Updated Overall Survival Data and Predictive Biomarkers of Sintilimab Plus Pemetrexed and Platinum as First-Line Treatment for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC in the Phase 3 ORIENT-11 Study

IntroductionSintilimab plus chemotherapy significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with chemotherapy alone in nonsquamous NSCLC in the ORIENT-11 study. Updated overall survival (OS) and PFS data and corresponding biomarker analyses are reported here.MethodsIn this study, a total of 397 patients with previously untreated, locally advanced or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC were assigned to sintilimab plus chemotherapy combination treatment (combo) group or placebo plus chemotherapy treatment group. The patients were stratified by programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression levels. Immune signature profiles from tumor RNA sequencing and PD-L1 immunohistochemistry were correlated with clinical outcome to identify predictive biomarkers.ResultsAs of January 2021, with median follow-up of 22.9 months, median OS was significantly improved in the combo group compared with the placebo plus chemotherapy treatment group (not reached versus 16.8 mo; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45–0.79, p = 0.0003). High or medium immune cell infiltration was strongly associated with improved PFS in the combo group, in contrast to absent or low immune cell infiltration, which suggests that chemotherapy could not prime “immune deserts” to obtain benefit from programmed cell death protein-1 inhibition. In particular, high major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II presentation pathway expression was significantly correlated with prolonged PFS (HR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.19–0.54, p < 0.0001) and OS (HR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.20–0.64, p = 0.0005) in the combo group. Importantly, patients with low or absent PD-L1 but high MHC class II expression could still benefit from the combo treatment. In contrast, MHC class I antigen presentation pathway was less relevant in this combination setting.ConclusionsThe addition of sintilimab to chemotherapy resulted to significantly longer OS in nonsquamous NSCLC. Expression of MHC class II antigen presentation pathway could identify patients benefiting most from this combination.     

A Randomized,Placebo-Controlled Trial of Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy in Patients With Metastatic Squamous NSCLC: Protocol-Specified Final Analysis of KEYNOTE-407

IntroductionIn the randomized KEYNOTE-407 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02775435), pembrolizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel/nab-paclitaxel (chemotherapy) significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated metastatic squamous NSCLC. We report updated efficacy outcomes from the protocol-specified final analysis and, for the first time, progression on next line of treatment.MethodsEligible patients were randomized to chemotherapy plus either pembrolizumab (n = 278) or placebo (n = 281). After positive results from the second interim analysis, patients still receiving placebo could cross over to pembrolizumab monotherapy at the time of confirmed progressive disease. The primary end points were OS and PFS. PFS-2 (time from randomization to progression on next-line treatment/death, whichever occurred first) was an exploratory end point.ResultsAfter median (range) follow-up of 14.3 (0.1–31.3) months, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy continued to exhibit a clinically meaningful improvement over placebo plus chemotherapy in OS (median, 17.1 mo [95% confidence interval (CI): 14.4‒19.9] versus 11.6 mo [95% CI: 10.1‒13.7]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI: 0.58‒0.88]) and PFS (median, 8.0 mo [95% CI: 6.3‒8.4] versus 5.1 mo [95% CI: 4.3‒6.0]; HR, 0.57 [95% CI: 0.47‒0.69]). PFS-2 was longer for patients randomized to first-line pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (HR, 0.59 [95% CI: 0.49‒0.72]). Grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurred in 74.1% and 69.6% of patients receiving pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and placebo plus chemotherapy, respectively.ConclusionsPembrolizumab plus chemotherapy continued to exhibit substantially improved OS and PFS in patients with metastatic squamous NSCLC. The PFS-2 outcomes support pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy as a standard first-line treatment in patients with metastatic squamous NSCLC.     

CCTG BR34: A Randomized Phase 2 Trial of Durvalumab and Tremelimumab With or Without Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Patients With Metastatic NSCLC

