immunosuppressive environment in patients with NSCLC Both were
patients with short months)
lowest harard abo low MILH at
perpheral blood tactors
PD-L1 expression on tumour cells remains the only predictive
raised in the short response group before treatment and during
vs durable months) response
trst follow-up 0.0001)
associated with orger PFS
biomarker in routine use Its performance is imperfect, and because
follow-up, and both feed directly into the MLR and the NLR which
is assessed once, on archival tissue, it cannot reflect the changes
is why two ratios taken from a routine blood count carry as much
in immune status that occur during therapy.
signal as they do
Median 63.6%
there
Median 0.44
Before
-
Peripheral blood offers a minimally invasive alternative It can be
The NKT result is counterintuitive
sampled repeatedly. it reports systemic immune status, and the
The most surprising finding is the high proportion of NKT cells in
-
simplest indices derived from it the monocyte-to-lymphocyte and
patients with short response. The role of NKT cells in the antitumour
HR 0.44: 95% CI 0.25-0.80
HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.27-0.73
neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios are already generated by every
response is dualistic, and this pattern may be linked to a
routine blood count at no additional cost.
predominance of innate over adaptive immunity. including
-
disturbance of antigen presentation and recognition
.
Aim
To characterise peripheral blood factors associated with short and
Two analyses, not one
.
-
-
in
-
-
.
"
"
-
"
-
-
durable response to pembrolizumab-based treatment in patients
The two approaches answer different questions The inflammatory
-
-
with NSCLC.
indices are free, repeatable at every visit and immediately available;
-
"
-
the immunophenotyping explains what those indices are actually
measuring In clinical practice both are worth considering
-
"
"
"
-
Figure free survival by the proportion of symphocytes among perpheral blood
Figure Progression free survive by monocyte - tymphocyte ratio before treatment median
Conclusion
mononucles cells at first follow median cut-off on) higher proportion favoured
DA lower MLR favoured longer PPS HR 0.44 (95% CI 0.27 0.0016
Simple inflammatory indices derived from routine blood counts may
longer PPS HR 0.44 (90% 0.0064
serve as accessible predictive markers of response to
METHODS
pembrolizumab based immunotherapy in NSCLC Peripheral blood
immunophenotyping provides additional insight into the immune
-
mechanisms associated with short and durable response and may
Median 0.34
-
Median 5.2%
Patients
support stratification of patients to more frequent monitoring of
-
-
-
81 patients with NSCLC qualified for treatment with pembrolizumab
treatment efficacy. Prospective validation is required before either is
used to guide treatment decisions.
-
in
alone or pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy.
HR 0.23: 95% CI 0.12-0.43
HR L50; 95% CI 0.28-0.90
-
-
Sampling
Peripheral blood collected before initiation of treatment and at three-
-
month intervals during therapy
REFERENCES & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
L
L
Immunophenotyping
"
"
*
.
.
-
"
"
-
-
Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were isolated and analysed by
I
-
-
flow cytometry-based immunophenotyping
1 Reck M. Rodriguez Abreu D. Robinson AG. et at N Engl Med
I
.
2. Gandhi Rodriguez Abres D. Gadgeel Engl Med 2018,378,2078-92.
-
Inflammatory indices
3. Herbst RS Bass Kim DW. Lancet
of
Monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte
Mezquita Auclin E. Ferrara et al JAMA
Figure Progression- survival by полосуле - the follow median
Figure regressor free survival by the proportion of natural killer cells M first follow-up
ratio (NLR) were calculated from routine laboratory parameters.
Diem Schmid $ Krapf M. et Lung Cancer 2017 an
out-off 0.34). lower MLR favoured longer PFS: HR 0.23 (95% 0.0001
(median of 1.2%) ower proportion Revoured longer PPS HR 0.50 (95% C10.28-0.90).
6. Kneg c. Nowicks M. Gugleta 5. et al Nat Med 2018.24
P 0.0218
Stratification and analysis
Funding. Innovation Grant (G/3), Medical University of Lubin
Patients were stratified by progression free survival into short-
Acknowledgements. The authors thank the Chair and Department of Pneumonology
response group (PFS 6 months, n . 41) and durable-response
Oncology and Adergology and the Chair and Department of Thoracic Surgery, Medical
group (PFS months, n 40). For each parameter, patients were
University Lubin
dichotomised at its median and progression free survival compared by
Median 3.15
Factors favouring longer PFS
-
the Kaplan-Meier method, with hazard ratios and 95% confidence
-
High lymphocyte proportion (flow cytometry) before treatment (p
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Disclosure
intervals. Statistica v.13.3 and MedCalc 18.11.6
-
0.0141) and M first follow-up to 0.0064; Fig 1)
Disclosure - - poster Caule Anthony - net supportive tool and - the posser test
a
Englan - The figures the adont analyses, reproduced ton the source
HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.24-0.80
.
