Chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients after prior immunotherapy: The multicenter retrospective CLARITY study

The relationship between LDH and GLIM criteria for cancer cachexia: Systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Cancer cachexia is a clinical condition characterized by recognizable "sickness behaviors" accompanied by loss of lean body tissue. The Global Leadership on Malnutrition (GLIM) has proposed phenotypic (unintentional weight loss, low body mass index and low muscle mass) and aetiologic (reduced food intake and inflammation or disease burden) diagnostic criteria. Recent work has suggested serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) might represent a 3rd aetiologic criteria. Little is known of its relationship with GLIM. A systematic review and meta-analysis of their comparative prognostic value and association was performed.

METHODS

A search of electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, Ovid, Cochrane) up to February 2023 was used to identify studies that compared the prognostic value of LDH and components of the GLIM criteria in cancer. An analysis of the relationship between LDH and the components of GLIM was undertaken where this data was available. RevMan 5.4.1 was used to perform a meta-analysis for each diagnostic criteria that had 3 or more studies which reported hazard ratios with a 95 per cent confidence interval for overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 119 studies were reviewed. Advanced lung cancer was the most studied population. Included in the meta-analysis were 6 studies (n=2165) on LDH and weight loss, 17 studies (n=7540) on LDH and low BMI, 5 studies (n=758) on LDH and low muscle mass, 0 studies on LDH and food intake and 93 studies (n=32,190) on LDH and inflammation. There was a significant association between elevated serum LDH and each of low BMI (OR 1.39, 1.09 - 1.77; p=0.008), elevated NLR (OR 2.04, 1.57 - 2.65; p<0.00001) and elevated CRP (OR 2.58, 1.81 - 3.67; p<0.00001). There was no association between elevated serum LDH and low muscle mass. Only one study presented data on the association between LDH and unintentional weight loss. Elevated LDH showed a comparative OS (HR 1.86, 1.57 - 2.07; p<0.00001) to unintentional weight loss (HR 1.57, 1.23 - 1.99; p=0.0002) and had a similar OS (HR 2.00, 1.70 - 2.34; p<0.00001) to low BMI (HR 1.57, 1.29-2.90; p<0.0001). LDH also showed an OS (HR 2.25, 1.76 - 2.87; p<0.00001) congruous with low muscle mass (HR 1.93, 1.14 - 3.27; p=0.01) and again, LDH conferred as poor an OS (HR 1.77, 1.64-1.90; p<0.00001) as elevated NLR (HR 1.61, 1.48 - 1.77; p<0.00001) or CRP (HR 1.55, 1.43 - 1.69; p<0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Current literature suggests elevated serum LDH is associated with inflammation in cancer (an aetiologic GLIM criterion), however more work is required to establish the relationship between LDH and the phenotypic components of GLIM. Additionally, elevated serum LDH appears to be a comparative prognosticator of overall survival in cancer when compared to the GLIM criteria.

Effectiveness and Safety of Anlotinib Combined with PD-1 Blockades in Patients with Previously Immunotherapy Treated Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Exploratory Study

Objective

This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness and tolerability of anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades in patients with previously immunotherapy treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

A total of 67 patients with previously immunotherapy treated advanced NSCLC who received anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades in clinical practice were screened retrospectively. All the PD-1 blockades used in this study were approved in China and consisted of sintilimab, camrelizumab, tislelizumab and pembrolizumab. Effectiveness and safety of anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades were assessed, and all patients were followed up regularly. Clinical significance between response status to previous immune-related treatment regimens and therapeutic outcomes of anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades was further explored.

Results

The best overall response among the 67 patients suggested that a partial response was observed in 16 patients, stable disease was noted in 41 patients and progressive disease was found in 10 patients, which yielded an objective response rate of 23.9% (95% CI: 14.3-35.9%) and a disease control rate of 85.1% (95% CI: 74.3-92.6%). Prognostic outcomes indicated that the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.1 months (95% CI: 2.37-9.83) and the median overall survival (OS) was 16.5 months (95% CI: 10.73-22.27). Exploratory analysis highlighted that patients who were intolerant to previous immune-related regimens (17 patients) might have a superior prognosis (median OS: 22.3 months vs 12.5 months, P=0.024). Additionally, adverse reactions with any grades during anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades administration were observed in 62 patients (92.5%), of which 31 patients (46.3%) had ≥grade 3 adverse reactions. Most common adverse reactions were fatigue, hypertension, diarrhea and hepatotoxicity.