IntroductionFirst-line therapy for patients with metastatic NSCLC includes checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy, dual checkpoint inhibition, or combination with chemotherapy. We compared outcomes with combination chemoimmunotherapy versus dual checkpoint inhibition as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic NSCLC.MethodsThis open-label, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 44 sites in Canada and Australia. Patients with treatment-naive, metastatic NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK alterations were randomized (1:1) to receive treatment with durvalumab plus tremelimumab with or without platinum-doublet chemotherapy. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were progression-free survival, overall response rate, and safety.ResultsA total of 301 patients were randomized. Median OS was 16.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.6–19.1) with chemotherapy plus immunotherapy and 14.1 months (95% CI: 10.6–18.3) with immunotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.88, 90% CI: 0.67–1.16, p = 0.46). Median progression-free survival with chemotherapy plus immunotherapy was 7.7 months (95% CI: 5.5–8.5) and 3.2 months (95% CI: 2.7–5.1) with immunotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52–0.88). The overall response rate with chemoimmunotherapy was 42.4% and 29.3% with immunotherapy (adjusted OR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.04–2.76). The percentage of patients with grade 3 or higher adverse events was 82% in the chemotherapy plus immunotherapy group and 70% in the immunotherapy group. Exploratory analyses of programmed death-ligand 1 expression and blood-based tumor mutation burden revealed no differential treatment effect on OS.ConclusionsThe addition of chemotherapy to durvalumab plus tremelimumab in the first-line treatment of stage IV NSCLC did not improve survival compared with durvalumab plus tremelimumab alone. Further study is warranted to identify patients that benefit from initial immunotherapy alone versus combination chemotherapy plus immunotherapy as first-line treatment.     

Atezolizumab Plus Chemotherapy for First-Line Treatment of Nonsquamous NSCLC: Results From the Randomized Phase 3 IMpower132 Trial

IntroductionWe report the final results of the phase 3 IMpower132 study evaluating atezolizumab plus carboplatin or cisplatin plus pemetrexed (APP) in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.MethodsChemotherapy-naive patients with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were randomized in a one-to-one ratio to receive four or six cycles of carboplatin or cisplatin plus pemetrexed (PP) or APP every 3 weeks, followed by maintenance therapy with atezolizumab plus pemetrexed or pemetrexed alone. Co-primary end points were overall survival (OS) and investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsThe intention-to-treat population included 578 patients (APP, n = 292; PP, n = 286). At the primary PFS analysis (May 22, 2018; median follow-up, 14.8 mo), APP exhibited significant PFS improvement versus PP (median = 7.6 versus 5.2 mo, stratified hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49–0.72, p < 0.0001). OS for the APP group was numerically better but not statistically significant at the interim (May 22, 2018; median = 18.1 versus 13.6 mo, stratified HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.64–1.03, p = 0.0797) and final analyses (July 18, 2019; median = 17.5 versus 13.6 mo; stratified HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.71–1.06, p = 0.1546). The OS and PFS results favored APP versus PP across subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 54.6% (APP) and 40.1% (PP) of patients; grade 5 treatment-related events occurred in 3.8% and 2.9%, respectively.ConclusionsIMpower132 met its co-primary PFS end point but not its co-primary OS end point, with numerical improvement for OS in the APP arm. APP had a manageable safety profile, with no new or unexpected safety signals identified.     

Final analysis of a randomised trial comparing pembrolizumab versus investigator-choice chemotherapy for ipilimumab-refractory advanced melanoma

AimTo evaluate the protocol-specified final analysis of overall survival (OS) in the KEYNOTE-002 study (NCT01704287) of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with ipilimumab-refractory, advanced melanoma.MethodsIn this randomised, phase II study, eligible patients had advanced melanoma with documented progression after two or more ipilimumab doses, previous BRAF or MEK inhibitor or both, if BRAF^V600 mutant-positive. Patients were randomised to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks or investigator-choice chemotherapy. Crossover to pembrolizumab was allowed following progression on chemotherapy. The protocol-specified final OS was performed in the intent-to-treat population. Survival was positive if p < 0.01 in one pembrolizumab arm.ResultsA total of 180 patients were randomised to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 181 to pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg and 179 to chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 28 months (range 24.1–35.5), 368 patients died and 98 (55%) crossed over to pembrolizumab. Pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67–1.10, p = 0.117) and 10 mg/kg (0.74, 0.57–0.96, p = 0.011) resulted in a non-statistically significant improvement in OS versus chemotherapy; median OS was 13.4 (95% CI 11.0–16.4) and 14.7 (95% CI 11.3–19.5), respectively, versus 11.0 months (95% CI 8.9–13.8), with limited improvement after censoring for crossover. Two-year survival rates were 36% and 38%, versus 30%. Progression-free survival, objective response rate and duration of response improved with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy, regardless of dose. Grade III–V treatment-related adverse events occurred in 24 (13.5%), 30 (16.8%) and 45 (26.3%) patients, respectively.ConclusionImprovement in OS with pembrolizumab was not statistically significant at either dose versus chemotherapy.     