Low monocyte proportion flow cytometry and blood count before
Limitations
the annotations cansated Ligion No penerated from nowedge
Single-centre cohort The SIX month PFS threshold is pragmatic rather
- analyses, and authors - The authors and verified -
treatment ID 0.0177; 0.0027) and at first follow-u P 0.0012;
M
expensibility
consent
.
0.0007)
than validated, and dichotomising each parameter at its own median is
- accordance - - - purdance - un the ACCRODADOR Council Continuing Medical
-
Low MLR before treatment to 0.0016 Fig 2) and at first follow-up (p
data driven, which tends to overstate effect size. The analyses are
Education (ACCME) individuals required factose the antion entigence
(A) development educations - The includes derefication specific wes -
0.0001 Fig 3)
exploratory and were not corrected for multiple comparisons. Numbers
and description -
at risk show that the flow cytometry and first follow-up endpoints were
ASLO mantains oversight educations cursent conducts though - the
-
"
-
n
-
Low NKT cell proportion M first follow-up (p 0.0218; Fig 4)
-
materials evadence - balanced and - - - - ACCME
-
Low NLR at first follow-up P 0.007; Fig 5)
available in a subset of about 65 patients rather than all 81. Blood
Standards
|
and
interpendence
-
indices are sensitive to intercurrent infection, corticosteroid exposure
-
immunophenotyping additionally showed differences between the two
while may ned supportive - - development 2001 - replace doce experise
and comorbidity. which were not adjusted for, and with no non-
independent medical signature - - advant - - - presented and -
groups the proportions of monocytes and lymphocytes, natural killer T
-
her - professions patigners when - - procide
cells, and naive субовокіс ymphocytes. Under pembrolizumab
immunotherapy comparator a prognostic effect cannot be separated
Figure regression Yes survival by erophé to утрпосую ato first follow up
monotherapy. NLR fell significantly in the durable response group,
from predictive one
- 3.15). - NEW favoured longer PFS HR 0.44 (95% CI 0.007
[Slide 2]
Factors favouring longer PFS
High lymphocyte proportion (flow cytometry) before treatment (p =
0.0141) and at first follow-up (p = 0.0064; Fig 1)
Low monocyte proportion - flow cytometry and blood count - before
treatment (p = 0.0177; p = 0.0027) and at first follow-up (p = 0.0012; p =
0.0007)
Low MLR before treatment (p = 0.0016; Fig 2) and at first follow-up (p <
0.0001; Fig 3)
Low NKT cell proportion at first follow-up (p = 0.0218; Fig 4)
Low NLR at first follow-up (p = 0.007; Fig 5)
Immunophenotyping additionally showed differences between the two
groups in the proportions of monocytes and lymphocytes, natural killer T
cells, and naïve cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Under pembrolizumab
monotherapy, NLR fell significantly in the durable-response group.
MMedJ@MedJ0401
At WCLC 2026, Prof. Yilong Wu of Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital reported phase 2 JS207 + chemo data: 25/42 patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC were deemed resectable; 22 underwent surgery. Early findings; long-term benefit remains unclear.
22.5K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
KALC
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026 I SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
[Slide 2]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
06 min 05s
2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Primary and Secondary Outcomes
ITT population: surgical conversion rate 59.5% (25/42), pCR rate 50.0% (11/22*)
N3 disease: surgical conversion rate 55.0% (11/20), pCR rate 50.0% (5/10*)
Tumor assessemt
Surgical conversion/
Pathological response
100,0%
resection rate
rate
92,9%
84,0%
(25/25)
82,4%
100%
100%
77,3%
100%
(39/42)
66,7%
(21/25)
(14/17)
59,5%
(17/22)
80%
52,4%
80%
80%
(28/42)
(25/42)
50,0%
41,2%
60%
(22/42)
60%
60%
(11/22)
ITT
Overall population
(7/17)
40%
40%
40%
20%
20%
Resectable (assessed by MDT)
20%
0%
0%
0%
ORR
DCR
Conversion rate
Resection rate
pCR rate
MPR rate
Resected
100,0%
100%
Unresectable (assessed by MDT)
81,8%
85,0%
(11/11)
80,0%
100%
(9/11)
(17/20)
66,7%
80%
55,0%
50,0%
100%
60,0%
(8/10)
80%
(12/20)
(6/9)
(11/20)
60%
(10/20)
80%
50,0%
60%
33,3%
60%
(5/10)
N3
(3/9)
40%
40%
40%
20%
20%
20%
0%
0%
0%
ORR
DCR
Conversion rate
Resection rate
pCR rate
MPR rate
ITT: Intend to treat, ITT population include all enrolled patients
* Three patients in ITT population deemed resectable declined surgical resection, and one was with N3 disease.
Data cutoff date: June 4, 2026
6
OA09.03 Presenter: Yi-Long Wu, Guangdong Lung Cancer Institute, China.
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
04 min 27s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
EFS
100
90
80.5%
80
Event-Free Survival Rate (%)
70
60
50
ITT (N=42)
40
Event
10
Median EFS,mo
NE (9.8-NE)
30
Survival Estimates
6 months:
ITT
(95% CI)
80.5 (68.4-94.7%)
20
10
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Patients-at-Risk
Months
ITT
42
40
30
23
8
4
0
The median follow-up time was 7.4 months
Shaded area represents the 95% confidence interval for the Kaplan-Meier estimate.