Conclusion

Anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades demonstrated promising effectiveness and tolerable safety in patients with previously immunotherapy treated advanced NSCLC. Those who were intolerant to previous immune-related regimens might benefit significantly from treatment with anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades. This conclusion should be confirmed in future studies.

Effectiveness of first-line anticancer treatment may predict treatment response in further lines in stage III/IV patients with non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of our study was to evaluate if therapeutic success in the first-line of anticancer treatments in patients with NSCLC may predict treatment success in the following lines.

METHODS

We analyzed the data of patients with NSCLC stage III/IV from the TULUNG registry separately for chemotherapy, TKIs, ALK inhibitors, and immunotherapy in the first line during the years 2011-2019. "Succesful treatment " was defined as PFS ≥ 6 months, a "good responder " was a patient with ˃50% of "successful treatment " lines. Treatment responses were analyzed separately for each drug group. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact test, Pearson Chi-Squared test, log-rank test, and univariate/multivariate logistic regression models were used.

RESULTS

The first-line TKI therapy was successful in 66.2%, while good responders accounted for 50.7% of the cohort and their rates were similar for all types of TKIs. First-line platinum-based chemotherapy was successful in 43.1% and 48.6% for combinations with pemetrexed and bevacizumab, respectively. Good responders accounted for 29.5% and 25.9%, respectively. In the group of ALK inhibitors, we observed treatment success in 52.3% of cases, while alectinib showed the highest effectiveness (up to 70%). Good responders constituted 50% of the group. In the first-line immunotherapy group, survival benefit was observed in 52.3%, and good responders constituted 52.3% of the cohort.

CONCLUSION

We concluded that the treatment success in first-line therapies in patients with NSCLC may predict survival benefits in the subsequent lines, particularly in EGFR- or ALK-positive disease and immunotherapy-treated patients.

First-line cemiplimab monotherapy and continued cemiplimab beyond progression plus chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 50% or more (EMPOWER-Lung 1): 35-month follow-up from a mutlicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Cemiplimab provided significant survival benefit to patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of at least 50% and no actionable biomarkers at 1-year follow-up. In this exploratory analysis, we provide outcomes after 35 months' follow-up and the effect of adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at the time of disease progression.

METHODS

EMPOWER-Lung 1 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. We enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed squamous or non-squamous advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of 50% or more. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to intravenous cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks for up to 108 weeks, or until disease progression, or investigator's choice of chemotherapy. Central randomisation scheme generated by an interactive web response system governed the randomisation process that was stratified by histology and geographical region. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression free survival, as assessed by a blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Patients with disease progression on cemiplimab could continue cemiplimab with the addition of up to four cycles of chemotherapy. We assessed response in these patients by BICR against a new baseline, defined as the last scan before chemotherapy initiation. The primary endpoints were assessed in all randomly assigned participants (ie, intention-to-treat population) and in those with a PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. We assessed adverse events in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540.