First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab With Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone for Metastatic NSCLC in CheckMate 9LA: 3-Year Clinical Update and Outcomes in Patients With Brain Metastases or Select Somatic Mutations

IntroductionIn the phase 3 CheckMate 9LA study, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy alone. We report updated efficacy and safety (≥3 y of follow-up), clinical outcomes in patients with baseline brain metastases, and exploratory somatic mutation analyses.MethodsAdults with stage IV or recurrent NSCLC, no known sensitizing EGFR or ALK alterations, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status less than or equal to 1 were randomized 1:1 to nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks with chemotherapy (two cycles) or chemotherapy alone (four cycles). Assessments included OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate. Exploratory analyses included systemic and intracranial efficacy in patients with or without baseline brain metastases, in addition to OS and PFS by KRAS, TP53, STK11, and KEAP1 somatic mutation status in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.ResultsWith a minimum follow-up of 36.1 months, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy continued to prolong OS versus chemotherapy alone in the intent-to-treat population (median [hazard ratio; 95% confidence interval] OS: 15.8 versus 11.0 mo [0.74; 0.62–0.87]; 3-y OS: 27% versus 19%). Efficacy outcomes were improved in patients with pretreated baseline brain metastases (median [hazard ratio; 95% confidence interval] OS: 19.3 versus 6.8 mo [0.45; 0.29–0.70]; systemic PFS: 9.7 versus 4.1 mo [0.44; 0.28–0.69]; intracranial PFS: 11.4 versus 4.6 mo [0.42; 0.26–0.68]). A trend of OS benefit was observed in patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, despite KRAS, TP53, and STK11 tumor mutations. Extended follow-up revealed no new safety signals.ConclusionsWith a 3-year minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy continued to have long-term, durable efficacy versus chemotherapy alone; a manageable safety profile; and survival benefit in patients with or without baseline brain metastases or select somatic mutations, further supporting the regimen as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic NSCLC.     

IMpower150 Final Overall Survival Analyses for Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Chemotherapy in First-Line Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC

IntroductionWe report the final overall survival (OS) analyses of atezolizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (ACP [experimental arm]) and OS data with approximately 39.8 months of median follow-up with atezolizumab-bevacizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (ABCP) versus bevacizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (BCP) in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC in the phase 3 IMpower150 study (NCT02366143).MethodsIn this randomized, open-label study (N = 1202), coprimary end points included investigator-assessed progression-free survival and OS in intention-to-treat (ITT) wild-type (WT; no EGFR or ALK alterations) patients. Secondary and exploratory end points included OS in ITT and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) subgroups defined by the VENTANA SP142 and SP263 immunohistochemistry assays.ResultsAt the final analysis with ACP versus BCP (data cutoff: September 13, 2019; minimum follow-up: 32.4 mo), ACP had numerical, but not statistically significant, improvements in OS (ITT-WT: median OS = 19.0 versus 14.7 mo; hazard ratio = 0.84; 95% confidence interval: 0.71–1.00). OS benefit was sustained with ABCP versus BCP (ITT-WT: 19.5 versus 14.7 mo; hazard ratio = 0.80; 95% confidence interval: 0.67–0.95). Exploratory analyses in the SP142-defined PD-L1 subgroups revealed longer median OS with ABCP and ACP versus BCP in PD-L1–high and PD-L1–positive subgroups; in the PD-L1–negative subgroups, median OS was similar with ACP and ABCP versus BCP. Safety was consistent with that in earlier analyses (data cutoff: January 22, 2018).ConclusionsAt the final IMpower150 OS analysis, ACP had numerical, but not statistically significant, OS improvement versus BCP. Updated data with an additional 20 months of follow-up revealed continued OS improvement with ABCP versus BCP in all patients.     

IMpower150 Final Exploratory Analyses for Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Chemotherapy in Key NSCLC Patient Subgroups With EGFR Mutations or Metastases in the Liver or Brain