Data cutoff date: June 4, 2026
8
OA09.03 Presenter: Yi-Long Wu, Guangdong Lung Cancer Institute, China.
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
04 min 10s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
EFS by local treatment
100
95.2%
90
80
Surgery
CRT
Event-Free Survival Rate (%)
70
77.8%
Without local treatment
60
Surgery
CRT
Without local
50
(N=22)
(N-10)
treatment
(N-10)
40
Event
I
5
4
30
Median
NE (NE-NE)
NE (7.1-NE)
3.1 (3.1-NE)
EFS,mo
20
Survival
6 months:
6 months:
6 months:
Estimates
95.2(86.6-
77.8 (54.9-
0.0 (NE-NE%)
(95% CT)
100.0%)
100.0%)
10
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Patients-at-Risk
Months
Surgery
22
22
21
17
6
4
0
CRT
10
10
9
6
2
0
Without local
10
8
0
treatment
The median follow-up time was 7.4 months
Data cutoff date: June 4, 2026
9
OA09.03 Presenter: Yi-Long Wu, Guangdong Lung Cancer Institute, China.
PPDBrown@PDBrownOnc
🚨🚨 Randomized Trial #WCLC26 Small Cell Lung Cancer MRI +/-PCI 🚨
• MRI alone superior cognitive outcome
• CFFS benefit of MRI alone similar in LS and ES-SCLC
• No diff OS
• MRI surveillance standard of care for SCLC https://t.co/4YM3QAzBeQ
20.1K impressions54 likes27 reposts2026-09-12
[Slide 1]
MAVERICK (SWOG 1827)
MRI +/- PCI
1 Year CFFS**
AE Gr2+
25/10 PCI
5%
41%
LS-SCLC or
ES-SCLC
M A O N Z D R E I
+ MRI*
n=304
MRI
16%
2%
Surveillance
Rusthoven World Lung 2026. 68% LS-SCLC *77% HA-PCI
**Primary Endpoint - Cognitive Failure Free Survival (CFFS) MRI alone, HR 0.61 (90% CI, 0.47-0.78), p<0.004
CFFS No signif diff benefit MRI alone by Dz stage or use immuno.OS MRI alone, HR 0.90 (90% CI, 0.67-1.20)
MMedJ@MedJ0401
Tam-peli improved median overall survival to 13.3 vs 9.4 months with topotecan in relapsed SCLC. Prof. Li Zhang, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, reported phase 3 TAISHAN-302 at WCLC 2026: interim results from China. Full article below.
19.6K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 2]
wck.lasic.org
000000 FWL
IASLC
2026 World Conference
on Lung Cancer
- And dear collegues
- - - -
Doctor Lipang from time University
SEPTEMBER a - a 2026 . seoul, REPUBLIC or ROSEA
- And - collegues
Cancer Center
Declor spang Yes ben
on behalf of my Co-investigators, m
Tam Peli, an Anb-87-H1 Anbbody-drug Conjugate, versus Topotacan
Cancer
here - present the temple
in Relapsed Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC)
On benefit or FO Co-investigations, m
here 0 present the scipe
LA
A Randomized, Open-label, Phase 3 Study (TAISHAN-302)
-
III
Science Without Boundaries Uniting the World Against Thoracic Cancer
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12- 15, 2026
-06 min 43s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Progression-Free Survival by Investigators
Tam-Peli demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS vs. topotecan,
with a 71% reduction in rate of disease progression or death
100%
Tam-Peli
Topotecan
(N = 225)
(N = 226)
80%
Probability (%) of PFS
58.1%
PFS events, n (%) 134 (59.6) 179 (79.2)
60%
Median PFS,
7.4
2.8
40%
months (95% CI)
(6.1,7.6)
(1.8,3.0)
20%
++ Censored
17.9%
Tam-Pell
Topotecan
HR 0.29 (95% CI: 0.23, 0.37)
0%
01234567891011121314 15 16 17
P <0.0001
Time (Months)
No. at risk:
Time (Months) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Tam-Peli 225 220 196 174 167 136 105 91 36 33 14 14 4 3 1 1 1 0
Topotecan 226 198 113 80 67 41 26 21 11 9 7 6 3 1 1 1 1 0
Data cut-off May 20. 2026 Median folow - GIFS was 7.8 months for TemPer and 4 months for topotecan
a confidence intervet, HR, hazard ratio ITS progression the survival
10
Li Zhang I Tam-Peli, an anti-B7-H3 antibody-drug conjugate, versus topotecan in relapsed SCLC: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (TAISHAN-302)
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
08 min 09s
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Safety Summary
Tam-Peli
Topotecan
Fewer grade >3 TRAEs, serious TRAEs
(N = 224)
(N . 217)
and TRAEs leading to dose reduction
Median duration of exposure,
31.1
10.1
were observed with Tam-Peli compared
weeks (range)
(3, 72.9)
(3, 70.4)
with topotecan (46% vs 74% and 25% vs
TRAEs, n (%)
36%).
