[go: up one dir, main page]

WO2025083600A1 - Predicting response to neoadjuvant treatment in non-small cell lung cancer - Google Patents

Predicting response to neoadjuvant treatment in non-small cell lung cancer Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2025083600A1
WO2025083600A1 PCT/IB2024/060194 IB2024060194W WO2025083600A1 WO 2025083600 A1 WO2025083600 A1 WO 2025083600A1 IB 2024060194 W IB2024060194 W IB 2024060194W WO 2025083600 A1 WO2025083600 A1 WO 2025083600A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
treatment
ctdna
patient
durvalumab
nsclc
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Pending
Application number
PCT/IB2024/060194
Other languages
French (fr)
Inventor
Davina GALE
Zhou Zhu
Zhongwu LAI
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
AstraZeneca AB
Original Assignee
AstraZeneca AB
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by AstraZeneca AB filed Critical AstraZeneca AB
Publication of WO2025083600A1 publication Critical patent/WO2025083600A1/en
Pending legal-status Critical Current
Anticipated expiration legal-status Critical

Links

Classifications

    • C—CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY
    • C12—BIOCHEMISTRY; BEER; SPIRITS; WINE; VINEGAR; MICROBIOLOGY; ENZYMOLOGY; MUTATION OR GENETIC ENGINEERING
    • C12Q—MEASURING OR TESTING PROCESSES INVOLVING ENZYMES, NUCLEIC ACIDS OR MICROORGANISMS; COMPOSITIONS OR TEST PAPERS THEREFOR; PROCESSES OF PREPARING SUCH COMPOSITIONS; CONDITION-RESPONSIVE CONTROL IN MICROBIOLOGICAL OR ENZYMOLOGICAL PROCESSES
    • C12Q1/00—Measuring or testing processes involving enzymes, nucleic acids or microorganisms; Compositions therefor; Processes of preparing such compositions
    • C12Q1/68—Measuring or testing processes involving enzymes, nucleic acids or microorganisms; Compositions therefor; Processes of preparing such compositions involving nucleic acids
    • C12Q1/6876—Nucleic acid products used in the analysis of nucleic acids, e.g. primers or probes
    • C12Q1/6883—Nucleic acid products used in the analysis of nucleic acids, e.g. primers or probes for diseases caused by alterations of genetic material
    • C12Q1/6886—Nucleic acid products used in the analysis of nucleic acids, e.g. primers or probes for diseases caused by alterations of genetic material for cancer
    • C—CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY
    • C12—BIOCHEMISTRY; BEER; SPIRITS; WINE; VINEGAR; MICROBIOLOGY; ENZYMOLOGY; MUTATION OR GENETIC ENGINEERING
    • C12Q—MEASURING OR TESTING PROCESSES INVOLVING ENZYMES, NUCLEIC ACIDS OR MICROORGANISMS; COMPOSITIONS OR TEST PAPERS THEREFOR; PROCESSES OF PREPARING SUCH COMPOSITIONS; CONDITION-RESPONSIVE CONTROL IN MICROBIOLOGICAL OR ENZYMOLOGICAL PROCESSES
    • C12Q2600/00—Oligonucleotides characterized by their use
    • C12Q2600/156—Polymorphic or mutational markers