IntroductionFinal overall survival (OS) analyses are presented for EGFR mutations and liver or brain metastases subgroups in the phase 3 IMpower150 study (NCT02366143) evaluating atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (ABCP) or atezolizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (ACP) versus bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (BCP).MethodsOverall, 1202 patients (intention-to-treat population) with chemotherapy-naive, metastatic, nonsquamous NSCLC were randomized to ABCP, ACP, or BCP. Patients with treated, stable brain metastases were permitted. OS was evaluated in EGFR mutations and baseline liver metastases subgroups; rate and time to development of new brain metastases were evaluated in the intention-to-treat patients.ResultsAt data cutoff (September 13, 2019; median follow-up, 39.3 mo), OS improvements were sustained with ABCP versus BCP in sensitizing EGFR mutations (all: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31–1.14; previous tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI]: HR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.38–1.46) and baseline liver metastases (HR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.45–1.02) subgroups. ACP did not have survival benefit versus BCP in sensitizing EGFR mutations (all: HR = 1.0; 95% CI: 0.57–1.74; previous TKI: HR = 1.22; 95% CI: 0.68–2.22) or liver metastases (HR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.68–1.51) subgroups. Overall, 100 patients (8.3%) developed new brain metastases. Although not formally evaluated, an improvement toward delayed time to development was found with ABCP versus BCP (HR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.39–1.19).ConclusionsThis final exploratory analysis revealed OS benefits for ABCP versus BCP in patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations, including those with previous TKI failures, and with liver metastases, although these results should be interpreted with caution. The impact of ABCP on delaying the development of new brain lesions requires further investigation.     

Tislelizumab Plus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC (RATIONALE 304): A Randomized Phase 3 Trial

IntroductionTislelizumab, an anti–programmed cell death protein-1 antibody, was specifically engineered to minimize FcɣR macrophage binding to abrogate antibody-dependent phagocytosis. Compared with chemotherapy alone, tislelizumab plus chemotherapy may improve clinical outcomes in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC (nsq-NSCLC).MethodsIn this open-label phase 3 trial (RATIONALE 304; NCT03663205), patients with histologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV nsq-NSCLC were randomized (2:1) to receive either arm A: tislelizumab plus platinum (carboplatin or cisplatin) and pemetrexed every 3 weeks (Q3Ws) or arm B: platinum and pemetrexed alone Q3W during induction treatment, followed by intravenous maintenance pemetrexed Q3W. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent review committee; clinical response and safety and tolerability were secondary end points.ResultsOverall, 332 patients (n = 222 [A]; n = 110 [B]) received treatment. With a median study follow-up of 9.8 months, PFS was significantly longer with tislelizumab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone (median PFS: 9.7 versus 7.6 mo; hazard ratio = 0.645 [95% confidence interval: 0.462–0.902], p = 0.0044). In addition, response rates were higher and response duration was longer with combination therapy versus chemotherapy alone. Hematologic adverse events (AEs) were common in both treatment arms; the most reported AEs were grades 1 to 2 in severity. The most common grade greater than or equal to 3 AEs were associated with chemotherapy and included neutropenia (44.6% [A]; 35.5% [B]) and leukopenia (21.6% [A]; 14.5% [B]).ConclusionsAddition of tislelizumab to chemotherapy resulted in significantly prolonged PFS, higher response rates, and longer response duration compared with chemotherapy alone, identifying a new potential option for first-line treatment of advanced nsq-NSCLC irrespective of disease stage.     

NEPTUNE: Phase 3 Study of First-Line Durvalumab Plus Tremelimumab in Patients With Metastatic NSCLC

IntroductionNEPTUNE, a phase 3, open-label study, evaluated first-line durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus chemotherapy in metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC).MethodsEligible patients with EGFR and ALK wild-type mNSCLC were randomized (1:1) to first-line durvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks until progression) plus tremelimumab (1 mg/kg every 4 weeks for up to four doses) or standard chemotherapy. Randomization was stratified by tumor programmed death-ligand 1 expression (≥25% versus <25%), tumor histologic type, and smoking history. The amended primary end point was overall survival (OS) in patients with blood tumor mutational burden (bTMB) greater than or equal to 20 mutations per megabase (mut/Mb). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with bTMB greater than or equal to 20 mut/Mb and safety and tolerability in all treated patients.ResultsAs of June 24, 2019, 823 patients were randomized (intention-to-treat [ITT]); 512 (62%) were bTMB-evaluable, with 129 of 512 (25%) having bTMB greater than or equal to 20 mut/Mb (durvalumab plus tremelimumab [n = 69]; chemotherapy [n = 60]). Baseline characteristics were balanced in the intention-to-treat. Among patients with bTMB greater than or equal to 20 mut/Mb, OS improvement with durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus chemotherapy did not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio 0.71 [95% confidence interval: 0.49–1.05; p = 0.081]; median OS, 11.7 versus 9.1 months); the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.77 (95% confidence interval, 0.51–1.15; median PFS, 4.2 versus 5.1 months). In the overall safety population, incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was 20.7% (durvalumab plus tremelimumab) and 33.6% (chemotherapy).ConclusionsNEPTUNE did not meet its primary end point of improved OS with durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with mNSCLC and bTMB greater than or equal to 20 mut/Mb. Despite the amended study design, with a resultant small primary analysis population, therapeutic activity was aligned with expectations based on mechanistic biology and previous studies.     