All grades
221 (98.7)
216 (99.5)
Grade 23
104 (46.4)
162 (74.7)
No treatment-related deaths were
Serious TRAEs
58 (25.9)
79 (36.4)
reported in the Tam-Peli arm.
Leading to dose interruption
78 (34.8)
80 (36.9)
Leading to dose reduction
58 (25.9)
80 (36.9)
The incidences of all-grade TRAEs and
dose interruptions were similar between
Leading to discontinuation
13 (5.8)
6 (2.8)
arms.
Leading to death
0
1 (0.5)
Data cut-off May 20, 2026
TRAES, treatment related adverse events
14
Li Zhang I Tam-Peli, an anti-B7-H3 antibody-drug conjugate, versus topotecan in relapsed SCLC: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (TAISHAN-302)
MMedJ@MedJ0401
Ris-Rez vs topotecan: median overall survival 18.5 vs 10.3 months in relapsed SCLC. Prof. Jie Wang, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, reported phase 3 ARTEMIS-008 results in 461 Chinese patients at WCLC 2026, per MedJ. Full article below.
18.3K impressions2 likes0 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
2026
WCLC
Prof.Jie Wang -
17
[Slide 2]
-
Background
SCLC name name the reasons capacity with amoid reatment options,
THE
- the more checkpoat insocuted with reduced service and
supports - potentive - therapesic target
versus topotecan in relapsed amail
cell lung cancer
Revenuting Ris Res. formerly HS 20093 N4227). a nove
- - - - - -
This is my disclosure
87 -0- directed TOPT) IDC - been reported with encouraging
value ropotecan in small
It - well known that small cell lung
- ung cancer
efficacy - maltiple solid humans - ARTEMIS 901
-
cancer a a highly malignant sumor.
This my -
-
- well mown Par and - lung
cancer a signey naignant furror
MAYON
Here - present results from the pre- planned interim analysis (A) = the plase I
ARTEMIS- 008 trial comparing Ris- Rez persus topetecan for the treatment of relapred SCLC
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Primary Endpoint: os
At this IA (DCO June 6, 2026), there're 77 (33.5%) OS events in Ris-Rez arm and 121 (52.4%) in Topotecan arm.
With a median follow-up of 12.2 months, Ris-Rez demonstrated statistically significant and clinical meaningful
improvement in OS.
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
100
N=230
N=231
Median OS, months
18.5
10.3
80
Hazard Ratio*
0.46
64.5%
(95% CI)
(0.35, 0.62)
Overall Survival Probability (%)
P value*
<0.0001
60
43.3%
40
20
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
Time (Months)
No. at risk
Ris R82
230
220
186
127
77
43
12
0
Topotecan 231
195
146
86
50
27
11
0
"Hazard ratio and Pvalue were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model and Log-rank test, stratified by baseline brain metastasis status, CTFI, and VALG stage at study entry.
Censoring rule for OS: patients were censored at their last known survival time; for the 15 untreated patients who withdrew consent in topotecan group, censoring occurred at the withdrawal date.
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval; CTFI, chemotherapy-free interval; IA, interim analysis; OS, overall survival; VALG, Veterans Administration Lung Study Group
6
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Secondary Endpoints: PFS by BICR and investigator
BICR-assessed PFS
Investigator-assessed PFS
100
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
100
Ris-Rez
Topotecan
N=230
N=231
N=230
N=231
80
mPFS, months
7.2
3.0
80
mPFS, months
7.8
4.0
Progression-Free Survival Probability (#)
HR
0.33
59.9%
(95% CI)
40
28.5%
26.1%
Progression-Free Survival Probability (W)
HR
0.35
61.5%
60
(0.25,0.42)
60
(95% CI)
(0.28,0.45)
40
30.5%
25.5%
20
20
Ris-Rez
5.3%
Ris-Rez
7.5%
Topotecan
Topotecan
0
0
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
Time (Months)
Time (Months)
No. risk
No. risk
Pas-Bez 230
185
108
51
24
11
2
0
Pla Ret
230
192
118
54
28
12
2
0
Topotican 231
as
38
8
2
1
1
0
Topotican 231
"
48
14
$
1
1
0
Abbreviation: BICR, blinded independent central review; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; m, median; PFS, progression free survival
8
MMasahiro TORASAWA, MD. PhD.@M_Torasawa
1/4
🔥 #ESMO26
Lung Cancer Presidential Highlights
🇪🇸 Madrid | October 24–25, 2026
Three major Phase 3 lung cancer LBAs, each with potential to reshape treatment paradigms:
🎙️ LBA3 | DeLLphi-305
🎙️ LBA5 | KRASCENDO 1
🎙️ LBA6 | SAFFRON
Three Phase 3 readouts to watch closely at #ESMO26 👀
@myESMO @OncoAlert @Larvol
16.2K impressions36 likes9 reposts2026-09-23
[Slide 1]
ESMO 2026
MADRID SPAIN
23-27 OCTOBER 2026
Lung Cancer Presidential Highlights
Presidential Symposium presentations
Based on current official programme.
