Key Abstracts in Early-Stage NSCLC From ASCO 2025
Dr Goldman begins with updated results from CheckMate 816, comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (chemo) vs chemo + nivolumab. Median overall survival (OS) in the nivolumab arm remains unreached vs 73.7 months with chemo alone. Event-free survival (EFS) is durable at 59.6 vs 21.1 months, as evidenced by 5-year EFS of 49% in the combination arm.
Next, he reviews the NeoADAURA trial evaluating neoadjuvant osimertinib ± chemo in resectable EGFR-mutated stage II-IIIB NSCLC. Major pathologic response was higher in osimertinib-containing arms (26% and 25%) vs 2% in the chemo arm, although long-term outcomes remain pending.
Dr Goldman also discusses the SWOG/NRG S1914 trial of perioperative stereotactic body radiotherapy ± atezolizumab, which did not show improvements in OS or progression-free survival (PFS).
He then highlights a prospective, low-dose CT screening study of the Mississippi Delta cohort, which showed a 4.7% lung cancer detection rate overall and 4.5% in patients with incidental pulmonary nodules — underscoring the utility of low-dose CT as a modality in early detection.
In closing, he reports on two studies in small cell lung cancer. The IMforte study showed that lurbinectedin + atezolizumab in 1L maintenance improved PFS (HR, 0.54). In the DeLLphi-304 study, second-line tarlatamab improved OS compared to chemo (HR, 0.6), which is a potentially practice-changing update.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump revives presidential fitness test – will US students run a mile?
Donald Trump announced on Thursday that he is re-establishing the presidential fitness test, a way of assessing the fitness level of American students. The test was administered in public middle and high schools in the United States from 1966 to 2013, when the Obama administration replaced it with the presidential youth fitness program – a similar physical assessment program, but with more focus on health education. Related: Let them, creatine and fibermaxxing: the biggest wellness trends of 2025 (so far) The health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr – vaccine skeptic and key figure in the 'Make America Healthy Again' movement – will be in charge of administering the test. In a statement reported by the AP, the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the president 'wants to ensure America's future generations are strong, healthy, and successful' and that young Americans 'have the opportunity to emphasize health, active lifestyles – creating a culture of strength and excellence for years to come'. Below, what you need to know about the presidential fitness test. What is the test? Initiated by Dwight D Eisenhower in 1956, the test changed over the years, but generally consisted of five parts: a one-mile run, a shuttle run (moving as quickly as possible back and forth between two points), pull-ups or push-ups, sit-ups and the sit-and-reach (sitting on the ground with your legs outstretched and seeing how far down your legs your hands can reach). According to the Harvard Health blog, the aim of the test was to 'assess cardiovascular fitness, upper-body and core strength, endurance, flexibility, and agility'. Why did the government start testing children's fitness? The test derives from the Kraus-Weber test for muscular fitness, an assessment developed by Dr Hans Kraus and Dr Sonja Weber. The test was administered to thousands of students across the US and Europe. Researchers found that European students performed significantly better than their American counterparts: 57.9% of US students failed at least one of the test's six exercises, compared with only 8.7% of European students. According to a 1955 Sports Illustrated article, when Kraus presented his findings at the White House, President Eisenhower declared the problem 'a serious one'. The president seemed less worried about children's health and wellbeing than he did their combat preparedness. According to the Department of Health and Human Service's 50th anniversary booklet about the test, 'his chief concern seemed to be the vulnerability to the red army'. 'Our growing softness, our increasing lack of physical fitness, is a menace to our security,' Eisenhower said. Did the presidential fitness test make kids healthier? It doesn't seem so. A 2025 report in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that from 2007 to 2023, trends had 'significantly worsened' for 'child mortality; chronic physical, developmental and mental health conditions; obesity; sleep health; early puberty; limitations in activity; and physical and emotional symptoms'. And when it comes to competition with Europe, the US is faring even worse than it did before. Dr Christopher Forrest, one of the study's authors, told NPR that back in the 1960s, 'the chance that a child was going to die in the United States was the same as European nations'. But from 2010 to 2023, 'kids in the United States were 80% more likely to die', than those in Europe. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
National Science Foundation staff decry Trump's ‘politically motivated' cuts
Almost 150 workers from the National Science Foundation (NSF) have lambasted Donald Trump's cuts to the agency as 'politically motivated and legally questionable', joining colleagues at three other federal research agencies in warning that the administration is destroying innovation and sacrificing the US's position as a global scientific leader. The three-page dissent states the actions of the administration 'collectively amount to the systemic dismantling of a world-renowned scientific agency' and that they have been compelled to act because 'NSF employees are bound by their oath to uphold the Constitution.' The document condemns the decision as 'illegally' withholding $2.2bn of the $9bn budget appropriated by Congress for 2025 and the 'unlawful termination and threatened mass reductions' in the workforce, which has already seen more than 10% of the agency's staff dismissed. They also point to the termination of more than 1,600 active NSF grants 'using undisclosed criteria devised by the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge)' – the quasi-government agency set up by Trump's billionaire donor Elon Musk. Earlier this month, the Guardian reported on the unprecedented political interference being wielded by Doge which, together with the chaotic cuts, has already undermined the gold standard review process used by the NSF to support cutting-edge science, and was jeopardizing the future of US industries and economic growth. 