A randomised phase II study of continuous versus stop-and-go S-1 plus oxaliplatin following disease stabilisation in first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic gastric cancer

ObjectivesWe compared continuous versus stop-and-go chemotherapy after disease stabilisation with induction chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of metastatic gastric cancer (MGC).MethodsMGC patients who achieved disease control after 6 cycles of S-1/oxaliplatin (SOX) were randomised to receive either continuous SOX until progression (continuous arm) or to have a chemotherapy-free interval followed by SOX reintroduction at progression (stop-and-go arm). The primary end-point was overall survival (OS).ResultsOf the 250 patients enrolled, 247 participated in the induction phase. Of these, 121 patients were randomised to the continuous arm (n = 59) or the stop-and-go arm (n = 62). Progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer in the continuous arm than in the stop-and-go arm (10.5 versus 7.2 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% CI, 0.37–0.81; P = 0.002). Duration of disease control (DDC) and OS, however, were comparable between the two arms: median DDC, 10.5 versus 11.3 months, HR 0.92 (95% CI, 0.62–1.36; P = 0.674); median OS, 22.6 versus 22.7 months, HR 0.78 (95% CI, 0.50–1.23; P = 0.284). Adverse events including grade ≥3 fatigue (28.8% versus 8.1%; P = 0.003) and sensory neuropathy (25.4% versus 9.7%; P = 0.022) occurred more frequently in the continuous arm than in the stop-and-go arm. Quality of life (QOL) including global health status, physical/role functioning and other symptom scores significantly favoured the stop-and-go arm.ConclusionCompared with the stop-and-go strategy, maintenance chemotherapy improved PFS but not DDC and OS and had a negative impact on QOL, suggesting the stop-and-go strategy may be an appropriate option in MGC patients following induction chemotherapy.     

Randomized Phase 2 Studies of Checkpoint Inhibitors Alone or in Combination With Pegilodecakin in Patients With Metastatic NSCLC (CYPRESS 1 and CYPRESS 2)

IntroductionCheckpoint inhibitors (CPIs) have been approved to treat metastatic NSCLC. Pegilodecakin + CPI suggested promising efficacy in phase 1 IVY, providing rationale for randomized phase 2 trials CYPRESS 1 and CYPRESS 2.MethodsCYPRESS 1 (N = 101) and CYPRESS 2 (N = 52) included Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1 and first-line/second-line metastatic NSCLC, respectively, without known EGFR/ALK mutations. Patients were randomized 1:1; control arms received pembrolizumab (CYPRESS 1) or nivolumab (CYPRESS 2); experimental arms received pegilodecakin + CPI. Patients had programmed death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score of greater than or equal to 50% (CYPRESS 1) or 0% to 49% (CYPRESS 2). Primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) per investigator. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Exploratory end points included immune activation biomarkers.ResultsMedian follow-up for CYPRESS 1 and CYPRESS 2 was 10.0 and 11.6 months, respectively. Results for pegilodecakin + pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab were as follows: ORR per investigator 47% versus 44% (OR = 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.5–2.5); median PFS 6.3 versus 6.1 months (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.937, 95% CI: 0.54–1.625); and median OS 16.3 months versus not reached (HR = 1.507, 95% CI: 0.708–3.209). Results per blinded independent central review were consistent. Treatment discontinuation rate owing to adverse events (AEs) doubled in the experimental arm (32% versus 15%). AEs with grade greater than or equal to 3 treatment-related AEs (62% versus 19%) included anemia (20% versus 0%) and thrombocytopenia (12% versus 2%). Results for pegilodecakin + nivolumab versus nivolumab were as follows: ORR per investigator 15% versus 12% (OR = 1.2, 95% CI: 0.3–5.9); median PFS 1.9 versus 1.9 months (HR = 1.006, 95% CI: 0.519–1.951); and median OS 6.7 versus 10.7 months (HR = 1.871, 95% CI: 0.772–4.532). AEs with grade greater than or equal to 3 treatment-related AEs (70.4% versus 16.7%) included anemia (40.7% versus 0%), fatigue (18% versus 0%), and thrombocytopenia (14.8% versus 0%). Biomarker data suggested activation of immunostimulatory signals of interleukin-10R pathway in pegilodecakin-containing arms.ConclusionsDespite evidence of biological effect in peripheral blood, adding pegilodecakin to CPI did not improve ORR, PFS, or OS, in first-line/second-line NSCLC. Pegilodecakin + CPI has been found to have overall higher toxicity compared with CPI alone, leading to doubling of treatment discontinuation rate owing to AEs.     