Definitions

  • the present disclosure relates to methods of assessing the success of treatment with durvalumab and chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in patients based on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection, ctDNA clearance and/or ctDNA partial clearance and/or variant allele fraction (VAF) before and after such treatment.
  • R-NSCLC circulating tumor DNA
  • VAF variant allele fraction
  • the present disclosure also relates to methods for treating patients with R-NSCLC based on ctDNA detection, ctDNA clearance and/or ctDNA partial clearance and/or VAF before and after such treatment.
  • SEQUENCE LISTING This application contains a sequence listing which is submitted electronically and is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
  • Non-small cell lung cancer represents 80% to 85% of all lung cancers (Pisters and Le Chevalier, “Adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer: J Clin Oncol.2005 May 10; 23(14):3270-8).
  • OS 5-year overall survival
  • circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) clearance can be used to predict success of a R- NSCLC treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy.
  • ctDNA circulating tumor DNA
  • VAF variant allele frequency
  • the disclosure provides a method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R- NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the ctDNA level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of the treatment; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; and (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post- treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful, or wherein no change in the ctDNA level or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful.
  • R- NSCLC resectable non-small cell lung cancer
  • the disclosure provides a method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining ctDNA level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post- treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; (d) administering the treatment to the patient or resecting the R-NSCLC if there is a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre- treatment sample, or administering an alternative treatment to the patient if there is no change or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample.
  • R-NSCLC resectable non-small cell lung cancer
  • the disclosure relates to methods of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for R-NSCLC in a patient, or methods of treating a patient having R-NSCLC, wherein the method comprises, in part, determining a variant allele fraction (VAF) in the pre-treatment sample and a VAF in the post-treatment sample; wherein a decrease in the VAF in the post-treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful; and Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT administering the treatment to the patient if there is a decrease in the VAF in the post- treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample.
  • VAF variant allele fraction
  • the disclosure relates to a method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; and (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful.
  • R-NSCLC resectable non-small cell lung cancer
  • the disclosure relates to a method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; and (c) administering an alternative treatment to the patient if ctDNA is detected in the post-treatment sample.
  • R-NSCLC resectable non-small cell lung cancer
  • FIG.1 shows the design of the AEGEAN study, a phase 3 global, randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled study of perioperative Durvalumab + neoadjuvant chemotherapy (D arm) versus Placebo and chemotherapy (PBO arm). Plasma samples were collected at protocol-specified timepoints, including prior to each neoadjuvant treatment cycle, before surgery, and adjuvant treatment cycle.
  • ⁇ Ventana SP263 immunohistochemistry assay Choice of CT regimen determined by histology and at the investigator’s discretion.
  • cisplatin + pemetrexed or carboplatin + pemetrexed For non-squamous: carboplatin + paclitaxel or cisplatin + gemcitabine (or carboplatin + gemcitabine for patients who have comorbidities or who are unable to tolerate cisplatin per the investigator’s judgment).
  • ⁇ Post-operative radiotherapy was permitted where indicated per local guidance. ⁇ Not all patients had samples available at all timepoints.
  • FIG.2 shows the distribution and median VAFs (variant allele fractions) quantifying the amount of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) at longitudinal timepoints in patients in the Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) versus the Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm).
  • Plasma samples analysed were collected pre-dose at cycle 1 day 1 (C1D1), cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), cycle 4 day 1 (C4D1) and pre-surgery prior to treatment.
  • ctDNA was considered detected if the signal to noise exceeded a threshold of P ⁇ 0.01.
  • FIG.3 shows the baseline characteristics and pathological response (pCR, pathological complete response; MPR, major pathological response) rates of ctDNA- evaluable patients compared to those for the overall mITT (modified Intention to Treat) population in the Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) vs the Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm).
  • pCR pathological complete response
  • MPR major pathological response
  • C1D1 168 adjuvant
  • FIG.4 shows longitudinal ctDNA VAFs (variant allele fractions) quantifying the amount of ctDNA in patients with (Y) or without (N) a pathological complete response (top) or major pathological response (bottom).
  • D+CT (blue): Durvalumab + chemotherapy arm; PBO+CT (red); Placebo + chemotherapy arm.
  • ctDNA was considered detected if the signal to noise exceeded a threshold of P ⁇ 0.01, as determined using the Invitae Personalized Cancer MonitoringTM assay.
  • ctDNA detected orange circles; ctDNA not detected: blue circles.
  • FIG.5 shows the amount of residual volume of tumor (RVT) in patients with (Yes, light grey) or without (No, dark grey) a pathological complete response in patients with ctDNA clearance (CL) at the timepoints specified.
  • RVT residual volume of tumor
  • -90% indicates a major pathologic response.
  • D+CT Durvalumab + chemotherapy arm
  • PBO+CT Placebo + chemotherapy arm.
  • FIG.6 shows the ctDNA clearance rate at different longitudinal timepoints at cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1); C3D1, C4D1 and pre-surgery.
  • ctDNA clearance is defined as the proportion of patients with a change from ctDNA detected at baseline C1D1 to undetected at the specified on-treatment timepoint.
  • ctDNA non-clearance is defined as ctDNA-positive at the specified on-treatment timepoint (where baseline [C1D1] can be either evaluable or non-evaluable).
  • the plot shows analysis of a variable number of patients at each timepoint. Among patients who were ctDNA-positive at baseline (C1D1), higher rates of ctDNA clearance were observed in the D arm vs the PBO arm. *The plot shows an analysis of a variable number of patients at each timepoint.
  • ctDNA clearance is defined as the proportion of patients with a change from ctDNA detected at baseline (C1D1) to undetected at the specified on-treatment timepoint.
  • ctDNA non-clearance is defined as ctDNA-positive at the specified on-treatment timepoint (where baseline [C1D1] can be either evaluable or non-evaluable).
  • FIG.7 shows the pathological complete response rate (pCR; left) or Major Pathological response rate (MPR; right) of patients who had either ctDNA clearance (CL) or non clearance (no CL) at cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1) following treatment with Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) or Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm).
  • FIG.8 shows the pathological complete response rate (pCR; left) or Major Pathological response rate (MPR; right) in patients who had either ctDNA clearance (CL) or non clearance (no CL) at cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1) following treatment with Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) or Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm).
  • Confidence Intervals (CIs) were calculated by Montgomeryn-Nurminen without stratification.
  • ctDNA clearance positive baseline and negative on-treatment.
  • ctDNA non-clearance positive on-treatment (includes baseline evaluable and non-evaluable).
  • FIG.9 shows the pathological complete response rate (pCR; left) or Major Pathological response rate (MPR; right) of patients who had either ctDNA clearance (CL) or non clearance (no CL) at cycle 4 day 1 (C4D1) following treatment with Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) or Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm). Confidence Intervals (CIs) were calculated by Montgomeryn-Nurminen without stratification.
  • ctDNA clearance positive baseline and negative on-treatment.
  • ctDNA non-clearance positive on-treatment (includes baseline evaluable and non-evaluable).
  • FIG.10 shows the pathological complete response rate (pCR; left) or Major Pathological response rate (MPR; right) of patients who had either ctDNA clearance (CL) or non clearance (no CL) at pre-surgery following treatment with Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) or Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm).
  • Confidence Intervals (CIs) were calculated by Montgomeryn-Nurminen without stratification.
  • ctDNA clearance positive baseline and negative on-treatment.
  • ctDNA non-clearance positive on-treatment (includes baseline evaluable and non-evaluable).
  • FIG.11 shows the ctDNA clearance rate in patients with a pathological complete response (pCR; left, solid line), no pCR (left, dotted line), major pathological response (MPR; right, solid line), no MPR (right, dotted line) at different longitudinal timepoints (i.e., cycle 2 day 1 [C2D1], C3D1, C4D1 and pre-surgery).
  • PBO arm (PBO) Placebo + chemotherapy.
  • pCR 25.6% vs 6.3%) and MPR (44.4% vs 18.8%) rates were higher in the D arm vs the PBO arm.
  • FIG.12 shows the ctDNA Variant Allele Fractions (VAFs) and dynamics at different longitudinal timepoints (Cycle 1 Day 1 [PreC1D1], etc.), with each line corresponding to a patient.
  • ctDNA was considered detected if the signal to noise exceeded a threshold of P ⁇ 0.01.
  • FIG.13A shows tables showing the positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of ctDNA clearance at different neoadjuvant timepoints for pCR (pathological complete response) or MPR (major pathological response).
  • PPV positive predictive value
  • NPV negative predictive value
  • FIG.13B shows tables showing the positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of ctDNA clearance at different neoadjuvant timepoints for pCR (pathological complete response) or MPR (major pathological response).
  • PPV positive predictive value
  • NPV negative predictive value
  • the number of patients analysed at each timepoint were as follows: C2D1 (27, 5), C3D1 (50, 6), C4D1 (51, 6) and Pre-surgery (45, 6).
  • NPV negative predictive value
  • PPV positive predictive value
  • FIG.14A – FIG.14D show the Kaplan-Meier analysis of Event Free Survival (EFS) by distinct combination groups of ctDNA and pathological responses for patients treated with Durvalumab and chemotherapy (D+CT) at the specified timepoint (cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), FIG.14A; cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), FIG.14B; cycle 4 day 1 (C4D1), FIG.14C; and pre- surgery, FIG.14D).
  • pCR(+); ctDNA-CL(+) Patients with ctDNA clearance who have a later pathological complete response (pCR).
  • pCR(+); ctDNA-CL(-) Patients with no ctDNA clearance who have a later pathological complete response (pCR).
  • pCR(-); ctDNA-CL(+) Patients with ctDNA clearance who do not have a later pCR.
  • pCR(-); ctDNA-CL(-) Patients without ctDNA clearance who do not have a later pCR.
  • Patients who are pCR-/ctDNA CL- have shortest EFS. From C3D1, patients who are pCR+/ctDNA CL+ have similar EFS benefits compared to patients who are pCR-/ctDNA CL+. * Note in the subset analysis, there are small N’s and large CIs.
  • FIG.15A – FIG.15D show the Kaplan-Meier analysis of Event Free Survival (EFS) by distinct combination groups of ctDNA and pathological responses for patients treated with placebo and chemotherapy (PBO+CT) at the specified timepoint (cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), FIG. 15A; cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), FIG.15B; cycle 4 day 1 (C4D1), FIG.15C; and pre-surgery, FIG.15D).
  • pCR(+); ctDNA-CL(+) Patients with ctDNA clearance who have a later pathological complete response (pCR).
  • pCR(+); ctDNA-CL(-) Patients with no ctDNA clearance who have a later pathological complete response (pCR).
  • pCR(-); ctDNA-CL(+) Patients with ctDNA clearance who do not have a later pCR.
  • pCR(-); ctDNA-CL(-) Patients without ctDNA clearance who do not have a later pCR.
  • Patients who are pCR-/ctDNA CL- Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT have shortest EFS.
  • pCR+/ctDNA CL+ marginally improved EFS compared to pCR-/ctDNA CL+. * Note in the subset analysis, there are small N’s and large CIs.
  • FIG.17 shows pCR (left) and MPR (right) by radiological response (tumor size) after neoadjuvant treatment, pre-surgery. *CIs calculated by stratified Mangatinen and Nurminen method.
  • FIG.18 shows ctDNA clearance at early neoadjuvant timepoints identified patients with improved EFS. More patients were identified by ctDNA clearance during neoadjuvant Tx than were identified by pCR (determined post-Sx) ⁇ . The number of patients in each subgroup were based on the BEP, and patients were not required to be evaluable at all visits to be included in the analysis, resulting in the differences in the number of patients at each visit (i.e., not all patients had samples at all timepoints). Medians and 95% CI were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. HRs were calculated using an unstratified Cox proportional hazards model.
  • *EFS was defined as time from randomisation to the earliest of: (A) progressive disease (PD) that precludes surgery; (B) PD discovered and reported by the investigator upon attempting surgery that prevents completion of surgery; (C) local/distant recurrence using BICR per RECIST v1.1; or (D) death from any cause.
  • PD progressive disease
  • C local/distant recurrence using BICR per RECIST v1.1
  • D death from any cause.
  • FIG.19 shows associations of ctDNA clearance and neoadjuvant C2D1 with EFS and OS.
  • FIG.21 shows associations of ctDNA clearance at pre-surgery with pCR and EFS. Patients with no ctDNA clearance at pre-surgery and no pCR had the poorest EFS outcomes. HRs were calculated using an unstratified Cox proportional hazard model using the Efron method to adjust for ties and Wald confidence intervals. *Data are shown for the pre-Sx timepoint for comparison of pCR; similar data were observed at earlier cycles of neoadjuvant Tx.
  • FIG.22 shows associations of MRD at the post-surgical landmark (adjuvant C1D1) with DFS.
  • the present disclosure relates to methods of assessing the success of treatment with durvalumab and chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in patients based on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection, ctDNA clearance and/or ctDNA partial clearance and/or variant allele fraction (VAF), and/or radiological response (tumor size) before and after such treatment.
  • R-NSCLC circulating tumor DNA
  • VAF ctDNA clearance and/or ctDNA partial clearance and/or variant allele fraction
  • tumor size radiological response
  • the present disclosure also relates to methods for treating patients with R-NSCLC based on ctDNA detection, ctDNA clearance and/or ctDNA partial clearance and/or VAF before and after such treatment.
  • the disclosure provides a method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R- NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of the treatment; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; and (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful, or wherein no change in the ctDNA level or an increase in the ctDNA level in
  • the disclosure provides a method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; (d) administering the treatment to the patient or resecting the R-NSCLC if there is a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, or administering an alternative treatment to the patient if there is no change or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample.
  • R-NSCLC resectable non-small cell lung cancer
  • the disclosure provides a method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; and (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful.
  • R-NSCLC resectable non-small cell lung cancer
  • the disclosure provides a method of a method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; and (c) administering an alternative treatment to the patient if ctDNA is detected in the post-treatment sample.
  • R-NSCLC resectable non-small cell lung cancer
  • the disclosure relates to methods of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for R-NSCLC in a patient, or methods of treating a patient having R-NSCLC, wherein the method comprises, in part, determining a variant allele fraction (VAF) in the pre-treatment sample and a VAF in the post-treatment sample; wherein a decrease in the VAF in the post-treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful; and administering the treatment to the patient if there is a decrease in the VAF in the post- treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample.
  • VAF variant allele fraction
  • any concentration range, percentage range, ratio range or integer range is to be understood to include the value of any integer within the recited range and, when appropriate, fractions thereof (such as one tenth and one hundredth of an integer), unless otherwise indicated. Units, prefixes, and symbols are denoted in their Système International de Unites (SI) accepted form. Numeric ranges are inclusive of the numbers defining the range. Unless otherwise indicated, nucleotide sequences are written left to right in 5' to 3' orientation. Amino acid sequences are written left to right in amino to carboxy orientation.
  • x, y, and/or z can refer to “x” alone, “y” alone, “z” alone, “x, y, and z,” “(x and y) or z,” “x or (y and z),” or “x or y or z.”
  • the terms “treat,” “treatment,” or “treating” when used in the context of treating cancer refer to reducing disease pathology, reducing or eliminating disease symptoms, promoting increased survival rates, and/or reducing discomfort.
  • treating can refer to the ability of a therapy when administered to a subject, to reduce disease symptoms, signs, or causes.
  • Treating also refers to mitigating or decreasing at least one clinical symptom and/or inhibition or delay in the progression of the condition and/or prevention or delay of the onset of a disease or illness.
  • the terms "subject,” “individual,” or “patient,” refer to any subject, particularly a mammalian subject, for whom diagnosis, prognosis, or therapy is desired. Mammalian subjects include, for example, humans, non-human primates, dogs, cats, guinea pigs, rabbits, rats, mice, horses, cattle, bears, and so on.
  • the term “patient” may refer to a human. This disclosure provides methods of predicting treatment outcome for R-NSCLC.
  • the methods can comprise: optionally, detecting circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and/or variant allele frequency (VAF) in a sample obtained from a patient at a first time point in a pre- treatment sample before the patient undergoes a R-NSCLC treatment; detecting ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in a sample obtained from the patient at one or more additional time points in one or more additional samples after the patient undergoes the R- NSCLC treatment; determining the difference between the detected ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in the pre-treatment sample and at least one or more additional samples, wherein a decrease in the ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates the patient as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is successful); and continuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient if the patient is indicated as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • ctDNA circulating tumor DNA
  • VAF variant allele frequency
  • This disclosure also provides methods of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R- NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT administration of the treatment; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; and (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein no change or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful.
  • This disclosure also provides methods of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and
  • detecting ctDNA in the post- treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. In certain embodiments, there is an increase or no change in the ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample.
  • an increase or no change in the ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates the patient as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful), and discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different R-NSCLC treatment to the patient if the patient is indicated as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • the R-NSCLC treatment refers to neoadjuvant treatment.
  • R-NSCLC treatment comprises administering durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient about every 21 days (Q3W) for about 4 cycles.
  • neoadjuvant treatment R-NSCLC treatment is administration of durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient about every 21 days (Q3W) for about 4 cycles.
  • the presence of ctDNA is detected in a post-treatment sample.
  • the detection of ctDNA in a post-treatment sample indicates the patient as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful and/or will not be successful), and discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different or alternative R-NSCLC treatment to the patient if the patient is indicated as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • the R-NSCLC treatment refers to neoadjuvant treatment.
  • Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT This disclosure also provides methods of predicting treatment outcome for R-NSCLC that further comprise determining tumor size of the R-NSCLC in the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient, administering the treatment to the patient; and determining tumor size of the R-NSCLC in the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein a decrease in tumor size after administration of the treatment is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful.
  • tumor size is determined prior to resecting the R-NSCLC.
  • tumor size is determined using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), or both MRI and CT.
  • MRI magnetic resonance imaging
  • CT computed tomography
  • a reduction in tumor size following treatment and prior to surgery can be an early indicator of pathological response to identify patients who may benefit most from treatment with durvalumab plus chemotherapy before surgery.
  • patients with radiological CR/PR have a higher rate of pCR and MPR as compared to patients with radiological stable disease. Also disclosed herein are methods of treating R-NSCLC.
  • the methods can comprise administering a R-NSCLC treatment to a subject in need thereof and determining a decrease in ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in a post-treatment sample from the patient when compared to a pre-treatment sample from the patient, and continuing with the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • the methods also comprise administering a R-NSCLC treatment to a subject in need thereof and determining an increase or no change in ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in a post-treatment sample from the patient when compared to a pre-treatment sample from the patient, and discontinuing with the R-NSCLC treatment, and optionally, starting a different or an alternative R-NSCLC treatment.
  • This disclosure also provides methods of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R- NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising administering the treatment to the patient and determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample and/or detecting an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not successful and/or will not be successful.
  • the first time point can be, for example, prior or immediately prior to the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • ctDNA is determined in a sample obtained from the patient at one or more additional time points (a skilled person would appreciate that a first sample can refer to a pre-treatment sample and a second sample can refer to a post-treatment sample).
  • the at least one of the one or more additional time points Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT can be, for example, at the end of or after at least a cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • the cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment is the first cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • the first time point is prior or immediately prior to a first cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment
  • the one or more additional time points are at the end of or after a second cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • the first cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment is immediately prior to the second cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment, which is immediately prior to the third cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment, which is immediately prior to the fourth cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • the R-NSCLC treatment may comprise up to 4 cycles of durvalumab and a chemotherapy before taking a post-treatment sample.
  • circulating-tumor DNA or "ctDNA” has its general meaning in the art and refers to DNA that comes from tumor cells.
  • ctDNA is detected in a blood sample from a patient.
  • ctDNA is detected in a blood sample that has been obtained from a patient.
  • the methods disclosed herein do not involve a surgical steps to obtain a patient sample.
  • the methods described herein may not encompass taking the sample.
  • ctDNA can carry one or more types of mutations, for example, germline mutations, somatic mutations, or both.
  • Germline mutations refer to mutations existing in germline DNA of a subject.
  • ctDNA from a patient can carry one or more mutations in one or more genes, for example, known cancer-associated genes (e.g., genes known to be associated NSCLC).
  • Somatic mutations refer to mutations originating in somatic cells of a subject, e.g., cancer cells.
  • the mutation can be cancer-associated mutations (e.g., cancer- associated somatic mutations).
  • Various assays can be used to detect and determine ctDNA levels.
  • ctDNA levels are detected using a ctDNA assay.
  • the methods provided herein can comprise isolation of cell-free DNA from the blood (e.g., plasma) of a patient of interest (e.g., a patient with R-NSCLC, or a subject is in remission of R-NSCLC, or a subject suspected to have R-NSCLC) and analysis of ctDNA in the cell-free DNA, employing the use of molecular barcoding and sequencing as a readout.
  • the method can comprise isolating plasma and ctDNA from intact cell-depleted blood.
  • the method can comprise centrifugation to generate plasma and extraction of nucleic acids from plasma, followed by library preparation with barcoding, sequencing, and then analysis.
  • the ctDNA for example, can be obtained from a whole blood and/or plasma sample by known methods.
  • the whole blood and/or plasma sample can be Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT analyzed by methods including, but not limited to, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and next generation sequencing (NGS).
  • PCR polymerase chain reaction
  • NGS next generation sequencing
  • the ctDNA is detected using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR).
  • ddPCR droplet digital PCR
  • ctDNA levels can be determined using, for example, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), next generation sequencing (NGS), whole genome sequencing, whole exome sequencing, and/or droplet digital PCR (ddPCR).
  • the ctDNA is detected using a tumor na ⁇ ve assay (not requiring tissue or a germline sample).
  • the ctDNA is detected using a methylation-based assay or a methylation-based tumor-na ⁇ ve assay.
  • the ctDNA is detected using assays targeting SNVs, SVs or copy number variants or assays using fragmentomics to assess size differences of ctDNA and cell-free DNA. For example, whole exome sequencing as well as whole genome sequencing of tumor and or germline samples can be used to identify patient-specific mutations in the tumor, which are used to design an assay to track ctDNA in the plasma, using next generation sequencing, multiplex PCR, hybrid capture or droplet digital PCR.
  • tumor-specific mutations can be identified directly from whole genome sequencing of the plasma sample from the patient, without the need for a specific assay design, and ctDNA levels assessed by bioinformatic analysis.
  • determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a tumour- informed assay (e.g., a tumour-informed assay that uses whole genome sequencing analysis, or multiplex PCR, or hybrid capture); or a tumor na ⁇ ve/uninformed assay (e.g., a tumour na ⁇ ve/uninformed assay does not require next generation sequencing of the tumor and germline blood to identify patient-specific mutations for assay design).
  • determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a personalized ctDNA assay.
  • determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a generic ctDNA assay. In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a personalized tumour-informed ctDNA assay. In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a personalized tumour-uninformed ctDNA assay. In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a generic tumour-informed ctDNA assay. In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a generic tumour-uninformed ctDNA assay.
  • ctDNA is detected using INVITAE Personalized Cancer Monitoring (PCMTM), which is a patient-specific, tumor-informed liquid biopsy assay that uses next-generation sequencing and Anchored Multiplex PCR (AMPTM) to monitor molecular residual disease with high sensitivity at low variant allele fractions
  • PCMTM INVITAE Personalized Cancer Monitoring
  • AMPTM Anchored Multiplex PCR
  • the INVITAE assay is a tumour-informed assay that uses whole exome sequencing analysis of the tumor Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT and germline to identify tumor-specific mutations, which has a LoD95 of 80ppm (parts per million).
  • the assays used for determining ctDNA levels can have a detection limit of about 80 ppm (parts per million), which is 0.008% variant allele fraction (VAF), or 80 ppm to about 0.3 ppm (0.00003%).
  • the approximate range for a tumor-informed assay can be about 0.01% - 0.0001% VAF
  • the approximate range for tumor-uniformed assay can be about 0.1% - 0.3% VAF, or about 0.05% - 0.3% VAF, or about 0.02% - 0.3% VAF.
  • Exemplary amounts of ctDNA in a biological sample can range from about 1 ng per 4 mL of plasma to about 200 ng per 4 mL of plasma. In certain embodiments, ctDNA in a sample can range from about 5 ng per 4 mL of plasma to about 50 ng per 4 mL of plasma. Exemplary amounts of ctDNA in a biological sample (e.g., plasma) can range, for example, from about 1 ng/mL to about 50 ng/mL. In certain embodiments, ctDNA levels in a biological sample (e.g., plasma) can range, from about 5 ng/mL to about 10 ng/mL.
  • the ctDNA can have an exemplary size distribution of about 100-500 nucleotides, with a size of about 145 nucleotides (base pairs) for ctDNA and about a size of about 166 nucleotides (base pairs for cell-free DNA).
  • the method comprises determining ctDNA levels of the subject before the treatment.
  • the treatment comprises one or more cycles, and the ctDNA is determined before, during and after each cycle of the treatment.
  • the ctDNA can be determined before, during and after two or more cycles of the treatment, three or more cycles of the treatment, or each cycle of the treatment.
  • Each cycle of treatment can be at least 21 days, for example, 21 days, 22 days, 23 days, 24 days, 25 days, 26 days, 27 days, 28 days, 29 days, 30 days, or more, or a range between any two of these values.
  • 'C2D1' refers to day 1 of cycle 2
  • 'C3D1' refers to day 1 of cycle 3
  • 'C4D1' refers to day 1 of cycle 4.
  • the method comprises determining the ctDNA level or determining the VAF in a post-treatment sample.
  • the method comprises determining the ctDNA level or determining the VAF in a post-treatment sample after C1D1, C2D1, C3D1, or C4D1.
  • each cycle of treatment is from about 21 days to about 28 days. In some embodiments, each cycle of treatment is about 21 days. In some embodiments, each cycle of treatment is about 28 days.
  • the first time point or pre-treatment sample is prior or immediately prior to the Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT R-NSCLC treatment, and at least one of the one or more additional time points or post- treatment samples are at the end of or after at least a cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, the first time point or pre-treatment sample is prior or immediately prior to a first cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment, and the one or more additional time points or post-treatment samples are at the end of or after a second cycle of the R- NSCLC treatment.
  • the first cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment is immediately prior to the second cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • a decrease in the ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates the patient as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is successful).
  • the method comprises continuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient when the patient is indicated as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • the patient completes the total number of pre-surgery/neoadjuvant cycles (about 3 to 6 cycles about every 14 – 28 days (Q2W to Q4W) of durvalumab and chemotherapy, or 4 cycles about every 21 days (Q3W) of durvalumab and chemotherapy), or if all of the neoadjvant cycles are completed, then the patient progresses to surgery (resecting the R-NSCLC), optionally followed by adjuvant durvalumab.
  • pre-surgery/neoadjuvant cycles about 3 to 6 cycles about every 14 – 28 days (Q2W to Q4W) of durvalumab and chemotherapy, or 4 cycles about every 21 days (Q3W) of durvalumab and chemotherapy
  • the method comprises discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different R-NSCLC treatment to the patient when the patient is not indicated as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • ctDNA is detected in at least one post-treatment sample, which indicates that the patient is non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful or will not be successful).
  • ctDNA levels Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT can have a detection limit of about 80ppm to about 0.3 ppm.
  • a baseline value from a pre-treatment sample can be the ctDNA level before administration of a R-NSCLC treatment.
  • the methods as disclosed herein would not be used, and such a patient would continue with the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • ctDNA clearance can be used to predict the success of the R- NSCLC treatment.
  • ctDNA clearance refers to undetectable levels of ctDNA in a sample obtained from the patient. For example, achieving ctDNA clearance in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates the patient as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is successful). In some embodiments, detecting the presence of ctDNA in at least one post-treatment sample indicates that the patient as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful or will not be successful). In some embodiments, the method comprises continuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient when the R-NSCLC treatment results in ctDNA clearance.
  • the method comprises discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different R-NSCLC treatment to the patient when ctDNA clearance and/or partial clearance does not occur and thus the patient is not indicated as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • a decreased ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample, or at least one of the additional samples, relative to the pre-treatment sample can comprise a decrease of at least 50% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 60% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 70% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 80% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 90% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 95% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 98% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre- treatment sample, a decrease of at least 99% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, or a decrease of 100% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment
  • ctDNA clearance refers to 100% clearance of ctDNA, wherein 100% clearance of ctDNA (or simply ctDNA clearance) refers to a ctDNA level below (undetected ctDNA) the lower limit of detection of the assay used to detect ctDNA.
  • a ctDNA clearance indicates a successful treatment, and can predict an Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum- based chemotherapy.
  • a ctDNA clearance indicates a successful treatment, and can predict an improvement in pCR and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum-based chemotherapy.
  • a partial response or a partial molecular response refers to ctDNA clearance of greater than or equal to 50% clearance compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample to less than 100% clearance.
  • a partial response indicates a successful treatment, and can predict an improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum based chemotherapy.
  • the term "responsive" refers to a patient that achieves a response, i.e., a patient where the cancer is eradicated, reduced or improved, and thus an indication that the treatment is successful.
  • a successful treatment can refer to an improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum based chemotherapy.
  • a patient with ctDNA clearance in a post-treatment sample is considered a "responder” and shows an improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum based chemotherapy.
  • a "non- responder” or “refractory" patient includes patients for whom the cancer does not show reduction or improvement after the preoperative adjuvant therapy.
  • a patient with less than 50% ctDNA clearance in a post-treatment sample is considered a "non- responder" and does not have an improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum based chemotherapy.
  • a patient having ctDNA detected in a post-treatment sample is considered a "non-responder” and does not have an improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum based chemotherapy.
  • variant allele frequency VAF is also determined and can be used to predict treatment success.
  • determining ctDNA levels also comprises detecting variant allele frequency in the ctDNA.
  • the method further comprises detecting the variant allele frequency of ctDNA in a subject at a first time point in a pre-treatment sample, detecting variant allele frequency from the subject at one or more additional time points in one or more additional samples, and determining the difference of the variant allele frequency between the first and at least one of the one or more additional samples, wherein a decrease in the variant allele frequency at the additional sample(s) relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates that the treatment is successful (an Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT increase in the variant allele frequency at the additional sample(s) relative to the pre- treatment sample indicates that the patient is at risk of relapse).
  • the variant allele frequency (VAF) in ctDNA can be determined, for example, by determining the levels of ctDNA using a tumor-informed or tumor-uninformed assay in each of the pre-treatment sample and one or more additional samples, and/or by the mean or median variant allele frequency in each of the pre-treatment sample and one or more additional samples.
  • the ctDNA level can be used to determine the VAF in a sample.
  • VAF is ctDNA as a percentage of cell-free DNA present in a sample (e.g., blood or tumor).
  • the methods as disclosed herein can comprise detecting variant allele frequency in the ctDNA in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient at a first time point, detecting variant allele frequency in the ctDNA obtained from the patient at one or more additional time points in one or more additional samples, and determining the difference of the variant allele frequency in ctDNA between the first and at least one of the one or more additional samples, wherein a decrease in the variant allele frequency in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates the patient as responsive to the treatment.
  • a decreased VAF in the post-treatment sample, or at least one of the additional samples, relative to the pre-treatment sample can comprise a decrease of at least 50% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 60% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 70% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 80% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 90% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 95% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 98% VAF from baseline, or a decrease of at least 99% ctDNA from baseline.
  • the variant allele frequency can be determined, for example, by determining the levels of ctDNA using a tumor-informed or tumor-uninformed assay in each of the pre-treatment sample and one or more additional samples, or by the mean or median variant allele frequency in each of the pre-treatment sample and one or more additional samples.
  • the variant allele frequency is mutant allelic frequency for a driver mutation of lung cancer.
  • the methods are indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful if the patient has and/or will have an improvement in one or more of EFS, OS, PCR, mPR and DFS.
  • the methods disclosed herein are indicative that the treatment is and/or will be unsuccessful if the Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT patient does not have and/or will not have an improvement in one or more of EFS, OS, PCR, mPR and DFS.
  • this disclosure provides methods of treating a patient identified as having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC).
  • the methods can comprise administering a R-NSCLC treatment to a subject in need thereof and determining a decrease in ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in a pre-treatment sample of the patient obtained at a first time point before the patient receives the R-NSCLC treatment when compared to a post-treatment sample of the patient obtained at a second time point after the patient receives the R-NSCLC treatment; and continuing with the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • the presence of ctDNA is detected in a post-treatment sample.
  • the detection of ctDNA in a post-treatment sample indicates the patient as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful and/or will not be successful), and discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different R-NSCLC treatment to the patient.
  • the patient having R-NSCLC is newly diagnosed.
  • the patient having R-NSCLC is previously untreated.
  • the patient having R-NSCLC is histologically or cytologically documented as having stage II or stage III cancer (according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] Cancer Staging Manual, version 8).
  • the patient having R-NSCLC is histologically or cytologically documented as having stage IIA to select [N2] stage IIIB cancer (according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] Cancer Staging Manual, version 8).
  • the patient having R-NSCLC is newly diagnosed, previously untreated, and histologically or cytologically documented, resectable NSCLC (stage IIA to select [N2] stage IIIB according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] Cancer Staging Manual, version 8).
  • the patient having R- NSCLC is has resectable Stage IIA to select [i.e., N2] Stage IIIB) disease (according to Version 8 of the IASLC Staging Manual in Thoracic Oncology 2016).
  • the patient having R-NSCLC is a candidate for lobectomy, sleeve resection, or bilobectomy as planned surgery at the time of enrollment.
  • the patient's tumor PD-L1 status of the R-NSCLC is determined prior to treatment.
  • the R-NSCLC of the patients has a PD- L1 tumor cell expression ⁇ 1%.
  • the R-NSCLC of the patients has a PD-L1 tumor cell expression 1–49%. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC of the patients has a PD-L1 tumor cell expression ⁇ 50%.
  • a patient's tumor PD-L1 Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT status is determined using an immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay. In certain embodiments, a patient's tumor PD-L1 status is determined using Ventana PD-L1 (SP263) immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay applied to formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue sample. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC is a squamous cell carcinoma.
  • the R-NSCLC is a non-squamous cell carcinoma. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC is an adenocarcinoma. In some embodiments, the patient's tumor EGFR and ALK status of the R-NSCLC is determined prior to treatment. In some embodiments, the patient does not have an EGFR mutation and/or an ALK translocation. In some embodiments, patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) mutations in their tumors were not required to be tested for EGFR/ALK and patients with squamous cell carcinoma were not required to be tested for ALK.
  • KRAS Kirsten rat sarcoma
  • durvalumab refers to an antibody that selectively binds PD-L1 and blocks the binding of PD-L1 to the PD-1 and CD80 receptors.
  • the durvalumab antibody is disclosed in U.S. Patent No.9,493,565 (referred to as "2.14H9OPT”), which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
  • the fragment crystallizable (Fc) domain of durvalumab contains a triple mutation in the constant domain of the IgG1 heavy chain that reduces binding to the complement component C1q and the Fc ⁇ receptors responsible for mediating antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity ("ADCC").