Presidential Symposium I
Presidential Symposium II
Sat, 24 Oct 2026
Sun, 25 Oct 2026
L
16:30-18:15
L
16:30-18:15
Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6
ALICANTE
Alicante Auditorium - - Hall 6
ALICANTE
SPAIN 2026
SPAIN 2026
01
02
03
LBA3 DeLLphi-305
LBA5
Krascendo 1
LBA6 SAFFRON
Tarlatamab + durvalumab
Divarasib vs sotorasib
Osimertinib + savolitinib
vs durvalumab
or adagrasib
vs platinum-pemetrexed
1L maintenance after
Previously treated
EGFR-mutant MET-overexpressed
durvalumab + platinum/
advanced/metastatic
and/or amplified advanced
etoposide in ES-SCLC
KRAS G12C NSCLC
NSCLC post-osimertinib
Phase 3
|
Primary endpoint: OS
Phase 3
|
Primary endpoint: PFS
Phase 3
I
Primary endpoint: PFS
Presenter: Ferdinandos
Presenter: Jacob Sands
Presenter: Shun Lu
Skoulidis
Presidential Symposium I
Presidential Symposium II
Presidential Symposium II
Sat, 24 Oct 2026
Sun, 25 Oct 2026
Sun, 25 Oct 2026
16:30-18:15 | Hall 6
16:30-18:15 | Hall 6
16:30-18:15 | Hall 6
congress
MADRID
2026
ESMO
MADRID
SPAIN
Session previews posted during the meeting
LLUNG CONNECT powered by COR2ED@lung_connect
Update from WCLC 2026: The latest in HER2-mutant NSCLC
>> From thoracic oncologist Dr @JSabari
What do DESTINY-Lung04, and new data from SOHO-01 & Beamion LUNG-1 mean for HER2-mutant NSCLC?
📺Watch to find out
Endorsed by @WarOnCancer, @Exon20Group &
@BiomarkerCo
Supported by an Independent Educational Grant from Bayer. For HCPs only.
894.4K impressions15 likes2 reposts2026-09-17
SStephen V Liu, MD@StephenVLiu
We now have TWO studies showing B7-H3 ADCs vastly superior to standard topotecan for relapsed SCLC: tam-peli and ris-rez. These studies were different - different agents, different baseline demographics of pts, etc - but the outcomes were similar, control arms performed similarly. These trials reinforce each other. Looking forward to global studies and to first-line studies. The ADC era soundly he
11.5K impressions5 likes0 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
RR
DCR
PFS
6m PFS Rate
OS
ILD rate
Tam-Peli 2mg/kg
59.1%
91.1%
7.4 VS 2.8m
58.1%
13.3 vs 9.4
4.9%
VS topotecan
VS 9.7%
VS 50.9%
PFS HR 0.29
VS 17.9%
OS HR 0.46
TAISHAN-302
Zhang, WCLC 2026
Ris-rez, 8mg/kg q3w
58.3%
90.4%
7.2 VS 3.0m
59.9%
18.5m VS 10.3
11.7%
VS topotecan
VS 12.6%
VS 60.2%
PFS HR 0.33
vs 28.5%
OS HR 0.46
ARTEMIS-008
Wang, WCLC 2026
OOncology Brothers@OncBrothers
Highlights from #WCLC26 #CommunityOncology:
NSCLC
1. #ADAURA Update Adj mEGFR
2. #PAPILLON 1L EGFR Ex20
3. #DESTINYLung04 1L mHER2
4. #ARROS1 1L ROS1+
5. #HARMONi 2L mEGFR
SCLC
6. #MAVERICK @SWOG MRI surv
7. #DeLLphi Tarla SubQ & ⬇️ freq
#lcsm #OncTwitter @IASLC
1/8 https://t.co/K5kHEzMTvv
11.4K impressions10 likes9 reposts2026-09-15
[Slide 1]
THE
IASLC
2026 D
2026 World Conference
Endorsed by
Korean
Association
for
on Lung Cancer
KAL
Lung Cancer
C
SEPTEMBER 12 — 15, 2026 | SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
YYakup Ergün@dr_yakupergun
Highlighted Studies at #WCLC26
1️⃣ HARMONi-2
In treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥1%, ivonescimab improved PFS (11.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.51) and OS (30.8 vs 22.6 months; HR 0.73) compared with pembrolizumab.
This is a genuinely positive trial, but it does not tell the same story for all PD-L1-positive patients. The OS benefit was clear in the ≥50% subgroup, whereas the HR was 0.85 with
9.1K impressions24 likes8 reposts2026-09-13
[Slide 1]
IASLC SEOUL 2026
WCLC26: KEY STUDIES
Early results key data at a glance
HARMONi-2
1
1L PD-L1 >1% advanced NSCLC
Clearly positive.