Atezolizumab Versus Docetaxel in Pretreated Patients With NSCLC: Final Results From the Randomized Phase 2 POPLAR and Phase 3 OAK Clinical Trials

IntroductionThe phase 2 POPLAR and phase 3 OAK studies of the anti–programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunotherapy atezolizumab in patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC revealed significant improvements in survival versus docetaxel (p = 0.04 and 0.0003, respectively). Longer follow-up permits evaluation of continued benefit of atezolizumab. This study reports the final overall survival (OS) and safety findings from both trials.MethodsPOPLAR randomized 287 patients (atezolizumab, 144; docetaxel, 143) and OAK randomized 1225 patients (atezolizumab, 613; docetaxel, 612). The patients received atezolizumab (1200 mg fixed dose) or docetaxel (75 mg/m²) every 3 weeks. Efficacy and safety outcomes were evaluated.ResultsA longer OS was observed in patients receiving atezolizumab versus docetaxel in POPLAR (median OS = 12.6 mo versus 9.7 mo; hazard ratio = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58–1.00) and OAK (median OS = 13.3 versus 9.8 mo; hazard ratio = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.68–0.89). The 4-year OS rates in POPLAR were 14.8% (8.7–20.8) and 8.1% (3.2–13.0) and those in OAK were 15.5% (12.4–18.7) and 8.7% (6.2–11.3) for atezolizumab and docetaxel, respectively. Atezolizumab had improved OS benefit compared with docetaxel across all PD-L1 expression and histology groups. Most 4-year survivors in the docetaxel arms received subsequent immunotherapy (POPLAR, 50%; OAK, 65%). Of the 4-year survivors, most had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 and nonsquamous histological classification and approximately half were responders (POPLAR: atezolizumab, seven of 15; docetaxel, three of four; OAK: atezolizumab, 24 of 43; docetaxel, 11 of 26). Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 27% and 16% of atezolizumab 4-year survivors in POPLAR and OAK, respectively.ConclusionsLong-term follow-up suggests a consistent survival benefit with atezolizumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated NSCLC regardless of PD-L1 expression, histology, or subsequent immunotherapy. Atezolizumab had no new safety signals, and the safety profile was similar to that in previous studies.     

Atezolizumab in Combination With Carboplatin and Nab-Paclitaxel in Advanced Squamous NSCLC (IMpower131): Results From a Randomized Phase III Trial

IntroductionCytotoxic agents have immunomodulatory effects, providing a rationale for combining atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [anti–PD-L1]) with chemotherapy. The randomized phase III IMpower131 study (NCT02367794) evaluated atezolizumab with platinum-based chemotherapy in stage IV squamous NSCLC.MethodsA total of 1021 patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive atezolizumab+carboplatin+paclitaxel (A+CP) (n = 338), atezolizumab+carboplatin+nab-paclitaxel (A+CnP) (n = 343), or carboplatin+nab-paclitaxel (CnP) (n = 340) for four or six 21-day cycles; patients randomized to the A+CP or A+CnP arms received atezolizumab maintenance therapy until progressive disease or loss of clinical benefit. The coprimary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. The secondary end points included PFS and OS in PD-L1 subgroups and safety. The primary PFS (January 22, 2018) and final OS (October 3, 2018) for A+CnP versus CnP are reported.ResultsPFS improvement with A+CnP versus CnP was seen in the ITT population (median, 6.3 versus 5.6 mo; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60–0.85; p = 0.0001). Median OS in the ITT population was 14.2 and 13.5 months in the A+CnP and CnP arms (HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.73–1.05; p = 0.16), not reaching statistical significance. OS improvement with A+CnP versus CnP was observed in the PD-L1–high subgroup (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29–0.81), despite not being formally tested. Treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events and serious adverse events occurred in 68.0% and 47.9% (A+CnP) and 57.5% and 28.7% (CnP) of patients, respectively.ConclusionsAdding atezolizumab to platinum-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in patients with first-line squamous NSCLC; OS was similar between the arms.     