FINDINGS

Between May 29, 2017, and March 4, 2020, we recruited 712 patients (607 [85%] were male and 105 [15%] were female). We randomly assigned 357 (50%) to cemiplimab and 355 (50%) to chemotherapy. 284 (50%) patients assigned to cemiplimab and 281 (50%) assigned to chemotherapy had verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. At 35 months' follow-up, among those with a verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50% median overall survival in the cemiplimab group was 26·1 months (95% CI 22·1-31·8; 149 [52%] of 284 died) versus 13·3 months (10·5-16·2; 188 [67%] of 281 died) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·46-0·71; p<0·0001), median progression-free survival was 8·1 months (95% CI 6·2-8·8; 214 events occurred) in the cemiplimab group versus 5·3 months (4·3-6·1; 236 events occurred) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·51, 95% CI 0·42-0·62; p<0·0001). Continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy as second-line therapy (n=64) resulted in a median progression-free survival of 6·6 months (6·1-9·3) and overall survival of 15·1 months (11·3-18·7). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (15 [4%] of 356 patients in the cemiplimab group vs 60 [17%] of 343 in the control group), neutropenia (three [1%] vs 35 [10%]), and pneumonia (18 [5%] vs 13 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in ten (3%) of 356 patients treated with cemiplimab (due to autoimmune myocarditis, cardiac failure, cardio-respiratory arrest, cardiopulmonary failure, septic shock, tumour hyperprogression, nephritis, respiratory failure, [n=1 each] and general disorders or unknown [n=2]) and in seven (2%) of 343 patients treated with chemotherapy (due to pneumonia and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each], and cardiac arrest, lung abscess, and myocardial infarction [n=1 each]). The safety profile of cemiplimab at 35 months, and of continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy, was generally consistent with that previously observed for these treatments, with no new safety signals INTERPRETATION: At 35 months' follow-up, the survival benefit of cemiplimab for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer was at least as pronounced as at 1 year, affirming its use as first-line monotherapy for this population. Adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at progression might provide a new second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

FUNDING

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi.

What to do after immune-checkpoint inhibitors failure in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: an expert opinion and review

INTRODUCTION

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (IO) have significantly improved outcomes of patients with non-oncogene-addicted non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), becoming the first-line agents for advanced disease. However, resistance remains a significant clinical challenge, limiting their effectiveness.

AREAS COVERED

Hereby, we addressed standard and innovative therapeutic approaches for NSCLC patients experiencing progression after IO treatment, discussing the emerging resistance mechanisms and the ongoing efforts to overcome them. In order to provide a complete overview of the matter, we performed a comprehensive literature search across prominent databases, including PubMed, EMBASE (Excerpta Medica dataBASE), and the Cochrane Library, and a research of the main ongoing studies on clinicaltrials.gov.

EXPERT OPINION

The dynamics of progression to IO, especially in terms of time to treatment failure and burden of progressive disease, should guide the best subsequent management, together with patient clinical conditions. Long-responders to IO might benefit from continuation of IO beyond-progression, in combination with other treatments. Patients who experience early progression should be treated with salvage CT in case of preserved clinical conditions. Finally, patients who respond to IO for a considerable timeframe and who later present oligo-progression could be treated with a multimodal approach in order to maximize the benefit of immunotherapy.

Value of chemotherapy post immunotherapy in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the number one cause of mortality among all types of cancer worldwide. Its treatment landscape has shifted from the classic chemotherapy alone to newer regimens based on the discovery of new immunotherapy and targeted therapy drugs. However, chemotherapy is still an option for treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after progression on immunotherapy alone or in combination with first-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study based on chart review of patients diagnosed with advanced NSCLC cases who received Docetaxel as second or third line after being treated by immunotherapy and/or chemotherapy in previous lines. The data was collected from the medical records of physicians' clinics in three different hospital centers in Lebanon over the period of 5 years from July 2015 until December 2020. February 2021 was data analysis cut off time. The main aim was to assess the role of Docetaxel post-chemoimmunotherapy for patients with diagnosed NSCLC.

RESULTS

A total of 21 patients were included in this study. The majority of our patients were males (81%). As for histologic type, most patients had non-squamous lung cancer (67%) as compared to 33% who had squamous lung cancer. Overall, our study reported a 24% response rate to Docetaxel including stable disease and partial response and a median progression free survival (PFS) of 3 months. The mean time interval elapsed from diagnosis to the initiation of Docetaxel was 11.5 months.

CONCLUSION

New therapeutic options should be validated for the treatment of NSCLC in the second and subsequent lines of therapy considering the poor prognosis of this disease. The chemotherapy in second and third line may keep an important role in the treatment after progression on newer agents, but it needs more evidence in prospective studies including a larger number of patients.

Chemotherapy postimmunotherapy for recurrent metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Clinical data on salvage chemotherapy used after checkpoints inhibitors in oncology are reviewed, with a special focus on recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC).

RECENT FINDINGS

Converging evidence is emerging about high response and/or disease control rates associated with salvage chemotherapy after immunotherapy failure in advanced solid tumours. This phenomenon is mainly reported in retrospective studies for "hot tumours" such as R/M HNSCC, melanoma, lung, urothelial or gastric cancers, but also in haematological malignancies. Some physiopathological hypotheses have been raised.

