Early Adverse Event Derived Biomarkers in Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Immunotherapy

RATIONALE

Adverse events (AEs) have been shown to have clinical associations, in addition to patient safety assessments of drugs of interest. However, due to their complex content and associated data structure, AE evaluation has been restricted to descriptive statistics and small AE subset for efficacy analysis, limiting the opportunity for global discovery. This study takes a unique approach to utilize AE-associated parameters to derive a set of innovative AE metrics. Comprehensive analysis of the AE-derived biomarkers enhances the chance of discovering new predictive AE biomarkers of clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We utilized a set of AE-associated parameters (grade, treatment relatedness, occurrence, frequency, and duration) to derive 24 AE biomarkers. We further innovatively defined early AE biomarkers by landmark analysis at an early time point to assess the predictive value. Statistical methods included the Cox proportional hazards model for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), two-sample t-test for mean difference of AE frequency and duration between disease control (DC: complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) + stable disease (SD)) versus progressive disease (PD), and Pearson correlation analysis for relationship of AE frequency and duration versus treatment duration. Two study cohorts (Cohort A: vorinostat + pembrolizumab, and B: Taminadenant) from two immunotherapy trials in late-stage non-small cell lung cancer were used to test the potential predictiveness of AE-derived biomarkers. Data from over 800 AEs were collected per standard operating procedure in a clinical trial using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5 (CTCAE). Clinical outcomes for statistical analysis included PFS, OS, and DC.

RESULTS

An early AE was defined as event occurrence at or prior to day 30 from initial treatment date. The early AEs were then used to calculate the 24 early AE biomarkers to assess overall AE, each toxicity category, and each individual AE. These early AE-derived biomarkers were evaluated for global discovery of clinical association. Both cohorts showed that early AE biomarkers were associated with clinical outcomes. Patients previously experienced with low-grade AEs (including treatment related AEs (TrAE)) had improved PFS, OS, and were associated with DC. The significant early AEs included low-grade TrAE in overall AE, endocrine disorders, hypothyroidism (pembrolizumab's immune-related adverse event (irAE)), and platelet count decreased (vorinostat related TrAE) for Cohort A and low-grade AE in overall AE, gastrointestinal disorders, and nausea for Cohort B. In contrast, patients with early development of high-grade AEs tended to have poorer PFS, OS, and correlated with PD. The associated early AEs included high-grade TrAE in overall AE, gastrointestinal disorders with two members, diarrhea and vomiting, for Cohort A and high-grade AE in overall AE, three toxicity categories, and five related individual AEs for Cohort B. One low-grade TrAE, alanine aminotransferase increased (vorinostat + pembrolizumab related), was an irAE and correlated with worse OS in Cohort A.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrated the potential clinical utility of early AE-derived biomarkers in predicting positive and negative clinical outcomes. It could be TrAEs or combination of TrAEs and nonTrAEs from overall AEs, toxicity category AEs, to individual AEs with low-grade event leaning to encouraging effect and high-grade event to undesirable impact. Moreover, the methodology of the AE-derived biomarkers could change current AE analysis practice from a descriptive summary into modern informative statistics. It modernizes AE data analysis by helping clinicians discover novel AE biomarkers to predict clinical outcomes and facilitate the generation of vast clinically meaningful research hypotheses in a new AE content to fulfill the demands of precision medicine.

Meta-analysis of noninferiority and equivalence trials: ignoring trial design leads to differing and possibly misleading conclusions

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study is to examine the analytic approach of meta-analyses that include noninferiority or equivalence (NI/EQ) trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We used Scopus to identify meta-analyses including NI/EQ trials. We extracted data from the meta-analyses and their included randomized clinical trials (RCTs). We used the RCT's NI/EQ margins to reinterpret the results of the meta-analyses, assessed for risk of biases unique to NI/EQ trials, and evaluated the consistency of the meta-analysis interpretation when using NI/EQ margins.

RESULTS

We identified 38 unique meta-analyses including 515 RCTs, of which 125 (24.3%) were NI/EQ trials. Fourteen meta-analyses (36.8%) reported the study design of their included trials, but only one (2.6%) interpreted their pooled estimates using NI/EQ margins and none assessed for risks of bias unique to NI/EQ trials. Nearly all NI/EQ trials (n = 116, 92.8%) included in the meta-analyses reported NI/EQ margins. The meta-analyses of 30 outcomes were reinterpreted using the NI/EQ margins; reinterpretations conflicted with the conclusion of the meta-analyses in most cases (n = 20, 66.7%).

CONCLUSION

Most meta-analyses including NI/EQ trials ignore trial design and do not assess risks of bias unique to NI/EQ studies. Meta-analyses addressing questions previously explored as NI/EQ should conduct an NI/EQ meta-analysis or use clear language when performing standard (i.e., superiority) meta-analyses.

Risk of selected gastrointestinal and hepatic toxicities in cancer patients treated with nintedanib: a meta-analysis

Background: A meta-analysis of the risk of selected gastrointestinal and hepatic toxicities associated with nintedanib has been conducted. Methods: Randomized Phase II/III trials of cancer patients on nintedanib; describing events of diarrhea, vomiting, elevated ALT and elevated AST constituted the eligible studies. Results: The odds ratio for high-grade diarrhea was 3.76 (95% CI: 1.42–9.96; p = 0.008); high-grade vomiting: 1.38 (95% CI: 0.76–2.51; p = 0.28); high-grade elevated ALT: 4.36 (95% CI: 2.14–8.85; p < 0.0001); high-grade elevated AST: 6.96 (95% CI: 4.09–11.85; p < 0.00001). Conclusion: Nintedanib-based regimens are associated with a higher risk of high-grade diarrhea, elevated ALT and elevated AST. Moreover, there is a proportional relationship between nintedanib dose and the risk of elevated transaminases.

Correlation between PD-L1 expression and outcome of NSCLC patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A meta analysis of the correlation between PD-L1 levels and outcomes of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been performed.

METHODS

Eligible studies included those evaluating PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in advanced NSCLC and correlating the outcomes to PD-L1 levels.

RESULTS

The search strategy yielded 250 potentially relevant citations from searched databases. After preclusion of ineligible studies, 12 studies were included. Comparing PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors to docetaxel in second line treatment, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) for progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was 0.75 (95% CI 0.62-0.90; p=0.002) and 0.61 (95% CI 0.50-75; p=0.00001) respectively; while the pooled odds ratio (OR) for objective response rate (ORR) was 1.98 (95% CI 1.28-3.07; p=0.002) in the PD-L1>1% population. Moreover, for PD-L1>1% patients versus PD-L1<1% patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 targeted agents, the OR of ORR was 2.18 (95% CI 1.45-3.29; p=0.0002); while for PD-L1>5% patients versus PD-L1<5% patients, it was 2.66 (95% CI 1.74-4.07; p<0.00001); and for PD-L1>10% versus PD-L1<10% patients, it was 3.38 (95% CI 2.23-5.13; p<0.00001); and for PD-L1>50% versus PD-L1<50% patients, it was 3.99 (95% CI 2.81-5.66; p<0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

The current analysis of data indicates that the benefit from PD-1 inhibitors versus docetaxel in second line treatment of NSCLC is limited to the PD-L1>1% subpopulation. Moreover, a possible dose effect relationship between the intensity of PD-L1 staining and the potential benefit from PD-1/PD-L1 targeted agents does exist with higher intensity associated with higher ORR.