  • the triple mutation refers to the IgG1 Fc region comprising a L234F/L235E/P331S triple mutation (EU numbering; see also US 9,493,565).
  • Durvalumab can relieve PD-L1-mediated suppression of human T-cell activation in vitro and inhibits tumor growth in a xenograft model via a T-cell dependent mechanism.
  • Durvalumab sequences MEDI4736 VL EIVLTQSPGTLSLSPGERATLSCRASQRVSSSYLAWYQQKPGQAPRLLIYDASSRATGIPDRFSGSGSG TDFTLTISRLEPEDFAVYYCQQYGSLPWTFGQGTKVEIK (SEQ ID NO. 1) MEDI4736 VL CDR1 RASQRVSSSYLA (SEQ ID NO. 2) MEDI4736 VL CDR2 DASSRAT (SEQ ID NO. 3) MEDI4736 VL CDR3 QQYGSLPWT (SEQ ID NO.
  • MEDI4736 VH EVQLVESGGGLVQPGGSLRLSCAASGFTFSRYWMSWVRQAPGKGLEWVANIKQDGSEKYYVDSVKGRFT ISRDNAKNSLYLQMNSLRAEDTAVYYCAREGGWFGELAFDYWGQGTLVTVSS (SEQ ID NO. 5)
  • MEDI4736 VH CDR1 GFTFSRYWMS (SEQ ID NO. 6)
  • Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT MEDI4736 VH CDR2 NIKQDGSEKYYVDSVKG (SEQ ID NO. 7)
  • MEDI4736 VH CDR3 EGGWFGELAFDY SEQ ID NO.
  • chemotherapy refers to one or more chemotherapeutic agents that can be used to treat a patient diagnosed with a non-small cell lung cancer.
  • chemotherapeutic agent refers to a chemical compound that is selectively destructive or selectively toxic to malignant cells and tissues.
  • platinum-based chemotherapy refers to chemotherapy drugs that contain the element platinum. Platinum-based chemotherapy has been used to treat many different types of cancer.
  • a platinum-based chemotherapy refers to chemotherapy treatment comprising comprises at least one of one or more of carboplatin, cisplatin, nedaplatin, and oxaliplatin.
  • a platinum-based chemotherapy can also refer to chemotherapy treatment comprising at least one or more of triplatin tetranitrate, phenanthriplatin, picoplatin, and satraplatin.
  • a platinum- based chemotherapy further comprises one or more of afatinib, cetuximab, bevacizumab, erlotinib, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, pemetrexed, and vemurafenib.
  • a platinum-based chemotherapy further comprises one or more of cisplatin, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and pemetrexed.
  • a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises carboplatin and paclitaxel.
  • a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises cisplatin and gemcitabine. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises carboplatin and gemcitabine. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises carboplatin and pemetrexed. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises cisplatin and pemetrexed. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a carboplatin area under the serum drug concentration-time curve (AUC) dose of about 5 to 6 mg/mL/min. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a cisplatin dose of about 75 mg/m 2 .
  • AUC serum drug concentration-time curve
  • a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a paclitaxel dose of about 200 mg/m 2 . In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a pemetrexed dose of about 500 mg/m 2 . In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a gemcitabine dose of about 1250 mg/m 2 .
  • adjuvant therapy refers to any type of therapy of cancer given as additional treatment, usually after surgical resection of the primary tumor, in a patient affected with a cancer that is at risk of metastasizing and/or at risk of recurrence.
  • Adjuvant therapies can comprise immunotherapy, monoclonal antibody therapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy, chemotherapy.
  • adjuvant therapy is durvalumab.
  • adjuvant therapy is radiotherapy.
  • adjuvant therapy comprises durvalumab and radiotherapy.
  • the term "neoadjuvant therapy” refers to any type of therapy of cancer given as additional treatment, usually before surgical resection of the primary tumor, in a patient affected with a cancer that is at risk of metastasizing and/or likely to recur.
  • Neoadjuvant therapies can comprise immunotherapy, monoclonal antibody therapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy, chemotherapy.
  • neoadjuvant therapy is durvalumab.
  • neoadjuvant therapy is chemotherapy.
  • neoadjuvant therapy comprises both durvalumab and chemotherapy (for example, a platinum-based chemotherapy).
  • the R-NSCLC treatment refers to a combination therapy comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy.
  • the combination therapy may be neoadjuvant durvalumab and neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
  • the combination therapy may be perioperative durvalumab and neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
  • the combination therapy may comprise neoadjuvant durvalumab, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant durvalumab.
  • the R-NSCLC treatment comprises administering about 1000 mg to about 2000 mg durvalumab once about every 14 to 28 days for up to about 3 to 6 total cycles prior to surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC and then about 1000 mg to about 2000 mg durvalumab once about every 14 to 28 days for up to about 12 cycles following the surgery.
  • the R-NSCLC treatment comprises administering about 1500 mg durvalumab once about every three weeks (q3w) for up to a maximum of about 4 cycles prior to surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC and then about 1500 mg durvalumab once about every four weeks (q4w) for about 12 cycles following the surgery.
  • durvalumab can be provided as a 500-mg vial solution for infusion after dilution.
  • the solution contains 50 mg/mL durvalumab, 26 mM histidine/histidine-hydrochloride, 275 mM trehalose dihydrate, and 0.02% w/v polysorbate 80; it has a pH of 6.0 and density of 1.054 g/mL.
  • a dose Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT of about 1500 mg (for patients >30 kg in WT) can be administered using an IV bag containing 0.9% (w/v) saline or 5% (w/v) dextrose, with a final durvalumab concentration ranging from 1 to 15 mg/mL and delivered through an IV administration set with a 0.2- or 0.22- ⁇ m filter.
  • WT-based dosing at 20 mg/kg can be administered using an IV bag selected such that the final concentration is within 1 to 15 mg/mL.
  • a standard infusion time is 1 hour ( ⁇ 10 mins); however, if there are interruptions, the total allowed time must not exceed 8 hours at room temperature.
  • this disclosure provides methods of treating a patient identified as having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), comprising (i) administering to the patient about 1000 - 2000 mg of durvalumab and a platinum-based chemotherapy about every 14 – 28 days for about 3 to 6 cycles; (ii) removing the R-NSCLC by surgery; and then (iii) administering to the patient about 1000 – 2000 mg of durvalumab about every 14 to 28 days for at least about 12 weeks.
  • the presence of ctDNA is detected in a post-treatment sample.
  • the detection of ctDNA in a post-treatment sample indicates the patient as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful and/or will not be successful), and discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different R-NSCLC treatment to the patient if the patient is indicated as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment.
  • a different R-NSCLC treatment or an alternative treatment refers to an entirely new therapy effect for treating R- NSCLC.
  • a different R-NSCLC treatment or an alternative treatment refers to durvalumab in combination with an alternative chemotherapy.
  • a different R-NSCLC treatment or an alternative treatment refers chemotherapy as disclosed herein but with an alternative to durvalumab.
  • a different R-NSCLC treatment or an alternative treatment refers durvalumab and chemotherapy as disclosed herein and an additional treatment.
  • patients after the surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC, patients should start durvalumab administration as soon as clinically feasible and within about 10 weeks from the surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC. A minimum of about 3 weeks is recommended between surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC and the start of durvalumab treatment (first post-surgical scan must be performed prior to starting adjuvant treatment and post-operative radiotherapy, if required).
  • surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC should happen within about 40 days from the last administration of durvalumab.
  • surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC comprises anatomic pulmonary resection of the NSCLC.
  • either open thoracotomy or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery access can be carried out as appropriate to the expertise of the surgeon.
  • lung-sparing anatomic resection is preferred over pneumonectomy, if anatomically appropriate and margin-negative resection is achieved.
  • T3 (invasion) and T4 local extension tumors may require en-bloc resection of the involved structure with negative margins.
  • patients can receive post-operative radiotherapy (PORT) following surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC.
  • Post-operative radiotherapy (PORT) can be given within about 8 weeks after surgery.
  • adjuvant durvalumab starts no longer than about 3 weeks after the end of PORT.
  • adjuvant durvalumab starts no more than about 10 weeks after surgery.
  • post- operative radiotherapy (PORT) is allowed for patients in which it is indicated according to local guidance.
  • PORT can include, but is not limited to, doses ranging from 50 to 60 Gy, 1.8 to 2 Gy per fraction, 5 fractions a week; for patients with positive margins of disease (R1). In some embodiments, PORT can include, but is not limited to, doses ranging from 60 to 66 Gy, 1.8 to 2 Gy per fraction, 5 fractions a week. In some embodiments, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) is allowed. In some embodiments of the methods disclosed herein, the methods result in improvement in one or more of EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and mPR compared to a standard of care.
  • IMRT intensity-modulated radiation therapy
  • 3D-CRT 3D-conformal radiotherapy
  • the methods results in improvement in one or more of EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and mPR compared to a platinum-based chemotherapy.
  • the success of the method of treatment is determined by an improvement in pathological complete response (pCR) as compared to standard of care, e.g., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy.
  • the success of the method of treatment is determined by an improvement in major pathological response (mPR) as compared to standard of care, e.g., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy.
  • the success of the method of treatment is determined by an improvement event free survival (EFS) as compared to standard of care, e.g., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy.
  • EFS improvement event free survival
  • neoadjuvant chemotherapy such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy.
  • DFS improvement in disease free survival
  • the success of the method of treatment is determined by an improvement in overall survival (OS) as compared to standard of care, e.g., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy.
  • OS overall survival
  • neoadjuvant chemotherapy such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy.
  • success of treatment may be defined as an increase in EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and/or mPR in patients treated with (i) neoadjuvant durvalumab and neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy only; or (ii) perioperative durvalumab and neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy only; or (iii) neoadjuvant durvalumab, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant durvalumab compared to patients treated with neoa
  • carboplatin AUC 5 (mg/mL/min) can be administered from cycle 1. 3) Pemetrexed + cisplatin: pemetrexed 500 mg/m 2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles (for non-squamous tumor histology).
  • carboplatin AUC 5 (mg/mL/min) can be administered from cycle 1. 4) Pemetrexed + carboplatin: pemetrexed 500 mg/m 2 and carboplatin AUC 5 (mg/mL/min) via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles (for non-squamous tumor histology).
  • standard of care may further include resection of the non-small cell lung cancer tumor.
  • Event-free survival refers to the time from randomization to the first of the following: a) local or distant recurrence as determined by BICR using RECIST 1.1 assessments; b) death due to any cause (event date is the date of death); c) PD that precludes surgery (event date is the date of this determination) or PD discovered and reported by the Investigator upon attempting surgery that prevents completion of surgery (event date is the date of the first attempt at surgery).
  • Event-free survival can be analyzed using the log-rank test based on blinded independent central review (BICR) assessment using RECIST v1.1 and pathology review stratified by disease stage (Stage II versus Stage III) and by PD-L1 expression status ( ⁇ 1% versus ⁇ 1%) on the mITT.
  • the p- value can be obtained from the stratified log-rank test using the Efron (Hertz-Picciotto and Rockhill “Validity and efficiency of approximation methods for tied survival times in Cox regression.” Biometrics 1997; 53(3):1151-6.).
  • pathological complete response or "pathological CR” or “pCR” refer to the proportion of patients who have 0% residual viable tumor cells within all resected tissue (including primary lung lesion and lymph nodes) following neoadjuvant treatment as assessed by central pathology laboratory. Patients who are not evaluable per central pathology assessment (this includes patients with R2 margins) or who do not have a surgical specimen can be considered as non-pCR (e.g., pathology assessments captured as "non-evaluable” or "missing,” as appropriate). Central pathology assessment of pCR will be performed according to the recommended methods and definitions described by IASLC 2020 (Travis et al.
  • Disease-free survival and “DFS” refer to the time from the date of surgery until the first date of disease recurrence as determined by BICR using RECIST 1.1 assessments (local or distant), or date of death due to any cause, whichever occurs first.
  • Pathological confirmation from biopsied lesions can also be taken into consideration (as applicable). A new primary malignancy, confirmed by pathology, is not considered a DFS event.
  • Disease-free survival can be analyzed using the log-rank test based on BICR assessment using RECIST 1.1 and pathology review stratified by disease stage Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT (Stage II versus Stage III) and by PD-L1 expression status ( ⁇ 1% versus ⁇ 1%) on the modified resected analysis set.
  • the p-value can be obtained from the stratified log-rank test using the Efron (Hertz-Picciotto and Rockhill 1997) approach for handling ties.
  • MPR major pathological response
  • mPR mPR
  • patients who are not evaluable per central pathology assessment (including patients with R2 margins) or who do not have a surgical specimen can be considered as having non-mPR (e.g., response captured as "non-evaluable” or "missing,” as appropriate).
  • the analysis can be performed using a CMH test, stratified by disease stage (Stage II versus Stage III) and PDL1 expression status ( ⁇ 1% versus ⁇ 1%).
  • the effect of treatment can be estimated by the difference in proportions between treatment groups, together with their corresponding CI and p-value.
  • all survival and OS refer to the time from the date of randomization until death due to any cause regardless of whether the subject withdraws from randomized therapy or receives another anticancer therapy. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis will be censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive.
  • Overall survival can be analyzed in the mITT population using the same methodology as described for EFS.
  • the effect of treatment can be estimated by the HR together with its corresponding CI. Kaplan-Meier plots can be presented by treatment arm.
  • ITT Intent-to-treat
  • mITT Modified Intent-to-treat
  • Resected population set The resected set can consist of all patients in the ITT who had surgical resection following the neoadjuvant period, who do not have R2 margins, and Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT whose first scan following surgery shows no evaluable disease (defined as no post-surgery R2 margins and no RECIST evidence of disease).
  • Modified Resected population set The modified resected set can consist of all patients in the resected set, excluding those whose tumors have EGFRm/ALK translocation. Unless otherwise specified, this analysis set is used for DFS only.
  • Embodiment 1 A method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre- treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of the treatment; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; and (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful, or Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT wherein no change in the ctDNA level or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post- treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful.
  • Embodiment 2 A method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre- treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; and (d) administering the treatment to the patient or resecting the R-NSCLC if there is a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, or administering an alternative treatment to the patient if there is no change or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample.
  • R-NSCLC resectable non-small cell lung cancer
  • Embodiment 3 The method of either embodiment 1 or embodiment 2, wherein the decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample is a decrease of at least 50% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 60% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 70% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 80% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 90% from the ctDNA level in the pre- treatment sample, at least 95% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 98% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 99% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, or a decrease of 100% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample.
  • Embodiment 4 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 3, wherein the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample is undetectable.
  • Embodiment 5 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 4, wherein the method is indicative that treatment is and/or will be successful.
  • Embodiment 6 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 5, wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful.
  • Embodiment 7 A method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; and (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful.
  • R-NSCLC resectable non-small cell lung cancer
  • Embodiment 8 A method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; and (c) administering an alternative treatment to the patient if ctDNA is detected in the post-treatment sample.
  • R-NSCLC resectable non-small cell lung cancer
  • Embodiment 9 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 8, wherein the method further comprises: determining a variant allele fraction (VAF) in the pre-treatment sample and a VAF in the post-treatment sample; wherein a decrease in the VAF in the post-treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful; and administering the treatment to the patient if there is a decrease in the VAF in the post- treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample.
  • VAF variant allele fraction
  • Embodiment 10 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 8, wherein the decrease in the VAF in the post-treatment sample is a decrease of at least 50% from the VAF in the pre- treatment sample, at least 60% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 70% from Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 80% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 90% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 95% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 98% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 99% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, or a decrease of 100% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample.
  • Embodiment 11 The method of either embodiment 9 or embodiment 10, wherein the VAF in the post-treatment sample is undetectable and/or below a limit of detection.
  • Embodiment 12 The method of any one of embodiments 9 to 11, wherein the method is indicative that treatment is and/or will be successful.
  • Embodiment 13 The method of any one of embodiments 9 to 12, wherein detecting VAF in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful.
  • Embodiment 14 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 13, wherein determining the ctDNA level or determining the VAF in the post-treatment sample occurs after about 21 days of the treatment, after about 42 days of the treatment, after about 63 days of the treatment, or after about 84 days of the treatment.
  • Embodiment 15 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 14, wherein determining the ctDNA level or determining the VAF in the post-treatment sample occurs after about 1 cycle of the treatment, after about 2 cycles of the treatment, after about 3 cycles of the treatment, or after about 4 cycles of the treatment.
  • Embodiment 16 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 14, wherein the ctDNA level is detected by a sequencing reaction.
  • Embodiment 17 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 16 further comprising: (a) determining tumor size of the R-NSCLC in the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining tumor size of the R-NSCLC in the patient after administration of the treatment; Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT wherein a decrease in tumor size after administration of the treatment is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful.
  • Embodiment 18 The method of embodiment 17, wherein tumor size is determined prior to resecting the R-NSCLC.
  • Embodiment 19 The method of either embodiment 17 or embodiment 18, wherein tumor size is determined using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), or both MRI and CT.
  • Embodiment 20 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to19, wherein the treatment comprises administering durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient about every 21 days (Q3W) for about 4 cycles.
  • Embodiment 21 The method of embodiment 20 further comprising resecting the R-NSCLC after the about 4 cycles of the treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy.
  • Embodiment 22 The method of embodiment 21 further comprising administering to the patient durvalumab about every 14 to 28 days for up to about 12 cycles after resecting the R- NSCLC.
  • Embodiment 23 The method of embodiment 21 further comprising administering to the patient durvalumab about every 28 days (Q4W) for up to about 12 cycles after resecting the R-NSCLC.
  • Embodiment 24 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 23, wherein about 1000 to 2000 mg of durvalumab is administered to the patient.
  • Embodiment 25 The method of embodiment 24, wherein about 1500 mg of durvalumab is administered to the patient.
  • Embodiment 26 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 25, wherein the chemotherapy is a platinum-based chemotherapy.
  • Embodiment 27 The method of embodiment 26, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy is one or more of carboplatin, cisplatin, nedaplatin, and oxaliplatin.
  • Embodiment 28 The method of embodiment 27, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a carboplatin area under the serum drug concentration-time curve (AUC) dose of about 5 to about 6 mg/mL/min, or a cisplatin dose of about 75 mg/m 2 .
  • AUC serum drug concentration-time curve
  • Embodiment 29 The method of any one of embodiments 26 to 28, wherein the platinum- based chemotherapy further comprises one or more of afatinib, cetuximab, bevacizumab, erlotinib, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, pemetrexed, and vemurafenib.
  • Embodiment 30 The method of any one of embodiments 26 to 28, wherein the platinum- based chemotherapy further comprises one or more of cisplatin, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and pemetrexed.
  • Embodiment 31 The method of either embodiment 29 or embodiment 30, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy further comprises a paclitaxel dose of about 200 mg/m 2 , a pemetrexed dose of about 500 mg/m 2 , or a gemcitabine dose of about 1250 mg/m 2 .
  • Embodiment 32 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 31, wherein the R-NSCLC is a squamous cell carcinoma.
  • Embodiment 33 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 31, wherein the R-NSCLC is a non-squamous cell carcinoma.
  • Embodiment 34 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 33, wherein the patient does not have an EGFR mutation and/or an ALK translocation.
  • Embodiment 35 The method of any one of embodiments 21 to 23 further comprising a post- operative radiation therapy.
  • Embodiment 36 The method of embodiment 35, wherein the post-operative radiation therapy starts within about 8 weeks after resecting the R-NSCLC.
  • Embodiment 37 The method of embodiment 36, wherein administering durvalumab starts within about 3 weeks from the end of the post-operative radiation therapy.
  • Embodiment 38 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 37, wherein an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the pre-treatment sample is determined, and one or more alternative treatments R-NSCLC is administered to the patient.
  • Embodiment 39 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 38, wherein the method results in improvement in one or more of EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and mPR compared to a standard of care.
  • Embodiment 40 The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 38, wherein the method results in improvement in one or more of EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and mPR compared to a platinum- based chemotherapy.
  • Example 1 Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant Durvalumab for the treatment of patients with Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (R-NSCLC)
  • the AEGEAN (NCT03800134) study described herein is a phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center international study of assessed perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) durvalumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with resectable stage II and stage III non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC).
  • NSCLC non-small cell lung cancer
  • Eligible patients had newly diagnosed, previously untreated, histologically or cytologically documented, resectable NSCLC (stage IIA to select [N2] stage IIIB according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] Cancer Staging Manual, version 8).
  • Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either durvalumab plus a platinum-based chemotherapy before surgery followed by durvalumab post-surgery (Arm 1; a platinum-based chemotherapy plus durvalumab intravenously every three weeks (four cycles) before surgery, followed by durvalumab intravenously every four weeks (12 cycles)) or placebo plus a platinum-based chemotherapy before surgery followed by placebo post- surgery (Arm 2; a platinum-based chemotherapy plus placebo intravenously every three weeks (four cycles) before surgery, followed by placebo intravenously every four weeks (12 cycles)).
  • Patients were also stratified by disease stage (Stage II versus Stage III) and by PD- L1 expression status ( ⁇ 1% versus ⁇ 1%). Patients had resectable (Stage IIA to select [i.e., N2] Stage IIIB) disease (according to Version 8 of the IASLC Staging Manual in Thoracic Oncology 2016) and were candidates for lobectomy, sleeve resection, or bilobectomy as planned surgery at the time of enrollment. At screening, complete surgical resection of the primary NSCLC was deemed achievable by performing a multidisciplinary evaluation, which included a thoracic surgeon who performs lung cancer surgery as a prominent part of his/her practice.
  • Additional inclusion criteria necessitated an age of 18 years or older; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1; an estimated life expectancy of ⁇ 12 weeks; documented tumor PD-L1 status (as assessed at a central laboratory using the VENTANA SP263 immunohistochemistry assay); and ⁇ 1 lesion, not previously irradiated, that qualified as a Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) target lesion.
  • T4 tumors were only eligible if they were defined as T4 based only on their size (more than 7 cm); any other reason for T4 (e.g., adherent to any of the following structures: Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT diaphragm, mediastinum, heart, great vessels, trachea, recurrent laryngeal nerve, esophagus, vertebral body, carina) were considered ineligible. Nodal status was investigated with whole body 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), plus contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT).
  • FDG-PET 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography
  • CT contrast-enhanced computed tomography
  • positron emission tomography (PET)/CT scan was positive in the mediastinum, or if scan was negative, but there was T>3 cm, central tumor, or clinical N1 (cN1), then it was recommended that nodal status be proven by biopsy via endobronchial ultrasound, mediastinoscopy, or thoracoscopy.
  • Mandatory brain magnetic resonance imaging was performed (MRI; preferred) with IV contrast or brain CT with IV contrast at the time of staging.
  • Patients had no prior exposure to immune-mediated therapy including, but not limited to, other anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, and anti-PD-L2 antibodies, excluding therapeutic anticancer vaccines.
  • the modified intent-to-treat population included all patients who were randomized, excluding patients with documented EGFR/ALK aberrations. ⁇ Characteristics with missing or other responses were histology (0.3% in the durvalumab arm and 1.1% in the placebo arm had ‘other’ histology), disease stage (0.3% in the durvalumab arm had stage IV disease and 0.3% in the placebo arm had stage III [NOS] disease, as reported per the eCRF), and N2 lymph node station status (1.6% in the durvalumab arm and 3.5% in the placebo arm had N2 disease with missing data on single-station versus multi-station classification). Race was self- reported per the eCRF.
  • Demographics AEGEAN Observations Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Study mITT, N 740 Age, median (range) 65.0 (30–88) • Patients with resectable NSCLC are on average Age, mean ⁇ SD 64.0 ⁇ 8.8 approximately 65 years of age across geographies. The age of patients on the AEGEAN study was representative of a real- world population. Sex • Globally NSCLC affects more men than women. The Male 71.6% gender balance in the AEGEAN study was Female 28.4% representative of a real-world population.
  • ECOG performance The majority of patients diagnosed with resectable status NSCLC have good performance status (ECOG 0 68.4% performance status of 0), a trend that was also 1 31.6% borne out in the AEGEAN study. ⁇ 2 0% Unknown/ Missing 0% Smoking Status • Lung cancer is strongly associated with smoking, with Current smoker/ former 86% approximately 80% of patients having a history smoker of smoking. This was also reflected in the Never smoker 24% AEGEAN study population. Region • The AEGEAN study enrolled patients across 28 Asia 41% countries and 3 continents. The race and Europe 38% ethnicity composition of the AEGEAN study North America 12% are indicative of a large, diverse, and global South America 9% Race clinical trial.
  • the modified intent-to-treat population included all patients who were randomized, excluding patients with documented EGFR/ALK aberrations. ⁇ Except where specified otherwise, percentages were calculated using the full modified intent-to-treat population as the denominator. As per the investigator’s assessment. Patients who ‘underwent’ surgery were those for whom curative-intent thoracic surgery was attempted regardless of whether it was completed. Patients who ‘completed’ surgery were those for whom curative-intent thoracic surgery was completed (assessed by the investigator at the time of surgery). ⁇ Includes patients who had surgery outside of the study.
  • AJCC American Joint Committee on Cancer
  • ECOG PS Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status
  • eCRF electronic case report form
  • NOS not otherwise specified
  • PD-L1 programmed cell death-ligand 1
  • TC tumor cell
  • TNM tumor, [lymph] nodes, metastasis. Table 5.
  • the safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ⁇ 1 dose of study treatment; adverse events were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0.
  • the overall study period spans from the first dose of study treatment (durvalumab/placebo/chemotherapy) until the earliest of: the last dose of study treatment or surgery + 90 days (taking the latest dose of durvalumab or placebo or chemotherapy or the date of surgery, + 90 days); the data cut-off date; or the date of the first dose of subsequent anti-cancer treatment.
  • Study Design and Treatment Approximately 800 patients with resectable NSCLC (Stage IIA to select Stage IIIB; either squamous or non-squamous) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either durvalumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy before surgery followed by durvalumab post- surgery (Arm 1) or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy before surgery followed by placebo post-surgery (Arm 2).
  • Patients were stratified by disease stage (Stage II versus Stage III) and by programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression status ( ⁇ 1% versus ⁇ 1%). Patients received 4 cycles of durvalumab or placebo plus a platinum-based chemotherapy (every 3 weeks [q3w]) followed by surgery to remove the NSCLC. Surgery consisted of lobectomy, sleeve resection, or bilobectomy, as determined by the attending surgeon based on the baseline findings. Patients whose planned surgery at enrollment includes pneumonectomy, segmentectomies, or wedge resections at eligibility assessment were not eligible for this study. All patients were staged and managed according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2020 Guidelines (version 1.2021). Surgery was expected within 40 days from the dose.
  • Treatments and treatment duration Patients received 1500 mg durvalumab or placebo via intravenous (IV) infusion q3w for up to a maximum of 4 cycles prior to surgery and q4w for 12 cycles following surgery, unless there was unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or another discontinuation criterion was met. If a patient's weight (WT) falls to 30 kg or below ( ⁇ 30 kg), then the patient received WT-based dosing equivalent to 20 mg/kg of durvalumab [or placebo] q3w or q4w after consultation between Investigator and Study Physician/Medical Engineer, until the WT improved to >30 kg, at which point the patient started receiving the fixed dosing of durvalumab 1500 mg [or placebo] q3w or q4w.
  • IV intravenous
  • SoC Standard of Care
  • Squamous tumor histology Carboplatin + paclitaxel: carboplatin area under the serum drug concentration-time curve (AUC) 6 (mg/mL/min) and paclitaxel 200 mg/m 2 via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles.
  • Squamous tumor histology Cisplatin + gemcitabine: cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles, and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m 2 via IV infusion on Day 1 and Day 8 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles.
  • EFS event-free survival
  • pCR pathological complete response
  • Other secondary endpoints included evaluation of the primary endpoints Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT and key secondary endpoints in patients with PD-L1 expression ⁇ 1%; pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity; patient-reported outcomes; and safety.
  • EFS was defined as the time from randomization to any of the following events: progression of disease (PD) that precludes surgery, local or distant recurrence, or death due to any cause.
  • EFS was defined as the time from randomization to the earliest of: (1) progressive disease that precludes surgery; (2) progressive disease discovered and reported by the investigator upon attempting surgery that prevents completion of surgery; (3) local or distant recurrence using blinded independent central review according to RECIST v1.1; or (4) death from any cause. Failure to undergo/complete surgery for reasons other than progressive disease was not considered an EFS event (i.e., patients remained in follow-up for RECIST- defined progression).
  • Tumors were evaluated per RECIST v1.1 using imaging collected at the following timepoints: baseline ( ⁇ 28 days before randomization); after completing neoadjuvant treatment and before surgery; 5 weeks ( ⁇ 2 weeks) after surgery and before starting adjuvant treatment; every 12 weeks ( ⁇ 1 week) until Week 48 after surgery; every 24 weeks ( ⁇ 2 weeks) until Week 192 (i.e., ⁇ 4 years post-surgery); and every 48 weeks ( ⁇ 2 weeks) thereafter until local or distant recurrence, consent withdrawal, or death. Safety was monitored throughout the study and adverse events (AEs) were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for AEs version 5.0.
  • EFS mITT and PD-L1 TC ⁇ 1% analysis set
  • pCR mITT and PD-L1 TC ⁇ 1% analysis set
  • mPR mITT and PD-L1 TC ⁇ 1% analysis set
  • DFS modified resected set and PD-L1 TC ⁇ 1% resected set
  • OS mITT and PD-L1 TC ⁇ 1% analysis set
  • Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics and planned neoadjuvant chemotherapy doublet regimens were largely balanced between the treatment arms in the mITT population (Table 1). Median age was 65.0 years, and most patients were male (71.6%), had a performance status of 0 (68.4%), and were current or former smokers (85.5%). Over 70% of patients had stage III disease, and half of all patients had N2 disease. Approximately equal proportions of patients had squamous and non-squamous histology. Across both treatment arms, 33.4% of patients had tumor PD-L1 expression of ⁇ 1%, and carboplatin was the planned neoadjuvant platinum agent for over 70% of patients.
  • the safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ⁇ 1 dose of study treatment. SoC, standard of care. Surgery Summary At the data cut-off, approximately 81% of patients in each treatment arm (Table 3; mITT population) had undergone surgery (noting that curative-intent thoracic surgery was attempted regardless of whether it was completed). In total, 77.6% of patients in the durvalumab arm and 76.7% of patients in the placebo arm had completed surgery (i.e., curative-intent thoracic surgery deemed completed as assessed by the investigator), among whom a slightly higher proportion had R0 resection in the durvalumab arm versus the placebo arm (94.7% vs.91.3%).
  • the safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ⁇ 1 dose of study treatment. *Reasons for surgical delay are not mutually exclusive for patients with multiple reasons per delay or subjects with multiple delays (although a patient can only be counted once per category). Table 8. Details of Surgery and Surgical Outcomes in the Modified Intent-to-treat Population.
  • CI confidence interval
  • RECIST v1.1 Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1.
  • a trend towards pCR benefit with durvalumab was observed across all prespecified subgroups, with the results largely consistent with the overall mITT population.
  • Primary tumor pathological regression was, overall, greater in the durvalumab arm versus the placebo arm. See Table 9 for a summary of objective response prior to surgery in the mITT population.
  • AEs possibly related to any study treatment with an outcome of death were uncommon, with rates of 1.8% and 0.5% in the durvalumab and placebo arms, respectively.
  • the most common AEs of any cause largely reflected the safety profile of the chemotherapy agents used in the study (Table 10); the rates of the most common AEs were largely similar across both treatment arms. Rates of any-grade rash (14% vs.8.5%) and pruritus (11.8% vs.5.5%) were higher among patients in the durvalumab arm versus the placebo arm; however, grade 3 or 4 events were uncommon, and occurred with similar frequency in both treatment arms.
  • the safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ⁇ 1 dose of study treatment; adverse events were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Included are adverse events reported with an any-grade incidence of at least 10% in the durvalumab arm during the overall study period, which spans from the first dose of study treatment (durvalumab or placebo or chemotherapy) until the earliest of: the last dose of study treatment or surgery + 90 days (taking the latest dose of durvalumab or placebo or chemotherapy or the date of surgery, + 90 days); the data cut-off date; or the date of the first dose of subsequent anti-cancer treatment. ⁇ Two patients (one in each arm) had decreased appetite with an outcome of death (max.
  • the safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ⁇ 1 dose of study treatment; adverse events were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Included are adverse events assessed by the investigator as possibly related to any study treatment (durvalumab or placebo or chemotherapy) reported with an any-grade Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT incidence of at least 5% in the durvalumab arm during the overall study period, which spans from the first dose of study treatment until the earliest of: the last dose of study treatment or surgery + 90 days (taking the latest dose of durvalumab or placebo or chemotherapy or the date of surgery, + 90 days); the data cut-off date; or the date of the first dose of subsequent anti-cancer treatment.
  • the safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ⁇ 1 dose of study Tx; AEs were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0.
  • An immune-mediated AE was defined as an AE of special interest consistent with an immune-mediated mechanism of action, where there is no clear alternate etiology, and requiring the use of systemic corticosteroids or other immunosuppressants and/or, for specific endocrine events, endocrine therapy.
  • AE adverse event.
  • Summary Perioperative durvalumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) significantly improved both pCR and EFS among patients with resectable NSCLC versus neoadjuvant CT alone.
  • the improvement in pCR rate was 13.0% (95% CI: 8.7–17.6).
  • EFS and pCR benefit with durvalumab was broadly observed across all predefined subgroups and was consistent with improvements observed in the overall mITT population.
  • EFS benefit for example, was observed regardless of age, disease stage (including patients with N2 disease), histology, and PD-L1 expression, including, notably, patients with PD-L1 expression ⁇ 1% (although the magnitude of benefit was numerically better in patients with PD-L1 expression ⁇ 50%).
  • AEs possibly related to study Tx with an outcome of death were rare in both arms. Immune-mediated AEs were more common in the durvalumab arm versus the placebo arm (23.5% vs.9.8%); however, most were grade 1 or 2. Also, although differences in the populations and study designs of AEGEAN versus PACIFIC confound between-study comparisons (particularly, use of chemoradiotherapy in the latter), it is notable that the rates of any-grade and grade 3 or 4 immune AEs were similar between these studies (Antonia et al. N Engl J Med 2017; 377:1919–29; Antonia et al. N Engl J Med 2018; 379:2342–50).
  • AEGEAN was not designed to assess the individual contributions of the neoadjuvant and adjuvant components of treatment. Nonetheless, the results reported here justify a perioperative treatment strategy and substantiate other studies that have employed this approach with immunotherapy in the melanoma and NSCLC settings (Patel et al., N Engl J Med 2023; 388:813-823; Lu et al., Journal of Clinical Oncology 41, no.36_suppl (April 20, 2023) 425126-425126). Moreover, the benefit of the full course of perioperative durvalumab may only be fully realized until such time as all patients have had the opportunity to complete adjuvant study treatment.
  • Example 2 Associations of ctDNA clearance, radiological response, and pathological response with neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable NSCLC from the phase 3 AEGEAN trial
  • the AEGEAN (NCT03800134) study is a phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center international study of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) durvalumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with resectable stage II and stage III non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC).
  • perioperative durvalumab (D) plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) significantly improved pathological complete response (pCR), major pathological response (MPR), and event-free survival (EFS), with manageable safety, versus neoadjuvant CT alone among patients with resectable (R) NSCLC (modified ITT [mITT] population).
  • CT pathological complete response
  • MPR major pathological response
  • EFS event-free survival
  • R-NSCLC patients (stage II–IIIB[N2]; AJCC 8th ed) were randomised (1:1) to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) + durvalumab or placebo (PBO) intravenously (IV) (Q3W, 4 cycles) prior to surgery, followed by durvalumab or PBO IV (Q4W, 12 cycles), respectively, after surgery.
  • Plasma samples were collected at protocol-specified timepoints, including prior to each neoadjuvant treatment cycle and before surgery. Analysis was Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT performed using patient-specific tumour-informed assays, following identification of mutations in diagnostic tissue via whole exome sequencing.
  • ctDNA variant allele fractions VAFs
  • dynamics were assessed during neoadjuvant treatment, including ctDNA clearance and association with pCR or MPR.
  • Radiological CR/PR had a higher rate of pCR and MPR as compared to patients with radiological stable disease (SD); no patients with radiological progressive disease (PD) had pCR or MPR (Figure 17).
  • ctDNA clearance at early presurgical timepoints identified patients with improved event-free survival, which was more pronounced in patients who received durvalumab with chemotherapy before surgery and durvalumab after surgery, compared to patients who only received chemotherapy before surgery. More patients with such improvement were identified by ctDNA clearance than by pathological response.