SUMMARY

Several independent series show increased response rates associated with postimmuno chemotherapy when compared with retrospective series in similar settings. Several mechanisms could be involved such as a "carry-over" allowed by a persistence of the checkpoint inhibitor, a modulation of tumour microenvironment components but also an intrinsic immunomodulatory effect of chemotherapy, increased by a specific immunologic state induced by the therapeutic pressure of checkpoint inhibitors. These data establish a rationale for prospectively evaluating the features of postimmunotherapy salvage chemotherapy.

Salvage chemotherapy in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer after prior immunotherapy: a retrospective, real-life experience study

Patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who progress with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), salvage chemotherapy remains the only viable option for tumors that do not harbor genomic alterations. Data on the efficacy of salvage chemotherapy after immunotherapy (SCAI) are scarce. Our main objective in the current study was to evaluate the efficacy of SCAI. All consecutive patients who were diagnosed as having metastatic NSCLC and received at least one dose of ICIs were retrospectively reviewed. We computed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR) with SCAI. We also analyzed associations between survival and various clinicopathologic factors. We identified 35 patients with advanced NSCLC who received at least one dose of SCAI. The median age was 66 years. Most of patients were male ( n  = 26, 74.3%) and former or current smokers ( n  = 33, 94.3%). The majority of the patients were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) 2 ( n  = 22; 62.9%), and there were no patients with driver mutations. SCAI was administered as second-line therapy in 21 (60.0%) patients and third-line in 14 (40.0%) patients. The ORR to SCAI was 20.0% with median PFS and OS were 2.43 (95% CI, 1.69-3.16) months and 4.40 (95% CI, 2.17-6.62) months, respectively. In multivariate analysis, ECOG PS 2 was confirmed as being independently associated with inferior OS. We demonstrated that patients with NSCLC who progressed to ICIs had limited clinical benefit with salvage chemotherapy, particularly for patients who were ECOG PS 2.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based treatment beyond progression with prior immunotherapy in patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective study

Background

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) provide unprecedented survival improvement for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), disease progression inevitably occurs. After ICIs failure, limited data exist on whether ICI-based treatment beyond progression (TBP) may be beneficial to advanced NSCLC. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of this treatment approach in advanced NSCLC and identify potential beneficial factors.

Methods

Patients with stage IV NSCLC who received ICI-based treatment after the failure of prior PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor treatments (monotherapy or combination therapy) between January 2016 and July 2020 were enrolled. Their clinical characteristics and treatment procedures were collected, and the follow-up would be performed.

Results

A total of 204 patients were included. All patients had disease progression after prior immunotherapy, with 49.5% (101/204) of patients presenting with new metastasis lesions and the rest 50.5% (103/204) of patients' progression on originate lesions. Within the entire cohort, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) of ICI-based TBP with prior immunotherapy were 5.0 months (95% CI: 4.5-5.5 months) and 15.7 months (95% CI: 14.7-16.8 months), respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 9.3% and 74.0%, respectively. According to the multivariate analysis, ICI-based combination therapy [PFS: hazard ratio (HR), 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28-0.84, P=0.011] (OS: HR, 0.44, 95% CI: 0.23-0.85, P=0.014), not having targetable gene alterations (PFS: HR, 0.56, 95% CI: 0.40-0.79, P=0.001) (OS: HR, 0.57, 95% CI: 0.37-0.87, P=0.009), and good response to prior immunotherapy (PFS: HR, 0.36, 95% CI: 0.24-0.53, P<0.0001) (OS: HR, 0.31, 95% CI: 0.19-0.52, P<0.0001) were independently associated with improved PFS and OS. Moreover, disease progression due to appearances of new metastasis (OS: HR, 0.56, 95% CI: 0.37-0.84, P=0.005) was only associated with better OS.

Conclusions

While the ORR in patients with advanced NSCLC receiving ICI-based TBP with prior immunotherapy was limited, the DCR was relatively high in our study which is encouraging. ICI-based treatment strategy may be a reasonable option for patients who progressed from prior immunotherapy. Further prospective studies on larger sample size are warranted.

