Practice-changing
Metastatic
PL02.06 — FLAURA2
First-Line Osimertinib + Chemotherapy Versus Osimertinib Monotherapy in EGFRm Advanced NSCLC: Final Overall Survival
Result: Adding platinum–pemetrexed to osimertinib improved overall survival vs osimertinib alone in first-line EGFRm advanced NSCLC.
Key data: Median OS 47.5 vs 37.6 mo; HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.61–0.96); p=0.0202; consistent across subgroups; AEs manageable; discontinuation 12% vs 7%.
Why it matters: Confirms OS benefit and cements the combo as a first-line standard for eligible EGFRm patients.
Potentially practice-changing
Early Stage
PL03.10 — NADIM ADJUVANT
Adjuvant Chemotherapy vs Chemo-Immunotherapy (nivolumab) for R0 Stage IB–IIIA NSCLC: Randomized Phase 3 Trial
Result: Adding adjuvant nivolumab to chemotherapy reduced recurrence risk vs chemotherapy alone; OS immature.
Key data: DFS HR 0.65 (95% CI 0.40–1.07); p=0.085; cancer-specific DFS HR 0.54 (95% CI 0.32–0.93); landmark HR 0.60; grade ≥3 TRAEs 26.2% vs 14.5%.
Why it matters: Signals benefit for adjuvant chemo-IO after complete resection; watch for mature DFS/OS before broad adoption.
Locally advanced
PL02.12 — HARMONi
Ivonescimab + Chemo vs Placebo + Chemo in EGFR-mutated NSCLC Progressing on 3rd-Gen EGFR-TKI: Phase 3 Trial
Result: Ivonescimab + chemo improved PFS vs placebo + chemo; OS trend favored ivonescimab but did not cross significance at final readout.
Key data: PFS HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.41–0.66); median PFS 6.8 vs 4.4 mo; OS HR 0.79 (95% CI 0.62–1.01); p=0.057; grade ≥3 VEGF-type AEs ~7% vs 3%.
Why it matters: A chemo-anchored option after 3rd-gen EGFR-TKI with consistent subgroup activity (incl. brain mets); regulatory/label context will guide use.
Other (Surgical/Technique)
PL03.13 — VATS vs Open Lobectomy (IPD meta-analysis)
Survival Outcome of VATS Compared to Open Lobectomy for Lung Cancer: Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis of Randomised Trials
Result: VATS lobectomy associated with improved overall survival vs open lobectomy in pooled randomized data; DFS similar.
Key data: OS HR 0.79 (95% CI 0.65–0.96); DFS HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.75–1.12); N=1185 across 3 RCTs; low bias risk.
Why it matters: Supports prioritizing VATS when technically feasible without oncologic compromise.
Watchlist
Early Stage
PL02.18 — E4512
Phase 3: Adjuvant Crizotinib vs Observation in Resected Early-Stage ALK+ NSCLC
Result: No DFS improvement vs observation; OS not improved.
Key data: DFS HR 1.06 (90% CI 0.63–1.77); p=0.86; grade ≥3 TRAEs 34% on crizotinib; discontinuation 25%.
Why it matters: Confirms no role for adjuvant crizotinib; current adjuvant ALK inhibitor standards unaffected.
Locally advanced
PL03.06 — EA5181
Concurrent + Consolidation Durvalumab vs Consolidation-Only After cCRT in Unresectable Stage III NSCLC: Phase 3 Trial
Result: Adding concurrent durvalumab did not improve OS or PFS vs consolidation-only strategy.
Key data: OS HR 1.03; p=0.83 (41.5 vs 39.4 mo); PFS HR 1.05; p=0.65; no meaningful safety/recurrence-pattern advantages.
Why it matters: Consolidation-only remains standard after cCRT; no change to current pathways.
Metastatic
PL02.15 — ARROS-1 (zidesamtinib)
Pivotal, Single-Arm: Zidesamtinib in ROS1+ NSCLC (TKI-pretreated; preliminary TKI-naïve cohort)
Result: Clinically meaningful activity and durability in heavily pretreated ROS1+ disease; strong preliminary activity in TKI-naïve cohort.
Key data: ORR ~44% (pretreated); IC-activity; dose reductions 10%; discontinuations 2%; common AEs: edema, constipation, CPK ↑.
Why it matters: Encouraging option post-TKI with CNS and resistance-mutation coverage; needs comparative data/label to define place in therapy.
Other
PL03.07 — LS-SCLC HypoRT vs ConvRT
Hypofractionated vs Conventional Fractionated RT With Concurrent Chemo in LS-SCLC: Phase 3 Trial
Result: Non-inferiority in OS not met at early final; efficacy similar; HypoRT showed lower acute hematologic toxicity and less pneumonitis.
Key data: Median OS 40.2 vs 47.9 mo (HR ~1.04); PFS 16.5 vs 18.0 mo; acute grade ≥3 AEs 48.7% vs 67.7%; RP ≥grade 2: 7.7% vs 14.5%.
Why it matters: Possible safety/operational advantages; oncologic equivalence not yet proven—consider in selected contexts.
PL03.16 — JCOG0802/WJOG4607L STAS analysis
STAS and Prognosis in Segmentectomy vs Lobectomy (Pathology subset)
Result: STAS associated with worse RFS/OS overall; prognostic signal persists across surgery types.
Key data: OS HR ~2.34; RFS HR ~2.05; grade-3 histology strongly associated with STAS and poorer outcomes.
Why it matters: Supports incorporating STAS/grade into risk stratification and surgical discussions; not a practice change alone.
PL03.19 — Screening upper age limit
Comparing 74 vs 80 as the Upper Age Limit Cutoff in UK Screening Programs: Multi-Centre Cohort Study
Result: Older screenees (75–80) had higher all-cause mortality overall despite similar stage; surgical subgroup had comparable outcomes to younger.
Key data: All-cause mortality HR 1.54 (95% CI 1.12–2.10); surgical subgroup HR ~1.00; resection 42% vs 58%.
Why it matters: Highlights role of surgical fitness selection in extending screening age; policy implications pending randomized data.
Next Up
Slide deck with key figures and tables from WCLC 2025 — optimized for teaching and departmental updates — will be released once data is available.
A Note From Me
This pilot issue comes from first-hand experience: as an oncologist, I know how overwhelming conferences can be. Between plenaries, posters, and press releases, it’s easy to drown in information overload — and most summaries out there give far too much detail.
OncoBrief is my attempt to solve that problem: condensing the most important findings into a format busy clinicians can read in minutes and use in practice the very next day.
I always wished something like this existed — so I built it. I’d love your feedback on this format as we refine it together.
🔔 Click here to subscribe and get future summaries and slide decks delivered directly to your inbox.