Strongest signal in PD-L1 >50%.
PFS 11.1 vs 5.8 mo
HR 0.51
In 1-49%, the control arm does
os 30.8 vs 22.6 mo
HR 0.73
not fully reflect current practice.
2
SWOG S1827 / MAVERICK
Post-treatment SCLC MRI surveillance vs MRI + PCI
With reliable MRI access, routine
PCI is now hard to justify.
Cognitive failure / death
HR 0.60
Final os is still needed before
Grade ≥3 toxicity 0.8% vs 7.9%
declaring PCI obsolete.
Interim OS and brain metastasis-free survival: no difference
TAISHAN-302
3
Relapsed SCLC B7-H3 ADC Tam-Peli vs topotecan
Clear survival gain.
A potential topotecan replacement;
os 13.3 vs 9.4 mo
HR 0.46
efficacy after tarlatamab
PFS 7.4 vs 2.8 mo
ORR 59% vs 10%
maintenance remains unknown.
ARTEMIS-008
4
Relapsed SCLC . B7-H3 ADC Ris-Rez VS topotecan
Confirms B7-H3 as a target.
No cross-trial comparison with
os 18.5 vs 10.3 mo
HR 0.46
TAISHAN; ILD and hematologic
PFS 7.2 vs 3.0 mo
ORR 58% vs 13%
toxicity may drive selection.
5
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46
PD-L1 >50% metastatic NSCLC SG+pembro VS pembro
More tumor shrinkage,
ORR 56% vs 44%
similar response duration,
os 21.5 vs 22.8 mo
no OS gain:
Grade ≥3 toxicity 56% vs 17%
no role in clinical practice.
Primary PFS threshold not met
13 SEPTEMBER 2026 INTERIM CONGRESS SNAPSHOT
@dr_yakupergun
MMedJ@MedJ0401
Two Chinese phase 3 trials take B7-H3 ADCs to the WCLC 2026 Presidential Symposium: TAISHAN-302 and ARTEMIS-008 compare them with topotecan in relapsed SCLC. The focus: overall survival and safety, beyond early response rates. Full article below. https://t.co/rnhCfTAJho
8.5K impressions0 likes0 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 2]
PL02.03. Tam-Peli, an Anti-B7-H3 Antibody-Drug Conjugate, Versus Topotecan in Relapsed SCLC: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 Study
L. Zhang¹, Y. Zhao¹, H. Liu², X. Meng³, Z. Liu⁴, Y. Yu5, Y. Zheng⁶, L. Sun7, R. Yang⁸, J. Liu6, Y. Zhao⁹, L. Wu¹⁰, L. Yang¹¹, Z. Zhang¹², M. Li¹³, P. Zhang¹⁴, Y.
Zhang¹⁵, H. Zhong¹⁶, J. Cui¹⁷, Z. Huang¹ Y. Yin¹⁹, M. Li20, F. Tong²¹, D. Xue²², D. Lv²³, X. Li24, X. Zhang²⁴, S. Chin²⁴, J. Cai24, T. Xue24, Y. Huang¹, H. Zhao¹
Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Cancer,
Guangzhou/CN 2Cancer Hospital of Dalian University of Technology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang/CN ³Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute,
Shandong First Medical University, Jinan/CN, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, Nanchang/CN, ⁵Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin/CN ⁶The First Affiliated
Hospital, Zhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory for Drug Evaluation and Clinical Research, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou/CN, The First Affiliated
Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang/CN The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Tumor Hospital, Kunming/CN 9The Affiliated Cancer
Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou/CN, ¹⁰Hunan Cancer Hospital/The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Xiangya School of Medicine,
Central South University, Changsha/CN, 11 Gansu Provincial Cancer Hospital, Lanzhou/CN, ¹²The First Affiliated Hospital, and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan
University of Science and Technology, Luoyang/CN, ¹³The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou/CN, 4Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital Affiliated to
Tongji University, Shanghai/CN 5West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu/CN ¹⁶Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine,
Shanghai/CN 17 The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun/CN, Clinical Oncology School of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou/CN, 19 Linyi
People's Hospital, Linyi/CN 20The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an/CN Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science
and Technology, Wuhan/CN 22Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou/CN ²³Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University,
Taizhou/CN ²⁴MediLink Therapeutics (Suzhou) Co., Ltd., Suzhou/CN 1 8:59 AM- 9:09
AM
10m
View abstract
@
Jo
View biography
[Slide 3]
PL02.04. Risvutatug Rezetecan (a B7-H3-Directed ADC) Versus Topotecan in Relapsed SCLC: Primary Results of Phase 3 ARTEMIS-008
J. Wang1, L. Wang2, J. Duan¹, H. Liu³, Q. Wang4, H. Wang2, L. Sun5, S. Huang⁶, Y. Huang⁷, F. Tong⁸, W. Zheng9, T. Chu¹⁰, Y. Fan¹¹, D. Huang¹², P. Zhang¹³, W.