'A covert and ideologically driven secondary review process by unqualified political appointees is now interfering with the scientific merit-based review system,' the letter states. The best public interest journalism relies on first-hand accounts from people in the know. If you have something to share on this subject you can contact us confidentially using the following methods. Secure Messaging in the Guardian app The Guardian app has a tool to send tips about stories. Messages are end to end encrypted and concealed within the routine activity that every Guardian mobile app performs. This prevents an observer from knowing that you are communicating with us at all, let alone what is being said. If you don't already have the Guardian app, download it (iOS/Android) and go to the menu. Select 'Secure Messaging'. SecureDrop, instant messengers, email, telephone and post See our guide at for alternative methods and the pros and cons of each. The NSF was created 75 years ago and until Trump took office for his second term had enjoyed bipartisan support. It is the only federal agency that funds fundamental research across all fields of science and engineering, and which over the years has contributed to major breakthroughs in organ transplants, gene technology, AI, smartphones, extreme weather warning systems, American sign language, cybersecurity and even the language app Duolingo. Trump's budget proposal calls for a 56% cut to the NSF budget for 2026, which if enacted 'would undermine US leadership in science, eliminate funding for over 250,000 researchers and students, and break bipartisan commitments made under the CHIPS and Science Act', the letter states. The NSF statement follows similar unprecedented dissent by hundreds of scientists and other staff at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and most recently the Voyager Declaration from almost 300 current and former Nasa scientists including four astronauts. All have warned about the devastating impact of the administration's arbitrary and chaotic cuts to staff and research funds on the lives of Americans – now and in the future – in order to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy including Trump's billionaire donors. The NSF dissent is addressed to California member of Congress Zoe Lofgren, the top Democrat on the House science committee, who has repeatedly condemned Trump's assault on science. Only one employee, Jesus Soriano, president of the local chapter of the American Federation of Government Employees which represents two thirds of the NSF's unionized bargaining unit, included his name; 148 of the 149 signatories are anonymous due to fear of reprisals. The fear is well founded given that around 140 named signatories of the EPA 'declaration of dissent' were put on administrative leave, and Lee Zeldin, the climate change denier and EPA secretary, warned that there was a 'zero-tolerance policy for career bureaucrats unlawfully undermining, sabotaging, and undercutting' the current administration. It ends with a stark warning: 'NSF employees are committed to serving the American people through research, education, and innovation. But they cannot do so under fear, censorship, and institutional sabotage. Without immediate oversight and corrective action from Congress, one of our nation's greatest engines for scientific and technological advancement faces irreversible long-term damage. Put simply, America will forfeit its scientific leadership position to China and other rival nations.'
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump threatens drug giants with crackdown over prices
Donald Trump has threatened to use 'every tool in our arsenal' to crack down on pharmaceutical giants if they fail to cut drug prices for Americans within 60 days. The president wrote to executives at 17 companies on Thursday, demanding they match their US prices for prescription drugs with the lowest price offered in other developed nations. Current prices were an 'unacceptable burden' on US families, Trump said, claiming they could be up to three times higher than in other countries. After returning to the White House earlier this year and pledging to bring down drug prices, the president claimed that 'most proposals' from the pharmaceutical industry amounted to 'more of the same', accusing firms of seeking to shift blame and requesting policies that would pave the way for handouts worths billions of dollars for the sector. 'Make no mistake: a collaborative effort towards achieving global pricing parity would be the most effective path for companies, the government, and American patients,' Trump wrote. 'But if you refuse to step up we will deploy every tool in our arsenal to protect American families from continued abusive drug pricing practices. 'Americans are demanding lower drug prices, and they need them today.' The bosses of Pfizer, AstraZeneca and GSK were among those who received the letters. GSK did not respond to requests for comment. AstraZeneca declined to comment. Pfizer said: 'Pfizer is working closely with the Trump administration and Congress on solutions that will increase access and affordability for American patients and enhance the power of the biopharmaceutical innovation ecosystem in the United States. Our discussions have been productive.' Shares in Pfizer slipped 2%, AstraZeneca fell 3.8% and GSK dropped 3.9% during afternoon trading in New York. At the heart of of Trump's proposal is a status known as 'Most Favored Nation', through which he wants to bind the cost of medications sold in the US to the lowest prices paid elsewhere. The White House is demanding that pharmaceutical companies extend this to drugs used by older people through the government-backed Medicaid health program, as well as new drugs.