Landscapes

  • Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
  • Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
  • Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
  • Organic Chemistry (AREA)
  • Proteomics, Peptides & Aminoacids (AREA)
  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Immunology (AREA)
  • Pathology (AREA)
  • Analytical Chemistry (AREA)
  • Zoology (AREA)
  • Genetics & Genomics (AREA)
  • Wood Science & Technology (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Biotechnology (AREA)
  • Microbiology (AREA)
  • Molecular Biology (AREA)
  • Hospice & Palliative Care (AREA)
  • Biophysics (AREA)
  • Oncology (AREA)
  • Biochemistry (AREA)
  • Bioinformatics & Cheminformatics (AREA)
  • General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
  • Measuring Or Testing Involving Enzymes Or Micro-Organisms (AREA)

Abstract

The disclosure relates to methods of assessing the success of treatment with durvalumab and chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in patients based on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection, ctDNA clearance and/or partial clearance and/or variant allele fraction (VAF) before and after such treatment. The disclosure also relates to methods for treating patients with R-NSCLC based on ctDNA detection, ctDNA clearance and/or partial molecular clearance and/or VAF before and after such treatment.

Description

Reference Nos: B7H1-550-WO-PCT PREDICTING RESPONSE TO NEOADJUVANT TREATMENT IN NON-SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No.63/591,109, filed October 17, 2023, U.S. Provisional Application No.63/603,767, filed November 29, 2023, U.S. Provisional Application No.63/636,344, filed April 19, 2024, and U.S. Provisional Application No.63/694,735, filed September 13, 2024, the disclosure of each of which is incorporated by reference in its entirety. FIELD OF THE DISCLOSURE The present disclosure relates to methods of assessing the success of treatment with durvalumab and chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in patients based on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection, ctDNA clearance and/or ctDNA partial clearance and/or variant allele fraction (VAF) before and after such treatment. The present disclosure also relates to methods for treating patients with R-NSCLC based on ctDNA detection, ctDNA clearance and/or ctDNA partial clearance and/or VAF before and after such treatment. SEQUENCE LISTING This application contains a sequence listing which is submitted electronically and is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. The sequence listing submitted herewith is contained in the XML filed created October 14, 2024 entitled “B7H1-550-WO- PCT__Sequence-Listing.xml” and is 8,076 bytes in size. BACKGROUND OF THE DISCLOSURE Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, with non-small- cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounting for over 80% of cases. Approximately 25–30% of patients present with resectable disease at diagnosis, a proportion that is expected to increase with growing use of lung cancer screening programs. Surgery remains the primary curative- intent treatment for eligible patients with early-stage NSCLC. Despite this, many patients experience tumor recurrence within 5 years of surgery (~30–55% depending on disease stage at diagnosis), leading to deterioration in health-related quality of life and increasing the 4 Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT likelihood of disease-related death. Chemotherapy, in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting, is a well-established treatment strategy, but offers only a modest improvement in 5-year survival of approximately 5% versus surgery alone. Lung cancer has been the most common cancer in the world for several decades, with an estimated 1.8 million new cases in 2012 (12.9% of all new cancers), and was also the most common cause of death from cancer in 2012, with 1.6 million deaths (19.4% of cancer deaths; GLOBOCAN 2012). Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represents 80% to 85% of all lung cancers (Pisters and Le Chevalier, “Adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer: J Clin Oncol.2005 May 10; 23(14):3270-8). Despite advances in the diagnosis, imaging, staging, and treatment of NSCLC, the estimated 5-year overall survival (OS) for patients in Europe and the United States continues to be low (11% and 17%, respectively; D'Addario et al. “Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up” Ann Oncol.2010 May; 21 Suppl 5:v116-9; Howlader et al. “SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2014”, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD. April 2017). For early-stage NSCLC, the primary treatment is curative surgery. Only ~30% of patients present with Stages I to IIIA lung cancer; however, this percentage is expected to increase as a result of the implementation of lung cancer screening. Unfortunately, the 5-year survival for patients treated with surgery alone remains low, ranging from 67% (Stage IA) to 23% (Stage IIIA) (Mountain “Revisions in the international system for staging lung cancer.” Chest 1997;111:1710-7.). Studies of adjuvant chemotherapy in the NSCLC setting have demonstrated a modest but clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival; perioperative platinum-based chemotherapy has shown a survival rate of 5.4 percentage points higher than surgery alone, with toxicities of Grade 3 or higher observed in more than 60% of patients (Pignon et al. “Lung adjuvant cisplatin evaluation: a pooled analysis by the LACE Collaborative Group.” J Clin Oncol 2008; 26:3552-9; Wakelee et al. “Adjuvant chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with resected non-small-cell lung cancer (E1505): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial.” Lancet Oncol 2017;18:1610-23). A number of studies have demonstrated the clinical benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage NSCLC. However, despite advances, new therapies, and methods to assess the success of these therapies, are needed to further improve the long-term prognosis for patients with NSCLC who undergo surgical resection. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT SUMMARY OF THE DISCLOSURE The present disclosure generally relates to methods for predicting success of treatment for resectable non-small cell lung cancer patients (R-NSCLC). The disclosure demonstrates that circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) clearance, partial ctDNA clearance, tumor size, ctDNA detection, and/or variant allele frequency (VAF) can be used to predict success of a R- NSCLC treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy. In one aspect, the disclosure provides a method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R- NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the ctDNA level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of the treatment; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; and (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post- treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful, or wherein no change in the ctDNA level or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. In another aspect, the disclosure provides a method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining ctDNA level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post- treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; (d) administering the treatment to the patient or resecting the R-NSCLC if there is a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre- treatment sample, or administering an alternative treatment to the patient if there is no change or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample. In another aspect, the disclosure relates to methods of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for R-NSCLC in a patient, or methods of treating a patient having R-NSCLC, wherein the method comprises, in part, determining a variant allele fraction (VAF) in the pre-treatment sample and a VAF in the post-treatment sample; wherein a decrease in the VAF in the post-treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful; and Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT administering the treatment to the patient if there is a decrease in the VAF in the post- treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample. In another aspect, the disclosure relates to a method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; and (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. In another aspect, the disclosure relates to a method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; and (c) administering an alternative treatment to the patient if ctDNA is detected in the post-treatment sample. These and other features and advantages of the present disclosure will be more fully understood from the following detailed description taken together with the accompanying claims. It is noted that the scope of the claims is defined by the recitations therein and not by the specific discussion of features and advantages set forth in the present description. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS/FIGURES The accompanying drawings are included to provide a further understanding of the methods and compositions of the disclosure. The drawings illustrate one or more embodiments of the disclosure, and together with the description serve to explain the principles and operation of the disclosure. FIG.1 shows the design of the AEGEAN study, a phase 3 global, randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled study of perioperative Durvalumab + neoadjuvant chemotherapy (D arm) versus Placebo and chemotherapy (PBO arm). Plasma samples were collected at protocol-specified timepoints, including prior to each neoadjuvant treatment cycle, before surgery, and adjuvant treatment cycle. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis was performed on 1268 neoadjuvant (multiple timepoints) and 168 adjuvant (C1D1) plasma samples from 283 patients (D arm = 142 patients; PBO arm = 141 patients) in the pathological complete response (pCR) interim analysis cohort within the mITT (modified Intention to Treat) population. Analysis was performed using Invitae Personalized Cancer Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Monitoring™, a tumor-informed MRD (molecular residual disease) assay. Patient specific tumor-informed panels were designed to include 16-50 variants, identified by whole exome sequencing of treatment-naïve diagnostic biopsies only (rather than on-study surgical resections) to avoid selection bias. †Ventana SP263 immunohistochemistry assay. Choice of CT regimen determined by histology and at the investigator’s discretion. For non-squamous: cisplatin + pemetrexed or carboplatin + pemetrexed. For squamous: carboplatin + paclitaxel or cisplatin + gemcitabine (or carboplatin + gemcitabine for patients who have comorbidities or who are unable to tolerate cisplatin per the investigator’s judgment). §Post-operative radiotherapy was permitted where indicated per local guidance. ¶Not all patients had samples available at all timepoints. £pCR and MPR were evaluated centrally per IASLC recommendations.2 €The lower limit of detection for the assay was 0.008% VAF (80 parts per million). AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; CXDX, cycle X day X; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; IASLC, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer; IV, intravenous; PD-L1, programmed cell death- ligand 1; QXW, every X weeks; R, randomisation; VAF, variant allele fraction. FIG.2 shows the distribution and median VAFs (variant allele fractions) quantifying the amount of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) at longitudinal timepoints in patients in the Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) versus the Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm). Plasma samples analysed were collected pre-dose at cycle 1 day 1 (C1D1), cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), cycle 4 day 1 (C4D1) and pre-surgery prior to treatment. ctDNA was considered detected if the signal to noise exceeded a threshold of P<0.01. ctDNA detected. Median VAFs shown by the horizontal black line within the box plot. Downward arrows indicate the decrease in median VAF from the preceding timepoint. As indicated, there is a variable number of patients analysed per timepoint, and the percentage and number detected/total is shown. *ctDNA was considered detected if the signal to noise exceeded a threshold of P<0.01. There is a variable number of patients analysed per timepoint, as indicated. †There was no difference in median VAF levels at baseline between the two treatment arms. FIG.3 shows the baseline characteristics and pathological response (pCR, pathological complete response; MPR, major pathological response) rates of ctDNA- evaluable patients compared to those for the overall mITT (modified Intention to Treat) population in the Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) vs the Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm). ctDNA was evaluated in 1268 neoadjuvant (multiple timepoints) and 168 adjuvant (C1D1) samples from 283 mITT patients (D arm, n=142; PBO arm, n=141). ctDNA analysis Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT was performed in patients who had provided appropriate consent for analysis (n=601), had a sufficient sample for tumour-informed ctDNA analysis (i.e., tissue from diagnostic biopsies, blood for germline analysis, and plasma, n=426) and for whom a patient-specific assay was successfully developed for ctDNA analysis (n=283). The lower-than-expected success rate (66.4% of patients with a sufficient sample had an assay successfully developed) was partly due to a larger than anticipated number of insufficient-quality buffy coat samples. Baseline characteristics of ctDNA-evaluable patients were generally similar to those for the overall mITT population. pCR and MPR rates were higher in the D vs PBO arm, as observed in the overall mITT population (D, durvalumab; PBO, placebo). FIG.4 shows longitudinal ctDNA VAFs (variant allele fractions) quantifying the amount of ctDNA in patients with (Y) or without (N) a pathological complete response (top) or major pathological response (bottom). D+CT (blue): Durvalumab + chemotherapy arm; PBO+CT (red); Placebo + chemotherapy arm. Data shown at longitudinal timepoints following analysis of plasma samples collected pre-dose at cycle 1 day 1 (C1D1), cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), cycle 4 day 1 (C4D1) and pre-surgery. ctDNA was considered detected if the signal to noise exceeded a threshold of P<0.01, as determined using the Invitae Personalized Cancer Monitoring™ assay. ctDNA detected: orange circles; ctDNA not detected: blue circles. Median VAF shown by the horizontal black line within the box plot. P-values shown at the top of each comparison were calculated using the Kruskal- Wallis rank sum test. IASLC recommendations were used for pathologic assessment of response to therapy (Travis WD, et al. J Thorac Oncol 2020;15:709-40). pCR is defined as a lack of any viable tumor cells after complete evaluation of the resected lung cancer specimen and all sampled regional lymph nodes. MPR is defined as less than or equal to 10% viable tumor cells in lung primary tumor after complete evaluation of the resected lung cancer specimen. FIG.5 shows the amount of residual volume of tumor (RVT) in patients with (Yes, light grey) or without (No, dark grey) a pathological complete response in patients with ctDNA clearance (CL) at the timepoints specified. In this figure, -100% RVT indicates a pathological complete response, and -90% indicates a major pathologic response. D+CT: Durvalumab + chemotherapy arm; PBO+CT: Placebo + chemotherapy arm. Analysis was performed in longitudinal plasma samples collected pre-dose at cycle 1 day 1 (C1D1), cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), cycle 4 day 1 (C4D1) and pre-surgery. P-values were calculated using a two-sided Wilcoxon Rank Test. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT FIG.6 shows the ctDNA clearance rate at different longitudinal timepoints at cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1); C3D1, C4D1 and pre-surgery. ctDNA clearance is defined as the proportion of patients with a change from ctDNA detected at baseline C1D1 to undetected at the specified on-treatment timepoint. ctDNA non-clearance is defined as ctDNA-positive at the specified on-treatment timepoint (where baseline [C1D1] can be either evaluable or non-evaluable). D arm (left): Durvalumab + chemotherapy; PBO arm (right): Placebo + chemotherapy. The plot shows analysis of a variable number of patients at each timepoint. Among patients who were ctDNA-positive at baseline (C1D1), higher rates of ctDNA clearance were observed in the D arm vs the PBO arm. *The plot shows an analysis of a variable number of patients at each timepoint. ctDNA clearance is defined as the proportion of patients with a change from ctDNA detected at baseline (C1D1) to undetected at the specified on-treatment timepoint. ctDNA non-clearance is defined as ctDNA-positive at the specified on-treatment timepoint (where baseline [C1D1] can be either evaluable or non-evaluable). FIG.7 shows the pathological complete response rate (pCR; left) or Major Pathological response rate (MPR; right) of patients who had either ctDNA clearance (CL) or non clearance (no CL) at cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1) following treatment with Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) or Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm). Confidence Intervals (CIs) were calculated by Miettinen-Nurminen without stratification. ctDNA clearance: positive baseline and negative on-treatment. ctDNA non-clearance: positive on-treatment (includes baseline evaluable and non-evaluable). FIG.8 shows the pathological complete response rate (pCR; left) or Major Pathological response rate (MPR; right) in patients who had either ctDNA clearance (CL) or non clearance (no CL) at cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1) following treatment with Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) or Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm). Confidence Intervals (CIs) were calculated by Miettinen-Nurminen without stratification. ctDNA clearance: positive baseline and negative on-treatment. ctDNA non-clearance: positive on-treatment (includes baseline evaluable and non-evaluable). FIG.9 shows the pathological complete response rate (pCR; left) or Major Pathological response rate (MPR; right) of patients who had either ctDNA clearance (CL) or non clearance (no CL) at cycle 4 day 1 (C4D1) following treatment with Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) or Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm). Confidence Intervals (CIs) were calculated by Miettinen-Nurminen without stratification. ctDNA clearance: positive baseline and negative on-treatment. ctDNA non-clearance: positive on-treatment (includes baseline evaluable and non-evaluable). Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT FIG.10 shows the pathological complete response rate (pCR; left) or Major Pathological response rate (MPR; right) of patients who had either ctDNA clearance (CL) or non clearance (no CL) at pre-surgery following treatment with Durvalumab + chemotherapy (D arm) or Placebo + chemotherapy (PBO arm). Confidence Intervals (CIs) were calculated by Miettinen-Nurminen without stratification. ctDNA clearance: positive baseline and negative on-treatment. ctDNA non-clearance: positive on-treatment (includes baseline evaluable and non-evaluable). FIG.11 shows the ctDNA clearance rate in patients with a pathological complete response (pCR; left, solid line), no pCR (left, dotted line), major pathological response (MPR; right, solid line), no MPR (right, dotted line) at different longitudinal timepoints (i.e., cycle 2 day 1 [C2D1], C3D1, C4D1 and pre-surgery). D arm (D): Durvalumab + chemotherapy; PBO arm (PBO): Placebo + chemotherapy. In the ctDNA-evaluable population, pCR (25.6% vs 6.3%) and MPR (44.4% vs 18.8%) rates were higher in the D arm vs the PBO arm. †The plots include all evaluable patients at each timepoint. Among patients who were ctDNA-positive at baseline (C1D1), all patients achieving pCR and >90% of all patients achieving MPR had ctDNA clearance at C4D1*.FIG.12 shows the ctDNA Variant Allele Fractions (VAFs) and dynamics at different longitudinal timepoints (Cycle 1 Day 1 [PreC1D1], etc.), with each line corresponding to a patient. D arm (D): Durvalumab + chemotherapy; PBO arm (PBO): Placebo + chemotherapy. ctDNA was considered detected if the signal to noise exceeded a threshold of P<0.01. ctDNA detected (positive): circle; ctDNA not detected (negative): triangle. The inset shows the profile in square-root scale of VAFs in parts per million to help visualization of patients with low VAFs. Among patients who were ctDNA+ at baseline, all patients achieving pCR and >90% achieving MPR had ctDNA CL by C4D1. FIG.13A shows tables showing the positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of ctDNA clearance at different neoadjuvant timepoints for pCR (pathological complete response) or MPR (major pathological response). C2D1, cycle 2 day 1, PreSurgery Assess: pre-surgical assessment. FIG.13B shows tables showing the positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of ctDNA clearance at different neoadjuvant timepoints for pCR (pathological complete response) or MPR (major pathological response). Among patients who were ctDNA-positive at baseline (neoadjuvant C1D1) in both arms (89.6%), all patients who had pCR and >93% who had MPR had ctDNA clearance at neoadjuvant C4D1†. Absence of early ctDNA clearance may identify patients unlikely to have pCR. In both arms, Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT lack of early ctDNA clearance identified patients with a low probability of having pCR (NPV: ≥89% at C2D1; 100% at C4D1). Patients who had ctDNA clearance were more likely to have pCR in the D vs PBO arm (PPV: 49% vs 11% at C2D1). *ctDNA clearance was defined as a change from ctDNA detected at baseline (neoadjuvant C1D1) to undetected at the specified on-Tx timepoint. ctDNA non-clearance was defined as ctDNA-positive at the specified timepoint (where baseline could be either evaluable or non-evaluable). †In the BEP, pCR (23% vs 4%) and MPR (42% vs 14%) rates were higher in the D vs PBO arm. Assessed in patients who were ctDNA-positive at baseline (neoadjuvant C1D1). In the D arm, the number of patients analysed at each timepoint (had ctDNA clearance, were pCR- positive) were as follows: C2D1 (41, 29), C3D1 (62, 27), C4D1 (63, 25) and Pre-surgery (65, 26). In the PBO arm, the number of patients analysed at each timepoint (had ctDNA clearance, were pCR-positive) were as follows: C2D1 (27, 5), C3D1 (50, 6), C4D1 (51, 6) and Pre-surgery (45, 6). NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value. FIG.14A – FIG.14D show the Kaplan-Meier analysis of Event Free Survival (EFS) by distinct combination groups of ctDNA and pathological responses for patients treated with Durvalumab and chemotherapy (D+CT) at the specified timepoint (cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), FIG.14A; cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), FIG.14B; cycle 4 day 1 (C4D1), FIG.14C; and pre- surgery, FIG.14D). pCR(+); ctDNA-CL(+): Patients with ctDNA clearance who have a later pathological complete response (pCR). pCR(+); ctDNA-CL(-): Patients with no ctDNA clearance who have a later pathological complete response (pCR). pCR(-); ctDNA-CL(+): Patients with ctDNA clearance who do not have a later pCR. pCR(-); ctDNA-CL(-): Patients without ctDNA clearance who do not have a later pCR. Patients who are pCR-/ctDNA CL- have shortest EFS. From C3D1, patients who are pCR+/ctDNA CL+ have similar EFS benefits compared to patients who are pCR-/ctDNA CL+. * Note in the subset analysis, there are small N’s and large CIs. FIG.15A – FIG.15D show the Kaplan-Meier analysis of Event Free Survival (EFS) by distinct combination groups of ctDNA and pathological responses for patients treated with placebo and chemotherapy (PBO+CT) at the specified timepoint (cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), FIG. 15A; cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), FIG.15B; cycle 4 day 1 (C4D1), FIG.15C; and pre-surgery, FIG.15D). pCR(+); ctDNA-CL(+): Patients with ctDNA clearance who have a later pathological complete response (pCR). pCR(+); ctDNA-CL(-): Patients with no ctDNA clearance who have a later pathological complete response (pCR). pCR(-); ctDNA-CL(+): Patients with ctDNA clearance who do not have a later pCR. pCR(-); ctDNA-CL(-): Patients without ctDNA clearance who do not have a later pCR. Patients who are pCR-/ctDNA CL- Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT have shortest EFS. pCR+/ctDNA CL+ marginally improved EFS compared to pCR-/ctDNA CL+. * Note in the subset analysis, there are small N’s and large CIs. FIG.16 shows the forest plot and data table showing Event Free Survival (EFS) benefit by pathological response (pCR, pathological complete response; MPR, major pathological response) or ctDNA clearance at the specified timepoint (for example, cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1)). ctDNA clearance is from baseline C1D1 to the specified timepoint. D+CT: Durvalumab + chemotherapy arm; PBO+CT: Placebo + chemotherapy arm. Median EFS: median event-free survival; No: number; 95% CI: 95% confidence interval (CI). HR: hazard ratio. A hazard ratio of <1 indicates longer EFS in the positive (Yes) response group than corresponding negative (No) group. ctDNA clearance can identify all pCR patients but also additional patients with similar EFS benefits as pCR at an earlier timepoint. FIG.17 shows pCR (left) and MPR (right) by radiological response (tumor size) after neoadjuvant treatment, pre-surgery. *CIs calculated by stratified Miettinen and Nurminen method. †No formal statistical testing was performed at the pCR final analysis (n=740); statistical significance in the global mITT population was achieved at the interim pCR analysis (n=402; P-value for pCR and MPR calculated using a stratified Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel test with a significance boundary <0.001 calculated using a Lan-DeMets alpha spending function with O'Brien Fleming boundary). 53 of 740 patients from the interim EFS analysis of the mITT population were non-evaluable for radiological response (n=3 with MPR and none with pCR). ¶Patients with RECIST-defined radiological progressive disease per investigator assessment could undergo surgery if the tumor were deemed resectable. FIG.18 shows ctDNA clearance at early neoadjuvant timepoints identified patients with improved EFS. More patients were identified by ctDNA clearance during neoadjuvant Tx than were identified by pCR (determined post-Sx)†. The number of patients in each subgroup were based on the BEP, and patients were not required to be evaluable at all visits to be included in the analysis, resulting in the differences in the number of patients at each visit (i.e., not all patients had samples at all timepoints). Medians and 95% CI were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. HRs were calculated using an unstratified Cox proportional hazards model. *EFS was defined as time from randomisation to the earliest of: (A) progressive disease (PD) that precludes surgery; (B) PD discovered and reported by the investigator upon attempting surgery that prevents completion of surgery; (C) local/distant recurrence using BICR per RECIST v1.1; or (D) death from any cause. †For example, in the D arm, n=65 for ctDNA CL at pre-Sx and n=32 for pCR; in the PBO arm, n=45 for ctDNA CL at pre-Sx and n=6 for pCR. Patients who (‘Yes’) had either ctDNA clearance, Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT radiological response or pathological response at the assessment timepoint (vs patients who [‘No’] did not). BICR, blinded independent central review; CL, clearance; Neoadj, neoadjuvant; NR, not reached; Pre-Sx OR, pre-surgical objective response (using BICR per RECIST v1.1); RECIST v1.1, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, version 1.1; Sx, surgery. FIG.19 shows associations of ctDNA clearance and neoadjuvant C2D1 with EFS and OS. Patients with ctDNA clearance have longer EFS and OS compared to patients without ctDNA clearance. HRs were calculated using an unstratified Cox proportional hazard model using the Efron method to adjust for ties and Wald confidence intervals. *Data are shown for neoadjuvant C2D1; similar data for the D arm were observed at later cycles of neoadjuvant Tx. FIG.20 shows associations of ctDNA clearance at pre-surgery with EFS. Patients with ctDNA clearance had improved EFS outcomes compared to patients without ctDNA clearance. HRs were calculated using an unstratified Cox proportional hazard model using the Efron method to adjust for ties and Wald confidence intervals. *Data are shown for the pre-Sx timepoint; similar data were observed at earlier cycles of neoadjuvant Tx. FIG.21 shows associations of ctDNA clearance at pre-surgery with pCR and EFS. Patients with no ctDNA clearance at pre-surgery and no pCR had the poorest EFS outcomes. HRs were calculated using an unstratified Cox proportional hazard model using the Efron method to adjust for ties and Wald confidence intervals. *Data are shown for the pre-Sx timepoint for comparison of pCR; similar data were observed at earlier cycles of neoadjuvant Tx. FIG.22 shows associations of MRD at the post-surgical landmark (adjuvant C1D1) with DFS. Patients with completed surgery and with ctDNA detected at adjuvant C1D1 had the poorest DFS outcomes compared to ctDNA negative patients. HRs were calculated using an unstratified Cox proportional hazard model using the Efron method to adjust for ties and Wald confidence intervals. *DFS (assessed per BICR using RECIST v1.1) was analyzed in patients who had tumour resection with R0/R1 margins and no evidence of disease in the first post-Sx scan. The landmark MRD timepoint was a median 6.9 weeks (range, 2.3–19.4) post- Sx at adjuvant C1D1. Skilled artisans will appreciate that elements in the Figures are illustrated for simplicity and clarity and have not necessarily been drawn to scale. For example, the Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT dimensions of some of the elements in the Figures can be exaggerated relative to other elements to help improve understanding of the embodiments of the present disclosure. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DISCLOSURE The present disclosure relates to methods of assessing the success of treatment with durvalumab and chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in patients based on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection, ctDNA clearance and/or ctDNA partial clearance and/or variant allele fraction (VAF), and/or radiological response (tumor size) before and after such treatment. The present disclosure also relates to methods for treating patients with R-NSCLC based on ctDNA detection, ctDNA clearance and/or ctDNA partial clearance and/or VAF before and after such treatment. In one aspect, the disclosure provides a method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R- NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of the treatment; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; and (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful, or wherein no change in the ctDNA level or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. In another aspect, the disclosure provides a method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; (d) administering the treatment to the patient or resecting the R-NSCLC if there is a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, or administering an alternative treatment to the patient if there is no change or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT In another aspect, the disclosure provides a method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; and (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. In another aspect, the disclosure provides a method of a method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; and (c) administering an alternative treatment to the patient if ctDNA is detected in the post-treatment sample. In another aspect, the disclosure relates to methods of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for R-NSCLC in a patient, or methods of treating a patient having R-NSCLC, wherein the method comprises, in part, determining a variant allele fraction (VAF) in the pre-treatment sample and a VAF in the post-treatment sample; wherein a decrease in the VAF in the post-treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful; and administering the treatment to the patient if there is a decrease in the VAF in the post- treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample. As utilized in accordance with the present disclosure, unless otherwise indicated, all technical and scientific terms shall be understood to have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the meaning commonly understood by a person skilled in the art to which this disclosure belongs. The following references provide one of skill with a general definition of many of the terms used in this disclosure: Singleton et al., Dictionary of Microbiology and Molecular Biology (2nd ed.1994); The Cambridge Dictionary of Science and Technology (Walker ed., 1988); The Glossary of Genetics, 5th Ed., R. Rieger et al. (eds.), Springer Verlag (1991); and Hale & Marham, The Harper Collins Dictionary of Biology (1991). As used herein, the following terms have the meanings ascribed to them below, unless specified otherwise. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT As used herein, the terms "comprise" and "include" and variations thereof (e.g., "comprises," "comprising," "includes," and "including") will be understood to indicate the inclusion of a stated component, feature, element, or step or group of components, features, elements or steps but not the exclusion of any other component, feature, element, or step or group of components, features, elements, or steps. Any of the terms "comprising," "consisting essentially of," and "consisting of" may be replaced with either of the other two terms, while retaining their ordinary meanings. Unless otherwise required by context, singular terms shall include pluralities and plural terms shall include the singular. As used herein, the singular forms "a," "an," and "the" include plural referents unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. Percentages disclosed herein can vary in amount by ±10, 20, or 30% from values disclosed and remain within the scope of the contemplated disclosure. Unless otherwise indicated or otherwise evident from the context and understanding of one of ordinary skill in the art, values herein that are expressed as ranges can assume any specific value or sub-range within the stated ranges in different embodiments of the disclosure, to the tenth of the unit of the lower limit of the range, unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. As used herein, ranges and amounts can be expressed as "about" a particular value or range. The term "about" also includes the exact amount. For example, "about 5%" means "about 5%" and also "5%." Therefore, about 5% also means 4.5% - 5.5%, for example. Additionally, "about" or "comprising essentially of" can mean a range of up to ±10%. Thus, the term "about" can also refer to ± 10% of a given value or range of values. When particular values or compositions are provided in the application and claims, unless otherwise stated, the meaning of "about" or "comprising essentially of" should be assumed to be within an acceptable error range for that particular value or composition. Unless otherwise clear from context, all numerical values provided herein are modified by the term "about." As described herein, any concentration range, percentage range, ratio range or integer range is to be understood to include the value of any integer within the recited range and, when appropriate, fractions thereof (such as one tenth and one hundredth of an integer), unless otherwise indicated. Units, prefixes, and symbols are denoted in their Système International de Unites (SI) accepted form. Numeric ranges are inclusive of the numbers defining the range. Unless otherwise indicated, nucleotide sequences are written left to right in 5' to 3' orientation. Amino acid sequences are written left to right in amino to carboxy orientation. The headings Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT provided herein are not limitations of the various aspects of the disclosure, which can be had by reference to the specification as a whole. Accordingly, the terms defined immediately below are more fully defined by reference to the specification in its entirety. As used herein, the terms "or" and "and/or" can describe multiple components in combination or exclusive of one another. For example, "x, y, and/or z" can refer to "x" alone, "y" alone, "z" alone, "x, y, and z," "(x and y) or z," "x or (y and z)," or "x or y or z." As used herein, the terms "treat," "treatment," or "treating" when used in the context of treating cancer refer to reducing disease pathology, reducing or eliminating disease symptoms, promoting increased survival rates, and/or reducing discomfort. For example, treating can refer to the ability of a therapy when administered to a subject, to reduce disease symptoms, signs, or causes. Treating also refers to mitigating or decreasing at least one clinical symptom and/or inhibition or delay in the progression of the condition and/or prevention or delay of the onset of a disease or illness. As used herein, the terms "subject," "individual," or "patient," refer to any subject, particularly a mammalian subject, for whom diagnosis, prognosis, or therapy is desired. Mammalian subjects include, for example, humans, non-human primates, dogs, cats, guinea pigs, rabbits, rats, mice, horses, cattle, bears, and so on. The term "patient" may refer to a human. This disclosure provides methods of predicting treatment outcome for R-NSCLC. The methods can comprise: optionally, detecting circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and/or variant allele frequency (VAF) in a sample obtained from a patient at a first time point in a pre- treatment sample before the patient undergoes a R-NSCLC treatment; detecting ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in a sample obtained from the patient at one or more additional time points in one or more additional samples after the patient undergoes the R- NSCLC treatment; determining the difference between the detected ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in the pre-treatment sample and at least one or more additional samples, wherein a decrease in the ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates the patient as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is successful); and continuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient if the patient is indicated as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment. This disclosure also provides methods of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R- NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT administration of the treatment; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; and (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein no change or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful.This disclosure also provides methods of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post- treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein no change or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful and administering one or more alternative treatments to the patient. In certain embodiments of the methods disclosed herein, detecting ctDNA in the post- treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. In certain embodiments, there is an increase or no change in the ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample. In such embodiments, an increase or no change in the ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates the patient as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful), and discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different R-NSCLC treatment to the patient if the patient is indicated as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC treatment refers to neoadjuvant treatment. In some embodiments, R-NSCLC treatment comprises administering durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient about every 21 days (Q3W) for about 4 cycles. In some embodiments, neoadjuvant treatment R-NSCLC treatment is administration of durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient about every 21 days (Q3W) for about 4 cycles. In certain embodiments, the presence of ctDNA is detected in a post-treatment sample. In such embodiments, the detection of ctDNA in a post-treatment sample indicates the patient as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful and/or will not be successful), and discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different or alternative R-NSCLC treatment to the patient if the patient is indicated as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC treatment refers to neoadjuvant treatment. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT This disclosure also provides methods of predicting treatment outcome for R-NSCLC that further comprise determining tumor size of the R-NSCLC in the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient, administering the treatment to the patient; and determining tumor size of the R-NSCLC in the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein a decrease in tumor size after administration of the treatment is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful. In some embodiments, tumor size is determined prior to resecting the R-NSCLC. In certain embodiments, tumor size is determined using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), or both MRI and CT. As disclosed herein, a reduction in tumor size following treatment and prior to surgery can be an early indicator of pathological response to identify patients who may benefit most from treatment with durvalumab plus chemotherapy before surgery. In certain embodiments, patients with radiological CR/PR have a higher rate of pCR and MPR as compared to patients with radiological stable disease. Also disclosed herein are methods of treating R-NSCLC. The methods can comprise administering a R-NSCLC treatment to a subject in need thereof and determining a decrease in ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in a post-treatment sample from the patient when compared to a pre-treatment sample from the patient, and continuing with the R-NSCLC treatment. The methods also comprise administering a R-NSCLC treatment to a subject in need thereof and determining an increase or no change in ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in a post-treatment sample from the patient when compared to a pre-treatment sample from the patient, and discontinuing with the R-NSCLC treatment, and optionally, starting a different or an alternative R-NSCLC treatment. This disclosure also provides methods of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R- NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising administering the treatment to the patient and determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample and/or detecting an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not successful and/or will not be successful. In some embodiments, the first time point can be, for example, prior or immediately prior to the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, ctDNA is determined in a sample obtained from the patient at one or more additional time points (a skilled person would appreciate that a first sample can refer to a pre-treatment sample and a second sample can refer to a post-treatment sample). The at least one of the one or more additional time points Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT can be, for example, at the end of or after at least a cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, the cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment is the first cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, the first time point is prior or immediately prior to a first cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment, and the one or more additional time points (i.e., post- treatment samples) are at the end of or after a second cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, the first cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment is immediately prior to the second cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment, which is immediately prior to the third cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment, which is immediately prior to the fourth cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC treatment may comprise up to 4 cycles of durvalumab and a chemotherapy before taking a post-treatment sample. As used herein, the term "circulating-tumor DNA" or "ctDNA" has its general meaning in the art and refers to DNA that comes from tumor cells. In some embodiments, ctDNA is detected in a blood sample from a patient. In some embodiments, ctDNA is detected in a blood sample that has been obtained from a patient. Thus, in certain embodiments, the methods disclosed herein do not involve a surgical steps to obtain a patient sample. For example, the methods described herein may not encompass taking the sample. ctDNA can carry one or more types of mutations, for example, germline mutations, somatic mutations, or both. Germline mutations refer to mutations existing in germline DNA of a subject. ctDNA from a patient can carry one or more mutations in one or more genes, for example, known cancer-associated genes (e.g., genes known to be associated NSCLC). Somatic mutations refer to mutations originating in somatic cells of a subject, e.g., cancer cells. In some embodiments, the mutation can be cancer-associated mutations (e.g., cancer- associated somatic mutations). Various assays can be used to detect and determine ctDNA levels. In some embodiments, ctDNA levels are detected using a ctDNA assay. In some embodiments, the methods provided herein can comprise isolation of cell-free DNA from the blood (e.g., plasma) of a patient of interest (e.g., a patient with R-NSCLC, or a subject is in remission of R-NSCLC, or a subject suspected to have R-NSCLC) and analysis of ctDNA in the cell-free DNA, employing the use of molecular barcoding and sequencing as a readout. In some embodiments, the method can comprise isolating plasma and ctDNA from intact cell-depleted blood. In some embodiments, the method can comprise centrifugation to generate plasma and extraction of nucleic acids from plasma, followed by library preparation with barcoding, sequencing, and then analysis. The ctDNA, for example, can be obtained from a whole blood and/or plasma sample by known methods. The whole blood and/or plasma sample can be Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT analyzed by methods including, but not limited to, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and next generation sequencing (NGS). In some embodiments, the ctDNA is detected using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). In some embodiments, ctDNA levels can be determined using, for example, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), next generation sequencing (NGS), whole genome sequencing, whole exome sequencing, and/or droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). In some embodiments, the ctDNA is detected using a tumor naïve assay (not requiring tissue or a germline sample). In certain embodiments, the ctDNA is detected using a methylation-based assay or a methylation-based tumor-naïve assay. In certain embodiments, the ctDNA is detected using assays targeting SNVs, SVs or copy number variants or assays using fragmentomics to assess size differences of ctDNA and cell-free DNA. For example, whole exome sequencing as well as whole genome sequencing of tumor and or germline samples can be used to identify patient-specific mutations in the tumor, which are used to design an assay to track ctDNA in the plasma, using next generation sequencing, multiplex PCR, hybrid capture or droplet digital PCR. In some embodiments, tumor-specific mutations can be identified directly from whole genome sequencing of the plasma sample from the patient, without the need for a specific assay design, and ctDNA levels assessed by bioinformatic analysis. In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a tumour- informed assay (e.g., a tumour-informed assay that uses whole genome sequencing analysis, or multiplex PCR, or hybrid capture); or a tumor naïve/uninformed assay (e.g., a tumour naïve/uninformed assay does not require next generation sequencing of the tumor and germline blood to identify patient-specific mutations for assay design). In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a personalized ctDNA assay. In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a generic ctDNA assay. In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a personalized tumour-informed ctDNA assay. In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a personalized tumour-uninformed ctDNA assay. In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a generic tumour-informed ctDNA assay. In another example, determining ctDNA levels can comprise using a generic tumour-uninformed ctDNA assay. In an embodiment, ctDNA is detected using INVITAE Personalized Cancer Monitoring (PCM™), which is a patient-specific, tumor-informed liquid biopsy assay that uses next-generation sequencing and Anchored Multiplex PCR (AMP™) to monitor molecular residual disease with high sensitivity at low variant allele fractions (the INVITAE assay is a tumour-informed assay that uses whole exome sequencing analysis of the tumor Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT and germline to identify tumor-specific mutations, which has a LoD95 of 80ppm (parts per million). In some embodiments, the assays used for determining ctDNA levels can have a detection limit of about 80 ppm (parts per million), which is 0.008% variant allele fraction (VAF), or 80 ppm to about 0.3 ppm (0.00003%). In certain embodiments, the approximate range for a tumor-informed assay can be about 0.01% - 0.0001% VAF, and the approximate range for tumor-uniformed assay can be about 0.1% - 0.3% VAF, or about 0.05% - 0.3% VAF, or about 0.02% - 0.3% VAF. Exemplary amounts of ctDNA in a biological sample (e.g., plasma or serum) can range from about 1 ng per 4 mL of plasma to about 200 ng per 4 mL of plasma. In certain embodiments, ctDNA in a sample can range from about 5 ng per 4 mL of plasma to about 50 ng per 4 mL of plasma. Exemplary amounts of ctDNA in a biological sample (e.g., plasma) can range, for example, from about 1 ng/mL to about 50 ng/mL. In certain embodiments, ctDNA levels in a biological sample (e.g., plasma) can range, from about 5 ng/mL to about 10 ng/mL. The ctDNA can have an exemplary size distribution of about 100-500 nucleotides, with a size of about 145 nucleotides (base pairs) for ctDNA and about a size of about 166 nucleotides (base pairs for cell-free DNA). In some embodiments, the method comprises determining ctDNA levels of the subject before the treatment. In some embodiments, the treatment comprises one or more cycles, and the ctDNA is determined before, during and after each cycle of the treatment. For example, the ctDNA can be determined before, during and after two or more cycles of the treatment, three or more cycles of the treatment, or each cycle of the treatment. Each cycle of treatment can be at least 21 days, for example, 21 days, 22 days, 23 days, 24 days, 25 days, 26 days, 27 days, 28 days, 29 days, 30 days, or more, or a range between any two of these values. As used herein, 'C2D1' refers to day 1 of cycle 2, 'C3D1' refers to day 1 of cycle 3, and 'C4D1' refers to day 1 of cycle 4. In some embodiments, the method comprises determining the ctDNA level or determining the VAF in a post-treatment sample. For example, in certain embodiments, the method comprises determining the ctDNA level or determining the VAF in a post-treatment sample after C1D1, C2D1, C3D1, or C4D1. In some embodiments, each cycle of treatment is from about 21 days to about 28 days. In some embodiments, each cycle of treatment is about 21 days. In some embodiments, each cycle of treatment is about 28 days. In some embodiments, the first time point or pre-treatment sample is prior or immediately prior to the Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT R-NSCLC treatment, and at least one of the one or more additional time points or post- treatment samples are at the end of or after at least a cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, the first time point or pre-treatment sample is prior or immediately prior to a first cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment, and the one or more additional time points or post-treatment samples are at the end of or after a second cycle of the R- NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, the first cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment is immediately prior to the second cycle of the R-NSCLC treatment. As disclosed herein, a decrease in the ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates the patient as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is successful). In some embodiments, the method comprises continuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient when the patient is indicated as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment. For example, if there is a decrease in ctDNA in a post-treatment sample, then the patient completes the total number of pre-surgery/neoadjuvant cycles (about 3 to 6 cycles about every 14 – 28 days (Q2W to Q4W) of durvalumab and chemotherapy, or 4 cycles about every 21 days (Q3W) of durvalumab and chemotherapy), or if all of the neoadjvant cycles are completed, then the patient progresses to surgery (resecting the R-NSCLC), optionally followed by adjuvant durvalumab. In some embodiments, the method comprises discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different R-NSCLC treatment to the patient when the patient is not indicated as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment. For example, in some embodiments, there is an increase or no change in the ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in at least one of the post- treatment samples relative to the pre-treatment sample, which indicates that the patient is non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful). In some embodiments, ctDNA is detected in at least one post-treatment sample, which indicates that the patient is non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful or will not be successful). Thus, in some embodiments, the method comprises discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting an alternative therapy, and/or advancing to having surgery on the patient when the patient is indicated as non- responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment. A patient’s ctDNA level can be an absolute value (e.g., number of copies/ml, nanogram/ml or microgram/ml), a relative value (e.g., relative intensity of signals; a percent or "fold" or "fold-change" decrease), a value that has an upper or a lower limit, a range of values, an average value, a median value, a mean value, or a value as compared to a particular control or baseline value from a pre-treatment sample. For example, ctDNA levels Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT can have a detection limit of about 80ppm to about 0.3 ppm. In some embodiments, a baseline value from a pre-treatment sample can be the ctDNA level before administration of a R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, when the baseline ctDNA level from a pre- treatment sample is below the detection limits of the assay used (i.e., no ctDNA is detected in the pre-treatment sample), then the methods as disclosed herein would not be used, and such a patient would continue with the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, ctDNA clearance can be used to predict the success of the R- NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, ctDNA clearance refers to undetectable levels of ctDNA in a sample obtained from the patient. For example, achieving ctDNA clearance in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates the patient as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is successful). In some embodiments, detecting the presence of ctDNA in at least one post-treatment sample indicates that the patient as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful or will not be successful). In some embodiments, the method comprises continuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient when the R-NSCLC treatment results in ctDNA clearance. In some embodiments, the method comprises discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different R-NSCLC treatment to the patient when ctDNA clearance and/or partial clearance does not occur and thus the patient is not indicated as responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment. A decreased ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample, or at least one of the additional samples, relative to the pre-treatment sample can comprise a decrease of at least 50% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 60% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 70% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 80% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 90% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 95% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 98% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre- treatment sample, a decrease of at least 99% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre- treatment sample, or a decrease of 100% ctDNA from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample. In certain embodiments, ctDNA clearance refers to 100% clearance of ctDNA, wherein 100% clearance of ctDNA (or simply ctDNA clearance) refers to a ctDNA level below (undetected ctDNA) the lower limit of detection of the assay used to detect ctDNA. In some embodiments, a ctDNA clearance indicates a successful treatment, and can predict an Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum- based chemotherapy. In some embodiments, a ctDNA clearance indicates a successful treatment, and can predict an improvement in pCR and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum-based chemotherapy. In some embodiments, a partial response or a partial molecular response refers to ctDNA clearance of greater than or equal to 50% clearance compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample to less than 100% clearance. In some embodiments, a partial response indicates a successful treatment, and can predict an improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum based chemotherapy. As used herein, the term "responsive" refers to a patient that achieves a response, i.e., a patient where the cancer is eradicated, reduced or improved, and thus an indication that the treatment is successful. In some embodiments, a successful treatment can refer to an improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum based chemotherapy. For example, a patient with ctDNA clearance in a post-treatment sample is considered a "responder" and shows an improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum based chemotherapy. A "non- responder" or "refractory" patient includes patients for whom the cancer does not show reduction or improvement after the preoperative adjuvant therapy. For example, a patient with less than 50% ctDNA clearance in a post-treatment sample is considered a "non- responder" and does not have an improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum based chemotherapy. In some embodiments, a patient having ctDNA detected in a post-treatment sample is considered a "non-responder" and does not have an improvement in pCR, MPR, DFS, OS, and/or EFS compared to standard of care or platinum based chemotherapy. In some embodiments, variant allele frequency (VAF) is also determined and can be used to predict treatment success. In some embodiments, determining ctDNA levels also comprises detecting variant allele frequency in the ctDNA. In some embodiments, the method further comprises detecting the variant allele frequency of ctDNA in a subject at a first time point in a pre-treatment sample, detecting variant allele frequency from the subject at one or more additional time points in one or more additional samples, and determining the difference of the variant allele frequency between the first and at least one of the one or more additional samples, wherein a decrease in the variant allele frequency at the additional sample(s) relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates that the treatment is successful (an Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT increase in the variant allele frequency at the additional sample(s) relative to the pre- treatment sample indicates that the patient is at risk of relapse). The variant allele frequency (VAF) in ctDNA can be determined, for example, by determining the levels of ctDNA using a tumor-informed or tumor-uninformed assay in each of the pre-treatment sample and one or more additional samples, and/or by the mean or median variant allele frequency in each of the pre-treatment sample and one or more additional samples. The ctDNA level can be used to determine the VAF in a sample. For example, VAF is ctDNA as a percentage of cell-free DNA present in a sample (e.g., blood or tumor). In certain embodiments, the methods as disclosed herein can comprise detecting variant allele frequency in the ctDNA in a pre-treatment sample obtained from the patient at a first time point, detecting variant allele frequency in the ctDNA obtained from the patient at one or more additional time points in one or more additional samples, and determining the difference of the variant allele frequency in ctDNA between the first and at least one of the one or more additional samples, wherein a decrease in the variant allele frequency in at least one of the additional samples relative to the pre-treatment sample indicates the patient as responsive to the treatment. A decreased VAF in the post-treatment sample, or at least one of the additional samples, relative to the pre-treatment sample can comprise a decrease of at least 50% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 60% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 70% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 80% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 90% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 95% VAF from baseline, a decrease of at least 98% VAF from baseline, or a decrease of at least 99% ctDNA from baseline. In some embodiments, the variant allele frequency can be determined, for example, by determining the levels of ctDNA using a tumor-informed or tumor-uninformed assay in each of the pre-treatment sample and one or more additional samples, or by the mean or median variant allele frequency in each of the pre-treatment sample and one or more additional samples. In some embodiments, the variant allele frequency is mutant allelic frequency for a driver mutation of lung cancer. In certain embodiments of the methods disclosed herein, the methods are indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful if the patient has and/or will have an improvement in one or more of EFS, OS, PCR, mPR and DFS. In certain embodiments, the methods disclosed herein are indicative that the treatment is and/or will be unsuccessful if the Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT patient does not have and/or will not have an improvement in one or more of EFS, OS, PCR, mPR and DFS. In an aspect, this disclosure provides methods of treating a patient identified as having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC). The methods can comprise administering a R-NSCLC treatment to a subject in need thereof and determining a decrease in ctDNA and/or variant allele frequency in a pre-treatment sample of the patient obtained at a first time point before the patient receives the R-NSCLC treatment when compared to a post-treatment sample of the patient obtained at a second time point after the patient receives the R-NSCLC treatment; and continuing with the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, the presence of ctDNA is detected in a post-treatment sample. In such embodiments, the detection of ctDNA in a post-treatment sample indicates the patient as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful and/or will not be successful), and discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different R-NSCLC treatment to the patient. In some embodiments, the patient having R-NSCLC is newly diagnosed. In some embodiments, the patient having R-NSCLC is previously untreated. In some embodiments, the patient having R-NSCLC is histologically or cytologically documented as having stage II or stage III cancer (according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] Cancer Staging Manual, version 8). In some embodiments, the patient having R-NSCLC is histologically or cytologically documented as having stage IIA to select [N2] stage IIIB cancer (according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] Cancer Staging Manual, version 8). In some embodiments, the patient having R-NSCLC is newly diagnosed, previously untreated, and histologically or cytologically documented, resectable NSCLC (stage IIA to select [N2] stage IIIB according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] Cancer Staging Manual, version 8). In some embodiments, the patient having R- NSCLC is has resectable Stage IIA to select [i.e., N2] Stage IIIB) disease (according to Version 8 of the IASLC Staging Manual in Thoracic Oncology 2016). In some embodiments, the patient having R-NSCLC is a candidate for lobectomy, sleeve resection, or bilobectomy as planned surgery at the time of enrollment. In some embodiments, the patient's tumor PD-L1 status of the R-NSCLC is determined prior to treatment. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC of the patients has a PD- L1 tumor cell expression <1%. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC of the patients has a PD-L1 tumor cell expression 1–49%. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC of the patients has a PD-L1 tumor cell expression ≥50%. In certain embodiments, a patient's tumor PD-L1 Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT status is determined using an immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay. In certain embodiments, a patient's tumor PD-L1 status is determined using Ventana PD-L1 (SP263) immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay applied to formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue sample. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC is a squamous cell carcinoma. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC is a non-squamous cell carcinoma. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC is an adenocarcinoma. In some embodiments, the patient's tumor EGFR and ALK status of the R-NSCLC is determined prior to treatment. In some embodiments, the patient does not have an EGFR mutation and/or an ALK translocation. In some embodiments, patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) mutations in their tumors were not required to be tested for EGFR/ALK and patients with squamous cell carcinoma were not required to be tested for ALK. As used herein, the term "durvalumab" refers to an antibody that selectively binds PD-L1 and blocks the binding of PD-L1 to the PD-1 and CD80 receptors. The durvalumab antibody is disclosed in U.S. Patent No.9,493,565 (referred to as "2.14H9OPT"), which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. The fragment crystallizable (Fc) domain of durvalumab contains a triple mutation in the constant domain of the IgG1 heavy chain that reduces binding to the complement component C1q and the Fcγ receptors responsible for mediating antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity ("ADCC"). In certain embodiments, the triple mutation refers to the IgG1 Fc region comprising a L234F/L235E/P331S triple mutation (EU numbering; see also US 9,493,565). Durvalumab can relieve PD-L1-mediated suppression of human T-cell activation in vitro and inhibits tumor growth in a xenograft model via a T-cell dependent mechanism. Amino acid sequences of Durvalumab are as follows: Durvalumab sequences MEDI4736 VL EIVLTQSPGTLSLSPGERATLSCRASQRVSSSYLAWYQQKPGQAPRLLIYDASSRATGIPDRFSGSGSG TDFTLTISRLEPEDFAVYYCQQYGSLPWTFGQGTKVEIK (SEQ ID NO. 1) MEDI4736 VL CDR1 RASQRVSSSYLA (SEQ ID NO. 2) MEDI4736 VL CDR2 DASSRAT (SEQ ID NO. 3) MEDI4736 VL CDR3 QQYGSLPWT (SEQ ID NO. 4) MEDI4736 VH EVQLVESGGGLVQPGGSLRLSCAASGFTFSRYWMSWVRQAPGKGLEWVANIKQDGSEKYYVDSVKGRFT ISRDNAKNSLYLQMNSLRAEDTAVYYCAREGGWFGELAFDYWGQGTLVTVSS (SEQ ID NO. 5) MEDI4736 VH CDR1 GFTFSRYWMS (SEQ ID NO. 6) Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT MEDI4736 VH CDR2 NIKQDGSEKYYVDSVKG (SEQ ID NO. 7) MEDI4736 VH CDR3 EGGWFGELAFDY (SEQ ID NO. 8) As used herein, the term "chemotherapy" refers to one or more chemotherapeutic agents that can be used to treat a patient diagnosed with a non-small cell lung cancer. The term "chemotherapeutic agent" refers to a chemical compound that is selectively destructive or selectively toxic to malignant cells and tissues. As used herein, the term "platinum-based chemotherapy" refers to chemotherapy drugs that contain the element platinum. Platinum-based chemotherapy has been used to treat many different types of cancer. In some embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy refers to chemotherapy treatment comprising comprises at least one of one or more of carboplatin, cisplatin, nedaplatin, and oxaliplatin. In some embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy can also refer to chemotherapy treatment comprising at least one or more of triplatin tetranitrate, phenanthriplatin, picoplatin, and satraplatin. In certain embodiments, a platinum- based chemotherapy further comprises one or more of afatinib, cetuximab, bevacizumab, erlotinib, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, pemetrexed, and vemurafenib. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy further comprises one or more of cisplatin, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and pemetrexed. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises carboplatin and paclitaxel. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises cisplatin and gemcitabine. In certain embodiments, a platinum- based chemotherapy comprises carboplatin and gemcitabine. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises carboplatin and pemetrexed. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises cisplatin and pemetrexed. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a carboplatin area under the serum drug concentration-time curve (AUC) dose of about 5 to 6 mg/mL/min. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a cisplatin dose of about 75 mg/m2. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a paclitaxel dose of about 200 mg/m2. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a pemetrexed dose of about 500 mg/m2. In certain embodiments, a platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a gemcitabine dose of about 1250 mg/m2. As used herein, the term "adjuvant therapy" refers to any type of therapy of cancer given as additional treatment, usually after surgical resection of the primary tumor, in a patient affected with a cancer that is at risk of metastasizing and/or at risk of recurrence. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Adjuvant therapies can comprise immunotherapy, monoclonal antibody therapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy, chemotherapy. In an embodiment, adjuvant therapy is durvalumab. In another embodiment, adjuvant therapy is radiotherapy. In yet another embodiment, adjuvant therapy comprises durvalumab and radiotherapy. As used herein, the term "neoadjuvant therapy" refers to any type of therapy of cancer given as additional treatment, usually before surgical resection of the primary tumor, in a patient affected with a cancer that is at risk of metastasizing and/or likely to recur. Neoadjuvant therapies can comprise immunotherapy, monoclonal antibody therapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy, chemotherapy. In an embodiment, neoadjuvant therapy is durvalumab. In another embodiment, neoadjuvant therapy is chemotherapy. In yet another embodiment, neoadjuvant therapy comprises both durvalumab and chemotherapy (for example, a platinum-based chemotherapy). In certain embodiments, the R-NSCLC treatment refers to a combination therapy comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy. In some embodiments, the combination therapy may be neoadjuvant durvalumab and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In some embodiments, the combination therapy may be perioperative durvalumab and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In some embodiments, the combination therapy may comprise neoadjuvant durvalumab, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant durvalumab. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC treatment comprises administering about 1000 mg to about 2000 mg durvalumab once about every 14 to 28 days for up to about 3 to 6 total cycles prior to surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC and then about 1000 mg to about 2000 mg durvalumab once about every 14 to 28 days for up to about 12 cycles following the surgery. In some embodiments, the R-NSCLC treatment comprises administering about 1500 mg durvalumab once about every three weeks (q3w) for up to a maximum of about 4 cycles prior to surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC and then about 1500 mg durvalumab once about every four weeks (q4w) for about 12 cycles following the surgery. If a patient's weight falls to 30 kg or below [≤30 kg], the patient should receive weight-based dosing equivalent to about 20 mg/kg of durvalumab [or placebo] about q3w or about q4w until the weight improves to >30 kg, at which point the patient should start receiving the fixed dosing of durvalumab about 1500 mg [or placebo] about q3w or about q4w. In some embodiments, durvalumab can be provided as a 500-mg vial solution for infusion after dilution. In some embodiments, the solution contains 50 mg/mL durvalumab, 26 mM histidine/histidine-hydrochloride, 275 mM trehalose dihydrate, and 0.02% w/v polysorbate 80; it has a pH of 6.0 and density of 1.054 g/mL. In certain embodiments, a dose Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT of about 1500 mg (for patients >30 kg in WT) can be administered using an IV bag containing 0.9% (w/v) saline or 5% (w/v) dextrose, with a final durvalumab concentration ranging from 1 to 15 mg/mL and delivered through an IV administration set with a 0.2- or 0.22-μm filter. If patient weight falls to ≤30 kg, WT-based dosing at 20 mg/kg can be administered using an IV bag selected such that the final concentration is within 1 to 15 mg/mL. In some embodiments, a standard infusion time is 1 hour (±10 mins); however, if there are interruptions, the total allowed time must not exceed 8 hours at room temperature. In some embodiments, this disclosure provides methods of treating a patient identified as having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), comprising (i) administering to the patient about 1000 - 2000 mg of durvalumab and a platinum-based chemotherapy about every 14 – 28 days for about 3 to 6 cycles; (ii) removing the R-NSCLC by surgery; and then (iii) administering to the patient about 1000 – 2000 mg of durvalumab about every 14 to 28 days for at least about 12 weeks. In certain embodiments, the presence of ctDNA is detected in a post-treatment sample. In such embodiments, the detection of ctDNA in a post-treatment sample indicates the patient as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment (i.e., that the treatment is not successful and/or will not be successful), and discontinuing the R-NSCLC treatment to the patient and/or starting a different R-NSCLC treatment to the patient if the patient is indicated as non-responsive to the R-NSCLC treatment. In some embodiments, a different R-NSCLC treatment or an alternative treatment refers to an entirely new therapy effect for treating R- NSCLC. In some embodiments, a different R-NSCLC treatment or an alternative treatment refers to durvalumab in combination with an alternative chemotherapy. In some embodiments, a different R-NSCLC treatment or an alternative treatment refers chemotherapy as disclosed herein but with an alternative to durvalumab. In some embodiments, a different R-NSCLC treatment or an alternative treatment refers durvalumab and chemotherapy as disclosed herein and an additional treatment. In certain embodiments, after the surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC, patients should start durvalumab administration as soon as clinically feasible and within about 10 weeks from the surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC. A minimum of about 3 weeks is recommended between surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC and the start of durvalumab treatment (first post-surgical scan must be performed prior to starting adjuvant treatment and post-operative radiotherapy, if required). Complete post-operative wound healing must have occurred following any surgery. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT In some embodiments, surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC should happen within about 40 days from the last administration of durvalumab. In some embodiments, surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC comprises anatomic pulmonary resection of the NSCLC. In some embodiments, either open thoracotomy or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery access can be carried out as appropriate to the expertise of the surgeon. In some embodiments, lung-sparing anatomic resection (sleeve lobectomy) is preferred over pneumonectomy, if anatomically appropriate and margin-negative resection is achieved. In some embodiments, T3 (invasion) and T4 local extension tumors may require en-bloc resection of the involved structure with negative margins. In some embodiments, patients can receive post-operative radiotherapy (PORT) following surgery to remove the resectable NSCLC. Post-operative radiotherapy (PORT) can be given within about 8 weeks after surgery. In some embodiments, adjuvant durvalumab starts no longer than about 3 weeks after the end of PORT. In some embodiments, adjuvant durvalumab starts no more than about 10 weeks after surgery. In some embodiments, post- operative radiotherapy (PORT) is allowed for patients in which it is indicated according to local guidance. In some embodiments, PORT can include, but is not limited to, doses ranging from 50 to 60 Gy, 1.8 to 2 Gy per fraction, 5 fractions a week; for patients with positive margins of disease (R1). In some embodiments, PORT can include, but is not limited to, doses ranging from 60 to 66 Gy, 1.8 to 2 Gy per fraction, 5 fractions a week. In some embodiments, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) is allowed. In some embodiments of the methods disclosed herein, the methods result in improvement in one or more of EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and mPR compared to a standard of care. In certain embodiments, the methods results in improvement in one or more of EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and mPR compared to a platinum-based chemotherapy. In some embodiments, the success of the method of treatment is determined by an improvement in pathological complete response (pCR) as compared to standard of care, e.g., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. In some embodiments, the success of the method of treatment is determined by an improvement in major pathological response (mPR) as compared to standard of care, e.g., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. In some embodiments, the success of the method of treatment is determined by an improvement event free survival (EFS) as compared to standard of care, e.g., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT In some embodiments, the success of the method of treatment is determined by an improvement in disease free survival (DFS) as compared to standard of care, e.g., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. In some embodiments, the success of the method of treatment is determined by an improvement in overall survival (OS) as compared to standard of care, e.g., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, such as neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. Thus success of treatment may be defined as an increase in EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and/or mPR in patients treated with (i) neoadjuvant durvalumab and neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy only; or (ii) perioperative durvalumab and neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy only; or (iii) neoadjuvant durvalumab, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant durvalumab compared to patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy only. As used herein, the term "Standard of care" (SoC) can refer to one or more of: 1) Carboplatin + paclitaxel: carboplatin AUC 6 (mg/mL/min) and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles (for squamous tumor histology). 2) Cisplatin + gemcitabine: cisplatin 75 mg/m2 via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3- week cycle, for 4 cycles, and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 via IV infusion on Day 1 and Day 8 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles (for squamous tumor histology). In the event of unfavorable tolerability, patients can switch from cisplatin to carboplatin therapy at any point during the study (assuming eligibility for the switched therapy is met). In patients with comorbidities or unable to tolerate cisplatin per Investigators judgment, carboplatin AUC 5 (mg/mL/min) can be administered from cycle 1. 3) Pemetrexed + cisplatin: pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles (for non-squamous tumor histology). In the event of unfavorable tolerability, patients can switch from cisplatin to carboplatin therapy at any point during the study (assuming eligibility for the switched therapy is met). In patients with comorbidities or unable to tolerate cisplatin per Investigators judgment, carboplatin AUC 5 (mg/mL/min) can be administered from cycle 1. 4) Pemetrexed + carboplatin: pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC 5 (mg/mL/min) via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles (for non-squamous tumor histology). In some embodiments, standard of care may further include resection of the non-small cell lung cancer tumor. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT As used herein, the terms "event-free survival" or "EFS" refer to the time from randomization to the first of the following: a) local or distant recurrence as determined by BICR using RECIST 1.1 assessments; b) death due to any cause (event date is the date of death); c) PD that precludes surgery (event date is the date of this determination) or PD discovered and reported by the Investigator upon attempting surgery that prevents completion of surgery (event date is the date of the first attempt at surgery). Event-free survival can be analyzed using the log-rank test based on blinded independent central review (BICR) assessment using RECIST v1.1 and pathology review stratified by disease stage (Stage II versus Stage III) and by PD-L1 expression status (<1% versus ≥1%) on the mITT. The p- value can be obtained from the stratified log-rank test using the Efron (Hertz-Picciotto and Rockhill “Validity and efficiency of approximation methods for tied survival times in Cox regression.” Biometrics 1997; 53(3):1151-6.). As used herein, the terms "pathological complete response" or "pathological CR" or "pCR" refer to the proportion of patients who have 0% residual viable tumor cells within all resected tissue (including primary lung lesion and lymph nodes) following neoadjuvant treatment as assessed by central pathology laboratory. Patients who are not evaluable per central pathology assessment (this includes patients with R2 margins) or who do not have a surgical specimen can be considered as non-pCR (e.g., pathology assessments captured as "non-evaluable" or "missing," as appropriate). Central pathology assessment of pCR will be performed according to the recommended methods and definitions described by IASLC 2020 (Travis et al. “IASLC Multidisciplinary Recommendations for Pathologic Assessment of Lung Cancer Resection Specimens After Neoadjuvant Therapy.” J Thorac Oncol.2020 May; 15(5):709-740. doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2020.01.005). The analysis can be performed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test, stratified by disease stage (Stage II versus Stage III) and PD-L1 expression status (<1% versus ≥1%). The effect of treatment will be estimated by the difference in proportions between treatment groups, together with their corresponding CI and p-value. As used herein, the terms "disease-free survival" and "DFS" refer to the time from the date of surgery until the first date of disease recurrence as determined by BICR using RECIST 1.1 assessments (local or distant), or date of death due to any cause, whichever occurs first. Pathological confirmation from biopsied lesions, can also be taken into consideration (as applicable). A new primary malignancy, confirmed by pathology, is not considered a DFS event. Disease-free survival can be analyzed using the log-rank test based on BICR assessment using RECIST 1.1 and pathology review stratified by disease stage Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT (Stage II versus Stage III) and by PD-L1 expression status (<1% versus ≥1%) on the modified resected analysis set. The p-value can be obtained from the stratified log-rank test using the Efron (Hertz-Picciotto and Rockhill 1997) approach for handling ties. As used herein, the terms "major pathological response", "MPR" or "mPR" refer to the proportion of patients with 10% or less residual viable tumor tissue in lung primary tumor after neoadjuvant treatment at the time of resection as assessed per central pathology laboratory. Patients who are not evaluable per central pathology assessment (including patients with R2 margins) or who do not have a surgical specimen can be considered as having non-mPR (e.g., response captured as "non-evaluable" or "missing," as appropriate). The analysis can be performed using a CMH test, stratified by disease stage (Stage II versus Stage III) and PDL1 expression status (<1% versus ≥1%). The effect of treatment can be estimated by the difference in proportions between treatment groups, together with their corresponding CI and p-value. As used herein, the terms "overall survival" and "OS" refer to the time from the date of randomization until death due to any cause regardless of whether the subject withdraws from randomized therapy or receives another anticancer therapy. Any patient not known to have died at the time of analysis will be censored based on the last recorded date on which the patient was known to be alive. Overall survival can be analyzed in the mITT population using the same methodology as described for EFS. The effect of treatment can be estimated by the HR together with its corresponding CI. Kaplan-Meier plots can be presented by treatment arm. Analyses can be performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates of OS to estimate the number of OS patients at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months. Intent-to-treat (ITT) population set: The ITT analysis set includes all randomized patients. Treatment groups are compared on the basis of randomized study treatment, regardless of the treatment actually received. Patients who were randomized but did not subsequently go on to receive study treatment are included in the analysis in the treatment group to which they were randomized. Modified Intent-to-treat (mITT) population set: The mITT includes all patients in the ITT, excluding those whose tumors have EGFRm/ALK translocation. Unless otherwise specified, the mITT is used for all efficacy analyses, including PROs. Treatment arms are compared based on randomized study treatment, regardless of the treatment actually received. Resected population set: The resected set can consist of all patients in the ITT who had surgical resection following the neoadjuvant period, who do not have R2 margins, and Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT whose first scan following surgery shows no evaluable disease (defined as no post-surgery R2 margins and no RECIST evidence of disease). Modified Resected population set: The modified resected set can consist of all patients in the resected set, excluding those whose tumors have EGFRm/ALK translocation. Unless otherwise specified, this analysis set is used for DFS only. Treatment arms are compared based on randomized study treatment, regardless of the treatment actually received. The terms "administration" or "administering" as used herein refer to providing, contacting, and/or delivering a compound or compounds by any appropriate route to achieve the desired effect. Administration may include, but is not limited to, oral, sublingual, parenteral (e.g., intravenous, subcutaneous, intracutaneous, intramuscular, intraarticular, intraarterial, intrasynovial, intrasternal, intrathecal, intralesional, or intracranial injection), transdermal, topical, buccal, rectal, vaginal, nasal, ophthalmic, via inhalation, and implants. It is to be understood that the particular aspects of the specification are described herein are not limited to specific embodiments presented, and can vary. It also will be understood that the terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular aspects only and, unless specifically defined herein, is not intended to be limiting. Moreover, particular embodiments disclosed herein can be combined with other embodiments disclosed herein, as would be recognized by a skilled person, without limitation. Without limiting the disclosure, a number of embodiments of the disclosure are described below for purpose of illustration. Embodiments: Embodiment 1: A method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre- treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of the treatment; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; and (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful, or Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT wherein no change in the ctDNA level or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post- treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. Embodiment 2: A method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre- treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; and (d) administering the treatment to the patient or resecting the R-NSCLC if there is a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, or administering an alternative treatment to the patient if there is no change or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample. Embodiment 3: The method of either embodiment 1 or embodiment 2, wherein the decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample is a decrease of at least 50% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 60% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 70% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 80% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 90% from the ctDNA level in the pre- treatment sample, at least 95% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 98% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, at least 99% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, or a decrease of 100% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample. Embodiment 4: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 3, wherein the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample is undetectable. Embodiment 5: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 4, wherein the method is indicative that treatment is and/or will be successful. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Embodiment 6: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 5, wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. Embodiment 7: A method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; and (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. Embodiment 8: A method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; and (c) administering an alternative treatment to the patient if ctDNA is detected in the post-treatment sample. Embodiment 9: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 8, wherein the method further comprises: determining a variant allele fraction (VAF) in the pre-treatment sample and a VAF in the post-treatment sample; wherein a decrease in the VAF in the post-treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful; and administering the treatment to the patient if there is a decrease in the VAF in the post- treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample. Embodiment 10: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 8, wherein the decrease in the VAF in the post-treatment sample is a decrease of at least 50% from the VAF in the pre- treatment sample, at least 60% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 70% from Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 80% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 90% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 95% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 98% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 99% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, or a decrease of 100% from the VAF in the pre- treatment sample. Embodiment 11: The method of either embodiment 9 or embodiment 10, wherein the VAF in the post-treatment sample is undetectable and/or below a limit of detection. Embodiment 12: The method of any one of embodiments 9 to 11, wherein the method is indicative that treatment is and/or will be successful. Embodiment 13: The method of any one of embodiments 9 to 12, wherein detecting VAF in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. Embodiment 14: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 13, wherein determining the ctDNA level or determining the VAF in the post-treatment sample occurs after about 21 days of the treatment, after about 42 days of the treatment, after about 63 days of the treatment, or after about 84 days of the treatment. Embodiment 15: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 14, wherein determining the ctDNA level or determining the VAF in the post-treatment sample occurs after about 1 cycle of the treatment, after about 2 cycles of the treatment, after about 3 cycles of the treatment, or after about 4 cycles of the treatment. Embodiment 16: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 14, wherein the ctDNA level is detected by a sequencing reaction. Embodiment 17: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 16 further comprising: (a) determining tumor size of the R-NSCLC in the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining tumor size of the R-NSCLC in the patient after administration of the treatment; Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT wherein a decrease in tumor size after administration of the treatment is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful. Embodiment 18: The method of embodiment 17, wherein tumor size is determined prior to resecting the R-NSCLC. Embodiment 19: The method of either embodiment 17 or embodiment 18, wherein tumor size is determined using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), or both MRI and CT. Embodiment 20: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to19, wherein the treatment comprises administering durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient about every 21 days (Q3W) for about 4 cycles. Embodiment 21: The method of embodiment 20 further comprising resecting the R-NSCLC after the about 4 cycles of the treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy. Embodiment 22: The method of embodiment 21 further comprising administering to the patient durvalumab about every 14 to 28 days for up to about 12 cycles after resecting the R- NSCLC. Embodiment 23: The method of embodiment 21 further comprising administering to the patient durvalumab about every 28 days (Q4W) for up to about 12 cycles after resecting the R-NSCLC. Embodiment 24: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 23, wherein about 1000 to 2000 mg of durvalumab is administered to the patient. Embodiment 25: The method of embodiment 24, wherein about 1500 mg of durvalumab is administered to the patient. Embodiment 26: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 25, wherein the chemotherapy is a platinum-based chemotherapy. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Embodiment 27: The method of embodiment 26, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy is one or more of carboplatin, cisplatin, nedaplatin, and oxaliplatin. Embodiment 28: The method of embodiment 27, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a carboplatin area under the serum drug concentration-time curve (AUC) dose of about 5 to about 6 mg/mL/min, or a cisplatin dose of about 75 mg/m2. Embodiment 29: The method of any one of embodiments 26 to 28, wherein the platinum- based chemotherapy further comprises one or more of afatinib, cetuximab, bevacizumab, erlotinib, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, pemetrexed, and vemurafenib. Embodiment 30: The method of any one of embodiments 26 to 28, wherein the platinum- based chemotherapy further comprises one or more of cisplatin, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and pemetrexed. Embodiment 31: The method of either embodiment 29 or embodiment 30, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy further comprises a paclitaxel dose of about 200 mg/m2, a pemetrexed dose of about 500 mg/m2, or a gemcitabine dose of about 1250 mg/m2. Embodiment 32: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 31, wherein the R-NSCLC is a squamous cell carcinoma. Embodiment 33: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 31, wherein the R-NSCLC is a non-squamous cell carcinoma. Embodiment 34: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 33, wherein the patient does not have an EGFR mutation and/or an ALK translocation. Embodiment 35: The method of any one of embodiments 21 to 23 further comprising a post- operative radiation therapy. Embodiment 36: The method of embodiment 35, wherein the post-operative radiation therapy starts within about 8 weeks after resecting the R-NSCLC. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Embodiment 37: The method of embodiment 36, wherein administering durvalumab starts within about 3 weeks from the end of the post-operative radiation therapy. Embodiment 38: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 37, wherein an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the pre-treatment sample is determined, and one or more alternative treatments R-NSCLC is administered to the patient. Embodiment 39: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 38, wherein the method results in improvement in one or more of EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and mPR compared to a standard of care. Embodiment 40: The method of any one of embodiments 1 to 38, wherein the method results in improvement in one or more of EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and mPR compared to a platinum- based chemotherapy. EXAMPLES The Examples that follow are illustrative of specific embodiments of the disclosure, and various uses thereof. They are set forth for explanatory purposes only and should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention in any way. Example 1: Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant Durvalumab for the treatment of patients with Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (R-NSCLC) The AEGEAN (NCT03800134) study described herein is a phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center international study of assessed perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) durvalumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with resectable stage II and stage III non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC). While the primary treatment for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC [Stages I to IIIA]) is curative surgery, the 5-year survival rate for patients treated with surgery alone remains low, ranging from 67% (Stage IA) to 23% (Stage IIIA) (Mountain 1997). Early studies of immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting in patients with resectable NSCLC have shown promising clinical activity as well as acceptable safety profiles (Forde et al. “Neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade in resectable lung cancer.” N Engl J Med 2018; 378:1976-86; Shu et al. “Neoadjuvant atezolizumab + chemotherapy in patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).” Poster presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting 2018.). It may be possible that combining chemotherapy with durvalumab prior to surgery can have clinical Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT benefit over chemotherapy + placebo. Therefore, in this Phase III study, the administration of durvalumab + a platinum-based chemotherapy prior to surgery, followed by further administration of durvalumab after surgery, was investigated to determine if this therapy regimen can improve activity and therefore long-term clinical outcomes for patients with resectable NSCLC. Patients The study enrolled approximately 1300 patients and randomized approximately 800 eligible patients. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed, previously untreated, histologically or cytologically documented, resectable NSCLC (stage IIA to select [N2] stage IIIB according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] Cancer Staging Manual, version 8). Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either durvalumab plus a platinum-based chemotherapy before surgery followed by durvalumab post-surgery (Arm 1; a platinum-based chemotherapy plus durvalumab intravenously every three weeks (four cycles) before surgery, followed by durvalumab intravenously every four weeks (12 cycles)) or placebo plus a platinum-based chemotherapy before surgery followed by placebo post- surgery (Arm 2; a platinum-based chemotherapy plus placebo intravenously every three weeks (four cycles) before surgery, followed by placebo intravenously every four weeks (12 cycles)). Patients were also stratified by disease stage (Stage II versus Stage III) and by PD- L1 expression status (<1% versus ≥1%). Patients had resectable (Stage IIA to select [i.e., N2] Stage IIIB) disease (according to Version 8 of the IASLC Staging Manual in Thoracic Oncology 2016) and were candidates for lobectomy, sleeve resection, or bilobectomy as planned surgery at the time of enrollment. At screening, complete surgical resection of the primary NSCLC was deemed achievable by performing a multidisciplinary evaluation, which included a thoracic surgeon who performs lung cancer surgery as a prominent part of his/her practice. Additional inclusion criteria necessitated an age of 18 years or older; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1; an estimated life expectancy of ≥12 weeks; documented tumor PD-L1 status (as assessed at a central laboratory using the VENTANA SP263 immunohistochemistry assay); and ≥1 lesion, not previously irradiated, that qualified as a Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) target lesion. T4 tumors were only eligible if they were defined as T4 based only on their size (more than 7 cm); any other reason for T4 (e.g., adherent to any of the following structures: Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT diaphragm, mediastinum, heart, great vessels, trachea, recurrent laryngeal nerve, esophagus, vertebral body, carina) were considered ineligible. Nodal status was investigated with whole body 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), plus contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT). If positron emission tomography (PET)/CT scan was positive in the mediastinum, or if scan was negative, but there was T>3 cm, central tumor, or clinical N1 (cN1), then it was recommended that nodal status be proven by biopsy via endobronchial ultrasound, mediastinoscopy, or thoracoscopy. Mandatory brain magnetic resonance imaging was performed (MRI; preferred) with IV contrast or brain CT with IV contrast at the time of staging. Patients had no prior exposure to immune-mediated therapy including, but not limited to, other anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, and anti-PD-L2 antibodies, excluding therapeutic anticancer vaccines. Confirmation of a patient's tumor PD-L1 status occurred prior to randomization using Ventana PD-L1 (SP263) immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay applied to formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue sample with testing completed by the central laboratory. Confirmation of EGFR and ALK status was also performed during screening. Patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) mutations in their tumors were not required to be tested for EGFR/ALK and patients with squamous cell carcinoma were not required to be tested for ALK. Patients with documented EGFR/ALK aberrations were excluded from efficacy analyses in the modified intent-to-treat population (N=740) Patients were considered suitable for inclusion if the planned surgery to be performed was lobectomy, sleeve resection, or bilobectomy, as determined by the attending surgeon based on the baseline findings. The patient was deemed to have adequate cardiac and lung function, according to a multidisciplinary assessment. A pre- or post-bronchodilator FEV1 of 1.0 L and >40% postoperative predicted value. Use of these cut-off values to assess candidacy for resection was guided by the results of cardiopulmonary exercise testing as outlined in the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines on pretreatment risk assessment. Both an FEV1 and a DLCO test were required for assessing lung function prior to resection. Table 1. Baseline Characteristics and Planned Treatment in the Modified Intent-to- Treat Population.* Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Characteristics † Durvalumab arm Placebo arm (N=366) (N=374) Age Median (range), years 65.0 (30–88) 65.0 (39–85) ≥75 years, n (%) 44 (12.0) 36 (9.6) Sex, n (%) Male 252 (68.9) 278 (74.3) Female 114 (31.1) 96 (25.7) ECOG PS, n (%) 0 251 (68.6) 255 (68.2) 1 115 (31.4) 119 (31.8) Race , n (%) Asian 143 (39.1) 164 (43.9) White 206 (56.3) 191 (51.1) Other 17 (4.6) 19 (5.1) Region, n (%) Asia 142 (38.8) 163 (43.6) Europe 141 (38.5) 140 (37.4) North America 43 (11.7) 43 (11.5) South America 40 (10.9) 28 (7.5) Smoking status, n (%) Current 95 (26.0) 95 (25.4) Former 220 (60.1) 223 (59.6) Never 51 (13.9) 56 (15.0) Disease stage II 104 (28.4) 110 (29.4) (AJCC 8th edition), n (%) IIIA 173 (47.3) 165 (44.1) IIIB 88 (24.0) 98 (26.2) TNM classification : T1 44 (12.0) 43 (11.5) primary tumor, n (%) T2 97 (26.5) 108 (28.9) T3 128 (35.0) 129 (34.5) T4 97 (26.5) 94 (25.1) TNM classification : N0 110 (30.1) 102 (27.3) regional lymph nodes, n (%) N1 75 (20.5) 87 (23.3) N2 181 (49.5) 185 (49.5) Single-station 141 (38.5) 132 (35.3) Multi-station 34 (9.3) 40 (10.7) Histology, n (%) Squamous 169 (46.2) 191 (51.1) Non-squamous 196 (53.6) 179 (47.9) PD-L1 expression, n (%) TC <1% 122 (33.3) 125 (33.4) TC 1–49% 135 (36.9) 142 (38.0) TC ≥50% 109 (29.8) 107 (28.6) Planned neoadjuvant Cisplatin 100 (27.3) 96 (25.7) platinum agent, n (%) Carboplatin 266 (72.7) 278 (74.3) Data cut-off of November 10, 2022 (N=740). *The modified intent-to-treat population included all patients who were randomized, excluding patients with documented EGFR/ALK aberrations. †Characteristics with missing or other responses were histology (0.3% in the durvalumab arm and 1.1% in the placebo arm had ‘other’ histology), disease stage (0.3% in the durvalumab arm had stage IV disease and 0.3% in the placebo arm had stage III [NOS] disease, as reported per the eCRF), and N2 lymph node station status (1.6% in the durvalumab arm and 3.5% in the placebo arm had N2 disease with missing data on single-station versus multi-station classification). Race was self- reported per the eCRF. ¶All patients were M0 except one patient in the durvalumab arm who was classified as M1 (NOS). AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; eCRF, electronic case report form; NOS, not otherwise specified; PD-L1, programmed cell death-ligand 1; TC, tumor cell; TNM, tumor, [lymph] nodes, metastasis. Table 2. Representativeness of Study Participants. Demographics AEGEAN Observations Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Study mITT, N=740 Age, median (range) 65.0 (30–88) • Patients with resectable NSCLC are on average Age, mean ± SD 64.0 ±8.8 approximately 65 years of age across geographies. The age of patients on the AEGEAN study was representative of a real- world population. Sex • Globally NSCLC affects more men than women. The Male 71.6% gender balance in the AEGEAN study was Female 28.4% representative of a real-world population. ECOG performance • The majority of patients diagnosed with resectable status NSCLC have good performance status (ECOG 0 68.4% performance status of 0), a trend that was also 1 31.6% borne out in the AEGEAN study. ≥2 0% Unknown/ Missing 0% Smoking Status • Lung cancer is strongly associated with smoking, with Current smoker/ Former 86% approximately 80% of patients having a history smoker of smoking. This was also reflected in the Never smoker 24% AEGEAN study population. Region • The AEGEAN study enrolled patients across 28 Asia 41% countries and 3 continents. The race and Europe 38% ethnicity composition of the AEGEAN study North America 12% are indicative of a large, diverse, and global South America 9% Race clinical trial. Asian 2.0% White 79.6% Black / African 9.6% American Other/ Unknown 9.3% Ethnicity Hispanic/Latino 2.5% Not Hispanic/Latino 87.5% Pre-planned Platinum • In real-world practice, many patients may have Backbone contraindications to cisplatin-based Carboplatin 77.3% chemotherapy. The AEGEAN study allowed for Cisplatin 27.8% flexibility in the choice of platinum agent, and as such is more reflective of a real-world treatment regimen. ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; mITT, modified intent-to-treat; SD, standard deviation. Table 3. Patient Disposition and Treatment Summary in the Modified Intent-to-treat Population.* Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Study phase † Durvalumab Placebo arm arm (N=374) (N=366) Neoadjuvant Randomized, n (%) 366 (100) 374 (100) phase Received treatment, n (%) 366 (100) 371 (99.2) Completed 4 cycles of both chemotherapy 310 (84.7) 326 (87.2) agents, n (%) Completed 4 cycles of 318 (86.9) 331 (88.5) durvalumab/placebo, n (%) Surgery Underwent surgery , n (%) 295 (80.6) 302 (80.7) Did not undergo surgery , n (%) 71 (19.4) 72 (19.3) Completed surgery , n (%) 284 (77.6) 287 (76.7) R0 resection, n (% of patients who 269 (94.7) 262 (91.3) completed surgery) Did not complete surgery , n (%) 11 (3.0) 15 (4.0) Adjuvant Started durvalumab/placebo § , n (%) 241 (65.8) 237 (63.4) phase (ongoing) Completed durvalumab/placebo, n (%) 88 (24.0) 79 (21.1) Discontinued durvalumab/placebo, n (%) 68 (18.6) 70 (18.7) Ongoing durvalumab/placebo, n (%) 85 (23.2) 88 (23.5) Data cut-off of Nov 10, 2022 (N=740). *The modified intent-to-treat population included all patients who were randomized, excluding patients with documented EGFR/ALK aberrations. †Except where specified otherwise, percentages were calculated using the full modified intent-to-treat population as the denominator. As per the investigator’s assessment. Patients who ‘underwent’ surgery were those for whom curative-intent thoracic surgery was attempted regardless of whether it was completed. Patients who ‘completed’ surgery were those for whom curative-intent thoracic surgery was completed (assessed by the investigator at the time of surgery). ¶Includes patients who had surgery outside of the study. §For patients to be eligible for adjuvant durvalumab or placebo, surgery must have been completed with R0/R1 resection margins and no evidence of disease on post- surgical RECIST assessment. RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Table 4. Baseline Characteristics in the Intent-to-treat Population Characteristics* Durvalumab arm Placebo arm (N=400) (N=402) Age Median (range), years 65.0 (30–88) 65.0 (39–85) ≥75 years, n (%) 48 (12.0) 38 (9.5) Sex, n (%) Male 262 (65.5) 291 (72.4) Female 138 (34.5) 111 (27.6) ECOG PS, n (%) 0 278 (69.5) 277 (68.9) 1 122 (30.5) 125 (31.1) Race†, n (%) Asian 165 (41.3) 187 (46.5) White 216 (54.0) 196 (48.8) Other 19 (4.8) 19 (4.7) Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Region, n (%) Asia 164 (41.0) 186 (46.3) Europe 147 (36.8) 144 (35.8) North America 50 (12.5) 44 (10.9) South America 39 (9.8) 28 (7.0) Smoking status, Current 96 (24.0) 97 (24.1) n (%) Former 232 (58.0) 231 (57.5) Never 72 (18.0) 74 (18.4) Disease stage II 119 (29.8) 120 (29.9) (AJCC 8th edition), IIIA 186 (46.5) 178 (44.3) n (%) IIIB 94 (23.5) 103 (25.6) TNM classification : T1 53 (13.3) 48 (11.9) primary tumor, n (%) T2 108 (27.0) 119 (29.6) T3 141 (35.3) 136 (33.8) T4 98 (24.5) 99 (24.6) TNM classification : N0 118 (29.5) 110 (27.4) regional lymph N1 83 (20.8) 94 (23.4) nodes, N2 199 (49.8) 198 (49.3) n (%) Single-station 151 (37.8) 140 (34.8) Multi-station 38 (9.5) 45 (11.2) Histology, n (%) Squamous 173 (43.3) 226 (56.5) Non-squamous 192 (47.8) 206 (51.2) PD-L1 expression, TC <1% 133 (33.3) 134 (33.3) n (%) TC 1–49% 151 (37.8) 158 (39.3) TC ≥50% 38 (9.5) 110 (27.4) EGFR mutation Detected 26 (6.5) 25 (6.2) status, n (%) Not detected 327 (81.8) 328 (81.6) Not tested due to KRAS 1 (0.3) 1 (0.2) Not tested due to squamous 43 (10.8) 46 (11.4) histology 3 (0.8) 2 (0.5) Unknown ALK translocation Detected 8 (2.0) 3 (0.7) status, n (%) Not detected 298 (74.5) 296 (73.6) Not tested due to squamous 84 (21.0) 98 (24.4) histology 10 (2.5) 5 (1.2) Unknown Data cut-off of November 10, 2022 (N=802). *Characteristics with missing or other responses were histology (0.3% in the durvalumab arm and 1.0% in the placebo arm had ‘other’ histology), disease stage (0.3% in the durvalumab arm had stage IV disease and 0.2% in the placebo arm had stage III [NOS] disease, as reported per the eCRF), and N2 lymph node station status (2.5% in the durvalumab arm and 3.2% in the placebo arm had N2 disease with missing data on single-station vs. multi-station classification). †Race was self-reported per the eCRF. All patients were M0 except one patient in the durvalumab arm who was classified as M1 (NOS). AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; eCRF, electronic case report form; NOS, not otherwise specified; PD-L1, programmed cell death-ligand 1; TC, tumor cell; TNM, tumor, [lymph] nodes, metastasis. Table 5. Summary of Adverse Events in the Safety Analysis Set.* Overall study period Durvalumab arm Placebo arm (inclusive of the neoadjuvant, surgical, and adjuvant (N=400) (N=399) treatment phases)† Any-grade all-causality adverse events, n (%) 386 (96.5) 378 (94.7) Maximum grade 3 or 4 169 (42.3) 173 (43.4) Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Serious adverse events 150 (37.5) 126 (31.6) Outcome of death 23 (5.8) 15 (3.8) Leading to discontinuation of durvalumab / placebo 48 (12.0) 24 (6.0) Leading to cancellation of surgery 7 (1.8) 4 (1.0) Any-grade adverse events possibly related to 346 (86.5) 322 (80.7) durvalumab / placebo / chemotherapy, n (%) Maximum grade 3 or 4 129 (32.3) 132 (33.1) Outcome of death 7 (1.8) 2 (0.5) Data cut-off of November 10, 2022 (N=799). *The safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment; adverse events were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. †The overall study period spans from the first dose of study treatment (durvalumab/placebo/chemotherapy) until the earliest of: the last dose of study treatment or surgery + 90 days (taking the latest dose of durvalumab or placebo or chemotherapy or the date of surgery, + 90 days); the data cut-off date; or the date of the first dose of subsequent anti-cancer treatment. Adverse events with an outcome of death included events assessed by the investigator as possibly related to any study treatment and include interstitial lung disease (n=2) and immune-mediated lung disease, pneumonitis, hemoptysis, myocarditis, and decreased appetite (n=1 each) in the durvalumab arm and pneumonia and infection (n=1 each) in the placebo arm. Study Design and Treatment Approximately 800 patients with resectable NSCLC (Stage IIA to select Stage IIIB; either squamous or non-squamous) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either durvalumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy before surgery followed by durvalumab post- surgery (Arm 1) or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy before surgery followed by placebo post-surgery (Arm 2). Patients were stratified by disease stage (Stage II versus Stage III) and by programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression status (<1% versus ≥1%). Patients received 4 cycles of durvalumab or placebo plus a platinum-based chemotherapy (every 3 weeks [q3w]) followed by surgery to remove the NSCLC. Surgery consisted of lobectomy, sleeve resection, or bilobectomy, as determined by the attending surgeon based on the baseline findings. Patients whose planned surgery at enrollment includes pneumonectomy, segmentectomies, or wedge resections at eligibility assessment were not eligible for this study. All patients were staged and managed according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2020 Guidelines (version 1.2021). Surgery was expected within 40 days from the dose. Patients started durvalumab or placebo administration following surgery as soon as clinically feasible and within 10 weeks from surgery (except for patients receiving post- operative radiation therapy, which were started within 8 weeks after surgery; durvalumab/placebo was given within 3 weeks from the end of post-operative radiation therapy). Patients randomized to receive durvalumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT prior to surgery received an additional 12 cycles of durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks (q4w), while patients randomized to receive placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy prior to surgery received an additional 12 cycles of placebo q4w. Treatments and treatment duration: Patients received 1500 mg durvalumab or placebo via intravenous (IV) infusion q3w for up to a maximum of 4 cycles prior to surgery and q4w for 12 cycles following surgery, unless there was unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or another discontinuation criterion was met. If a patient's weight (WT) falls to 30 kg or below (≤30 kg), then the patient received WT-based dosing equivalent to 20 mg/kg of durvalumab [or placebo] q3w or q4w after consultation between Investigator and Study Physician/Medical Scientist, until the WT improved to >30 kg, at which point the patient started receiving the fixed dosing of durvalumab 1500 mg [or placebo] q3w or q4w. Standard of Care (SoC): Patients received one of the following four SoC regimens, based on the tumor histology and Investigator's discretion, as part of their treatment regimen prior to surgery. Options for patients with squamous histology were carboplatin plus paclitaxel or cisplatin plus gemcitabine (or carboplatin plus gemcitabine for patients who had comorbidities or who are unable to tolerate cisplatin per the investigator’s judgment). Options for non-squamous histology were pemetrexed plus either cisplatin or carboplatin. 