Guo¹⁴, B. Liu¹⁵, J. Zhou¹⁶, Q. Li17, Y. Dong¹⁸, Q. Liu¹⁸, M. Zhang¹⁸ X. Zhang¹⁸, J. Yu2
National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Peking Union Medical College,
Beijing/CN, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University, Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan/CN 3 Jilin Cancer Hospital,
Changchun/CN 4The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Institute of Cancer Research, Henan Academy of Innovations in
Medical Science, Zhengzhou/CN ⁵The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang/CN, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University,
Zhengzhou/CN Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou/CN Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan/CN, 9Shengjing
Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang/CN, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai/CN, Zhejiang Cancer
Hospital, Hangzhou/CN 12 Cancer Institute&Hospital, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin/CN ¹³Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University, Shanghai/CN
/ 14Shanxi Provincial Cancer Hospital, Taiyuan/CN 15 Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin/CN, 16Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer
Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu/CN 17Xiangyang Center Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of
Hubei University Arts and Science, Xiangyang/CN, Shanghai Hansoh BioMedical Co., Ltd, Shanghai/CN
-
9:11 AM- 9:21 AM
10m
T
View abstract
o
View biography
DDr Rishabh Jain@DrRishabhOnco
🫁 EGFR at #WCLC26: 5 trials to watch 👇
1️⃣ ADAURA | PL03.01
8-year update of adjuvant osimertinib in resected EGFR-mutant NSCLC.
🔥 How durable is the survival benefit at 8 years?
2️⃣ PAPILLON | PL03.03
Amivantamab + chemotherapy vs chemotherapy in 1L EGFR exon 20 insertion NSCLC.
🔥 Does the PFS advantage translate into an OS benefit?
3️⃣ REZILIENT 3 | PL03.04
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy vs ch
8.2K impressions18 likes6 reposts2026-09-11
UUğur Özkerim@UOzkerim
Excellent discussion of the evolving 1L landscape for EGFR exon20ins NSCLC at #WCLC26. @LudaBazhenovaMD
A thoughtful comparison of PAPILLON, WU-KONG 28 and REZILIENT3, highlighting that treatment choice goes beyond efficacy alone—CNS disease, exon20ins subtype, toxicity, treatment burden, patient preference and subsequent therapy all matter.
Importantly, cross-trial comparisons and subgroup ana
6.2K impressions3 likes2 reposts2026-09-14
[Slide 1]
What should guide our first line decision?
PAPILLON
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
WU-KONG 28
Sunvozertinib
REZILIENT3
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
EFFICACY & TOXICITY
PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
PATIENT PRIORITIES
WHAT COMES NEXT?
Depth and duration of benefit
CNS metastases
IV VS oral therapy
Treatment burden
EGFR exon 20ins subtype
Quality of life
Sequential efficacy
Adverse events
preferences
Resistance mechanisms
[Slide 2]
along
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Do subgroup analyses help us choose first-line therapy?
PAPILLON
WU-KONG 28
REZILIENT3
Amivantamab + chemotherapy
Sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib + chemotherapy
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
BASELINE CNS METASTASES
CNS mets
CNS mets
HR 0.63 (0.38-1.06)
HR 0.96 (0.44-2.08)
CNS mets
HR 0.38 (0.21-0.67)
No CNS mets
HR 0.33 (0.23-0.46)
HR 0.62 (0.47-0.83)
No CNS mets
No CNS mets
HR 0.62 (0.38-0.99)
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
EXON 20 INSERTION LOCATION
Near loop
HR 0.40 (0.28-0.58)
Near loop
HR 0.59 (0.43-0.82)
Near loop
Not reported
Far loop
HR 0.19 (0.06-0.69)
Far loop
HR 0.83 (0.49-1.38)
Far loop
Not reported
CNS metastases and exon 20 insertion location are potential differentiators but subgroup data remain exploratory
[Slide 3]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III randomized 1L trials
PAPILLON
Platinum doublet
Amivantamab
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
+
sunvozertinib
Zipalertinib +
chemotherapy
chemotherapy
PAPILLON: 47
ORR%
WU KONG 28: 31.1
73
(BIRC)
59
65
REZILIENT 3: 40
PAPILLON: 6.7
11.4
mPFS m
10.3
14.5
WU KONG 28: 7.5
0.40; 0.30 -0.53; P<0.001
HR (CI, p)
0.65; 0.50 -0.85; <0.001
0.5; 0.34-0.73; p=0.00015
REZILIENT 38.5
mOS, m
PAPILLON: 27.9 (24.0-32.4)
34.3 (27.0-40.8)
29.8 (21.8-NE)
NR
HR (Cl,p)
WU KONG 28: 28.8 (27.0-NE)
HR, 0.87 (0.66-1.14);
0.99 (0.7-1.40)
0.72 (0.42-1.23)
REZILIENT 3: NR
P=0.307
p 0.49 39% maturity
P=0.11082
PAPILLON: 68
18m-OS
WU KONG 28: 67
74
65.5
Not reported
REZILIENT 3: NR
PAPILLON: 54
24m-OS
WU KONG 28: 56.2
64
57.4
Not reported
REZILIENT 3: NR
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit interpretation.