Effect of prior immunotherapy on the efficacy of chemotherapy in advanced non‐small cell lung cancer: A retrospective study

Background

The effect of the sequential combination of chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains unclear. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens administered after ICIs in advanced non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), compared to the same regimens administered without previous ICIs.

Methods

We retrospectively included all patients treated between 2015 and 2019 for an advanced NSCLC, receiving a salvage chemotherapy just after ICI (CAI group) comparing them to ICI naive patients (CWPI group) undergoing the same chemotherapy at Bordeaux University Hospital. The primary outcome was the time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR).

Results

A total of 152 patients were included, with 34/23 (CAI/CWPI) receiving paclitaxel/bevacizumab (PB), 24/11 paclitaxel (P), 27/12 gemcitabine (G) and 6/15 pemetrexed (PE). Characteristics were comparable, except for CAI treated with PB (more patients with an ECOG PS ≤1 [p <0.001]). Median number of lines received was higher in CAI for all groups. There was no difference between CAI and CWPI for TTD, OS and ORR. However, PB was associated with a nonsignificant increase in OS in the CAI group (HR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.38–1.2, p = 0.17].

Conclusion

Our data showed no difference in TTD, OS and ORR regardless of chemotherapy, but a trend towards an increased OS with PB when given after an ICI, while patients received chemotherapy later in the CAI group. This suggests that a sequential combination of ICI followed by chemotherapy could be an interesting strategy in advanced NSCLC for selected patients.

The Role of Change Rates of CYFRA21-1 and CEA in Predicting Chemotherapy Efficacy for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Cytokeratin 19 fragment 21-1 (CYFRA21-1) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) are effective prognostic biomarkers for lung cancer. This study investigated the predictive effects of change rates of CYFRA21-1 and CEA before and after the first cycles of chemotherapy on advanced IIIb/IIIc or IV stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

METHODS

Data of 103 NSCLC patients who received chemotherapy in Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital from February 2018 to November 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients received platinum doublet chemotherapy for at least 2 cycles. CYFRA21-1 and CEA levels of patients were detected before and after the first chemotherapy cycle, respectively. After the second cycle, the efficacy was evaluated, and patients were divided into the disease control (DC) and progressive disease (PD) groups. The generalized linear model (GLM) and linear trend test assessed the relationship between change rates of CYFRA21-1 and CEA levels and chemotherapeutic efficacy before and after chemotherapy. Moreover, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve determined the predictive value of change rates of CYFRA21-1 and CEA on chemotherapeutic efficacy.

RESULTS

After the second chemotherapeutic cycle, there were 92 patients in the DC group and 11 in the PD group. GLM and linear trend test both indicated that change rates of CYFRA21-1 and CEA were inversely correlated with chemotherapeutic efficacy for NSCLC. Change rates of CYFRA21-1 and CEA were used to predict area under the ROC curve of chemotherapeutic efficacy (0.87, 0.71-1.00), which is better than single index prediction of CYFRA21-1 (0.71, 0.49-0.94) or CEA change rate (0.85, 0.69-1.00) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Before and after chemotherapy of the first cycle for advanced NSCLC patients, combining serum CYFRA21-1 and CEA levels could increase sensitivity and specificity to predict the chemotherapeutic efficacy and guide the following therapy of advanced NSCLC patients.

Prognostic value of the geriatric nutritional risk index among patients with previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer who subsequently underwent immunotherapy

Background

The geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) is a simple and useful marker for predicting prognosis and treatment efficacy among patients with various cancers. However, to the best of our knowledge, there are no previous reports regarding the prognostic value of GNRI among patients with non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 85 patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC who were administered ICIs at Shinshu University Hospital between February 2016 and October 2020. Progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between groups with high (≥89.5) and low (<89.5) GNRI values. We used univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses to identify prognostic factors that were associated with PFS and OS.

Results

The high and low GNRI groups included 61 and 24 patients, respectively. Relative to the low GNRI group, the high GNRI group had significantly longer median PFS (3.7 vs. 2.4 months, p = 0.041) and significantly longer median OS (14.2 vs. 6.1 months, p = 0.008). Multivariate analyses revealed that independent predictors of favorable OS were high GNRI, performance status of 0–1, and age of ≥70 years. The high GNRI group was significantly more likely to undergo subsequent therapy after immunotherapy (68.6 vs. 33.3%, p = 0.008).