Treatment of Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma After Previous Cisplatin-based Chemotherapy for Localized Disease: A Retrospective Comparison of Different Chemotherapy Regimens

BackgroundOptimal chemotherapy for patients who received cisplatin for localized urothelial carcinoma (UC) and develop metastatic disease is unclear. We compared the efficacy of platinum-based (PBC) versus non–platinum-based (NPBC) first-line chemotherapy for metastasis.Patients and MethodsData were collected from the Retrospective International Study of Cancers of the Urothelial Tract (RISC), a database of 3024 patients from 28 international academic centers from 2005 to 2012. Patient inclusion criteria included: (1) predominant UC; (2) any primary tumor site; (3) cT2-4, cN0-N2, cM0; (4) prior receipt of perioperative/radiation cisplatin-containing chemotherapy; and (5) receipt of cytotoxic chemotherapy in the first-line metastatic setting. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to show progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from the first day of chemotherapy for metastatic disease to date of censor.ResultsEligibility criteria was met by 132 patients (n = 74 PBC; n = 58 NPBC). The median OS was 8.13 months (interquartile range, 4.87-16.64 months) and 8.77 months (interquartile range, 4.01-13.49 months) for PBC and NPBC, respectively. Neither OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-1.69; P = .87) nor PFS (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.56-1.31; P = .48) differed for PBC versus NPBC. However, for patients who received chemotherapy more than a year after perioperative/radiation chemotherapy, OS was superior for PBC over NPBC (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.10-0.92; P = .03).ConclusionsThere is no significant outcome difference between PBC and NPBC in patients with metastatic UC who previously received cisplatin-based chemotherapy for localized disease. However, if over a year has elapsed, return to PBC is associated with superior OS.     

Four-Year Survival With Durvalumab After Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III NSCLC—an Update From the PACIFIC Trial

IntroductionIn the Phase 3, placebo-controlled PACIFIC trial of patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC without disease progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy, consolidative durvalumab was associated with significant improvements in the primary end points of overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53–0.87; p = 0.00251; data cutoff, March 22, 2018) and progression-free survival (PFS) (blinded independent central review; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1) (HR = 0.52; 95% CI: 0.42–65; p < 0.0001; February 13, 2017) with manageable safety. Here, we report updated analyses of OS and PFS, approximately 4 years after the last patient was randomized.MethodsPatients with WHO performance status of 0 or 1 (and any tumor programmed death-ligand 1 status) were randomized (2:1) to intravenous durvalumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo, administered every 2 weeks (≤12 months), stratified by age, sex, and smoking history. OS and PFS were analyzed using a stratified log-rank test in the intent-to-treat population. Medians and 4-year OS and PFS rates were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method.ResultsOverall, 709 of 713 randomized patients received durvalumab (n/N=473/476) or placebo (n/N=236/237). As of March 20, 2020 (median follow-up = 34.2 months; range: 0.2–64.9), updated OS (HR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.57–0.88) and PFS (HR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.44–0.67) remained consistent with the primary analyses. The median OS for durvalumab was reached (47.5 mo; placebo, 29.1 months). Estimated 4-year OS rates were 49.6% versus 36.3% for durvalumab versus placebo, and 4-year PFS rates were 35.3% versus 19.5% respectively.ConclusionThese updated exploratory analyses demonstrate durable PFS and sustained OS benefit with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy. An estimated 49.6% of patients randomized to durvalumab remain alive at 4 years (placebo, 36.3%), and 35.3% remain alive and progression-free (placebo, 19.5%).     

Impact of TP53 mutation status on systemic treatment outcome in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer

BackgroundWe analyzed whether co-occurring mutations influence the outcome of systemic therapy in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Patients and methodsALK-rearranged stage IIIB/IV NSCLC patients were analyzed with next-generation sequencing and fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses on a centralized diagnostic platform. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined in the total cohort and in treatment-related sub-cohorts. Cox regression analyses were carried out to exclude confounders.ResultsAmong 216 patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC, the frequency of pathogenic TP53 mutations was 23.8%, while other co-occurring mutations were rare events. In ALK/TP53 co-mutated patients, median PFS and OS were significantly lower compared with TP53 wildtype patients [PFS 3.9 months (95% CI: 2.4–5.6) versus 10.3 months (95% CI: 8.6–12.0), P < 0.001; OS 15.0 months (95% CI: 5.0–24.9) versus 50.0 months (95% CI: 22.9–77.1), P = 0.002]. This difference was confirmed in all treatment-related subgroups including chemotherapy only [PFS first-line chemotherapy 2.6 months (95% CI: 1.3–4.1) versus 6.2 months (95% CI: 1.8–10.5), P = 0.021; OS 2.0 months (95% CI: 0.0–4.6) versus 9.0 months (95% CI: 6.1–11.9), P = 0.035], crizotinib plus chemotherapy [PFS crizotinib 5.0 months (95% CI: 2.9–7.2) versus 14.0 months (95% CI: 8.0–20.1), P < 0.001; OS 17.0 months (95% CI: 6.7–27.3) versus not reached, P = 0.049] and crizotinib followed by next-generation ALK-inhibitor [PFS next-generation inhibitor 5.4 months (95% CI: 0.1–10.7) versus 9.9 months (95% CI: 6.4–13.5), P = 0.039; OS 7.0 months versus 50.0 months (95% CI: not reached), P = 0.001).ConclusionsIn ALK-rearranged NSCLC co-occurring TP53 mutations predict an unfavorable outcome of systemic therapy. Our observations encourage future research to understand the underlying molecular mechanisms and to improve treatment outcome of the ALK/TP53 co-mutated subgroup.     