9
[Slide 4]
IASLC
2026 World Conference
SEPTEMBER 12 - 15, 2026
on Lung Cancer
SEOUL, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Phase III 1L randomized trials
Platinum doublet
PAPILLON
WU KONG 28
REZILIENT 3
Neutropenia (34%),
Diarrhea (14%),
Anemia (48.6%),
Most common
Paronychia (10%),
CK increased (20.9)
toxicity (Gr3)
anemia (13%),
Anemia (9.2%),
neutropenia (33.6),
infusion related reaction (1%)
rash (0.6%)
thrombocytopenia (30%)
rash (10.7%)
paronychia (3.7%)
GR3 AE %
75
75
81
% dose reduction*
36
41
44
% dose
11
12
17
discontinuation*
PAPILLON: 3
AE leading to
WU KONG 28: 1.3
5
4.3
9.5
death %
REZILIENT 3: 2.9
Descriptive cross-trial comparison; differences in eligibility, follow-up, assessment, and safety reporting limit
interpretation.
* Targeted therapy
10
MMustafa Özdoğan, MD@ozdogan_md
#WCLC26 — The Studies to Watch
Seoul, 12–15 September
A clinical map of the key questions at @IASLC WCLC 2026: early/locally advanced NSCLC, oncogenic drivers, IO combinations, SCLC (including CNS), limited-stage multimodal therapy, and local control.
Presidential symposium highlights include ADAURA OS update, PAPILLON, REZILIENT 3, ARROS-1, DESTINY-Lung04, EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE-D46, TAISHAN-302, A
5.5K impressions5 likes4 reposts2026-09-11
[Slide 1]
WCLC 2026: THE STUDIES TO WATCH
Seoul
12-15 September 2026
Presidential symposium
01
EARLY / LOCALLY ADVANCED NSCLC
02
ADVANCED NSCLC: DRIVERS
ADAURA
PL03.01
PAPILLON
PL03.03
Osimertinib
exploratory 8-year OS
EGFR exon 20 amivantamab + chemo
os
IMpower030
OA04.03
REZILIENT 3
PL03.04
Perioperative atezolizumab + chemo
EGFR exon 20 zipalertinib + chemo
MDT-BRIDGE
ARROS-1
PL03.06
OA04.02
ROS1 zidesamtinib TKI-naive
Neoadjuvant durvalumab + chemo
DESTINY-Lung04
PL03.08
Adjuvant gefitinib + chemo
OA04.01
HER2-mutant
first-line T-DXd
EGFR-mutant phase III
HARMONi
0A14.05
NAUTIKA1
M006.01/ OA04.04
Post-EGFR TKI ivonescimab + chemo os
Neoadjuvant alectinib / divarasib
AMIGO-1
0A12.04
Amivantamab + lazertinib + pemetrexed
03
ADVANCED NSCLC: NO DRIVER
04
SCLC: SYSTEMIC THERAPY & CNS
HARMONi-2
OA14.01
TAISHAN-302
PL02.03
Ivonescimab vs pembrolizumab OS
Tam-Peli vs topotecan relapsed
ARTEMIS-008
PL02.04
EVOKE-03 / KEYNOTE D46
PL02.06
Risvutatug rezetecan vs topotecan
Sacituzumab govitecan + pembrolizumab
PD-L1 ≥50%
SWOG S1827 MAVERICK
PL02.01
Pumitamig + BNT324
0A14.02
Brain MRI surveillance ± cranial irradiation
PD-L1/VEGF-A + B7-H3
NSCLC/SCLC
DeLLphi-309
OA05.01
Tarlatamab extended-interval dosing
RC148 / ABBV-1480
OA14.04
PD-1/VEGF bispecific + chemo
DeLLphi-308
M015.07
Tarlatamab subcutaneous delivery
MAVERICK: cross-stage brain prevention.
05
LIMITED-STAGE SCLC
06
SURGERY, RADIOTHERAPY & LOCAL CONTROL
Neoadjuvant serplulimab + chemo
M015.03
Wedge vs segmentectomy
OA08.01
pathological response / MRD
GGO-dominant early NSCLC
GREAT
OA08.02
Serplulimab + concurrent CRT
P3.288
Segmentectomy VS lobectomy
followed by serplulimab phase
II
STARLORD
OA09.04
CXCL9+ DCs / CXCR3+ Tregs
M015.01
Stereotactic RT when concurrent CRT is unsuitable
treatment resistance
LONESTAR
0A14.03
Early clinical and translational signals
Local consolidation after nivolumab + ipilimumab
EMERGING SCIENCE
KRAS G12D: GFH375 / QLC1101
DLL3 CAR-T: LB2102
mRNA vaccine: BNT116
OA12.01-02
OA05.02
M006.03
Pre-congress watchlist
Not a results summary
11 Sep 2026
Source: IASLC WCLC 2026 program
wclc.iaslc.org