1) Squamous tumor histology: Carboplatin + paclitaxel: carboplatin area under the serum drug concentration-time curve (AUC) 6 (mg/mL/min) and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles. 2) Squamous tumor histology: Cisplatin + gemcitabine: cisplatin 75 mg/m2 via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles, and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 via IV infusion on Day 1 and Day 8 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles. In the event of unfavorable tolerability, patients switched from cisplatin to carboplatin therapy at any point during the study (assuming eligibility for the switched therapy was met). In patients with comorbidities or unable to tolerate cisplatin per Investigators judgment, carboplatin AUC 5 (mg/mL/min) was administered from cycle 1. 3) Non-squamous tumor histology: Pemetrexed + cisplatin: pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles. In the event of unfavorable tolerability, patients switched from cisplatin to carboplatin therapy at any point during the study (assuming eligibility for the switched therapy was met). In patients with comorbidities or unable to tolerate cisplatin per Investigators judgment, carboplatin AUC 5 (mg/mL/min) was administered from cycle 1. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT 4) Non-squamous tumor histology: Pemetrexed + carboplatin: pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC 5 (mg/mL/min) via IV infusion on Day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for 4 cycles. Duration of treatment: Unless there is unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or another discontinuation criterion was met, treatment with 4 cycles of durvalumab or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (q3w) was administered prior to surgery, and treatment with durvalumab or placebo continued for 12 cycles (q4w) following surgery (±1 cycle of platinum-based chemotherapy). Surgery was expected within 40 days of the last IP dose prior to surgery, and patients started durvalumab or placebo administration following surgery as soon as clinically feasible and within 10 weeks from surgery (except for patients receiving post-operative radiation therapy, which was started within 8 weeks after surgery; durvalumab/placebo was given within 3 weeks from the end of post-operative radiation therapy). For patients to be eligible for adjuvant durvalumab or placebo, surgery must have been completed with R0 or R1 resection margins with no evidence of disease on the first post-surgical assessment using RECIST v1.1. Progression during treatment: Treatment was stopped at the time of local or distant recurrence determined by investigator using RECIST 1.1 or clinical progression, including progression that precludes surgery or progression discovered upon attempting surgery. Follow-up of patients post discontinuation of study drug: Patients who discontinued study treatment due to toxicity or symptomatic deterioration, clinical progression (excluding progression that precludes surgery or progression discovered upon attempting surgery), or who commenced subsequent anticancer therapy in the absence of local or distant recurrence (for resected patients) or RECIST 1.1-defined radiological progression of disease (PD) (for patients who did not have surgery for reasons other than PD) were followed up with tumor assessments until local or distant recurrence (for resected patients) or RECIST 1.1-defined radiological PD (for patients who did not have surgery for reasons other than PD) as determined by investigator and followed up for survival. These patients were not eligible for retreatment at any time. Endpoints and Assessments The two primary efficacy endpoints in this study were event-free survival (EFS; per blinded independent central review [BICR]) and pathological complete response (pCR; evaluated centrally). Other secondary endpoints included evaluation of the primary endpoints Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT and key secondary endpoints in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥1%; pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity; patient-reported outcomes; and safety. In accordance with FDA guidance on clinical trial endpoints for the approval of cancer drugs and biologics (FDA 2018), EFS was defined as the time from randomization to any of the following events: progression of disease (PD) that precludes surgery, local or distant recurrence, or death due to any cause. More specifically, EFS was defined as the time from randomization to the earliest of: (1) progressive disease that precludes surgery; (2) progressive disease discovered and reported by the investigator upon attempting surgery that prevents completion of surgery; (3) local or distant recurrence using blinded independent central review according to RECIST v1.1; or (4) death from any cause. Failure to undergo/complete surgery for reasons other than progressive disease was not considered an EFS event (i.e., patients remained in follow-up for RECIST- defined progression). Tumors were evaluated per RECIST v1.1 using imaging collected at the following timepoints: baseline (≤28 days before randomization); after completing neoadjuvant treatment and before surgery; 5 weeks (±2 weeks) after surgery and before starting adjuvant treatment; every 12 weeks (±1 week) until Week 48 after surgery; every 24 weeks (±2 weeks) until Week 192 (i.e., ~4 years post-surgery); and every 48 weeks (±2 weeks) thereafter until local or distant recurrence, consent withdrawal, or death. Safety was monitored throughout the study and adverse events (AEs) were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for AEs version 5.0. Efficacy assessments were performed and determined by pathology review or a BICR using RECIST 1.1 assessment, as applicable, including EFS (mITT and PD-L1 TC≥1% analysis set), pCR (mITT and PD-L1 TC≥1% analysis set), mPR (mITT and PD-L1 TC≥1% analysis set), DFS (modified resected set and PD-L1 TC≥1% resected set), and OS (mITT and PD-L1 TC≥1% analysis set). The EFS event of PD that precludes surgery or PD discovered during surgery that prevents completion of surgery will be determined by the Investigator. At the first planned interim analysis the EFS follow-up in censored patients was 11.7 months (range: 0.0–46.1). Results Patients and Treatments Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT 1,480 patients were enrolled of whom 802 patients were randomized to either the durvalumab arm (n=400) or placebo arm (n=402), comprising the ITT population (FIG.1B). The characteristics of the ITT population (Table 4) were generally representative of a real- world population of patients with resectable NSCLC (Table 2). The mITT population (excluding patients with known EGFR/ALK aberrations) comprised 740 patients, with 366 and 374 randomized to the durvalumab and placebo arms, respectively. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics and planned neoadjuvant chemotherapy doublet regimens were largely balanced between the treatment arms in the mITT population (Table 1). Median age was 65.0 years, and most patients were male (71.6%), had a performance status of 0 (68.4%), and were current or former smokers (85.5%). Over 70% of patients had stage III disease, and half of all patients had N2 disease. Approximately equal proportions of patients had squamous and non-squamous histology. Across both treatment arms, 33.4% of patients had tumor PD-L1 expression of <1%, and carboplatin was the planned neoadjuvant platinum agent for over 70% of patients. At the data cut-off for this first planned interim analysis of EFS, median follow-up for EFS in censored patients was 11.7 months (range, 0.0 to 46.1). In the mITT population, approximately 85% of patients had completed four cycles of both chemotherapy agents in each treatment arm, and over 60% of all patients had started adjuvant durvalumab or placebo (Table 3; see Table 6 for details of neoadjuvant treatment exposure). Few patients in either treatment arm (5.8% of the mITT population) received post-operative radiotherapy (as permitted by the protocol, if indicated, according to the discretion of the treating physician). At the data cut-off for this analysis, 24.0% and 21.1% of patients in the mITT population had completed 12 cycles of adjuvant durvalumab or placebo, respectively; 18.6% and 18.7% of patients in each arm had prematurely discontinued adjuvant study treatment, respectively. Approximately a quarter of all patients in the mITT population were still receiving adjuvant study treatment (23.2% and 23.5% of patients in the durvalumab and placebo arms, respectively). Table 6. Neoadjuvant Treatment Exposure in the Safety Analysis Set. Durvalumab arm Placebo arm (N=400) (N=399) Patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment, n (%) 400 (100) 399 (100) Type of SoC chemotherapy, n (%) Cisplatin + Gemcitabine 46 (11.5) 43 (10.8) Cisplatin + Paclitaxel 0 1 (0.3) Cisplatin + Pemetrexed 63 (15.8) 60 (15.0) Carboplatin + Gemcitabine 11 (2.8) 9 (2.3) Carboplatin + Paclitaxel 122 (30.5) 140 (35.1) Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Carboplatin + Pemetrexed 158 (39.5) 146 (36.6) Total duration of treatment (weeks): Any SoC chemotherapy, median (range) 12.1 (2.0–20.7) 12.1 (3.0–22.7) 12.1 Durvalumab / placebo, median (range) 12.1 (2.0–19.0) (3.0–22.7) Cycles of any SoC chemotherapy, n (%) ≥4 cycles 347 (86.8) 356 (89.2) ≥3 cycles 382 (95.5) 375 (94.0) ≥2 cycles 390 (97.5) 387 (97.0) ≥1 cycle 400 (100) 399 (100) Cycles of durvalumab / placebo received, n (%) ≥4 cycles 349 (87.3) 358 (89.7) ≥3 cycles 386 (96.5) 377 (94.5) ≥2 cycles 392 (98.0) 389 (97.5) ≥1 cycle 400 (100) 399 (100) Data cut-off of November 10, 2022 (N=799). The safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment. SoC, standard of care. Surgery Summary At the data cut-off, approximately 81% of patients in each treatment arm (Table 3; mITT population) had undergone surgery (noting that curative-intent thoracic surgery was attempted regardless of whether it was completed). In total, 77.6% of patients in the durvalumab arm and 76.7% of patients in the placebo arm had completed surgery (i.e., curative-intent thoracic surgery deemed completed as assessed by the investigator), among whom a slightly higher proportion had R0 resection in the durvalumab arm versus the placebo arm (94.7% vs.91.3%). (See Table 7 and Table 8 for a summary of the most common reasons for not undergoing or completing surgery in the ITT population, details of surgical delays in the safety analysis set [Table 7] and details of surgery and surgical outcomes in the mITT population [Table 8].) Table 7. Details of Surgical Delays in the Safety Analysis Set. Surgical detail Durvalumab arm Placebo arm (N=400) (N=399) Patients with delayed surgery, n (%) 57 (14.3) 68 (17.0) Reason for surgical delay, n (%)* 5 (1.3) 4 (1.0) Unresolved toxicity from neoadjuvant Tx 2 (0.5) 2 (0.5) Durvalumab / Placebo 3 (0.8) 2 (0.5) SoC 30 (7.5) 38 (9.5) Logistical reasons 11 (2.8) 13 (3.3) Adverse event 14 (3.5) 13 (3.3) Other Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Length of delay in surgery, n (%) 31 (7.8) 39 (9.8) <2 weeks 14 (3.5) 22 (5.5) 2 to <4 weeks 7 (1.8) 3 (0.8) 4 to <6 weeks 5 (1.3) 4 (1.0) ≥6 weeks Data cut-off of November 10, 2022 (N=799). The safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment. *Reasons for surgical delay are not mutually exclusive for patients with multiple reasons per delay or subjects with multiple delays (although a patient can only be counted once per category). Table 8. Details of Surgery and Surgical Outcomes in the Modified Intent-to-treat Population. Surgical detail Durvalumab arm Placebo arm (N=366) (N=374) Patients who underwent surgery, n (%) 295 (80.6) 302 (80.7) Patients who completed surgery, n (%) 284 (77.6) 287 (76.7) Margins, n (%)* 269 (94.7) 262 (91.3) R0 12 (4.2) 22 (7.7) R1 2 (0.7) 2 (0.7) R2 1 (0.4) 1 (0.3) Missing Surgery procedure performed, n (%) 238 (65.0) 221 (59.1) Lobectomy 7 (1.9) 14 (3.7) Sleeve resection 13 (3.6) 20 (5.3) Bilobectomy 27 (7.4) 29 (7.8) Pneumonectomy 2 (0.5) 2 (0.5) Sleeve resection (bronchial) 0 1 (0.3) Sleeve resection (arterial) 1 (0.3) 2 (0.5) Wedge resection 7 (1.9) 13 (3.5) Other Surgical approach, n (%) 145 (39.6) 153 (40.9) Open Procedure 145 (39.6) 142 (38.0) Minimally invasive 4 (1.1) 6 (1.6) Other 1 (0.3) 1 (0.3) Missing Days from last neoadjuvant Tx dose to 34.0 (12–91) 34.0 (13–103) surgery, median (range) Days from surgery to first dose of 50.0 (22–136) 52.0 (21–141) adjuvant Tx, median (range) Data cut-off of November 10, 2022 (N=740). *For the summary of resection margin status only, percentages are calculated using the number of patients who completed surgery as the denominator. Efficacy At this first interim analysis of EFS with 31.9% maturity, EFS was significantly prolonged in the durvalumab arm versus the placebo arm (stratified hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.88]; P=0.003902), with the median times not reached (NR) (95% CI, 31.9 Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT months to NR) versus 25.9 months (95% CI, 18.9 to NR), respectively. EFS benefit with durvalumab versus placebo was maintained across most prespecified subgroups. Consistent benefit was observed regardless of the planned neoadjuvant platinum agent. Benefit was also observed regardless of age, disease stage, PD-L1 tumor cell expression, and tumor histology. The magnitude of benefit was greater for current smokers. Female patients appeared to have a smaller treatment effect, but the HR CIs were wide for this subgroup, which comprised only 28.4% of the mITT population. Table 9. Objective Response Prior to Surgery According to Blinded Independent Central Review (RECIST v1.1) in the Modified Intent-to-treat Population. Durvalumab arm Placebo arm (N=366) (N=374) Objective response rate 206 (56.3) 142 (38.0) 95% CI 51.0–61.4 33.0–43.1 Patients with a response, n (%) 4 (1.1) 1 (0.3) Complete response 202 (55.2) 141 (37.7) Partial response Patients with no response, n (%) 124 (33.9) 189 (50.5) Stable disease 11 (3.0) 15 (4.0) Progression 25 (6.8) 28 (7.5) Not evaluable Data cut-off of November 10, 2022 (N=740). CI, confidence interval; RECIST v1.1, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. At the final analysis of pCR, a higher proportion of patients had achieved pCR in the durvalumab arm (17.2%; 95% CI, 13.5 to 21.5) versus the placebo arm (4.3%; 95% CI, 2.5 to 6.9) (difference in proportions, 13.0%; 95% CI, 8.7 to 17.6]). A higher proportion of patients also achieved MPR in the durvalumab arm (33.3%; 95% CI, 28.5 to 38.4) versus the placebo arm (12.3%; 95% CI, 9.1 to 16.1) (difference in proportions, 21.0; 95% CI, 15.1 to 26.9). Results for pCR and MPR were consistent at the interim analysis of pCR (N=402) ; statistical significance for pCR (P=0.0036) and MPR (P=0.000002) was achieved at this earlier analysis. A trend towards pCR benefit with durvalumab was observed across all prespecified subgroups, with the results largely consistent with the overall mITT population. A similar trend was observed across subgroups for MPR. Primary tumor pathological regression was, overall, greater in the durvalumab arm versus the placebo arm. See Table 9 for a summary of objective response prior to surgery in the mITT population. Safety Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Overall, adverse events (AEs) of any cause occurred in 96.5% of patients in the durvalumab arm and 94.7% of patients in the placebo arm (Table 5); AEs possibly related to any study treatment (i.e., durvalumab, placebo, or chemotherapy) occurred in 86.5% and 80.7%, respectively. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 AEs of any cause was similar between the study arms (42.3% vs.43.4%); likewise, the incidence of grade 3 or 4 AEs possibly related to any study treatment was also similar (32.3% vs.33.1%). AEs possibly related to any study treatment with an outcome of death were uncommon, with rates of 1.8% and 0.5% in the durvalumab and placebo arms, respectively. The most common AEs of any cause largely reflected the safety profile of the chemotherapy agents used in the study (Table 10); the rates of the most common AEs were largely similar across both treatment arms. Rates of any-grade rash (14% vs.8.5%) and pruritus (11.8% vs.5.5%) were higher among patients in the durvalumab arm versus the placebo arm; however, grade 3 or 4 events were uncommon, and occurred with similar frequency in both treatment arms. (See Table 11 for summary of the most common AEs possibly related to any study treatment.) Immune-mediated AEs of any grade were reported in 23.7% and 9.8% of patients in the durvalumab and placebo arms, respectively (Table 12); most were grade 1 or 2 with grade 3 or 4 events reported in 4.2% and 2.5% of patients, respectively. Immune-mediated pneumonitis of any grade was reported in 3.7% and 1.8% of patients in the durvalumab and placebo arms, respectively. Table 10. Most Common Adverse Events of Any Cause in the Safety Analysis Set. Event Durvalumab arm (N=400) Placebo arm (N=399) Any Grade Max. Grade 3 Any Grade Max. Grade 3 or 4 or 4 Number of patients with event (%) Anemia 136 (34.0) 26 (6.5) 126 (31.6) 26 (6.5) Nausea 101 (25.3) 1 (0.3) 115 (28.8) 1 (0.3) Constipation 99 (24.8) 1 (0.3) 85 (21.3) 0 Decreased appetite † 73 (18.3) 1 (0.3) 70 (17.5) 1 (0.3) Neutropenia 68 (17.0) 36 (9.0) 71 (17.8) 38 (9.5) Alopecia 68 (17.0) 0 64 (16.0) 1 (0.3) Neutrophil count 64 (16.0) 39 (9.8) 57 (14.3) 43 (10.8) decreased Rash 56 (14.0) 2 (0.5) 34 (8.5) 1 (0.3) Diarrhea 52 (13.0) 3 (0.8) 49 (12.3) 3 (0.8) Fatigue 52 (13.0) 0 46 (11.5) 1 (0.3) Asthenia 50 (12.5) 0 54 (13.5) 5 (1.3) Pruritis 47 (11.8) 1 (0.3) 22 (5.5) 0 Vomiting 45 (11.3) 3 (0.8) 42 (10.5) 4 (1.0) Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Procedural pain 44 (11.0) 1 (0.3) 48 (12.0) 2 (0.5) COVID-19 44 (11.0) 1 (0.3) 36 (9.0) 3 (0.8) Insomnia 41 (10.3) 0 46 (11.5) 0 Data cut-off of November 10, 2022. *The safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment; adverse events were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Included are adverse events reported with an any-grade incidence of at least 10% in the durvalumab arm during the overall study period, which spans from the first dose of study treatment (durvalumab or placebo or chemotherapy) until the earliest of: the last dose of study treatment or surgery + 90 days (taking the latest dose of durvalumab or placebo or chemotherapy or the date of surgery, + 90 days); the data cut-off date; or the date of the first dose of subsequent anti-cancer treatment. †Two patients (one in each arm) had decreased appetite with an outcome of death (max. grade 5); the fatal event in the durvalumab arm was assessed as possibly related to study treatment by the investigator. Six patients had COVID-19 events of max. grade 5 (durvalumab arm, n=5; placebo arm, n=1); all COVID-19 deaths were assessed by the investigator as unrelated to study treatment (note: COVID-19 is summarized as a grouped term comprising the ‘COVID-19’ and ‘COVID-19 pneumonia’ preferred terms). Table 11. Most Common Adverse Events Possibly Related to Study Treatment in the Safety Analysis Set. Event Durvalumab arm (N=400) Placebo arm (N=399) Any Grade Max. Grade 3 Any Grade Max. Grade 3 or 4 or 4 Number of patients with event (%) Anemia 104 (26.0) 17 (4.3) 96 (24.1) 20 (5.0) Nausea 84 (21.0) 1 (0.3) 96 (24.1) 1 (0.3) Alopecia 66 (16.5) 0 58 (14.5) 1 (0.3) Neutrophil count decreased 61 (15.3) 38 (9.5) 56 (14.0) 42 (10.5) Neutropenia 60 (15.0) 36 (9.0) 64 (16.0) 35 (8.8) Decreased appetite † 49 (12.3) 0 45 (11.3) 1 (0.3) Constipation 44 (11.0) 0 49 (12.3) 0 Fatigue 42 (10.5) 0 36 (9.0) 0 Rash 37 (9.3) 2 (0.5) 27 (6.8) 1 (0.3) Hypothyroidism 37 (9.3) 0 6 (1.5) 0 Asthenia 34 (8.5) 0 38 (9.5) 0 Diarrhea 34 (8.5) 3 (0.8) 21 (5.3) 3 (0.8) Leukopenia 33 (8.3) 9 (2.3) 30 (7.5) 12 (3.0) Pruritis 33 (8.3) 1 (0.3) 8 (2.0) 0 Vomiting 31 (7.8) 3 (0.8) 28 (7.0) 4 (1.0) Alanine aminotransferase 30 (7.5) 2 (0.5) 17 (4.3) 1 (0.3) increased Platelet count decreased 29 (7.3) 7 (1.8) 31 (7.8) 13 (3.3) White blood cell count decreased 25 (6.3) 8 (2.0) 32 (8.0) 12 (3.0) Thrombocytopenia 24 (6.0) 6 (1.5) 29 (7.3) 9 (2.3) Arthralgia 21 (5.3) 1 (0.3) 20 (5.0) 1 (0.3) Data cut-off of November 10, 2022. *The safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment; adverse events were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Included are adverse events assessed by the investigator as possibly related to any study treatment (durvalumab or placebo or chemotherapy) reported with an any-grade Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT incidence of at least 5% in the durvalumab arm during the overall study period, which spans from the first dose of study treatment until the earliest of: the last dose of study treatment or surgery + 90 days (taking the latest dose of durvalumab or placebo or chemotherapy or the date of surgery, + 90 days); the data cut-off date; or the date of the first dose of subsequent anti-cancer treatment. †One patient in the durvalumab arm had decreased appetite with an outcome of death (grade 5) that was assessed as possibly related to study treatment by the investigator. Table 12. Immune-mediated Adverse Events (Grouped Terms) Occurring in ≥1% Patients in Either Treatment Arm in the Safety Analysis Set.* Durvalumab Arm Placebo Arm (N=400) (N=399) Any Grade Any Grade Any Grade Any Grade 3 or 4 3 or 4 Any immune-mediated event, 95 (23.7) 17 (4.2) 37 (9.3) n (%) 10 (2.5) Hypothyroid events 37 (9.2) 0 9 (2.3) 0 Dermatitis/Rash 22 (5.5) 2 (0.5) 7 (1.8) 1 (0.3) Pneumonitis 15 (3.7) 5 (1.2) 7 (1.8) 4 (1.0) Hepatic events 13 (3.2) 8 (2.0) 3 (0.8) 1 (0.3) Hyperthyroid events 7 (1.7) 0 4 (1.0) 0 Diarrhea/Colitis 3 (0.7) 0 5 (1.3) 3 (0.8)           Data cut-off of November 10, 2022 (N=799). *The safety analysis set includes all randomized patients who received ≥1 dose of study Tx; AEs were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. An immune-mediated AE was defined as an AE of special interest consistent with an immune-mediated mechanism of action, where there is no clear alternate etiology, and requiring the use of systemic corticosteroids or other immunosuppressants and/or, for specific endocrine events, endocrine therapy. AE, adverse event. Summary Perioperative durvalumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) significantly improved both pCR and EFS among patients with resectable NSCLC versus neoadjuvant CT alone. The pCR rate was significantly higher in the durvalumab versus placebo arm (17.2% vs.4.3% at final analysis; difference, 13.0%; 95% CI, 8.7 to 17.6; P=0.000036 assessed at interim analysis [n=402]). The improvement in pCR rate was 13.0% (95% CI: 8.7–17.6). The improvement in EFS was also significant (EFS stratified HR = 0.68 (95% CI: 0.53–0.88; P = 0.003902; median follow-up of 11.7 months and 31.9% maturity). Benefit was observed regardless of disease stage and PD-L1 expression. Improvements in both pCR and EFS were largely consistent across predefined subgroups and EFS benefit was observed regardless of the planned neoadjuvant platinum agent (the HR was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.35–1.00) for cisplatin and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.54–0.98) for carboplatin). Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Perioperative durvalumab + neoadjuvant CT was also associated with a manageable safety profile that was consistent with the known safety profiles of durvalumab and CT. Grade 3 or 4 any-cause adverse events occurred in 42.3% and 43.4%, respectively. The addition of durvalumab did not impact completion of neoadjuvant CT (4 cycles) or surgery Perioperative durvalumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved pCR and EFS versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, with a manageable safety profile, in patients with R-NSCLC. This study is the first phase 3 study to describe the benefit of perioperative immunotherapy + neoadjuvant CT and demonstrate that perioperative durvalumab + neoadjuvant CT is a potential new treatment for patients with resectable NSCLC. In patients with resectable NSCLC, perioperative durvalumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy, versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, significantly improved both primary endpoints of EFS (HR, 0.68; P=0.003902) and pCR (difference in proportions, 13.0%; P=0.000036), with a manageable safety profile and no impact on completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery. Notably, significant EFS benefit was achieved at the first planned interim analysis, based on 31.9% maturity and a median follow-up of less than 1 year (censored patients), when approximately a quarter of patients were still receiving adjuvant study treatment (as more than half of all patients were randomized in the last year of enrollment). These findings support an intensified treatment strategy with immunotherapy as a perioperative, rather than only a neoadjuvant or adjuvant, regimen. EFS and pCR benefit with durvalumab was broadly observed across all predefined subgroups and was consistent with improvements observed in the overall mITT population. EFS benefit, for example, was observed regardless of age, disease stage (including patients with N2 disease), histology, and PD-L1 expression, including, notably, patients with PD-L1 expression <1% (although the magnitude of benefit was numerically better in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%). A greater magnitude of benefit was observed in current smokers versus non-smokers; however, this is consistent with findings across other studies of immunotherapy (Zhao et al., “Impact of Smoking History on Response to Immunotherapy in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Front Oncol.2021 Aug 23;11:703143. PMID: 34497760; PMCID: PMC8419340). Female patients appeared to derive less relative benefit; while the EFS HR confidence intervals were wide, overlapping with the male subgroup, this may have been due, at least in part, to the higher proportion of female patients who were never smokers (28.9% vs.7.1%) and a lower proportion who had PD-L1 expression ≥50% (24.6% vs.32.1%), relative to male patients. While EFS and pCR Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT benefit with durvalumab was observed regardless of disease stage, the magnitude somewhat varied, with stage II patients having a larger pCR benefit and stage IIIA patients (the largest subgroup) having a relatively larger EFS benefit. However, it is worth noting that, at this first interim analysis, there were fewer EFS events in the stage II subgroup, as these patients have a better prognosis, and many patients continued to received durvalumab or placebo at the time of the data cutoff. It is, therefore, likely that the full benefits from adjuvant durvalumab have not been fully realized in the current analysis, particularly for the stage II subgroup, and that additional maturity and follow-up is warranted to clearly assess EFS benefit, as well as overall survival and other longer-term secondary endpoints. Finally, a clear and consistent EFS benefit with durvalumab was observed regardless of whether the planned neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen was cisplatin- or carboplatin-based; this underscores the efficacy of the broad variety of platinum-based regimens used in the neoadjuvant setting in real-world practice. Use of perioperative durvalumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in this study was associated with a manageable safety profile that was consistent with the known safety profiles of durvalumab and chemotherapy. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 AEs of any cause was similar between the study arms, occurring in 42.3% and 43.4% of patients in the durvalumab and placebo arms, respectively. AEs possibly related to study Tx with an outcome of death were rare in both arms. Immune-mediated AEs were more common in the durvalumab arm versus the placebo arm (23.5% vs.9.8%); however, most were grade 1 or 2. Also, although differences in the populations and study designs of AEGEAN versus PACIFIC confound between-study comparisons (particularly, use of chemoradiotherapy in the latter), it is notable that the rates of any-grade and grade 3 or 4 immune AEs were similar between these studies (Antonia et al. N Engl J Med 2017; 377:1919–29; Antonia et al. N Engl J Med 2018; 379:2342–50). Finally, although AEGEAN enrolled patients during the height of the global Covid-19 pandemic, only 6 of 80 patients (7.5%) with any-grade Covid-19 had grade 5 Covid-19 events; in comparison, based on reports published before the widespread use of vaccines, patients with lung cancer were associated with Covid-19 mortality rates of 18–47% (Passaro et al. J Immunother Cancer 2021; 9:e002266). Although comparison of the findings from this study (AEGEAN) with those of other studies that investigated immunotherapy as either neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy may be considered informative, differences in patient populations and study designs confound cross- trial comparisons. AEGEAN is notable for several differences relative to other trials of immunotherapy in the resectable NSCLC setting (Forde et al. N Engl J Med 2022; 386:1973- Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT 85; Felip et al. Lancet 2021; 398:1344-57; O’Brien et al. Lancet Oncol 2022; 12:1274-86). Key strengths include: the large number of patients enrolled; the use of a double-blind, placebo-controlled design throughout both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment periods; the exclusion of patients with documented EGFR/ALK aberrations from the pre-specified population for analyses of efficacy; the use of the 8th edition of the AJCC staging manual; the use of the IASLC recommendations for assessment of pathological response; and the flexibility in neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens. That said, AEGEAN was not designed to assess the individual contributions of the neoadjuvant and adjuvant components of treatment. Nonetheless, the results reported here justify a perioperative treatment strategy and substantiate other studies that have employed this approach with immunotherapy in the melanoma and NSCLC settings (Patel et al., N Engl J Med 2023; 388:813-823; Lu et al., Journal of Clinical Oncology 41, no.36_suppl (April 20, 2023) 425126-425126). Moreover, the benefit of the full course of perioperative durvalumab may only be fully realized until such time as all patients have had the opportunity to complete adjuvant study treatment. Example 2: Associations of ctDNA clearance, radiological response, and pathological response with neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable NSCLC from the phase 3 AEGEAN trial The AEGEAN (NCT03800134) study is a phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center international study of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) durvalumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with resectable stage II and stage III non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC). In AEGEAN, perioperative durvalumab (D) plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) significantly improved pathological complete response (pCR), major pathological response (MPR), and event-free survival (EFS), with manageable safety, versus neoadjuvant CT alone among patients with resectable (R) NSCLC (modified ITT [mITT] population). Reported herein are analyses of ctDNA, including association of ctDNA clearance (CL) with pCR and/or MPR. R-NSCLC patients (stage II–IIIB[N2]; AJCC 8th ed) were randomised (1:1) to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) + durvalumab or placebo (PBO) intravenously (IV) (Q3W, 4 cycles) prior to surgery, followed by durvalumab or PBO IV (Q4W, 12 cycles), respectively, after surgery. Plasma samples were collected at protocol-specified timepoints, including prior to each neoadjuvant treatment cycle and before surgery. Analysis was Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT performed using patient-specific tumour-informed assays, following identification of mutations in diagnostic tissue via whole exome sequencing. ctDNA variant allele fractions (VAFs) and dynamics were assessed during neoadjuvant treatment, including ctDNA clearance and association with pCR or MPR. ctDNA was evaluated in 1268 neoadjuvant (multiple timepoints) and 168 adjuvant (C1D1) samples from 283 mITT patients (D arm, n=142; PBO arm, n=141)in the interim pCR analysis cohort. Baseline characteristics of ctDNA-evaluable patients were generally similar to those in the overall mITT population. In both treatment arms, decreases in median VAFs were observed as early as C2D1 (D arm, 97% decrease; PBO arm, 94% decrease) and, by C3D1, were significantly lower in patients with pCR/MPR versus patients with non- pCR/MPR (P≤0.003). After 4 cycles of neoadjuvant treatment, higher ctDNA CL rates were observed in the durvalumab vs placebo arm (66% [95% CI, 54–77] vs 41% [95% CI, 30–52] at pre-surgery). Patients achieving ctDNA clearance versus no ctDNA clearance at C2D1 had higher rates of later pCR (D arm: 50.0% vs 15.1%; PBO arm: 14.3% vs 3.1%) and MPR (D arm: 66.7% vs 35.8%; PBO arm: 38.1% vs 12.5%). Among patients who were ctDNA positive at baseline, all patients achieving pCR and >90% achieving MPR had ctDNA CL by C4D1. Neoadjuvant treatment with durvalumab and chemotherapy resulted in greater ctDNA clearance than placebo and chemotherapy. Earlier ctDNA clearance was associated with higher likelihood of pCR and MPR, highlighting ctDNA clearance as a potential early- response biomarker (see Figures 2-16). To determine if changes in tumor size using imaging scans (e.g., CT/MRI) before surgery can predict pathological response to treatment, pre-surgical radiological response was evaluable in 687 patients (Durvalumab (D) = 341; Placebo (PBO) = 346) in the mITT population from the EFS interim analysis cohort (n=740; see Table 9). Patients with radiological CR/PR had a higher rate of pCR and MPR as compared to patients with radiological stable disease (SD); no patients with radiological progressive disease (PD) had pCR or MPR (Figure 17). Patients without radiological CR/PR in the durvalumab and placebo arms were unlikely to have pCR (NPV = 95.6% and 98.3%, respectively) or MPR (NPV = 88.8% and 95.3%, respectively). Patients with radiological CR/PR in the durvalumab arm compared with the placebo arm were more likely to have pCR (PPV = 27.2% vs 8.5%) and MPR (PPV = 50.5% vs 24.6%). Thus, changes in tumor size have potential as early indicators of pathological response to identify patients who may benefit most from treatment with durvalumab plus chemotherapy before surgery. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT In exploratory analyses of 283 evaluable patients from AEGEAN, ctDNA clearance was shown to be associated with pCR, EFS and OS. Among patients who were ctDNA- positive at baseline (neoadjuvant C1D1) in both arms (89.6%), all patients who had pCR and >93% who had MPR had ctDNA clearance at neoadjuvant C4D1. Absence of early ctDNA clearance can identify patients unlikely to have pCR. In both arms, lack of early ctDNA clearance identified patients with a low probability of having pCR (NPV: ≥89% at C2D1; 100% at C4D1). Patients in the Durvalumab treatment arm with ctDNA clearance as early as neoadjuvant C2D1 had longer EFS and OS compared to patients without clearance, and versus patients in the PBO arm. Patients with ctDNA clearance, with or without pCR, had longer EFS than patients with no ctDNA clearance and no pCR. Patients who had ctDNA clearance were more likely to have pCR in the D vs PBO arm (PPV: 49% vs 11% at C2D1). Among patients who completed surgery, patients with ctDNA detected at the post- surgical landmark (adjuvant C1D1) had the poorest DFS outcomes compared to ctDNA- negative patients. Based on data from 283 patients for whom patient-specific ctDNA blood tests were successfully developed, it was shown that patients without ctDNA clearance were unlikely to have a pathologic response. ctDNA clearance at early presurgical timepoints identified patients with improved event-free survival, which was more pronounced in patients who received durvalumab with chemotherapy before surgery and durvalumab after surgery, compared to patients who only received chemotherapy before surgery. More patients with such improvement were identified by ctDNA clearance than by pathological response. Patients receiving durvalumab with ctDNA clearance as early as the second cycle of presurgical treatment had longer event-free survival and lived longer compared to patients without clearance, and compared to patients who did not receive durvalumab. Patients with ctDNA clearance, with or without pathological response, had longer event-free survival than patients with no ctDNA clearance and no pathological response. Patients with ctDNA detected at the first collection timepoint after surgery had poorer disease-free survival. All patents and publications mentioned in this specification are herein incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each independent patent and publication was specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference. Citation or identification of any Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT reference in any section of this application shall not be construed as an admission that such reference is available as prior art to the present disclosure.