Efficacy and Safety of Sintilimab Plus Pemetrexed and Platinum as First-Line Treatment for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC: a Randomized,Double-Blind,Phase 3 Study (Oncology pRogram by InnovENT anti-PD-1-11)

IntroductionSintilimab, an anti–programmed death 1 antibody, plus pemetrexed and platinum had revealed promising efficacy for nonsquamous NSCLC in a phase 1b study. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study to compare the efficacy and safety of sintilimab with placebo, both in combination with such chemotherapy (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03607539).MethodsA total of 397 patients with previously untreated, locally advanced or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or anaplastic lymphoma kinase genomic aberration were randomized (2:1 ratio) to receive either sintilimab 200 mg or placebo plus pemetrexed and platinum once every 3 weeks for four cycles, followed by sintilimab or placebo plus pemetrexed therapy. Crossover or treatment beyond disease progression was allowed. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) as judged by an independent radiographic review committee.ResultsAs of November 15, 2019, the median follow-up was 8.9 months. The median PFS was significantly longer in the sintilimab-combination group than that in the placebo-combination group (8.9 versus 5.0 mo; hazard ratio, 0.482, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.362–0.643; p < 0.00001). The confirmed objective response rate was 51.9% (95% CI: 45.7%–58.0%) in the sintilimab-combination group and 29.8% (95% CI: 22.1%–38.4%) in placebo-combination group. The incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse events was 61.7% in sintilimab-combination group and 58.8% in placebo-combination group.ConclusionsIn Chinese patients with previously untreated, locally advanced or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, the addition of sintilimab to chemotherapy with pemetrexed and platinum resulted in considerably longer PFS than with chemotherapy alone with manageable safety profiles.     

Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Tumor Proportion Score and Overall Survival From First-Line Pembrolizumab in Patients With Nonsquamous Versus Squamous NSCLC

IntroductionFor patients with NSCLC receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) has been validated as a predictive biomarker for improved overall survival (OS). Nevertheless, its histology-specific predictive value in patients with advanced squamous versus nonsquamous cancers remains unclear. To evaluate the differential value of PD-L1 TPS as a predictive biomarker for OS after first-line pembrolizumab in patients with squamous versus nonsquamous NSCLC.MethodsRetrospective, observational study of patients diagnosed with having advanced NSCLC who were treated between October 2015 and April 2019 at community oncology clinics and academic medical centers in a deidentified electronic health record–derived database. Included patients were diagnosed with having advanced or metastatic NSCLC, received treatment with first-line, single-agent pembrolizumab, and had documentation of PD-L1 testing with a numeric result. Exclusion criteria included alterations in EGFR, ALK, and ROS1. The primary end point was OS from start of first-line pembrolizumab therapy by squamous or nonsquamous histology and PD-1 expression level measured by TPS (low, <50% or high, ≥50%).ResultsThe cohort of 1460 patients with NSCLC who received pembrolizumab as a first-line therapy had a mean age of 72 years. Histology was 28% squamous and 72% nonsquamous. PD-L1 expression was low in 13% and high in 87%. No meaningful differences in age, sex, or smoking history were observed by PD-L1 TPS or histology type. A generalized gamma model adjusting for sex and stage at diagnosis found that for patients with nonsquamous histology, high PD-L1 TPS was significantly associated with improved OS by a median OS difference of 8.4 months (p < 0.001). In contrast, for patients with squamous histology, there was no evidence of association between PD-L1 expression level and OS (p = 0.283). PD-L1–related incremental differences in median OS between the patients with squamous and nonsquamous tumors were significantly different (p = 0.034).ConclusionsAmong patients with NSCLC treated with first-line pembrolizumab, high PD-L1 TPS is associated with OS among patients with nonsquamous NSCLC, but not among patients with squamous NSCLC.