1264P Updated analysis of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment of advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer (SQ NSCLC)

Liquid Biopsy and Immuno-Oncology for Advanced Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

In the last decade, immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment of metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer without oncogenic addiction. Currently, programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status, assessed in tissue biopsy samples, is the only test for guiding the prescription of these therapies in clinical practice. However, obtaining tumor tissue from patients with lung cancer is not always feasible and PD-L1 positivity is not a guarantee of immunotherapy efficacy. In this context, liquid biopsy, represented by several circulating biomarkers that reflect the tumor characteristics, is emerging as an interesting alternative approach.

CONTENT

We describe the main blood biomarkers evaluated in patients with metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer before/during immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment, with a focus on circulating cell-free DNA, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), blood tumor mutational burden, and circulating tumor cells (CTCs).

SUMMARY

Monitoring of ctDNA and CTCs during immunotherapy may be a promising tool to help clinicians in therapeutic decision-making.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety in the treatment strategies between chemotherapy combined with antiangiogenic and with immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with negative PD-L1 expression: A network meta-analysis

Background

In the first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), for those patients with negative PD-L1 expression, which treatment strategy has the better efficacy and safety between chemotherapy combined with antiangiogenic and with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is still unclear due to the absence of head-to-head clinical trials. This study aims to answer the question by performing a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov) were systematically searched accordingly to extract eligible studies from inception to October 2022, as well as the abstracts from the most recent main oncology congresses (American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), World Conference on Lung Cancer (WCLC), and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs) of grades 3 to 5 were independently extracted and collected by two reviewers based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. We used Cochrane’s risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials through RevMan 5.3 to ascertain the quality of the included studies. NMA with a Bayesian random-effects model was performed by R (version 4.0.4).

Results

According to the ranking list from OS-NMA, pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy has the most effective ranking first (surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) = 0.809844) (pooled HR = 0.65 [0.51–0.83]). On PFS, the triple combination of nivolumab/bevacizumab/chemotherapy ranks first (NMA estimate: HR = 0.35 [0.28–0.43]). On safety, in combination with chemotherapy, sintilimab has minimal toxicity, followed by pembrolizumab+chemo.

Conclusions

In advanced NSCLC patients with negative PD-L1 expression, pembrolizumab+chemo ranks first in the efficacy of OS and does not apparently increase the incidence of any grade ≥ 3 AE as compared with chemo alone. On PFS, pembrolizumab also has advantages, but for patients with squamous cell carcinoma, camrelizumab+chemo seems to be a better choice.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021231441.

First-line immune-based combination therapies for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Immune-based combination therapies have revolutionized the first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, for the efficacy and safety, the best treatment option is still uncertain.

METHODS

We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate first-line immune-based combination therapies for advanced NSCLC.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials involving 8467 patients were included. For the programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression non-selective patients, there were no significant differences among all the treatment modes for overall survival (OS), but the ranking profiles indicated that Immunotherapy + Immunotherapy + Chemotherapy (IO + IO + Chemo) was most likely to be the best mode (probability = 68%). Immunotherapy + Immunotherapy + Anti-angiogenic therapy + Chemotherapy (IO + Anti-angio + Chemo) was significantly better than most other treatment modes for progression-free survival (PFS) with better objective response rate (ORR) and more obvious grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). In PD-L1-high cohort, IO + Anti-angio + Chemo seemed to be the best mode for OS, PFS, and ORR according to the ranking profiles. In PD-L1-intermediate and PD-L1-negative cohort, IO + IO + Chemo was inclined to be ranked first for prolonging OS (probability = 78%; 37%) and IO + Anti-angio + Chemo was most likely to provide best PFS (probability = 96%; 100%).

CONCLUSION

IO + IO + Chemo has great potential to improve the OS regardless of histology type, especially in PD-L1-intermediate and PD-L1-negative cohort. IO + Anti-angio + Chemo shows great superiority in improving the short-term survival accompanied by increasing grade ≥3 TRAEs.

The relationship between blood-based tumor mutation burden level and efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The predictive role of blood-based tumor mutation burden (bTMB) for selecting advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who might benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is still under debate. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) /programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors versus that of standard-of-care therapy in patients with NSCLC who were bTMB high and bTMB low.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, the Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched systematically from inception to February 2021 for studies of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors (durvalumab OR atezolizumab OR avelumab OR pembrolizumab OR Nivolumab) that provided hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS), or odds ratios (ORs) for objective response rate (ORR) in both bTMB high and bTMB low groups.