Conclusions

The present study revealed that high GNRI was associated with good outcomes among patients with previously treated NSCLC who were treated with ICIs.

Post-progression outcomes of NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50% receiving first-line single-agent pembrolizumab in a large multicentre real-world study

BACKGROUND

Treatment sequencing with first-line immunotherapy, followed by second-line chemotherapy, is still a viable option for NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%.

METHODS

We evaluated post-progression treatment pathways in a large real-world cohort of metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50% treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy.

RESULTS

Overall, 974 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 22.7 months (95%CI: 21.6-38.2), the median overall survival (OS) of the entire population was 15.8 months (95%CI: 13.5-17.5; 548 events). At the data cutoff, among the 678 patients who experienced disease progression, 379 (55.9%) had not received any further treatment, and 359 patients (52.9%) had died. Patients who did not receive post-progression therapies were older (p = 0.0011), with a worse ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and were on corticosteroids prior to pembrolizumab (p = 0.0024). At disease progression, 198 patients (29.2%) received a switched approach and 101 (14.9%) received pembrolizumab ByPD either alone (64 [9.4%]) or in combination with local ablative treatments (37 [5.5%]) (LATs). After a random-case control matching according to ECOG-PS, CNS metastases, bone metastases, and (previous) best response to pembrolizumab, patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD plus LATs were confirmed to have a significantly longer post-progression OS compared to patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD alone 13.9 months versus 7.8 months (p = 0.0179) 241 patients (35.5%) among the 678 who had experienced PD, received a second-line systemic treatment (regardless of previous treatment beyond PD). As compared to first-line treatment commencement, patients' features at the moment of second-line initiation showed a significantly higher proportion of patients aged under 70 years (p = 0.0244), with a poorer ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and having CNS (p = 0.0001), bone (p = 0.0266) and liver metastases (p = 0.0148).

CONCLUSIONS

In the real-world scenario NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% treated with first-line single-agent pembrolizumab achieve worse outcomes as compared to the Keynote-024 trial. Poor post-progression outcomes are major determinants of the global results that should be considered when counselling patients for first-line treatment choices.

Immunotherapy beyond progression in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent a great breakthrough in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). However, whether immunotherapy beyond progression (IBP) is effective for aNSCLC has yet to be established. Therefore, a retrospective clinical study was conducted to investigate the efficacy of IBP in patients with aNSCLC under real-world conditions.

Methods

A total of 125 Chinese patients with aNSCLC who experienced progressive disease (PD) after receiving monotherapy or combination therapy (combined with chemotherapy or/and antiangiogenic therapy) with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors between January 2015 and March 2019 were enrolled. Patients who were treated with ICIs for more than 6 weeks after PD were defined as IBP (n=39), while those who received ICI treatment for less than 6 weeks or discontinued it due to PD were defined as non-IBP (n=86). Patient clinical characteristics were evaluated. An optimization-based method was applied to balance the clinical baseline characteristics between the two groups.

Results

In total population, the IBP group had longer overall survival (median OS, 26.6 vs. 9.5 months; HR, 0.40; 95% CI: 0.23–0.69; P<0.001) and progression-free survival (median PFS, 8.9 vs. 4.1 months; HR, 0.41; 95% CI: 0.26–0.65; P<0.001), compared with the non-IBP group. Despite no significant difference in objective response rate (ORR, 15.4% vs. 11.6%, P=0.560), disease control rate (DCR) was significantly higher in the IBP group (89.7% vs. 61.6%, P<0.001). After balancing baseline covariates, the IBP group also had longer OS (median: 26.6 vs. 10.7 months; HR, 0.40; 95% CI: 0.19–0.84; P=0.015) and PFS (median: 9.7 vs. 4.3 months; HR, 0.28; 95% CI: 0.15–0.51; P<0.001), with a benefit in either of patients previously treated with ICI monotherapy or in combination therapy and with non-response to the previously ICI.

Conclusions

IBP is associated with longer OS and PFS in patients with aNSCLC. Our findings may suggest new therapeutic options for patients with aNSCLC who experienced disease progression after initial immunotherapy.