Claims

Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT What is claimed is: Claim 1: A method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre- treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of the treatment; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; and (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful, or wherein no change in the ctDNA level or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. Claim 2: A method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) optionally, determining the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level in a pre- treatment sample obtained from the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; and (d) administering the treatment to the patient or resecting the R-NSCLC if there is a decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, or administering an alternative treatment to the patient if there is no change or an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Claim 3: The method of either claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the decrease in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample is a decrease of at least 50% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 60% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 70% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 80% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 90% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 95% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 98% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 99% from the ctDNA level in the pre- treatment sample, or a decrease of 100% from the ctDNA level in the pre-treatment sample. Claim 4: The method of any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the ctDNA level in the post- treatment sample is undetectable and/or below a limit of detection. Claim 5: The method of any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the method is indicative that treatment is and/or will be successful. Claim 6: The method of any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein detecting ctDNA in the post- treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. Claim 7: A method of assessing the success of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC) in a patient, the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; and (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein detecting ctDNA in the post-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. Claim 8: A method of treating a patient having resectable non-small cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC), the method comprising: (a) administering a treatment comprising durvalumab and chemotherapy to the patient; Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT (b) determining the ctDNA level in a post-treatment sample obtained from the patient after administration of the treatment; and (c) administering an alternative treatment to the patient if ctDNA is detected in the post-treatment sample. Claim 9: The method of any one of claims 1 to 8, wherein the method further comprises: determining a variant allele fraction (VAF) in the pre-treatment sample and a VAF in the post-treatment sample; wherein a decrease in the VAF in the post-treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful; and administering the treatment to the patient if there is a decrease in the VAF in the post- treatment sample compared to the VAF in the pre-treatment sample. Claim 10: The method of any one of claims 1 to 8, wherein the decrease in the VAF in the post-treatment sample is a decrease of at least 50% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 60% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 70% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 80% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 90% from the VAF in the pre- treatment sample, a decrease of at least 95% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, at least 98% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, a decrease of at least 99% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample, or a decrease of 100% from the VAF in the pre-treatment sample. Claim 11: The method of either claim 9 or claim 10, wherein the VAF in the post- treatment sample is undetectable and/or below a limit of detection. Claim 12: The method of any one of claims 9 to 11, wherein the method is indicative that treatment is and/or will be successful. Claim 13: The method of any one of claims 9 to 12, wherein detecting VAF in the post- treatment sample is indicative that the treatment is not and/or will not be successful. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Claim 14: The method of any one of claims 1 to 13, wherein determining the ctDNA level or determining the VAF in the post-treatment sample occurs about 21 days after administration of the treatment, about 42 days after administration of the treatment, about 63 days after administration of the treatment, or about 84 days after administration of the treatment. Claim 15: The method of any one of claims 1 to 14, wherein determining the ctDNA level or determining the VAF in the post-treatment sample occurs after about 1 cycle of the treatment, after about 2 cycles of the treatment, after about 3 cycles of the treatment, or after about 4 cycles of the treatment. Claim 16: The method of any one of claims 1 to 15, wherein the ctDNA level is detected by a sequencing reaction. Claim 17: The method of any one of claims 1 to 16 further comprising: (a) determining tumor size of the R-NSCLC in the patient prior to administration of a treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient; (b) administering the treatment to the patient; (c) determining tumor size of the R-NSCLC in the patient after administration of the treatment; wherein a decrease in tumor size after administration of the treatment is indicative that the treatment is and/or will be successful. Claim 18: The method of claim 17, wherein tumor size is determined prior to resecting the R-NSCLC. Claim 19: The method of either claim 17 or claim 18, wherein tumor size is determined using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), or both MRI and CT. Claim 20: The method of any one of claims 1 to 19, wherein the treatment comprises administering durvalumab and a chemotherapy to the patient about every 21 days (Q3W) for about 4 cycles. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Claim 21: The method of claim 20 further comprising resecting the R-NSCLC after the about 4 cycles of the treatment comprising durvalumab and a chemotherapy. Claim 22: The method of claim 21 further comprising administering to the patient durvalumab about every 14 to 28 days for up to about 12 cycles after resecting the R- NSCLC. Claim 23: The method of claim 21 further comprising administering to the patient durvalumab about every 28 days (Q4W) for up to about 12 cycles after resecting the R- NSCLC. Claim 24: The method of any one of claims 1 to 23, wherein about 1000 to 2000 mg of durvalumab is administered to the patient. Claim 25: The method of claim 24, wherein about 1500 mg of durvalumab is administered to the patient. Claim 26: The method of any one of claims 1 to 25, wherein the chemotherapy is a platinum-based chemotherapy. Claim 27: The method of claim 26, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy is one or more of carboplatin, cisplatin, nedaplatin, and oxaliplatin. Claim 28: The method of claim 27, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy comprises a carboplatin area under the serum drug concentration-time curve (AUC) dose of about 5 to about 6 mg/mL/min, or a cisplatin dose of about 75 mg/m2. Claim 29: The method of any one of claims 26 to 28, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy further comprises one or more of afatinib, cetuximab, bevacizumab, erlotinib, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, pemetrexed, and vemurafenib. Claim 30: The method of any one of claims 26 to 28, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy further comprises one or more of cisplatin, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and pemetrexed. Reference Nos: B7H1-550-PCT Claim 31: The method of either claim 29 or claim 30, wherein the platinum-based chemotherapy further comprises a paclitaxel dose of about 200 mg/m2, a pemetrexed dose of about 500 mg/m2, or a gemcitabine dose of about 1250 mg/m2. Claim 32: The method of any one of claims 1 to 31, wherein the R-NSCLC is a squamous cell carcinoma. Claim 33: The method of any one of claims 1 to 31, wherein the R-NSCLC is a non- squamous cell carcinoma. Claim 34: The method of any one of claims 1 to 33, wherein the patient does not have an EGFR mutation and/or an ALK translocation. Claim 35: The method of any one of claims 21 to 23 further comprising a post-operative radiation therapy. Claim 36: The method of claim 35, wherein the post-operative radiation therapy starts within about 8 weeks after resecting the R-NSCLC. Claim 37: The method of claim 36, wherein administering durvalumab starts within about 3 weeks from the end of the post-operative radiation therapy. Claim 38: The method of any one of claims 1 to 37, wherein an increase in the ctDNA level in the post-treatment sample compared to the pre-treatment sample is determined, and one or more alternative treatments R-NSCLC is administered to the patient. Claim 39: The method of any one of claims 1 to 38, wherein the method results in improvement in one or more of EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and mPR compared to a standard of care. Claim 40: The method of any one of claims 1 to 38, wherein the method results in improvement in one or more of EFS, pCR, DFS, OS, and mPR compared to a platinum-based chemotherapy.
PCT/IB2024/060194 2023-10-17 2024-10-17 Predicting response to neoadjuvant treatment in non-small cell lung cancer Pending WO2025083600A1 (en)

Applications Claiming Priority (8)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US202363591109P 2023-10-17 2023-10-17
US63/591,109 2023-10-17
US202363603767P 2023-11-29 2023-11-29
US63/603,767 2023-11-29
US202463636344P 2024-04-19 2024-04-19
US63/636,344 2024-04-19
US202463694735P 2024-09-13 2024-09-13
US63/694,735 2024-09-13

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2025083600A1 true WO2025083600A1 (en) 2025-04-24

Family

ID=93379118

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/IB2024/060194 Pending WO2025083600A1 (en) 2023-10-17 2024-10-17 Predicting response to neoadjuvant treatment in non-small cell lung cancer

Country Status (1)

Country Link
WO (1) WO2025083600A1 (en)

Citations (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US9493565B2 (en) 2009-11-24 2016-11-15 Medimmune Limited Targeted binding agents against B7-H1
WO2018183817A2 (en) * 2017-03-31 2018-10-04 Medimmune, Llc Tumor burden as measured by cell free dna

Patent Citations (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US9493565B2 (en) 2009-11-24 2016-11-15 Medimmune Limited Targeted binding agents against B7-H1
WO2018183817A2 (en) * 2017-03-31 2018-10-04 Medimmune, Llc Tumor burden as measured by cell free dna

Non-Patent Citations (26)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
"The Cambridge Dictionary of Science and Technology", 1988
ANTONIA ET AL., N ENGL J MED, vol. 377, 2017, pages 1919 - 29
ANTONIA ET AL., N ENGL J MED, vol. 379, 2018, pages 2342 - 50
D'ADDARIO ET AL.: "Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up", ANN ONCOL., vol. 21, no. 5, May 2010 (2010-05-01), pages 116 - 9
FELIP ET AL., LANCET, vol. 398, 2021, pages 1344 - 57
FORDE ET AL., N ENGL JMED, vol. 386, 2022, pages 1973 - 85
FORDE ET AL.: "Neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade in resectable lung cancer", N ENGL J MED, vol. 378, 2018, pages 1976 - 86
HALEMARHAM: "The Harper Collins Dictionary of Biology", 1991, SPRINGER VERLAG
HERTZ-PICCIOTTOROCKHILL: "Validity and efficiency of approximation methods for tied survival times in Cox regression", BIOMETRICS, vol. 53, no. 3, 1997, pages 1151 - 6
HOWLADER ET AL.: "SEER Cancer Statistics Review", April 2017, NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, pages: 1975 - 2014
LU ET AL., JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, vol. 41, no. 36, 20 April 2023 (2023-04-20), pages 425126 - 425126
MICHAEL A. KUZIORA ET AL: "Abstract 582: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) variant allele frequencies are reduced in responders to durvalumab and low baseline variant allele frequencies are associated with improved overall survival in NSCLC patients | Cancer Research | American Association for Cancer Research", CANCER RESEARCH, vol. 77, no. 13_Supplement, 1 July 2017 (2017-07-01), pages 582 - 582, XP093240540, ISSN: 0008-5472, Retrieved from the Internet <URL:https://aacrjournals.org/cancerres/article/77/13_Supplement/582/621647/Abstract-582-Circulating-tumor-DNA-ctDNA-variant> DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-582 *
MOUNTAIN: "Revisions in the international system for staging lung cancer", CHEST, vol. 111, 1997, pages 1710 - 7
O'BRIEN ET AL., LANCET ONCOL, vol. 12, 2022, pages 1274 - 86
PASSARO ET AL., J IMMUNOTHER CANCER, vol. 9, 2021, pages e002266
PATEL ET AL., N ENGLJ MED, vol. 388, 2023, pages 813 - 823
PIGNON ET AL.: "Lung adjuvant cisplatin evaluation: a pooled analysis by the LACE Collaborative Group", J CLIN ONCOL, vol. 26, 2008, pages 3552 - 9
PISTERSLE CHEVALIER: "Adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer", J CLIN ONCOL., vol. 23, no. 14, 10 May 2005 (2005-05-10), pages 3270 - 8
RAJIV RAJA ET AL: "Early Reduction in ctDNA Predicts Survival in Patients with Lung and Bladder Cancer Treated with Durvalumab", CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH, vol. 24, no. 24, 9 August 2018 (2018-08-09), US, pages 6212 - 6222, XP055719086, ISSN: 1078-0432, DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0386 *
SHU ET AL.: "Neoadjuvant atezolizumab + chemotherapy in patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC", POSTER PRESENTED AT: ASCO ANNUAL MEETING, 2018
SINGLETON ET AL.: "Dictionary of Microbiology and Molecular Biology", 1994
SPICER J. ET AL: "929MO Platform study of neoadjuvant durvalumab (D) alone or combined with novel agents in patients (pts) with resectable, early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Pharmacodynamic correlates and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) dynamics in the NeoCOAST study", ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, vol. 33, 1 September 2022 (2022-09-01), pages S971, XP093240535, ISSN: 0923-7534, Retrieved from the Internet <URL:https://pdf.sciencedirectassets.com/321639/1-s2.0-S0923753422X00148/1-s2.0-S0923753422029064/main.pdf?hash=38c45c56b8fea0045b32b249db886226c005994dbdc0a88eb9b913a734405798&host=68042c943591013ac2b2430a89b270f6af2c76d8dfd086a07176afe7c76c2c61&pii=S0923753422029064&tid=spdf-dc97ee31-6cf5-49a3-afdd-283> DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.07.1055 *
TRAVIS ET AL.: "IASLC Multidisciplinary Recommendations for Pathologic Assessment of Lung Cancer Resection Specimens After Neoadjuvant Therapy", J THORAC ONCOL., vol. 15, no. 5, May 2020 (2020-05-01), pages 709 - 740
TRAVIS WD ET AL., J THORAC ONCOL, vol. 15, 2020, pages 709 - 40
WAKELEE ET AL.: "Adjuvant chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with resected non-small-cell lung cancer (E1505): an open-label, multi centre, randomised, phase 3 trial", LANCET ONCOL, vol. 18, 2017, pages 1610 - 23
ZHAO ET AL.: "Impact of Smoking History on Response to Immunotherapy in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis", FRONT ONCOL., vol. 11, 23 August 2021 (2021-08-23), pages 703143

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
Scherpereel et al. Nivolumab or nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with relapsed malignant pleural mesothelioma (IFCT-1501 MAPS2): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, non-comparative, phase 2 trial
Godoy et al. Emerging precision neoadjuvant systemic therapy for patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer: current status and perspectives
JP2020172487A (en) Methods of treating early breast cancer with trastuzumab-mcc-dm1 and pertuzumab
JP6914336B2 (en) Treatment of advanced HER2-expressing cancer
US10208355B2 (en) Method of treatment for glioblastoma by administering a VEGF antagonist
KR20130126587A (en) Method to identify a patient with an increased likelihood of responding to an anti-cancer therapy
JP2020514281A5 (en)
CN112912403A (en) Method for treating tumors
CA2804246A1 (en) Method to identify a patient with an increased likelihood of responding to an anti-cancer therapy
JP2023551906A (en) Methods and compositions for neoadjuvant and adjuvant urothelial carcinoma therapy
AU2024250324A1 (en) Treatment of non-small cell lung cancer
WO2025083600A1 (en) Predicting response to neoadjuvant treatment in non-small cell lung cancer
Fencer et al. Current Updates on HER2–Directed Therapies in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
KR20250173561A (en) Treatment of non-small cell lung cancer
Walder Improving outcomes for the lung cancer patient with impaired lung function
Wei et al. Vemurafenib, cetuximab and camrelizumab in BRAF V600E-mutated/MSS metastatic colorectal cancer
WO2025251014A1 (en) Methods and compositions for biomarker-guided bladder cancer therapy
Bang et al. Perioperative Pembrolizumab for Locally Advanced Thymic Epithelial Tumors: A Single-Arm, Phase 2 Trial
METASTATIC session L: gastrointestinal cancer-colon-rectal
Stellato Extensive plasma proteomic profiling revealed receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-Β ligand (RANKL) as emerging biomarker of nivolumab clinical benefit in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma
PA session A: gastrointestinal tumours
Jia et al. First-Line Tislelizumab Combined with Bevacizumab and CAPOX for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinomas with PD-L1 CPS< 5: A Phase II Single-Arm Study
Stelzner et al. Gastrointestinal (Colorectal) Cancer (including liver metastases) Freie Vorträge
FOLFIRI poster discussions
HK1182449A (en) Method to identify a patient with an increased likelihood of responding to an anti-cancer therapy

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application

Ref document number: 24801670

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1