Results

A total of 2338 patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC from six randomized controlled trials, which all used chemotherapy (CT) as a control, were included in this study. Compared with CT, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor therapy improved OS (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52–0.75, P < 0.01), PFS (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.48–0.67, P < 0.01), and ORR (OR 2.69, 95% CI 1.84–3.93, P < 0.01) in bTMB-high NSCLC patients but not in bTMB-low patients (OS HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.69–1.07, P = 0.17; PFS HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.78–1.27, P = 0.98; ORR OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.49–0.80, P = 0.03). Subgroup analyses showed that these results were consistent across all subgroups (line of therapy, therapy regimen, type of NGS panel, PD-L1 expression, and cutoff value). Meta-regression analysis showed that the proportion of patients with squamous cell histology had no statistical effect on clinical outcomes. Sensitivity analyses illustrated that all results were stable.

Conclusions

The efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor therapy in advanced NSCLC patients may be dependent on bTMB level. Patients with high bTMB tend to obtain significantly better OS, PFS, and ORR from PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor therapy than from CT. However, because of multiple limitations, including those related to reproducibility, the results are exploratory and should be interpreted with caution.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08924-z.

The changing landscape of anti-lung cancer drug clinical trials in mainland China from 2005 to 2020

BACKGROUND

In recent years, new drug development on lung cancer is in full swing in China. The aim of this study was to overview the changing landscape of anti-lung cancer drug clinical trials in mainland China from 2005 to 2020.

METHODS

We analysed anti-lung cancer drug clinical trials registered on three websites including the China National Medical Products Administration Centre for Drug Evaluation platform, the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry and ClinicalTrials.gov.

FINDINGS

A total of 1595 anti-lung cancer drug clinical trials from Jan 1st, 2005 to Dec 31st, 2020 were extracted, which included 630 (39•5%) investigator-initiated trials (IITs), 698 (43•8%) domestic industry-sponsored trials (ISTs), and 267 (16•7%) international ISTs. During the past 16 years, the number of anti-lung cancer clinical trials including IITs and domestic ISTs had a remarkable growth, however, the number of international ISTs increased slowly. The number of principal clinical trial units also increased significantly over time. Of the 1595 trials, the largest growth was observed in phase I trials during 2013-2020, with an average annual growth rate of 38•6%. 278 trials were led by principal investigators (PI) from Guangdong, followed by Beijing (n=273) and Shanghai (n=257). Among the 965 ISTs, clinical trials involving targeted drugs (588, 60•9%) accounted for the largest proportion, followed by immunotherapeutic drugs (284, 29•4%), cytotoxic drugs (75, 7•8%), and traditional Chinese medicine (18, 1•9%). In terms of targeted drugs, EGFR-TKIs remained the most studied drugs (225/588, 38•27%). As for immunotherapy, 125 out of 284 (44•01%) trials involved PD-1 inhibitors, 60 (21•13%) trials involved PD-L1 inhibitors, and seven (2•46%) trials involved CTLA-4 inhibitors.

INTERPRETATION

In the past 16 years, the development of anti-lung cancer drug clinical trials has achieved much progress in mainland China. The most progress lied in targeted therapy and immunotherapy.

FUNDING

This work was financially supported in part by China National Major Project for New Drug Innovation (2017ZX09304015) and Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS) (2016-I2M-1-001).

Tislelizumab: an investigational anti-PD-1 antibody for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

INTRODUCTION

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for most lung cancers worldwide and has a poor prognosis at later stages; programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors have provided promising new treatment approaches for these patients. Tislelizumab, an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, was engineered to minimize binding to FcγR on macrophages to abrogate antibody-dependent phagocytosis, a mechanism of T-cell clearance and potential resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. Tislelizumab has demonstrated clinical activity and is approved in China for treatment of previously treated classical Hodgkin lymphoma and previously treated metastatic PD-L1-high urothelial carcinoma.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability of tislelizumab in patients with NSCLC and examines the mechanism of action, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic profiles of tislelizumab.

EXPERT OPINION

Tislelizumab has higher affinity to PD-1 than pembrolizumab and nivolumab, potentially due to its differential PD‑1 binding orientation. Tislelizumab demonstrated encouraging efficacy results, long duration of response, and a manageable safety profile across multiple clinical trials in advanced NSCLC. Ongoing trials of drug combinations (e.g. tislelizumab plus angiogenesis inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors, or immune agonists) and examining efficacy across the severity of disease will provide opportunities to understand and feature tislelizumab in clinical practice.