MA07.05 Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICPi) Re-Challenge: Outcomes Analysis in a French National Cohort of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Patients

Which treatment after first line therapy in NSCLC patients without genetic alterations in the era of immunotherapy?

Cancer immunotherapy has produced an unprecedented durable response rate, thus shifting from traditional doublet chemotherapy to immunotherapy-based treatments with and without chemotherapy as the first line strategies for advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients without a molecular driver. However, the majority of patients do not benefit from the treatment or may relapse after a period of response. As few treatment options are available after failure of cancer immunotherapy, including the combination of chemotherapy and anti-angiogenic drugs, a better understanding of the mechanisms limiting cancer immunotherapy may be of help in the definition of the best second line. Whereas only retrospective data support an immunotherapy rechallenge approach, new combination strategies including immunotherapy and cell-signaling inhibitors or double immunotherapy represent the newest and most promising strategy to overcome primary or acquired resistance to first line immunotherapy.

Immunotherapy use outside clinical trial populations: never say never?

BACKGROUND

Based on favourable outcomes in clinical trials, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), most notably programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors, are now widely used across multiple cancer types. However, due to their strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, clinical studies often do not address challenges presented by non-trial populations.

DESIGN

This review summarises available data on the efficacy and safety of ICIs in trial-ineligible patients, including those with autoimmune disease, chronic viral infections, organ transplants, organ dysfunction, poor performance status, and brain metastases, as well as the elderly, children, and those who are pregnant. In addition, we review data concerning other real-world challenges with ICIs, including timing of therapy switch, relationships to radiotherapy or surgery, re-treatment after an immune-related toxicity, vaccinations in patients on ICIs, and current experience around ICI and coronavirus disease-19. Where possible, we provide recommendations to aid the often-difficult decision-making process in those settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Data suggest that ICIs are often active and have an acceptable safety profile in the populations described above, with the exception of PD-1 inhibitors in solid organ transplant recipients. Decisions about whether to treat with ICIs should be personalised and require multidisciplinary input and careful counselling of patients with respect to potential risks and benefits. Clinical judgements need to be carefully weighed, considering factors such as underlying cancer type, feasibility of alternative treatment options, or activity in trial-eligible patients.

Pembrolizumab rechallenge in squamous non-small-cell lung cancer and HIV-positivity: a case report

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) changed management of non-small-cell lung cancer, but resistance usually develops. Today, at ICIs failure, chemotherapy is the treatment of choice, but the chance of immunotherapy rechallenge is appealing. Another challenging issue is whether it is safe to treat HIV-positive patients with ICIs: safety and efficacy of immunotherapy have been marginally considered in this subgroup. We report the case of a non-small-cell lung cancer patient treated by PD-1 inhibitors rechallenge despite his HIV-positivity, achieving good partial response with significant clinical benefit and without toxicities. Our experience underlines that HIV-positive patients can be treated similarly to HIV-negative individuals. HIV-positivity should be considered similar to other comorbidities, and not as a sufficient reason to preclude them the best available treatments.

Durvalumab activity in previously treated patients who stopped durvalumab without disease progression

BACKGROUND

Limited data exist on potential clinical benefit with anti-programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) retreatment in patients who stop initial therapy for reasons other than disease progression or toxicity and develop disease progression while off treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

NCT01693562 was a phase I/II study evaluating durvalumab monotherapy in advanced solid tumors. Patients benefiting from treatment were taken off durvalumab at 1 year per protocol and prospectively followed. At disease progression, they were eligible for durvalumab retreatment. Outcomes evaluated during retreatment included best overall response (BOR2), duration of response (DoR2), disease control rate (DCR2), and progression-free survival (PFS2).

RESULTS

Of 980 patients enrolled and treated with durvalumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W) in the dose-expansion cohorts, 168 completed 1 year of initial durvalumab treatment with confirmed BOR1 of complete response in 20 (11.9%), partial response (PR) in 84 (50%), stable disease (SD) in 52 (31%), and disease progression in 12 (7.1%). All 168 patients stopped treatment and were eligible for retreatment at progression; 70 patients (41.7%) representing 14 primary tumor types were retreated and response evaluable. Confirmed BOR2 was PR in 8 patients (11.4%), SD in 42 (60.0%), disease progression in 16 (22.9%), and unevaluable in 4 (5.7%). Median DoR2 was 16.5 months. DCR2 ≥24 weeks (DCR2 24) was 47.1%. PFS2 rate at 12 months was 34.2%, and median PFS2 was 5.9 months. Median overall survival (OS2) was 23.8 months. Response rates, DCR2 24, and median DoR2 were generally greater in patients with high PD-L1 expression than those with low/negative expression. No new safety signals were observed during retreatment.

CONCLUSION

Retreatment restored antitumor activity, resulting in high rates of durable disease control with an acceptable safety profile. This evidence supports retreatment of patients who stop anti-PD-L1 therapy for reasons other than progression or toxicity, and supports further investigation.

Update on Targeted Therapies for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Durvalumab in Context

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have transformed the therapeutic strategy and prognosis of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Nowadays, ICIs as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy are the standard of care treatment in advanced NSCLC, and in stage III, durvalumab (a programmed death ligand 1 inhibitor) is the unique drug approved as consolidation treatment after chemo-radiotherapy. This article reviews the pharmacological properties, clinical activity and safety of durvalumab as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy or other ICIs in the therapeutic strategy of NSCLC patients.

[Immunotherapy of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer from first line to resistance and its management]

Immunotherapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy is now an integral part of the treatment of metastatic NSCLC. This treatment is transforming the management of these cancers, with 20-30% of patients achieving long survival. However, disease progression under treatment is still the rule for the majority of patients, raising problems both in understanding its mechanisms and in subsequent appropriate management. This study examines current therapeutic options and proposes solutions to circumvent resistance to immunotherapy. The mechanisms of resistance to these treatments is also analysed.