Search

Background: Consolidation durvalumab after concurrent chemoradiation is the standard of care for unresectable stage III non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on the PACIFIC trial. However, there have been reports in the literature suggesting the efficacy of the treatment differs in patients whose tumors harbor epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations and in those with low programed death ligand‐1 (PD‐L1) expression. This study describes the survival outcomes for patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC treated with chemoradiation followed by durvalumab with a specific focus on EGFR mutation status and PD‐L1 expression. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted across six sites in Greater Sydney, Australia. It included all patients diagnosed with unresectable stage III NSCLC treated with chemoradiation and who received at least one cycle of durvalumab between January 2018 and September 2021. Patients were stratified according to EGFR mutation status and PD‐L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) of 1%. Results: Of the 145 patients included in the analysis, 15/145 (10%) patients harbored an EGFR mutation and 61/145 (42%) patients had PD‐L1 TPS of <1%. At a median follow‐up of 15.1 months from the start of durvalumab, median progression‐free survival (PFS) in EGFR mutant versus wild‐type patients was 7.5 and 33.9 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.7; 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] 1.2–5.7; p =.01). Overall survival (OS) was not different between EGFR mutant and wild‐type patients. There was no statistically significant difference in PFS (HR.7, 95% CI.4–1.7, p =.43) or OS (HR.5, 95% CI.4–4.7, p =.16) between patients with PD‐L1 TPS of <1% versus PD‐L1 TPS of ≥1%. Conclusions: Our data adds to the growing evidence that suggests consolidation durvalumab after definitive chemoradiation may not be as efficacious in patients with EGFR‐mutant tumors compared with EGFR wild‐type NSCLC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Several predictors of survival have been identified in EGFR-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with first generation EGFR inhibitors. Prognostic models of survival outcomes with afatinib have not been evaluated. Methods: A prognostic tool for overall survival (OS)/progression free survival (PFS) based on pre-treatment clinicopathological factors was developed for EGFR-positive advanced NSCLC patients treated with first-line afatinib using penalised regression of individual-participant data from LUX-Lung 3 and 6 (n = 468). Favourable, intermediate and poor risk groups were identified and externally validated using LUX-Lung 1 (n = 390) and LUX-Lung 2 (n = 129) trials that initiated afatinib following previous chemotherapy or EGFR inhibitor treatment. Results: Discriminative performance was good in the development and validation cohorts. For patients treated with first-line afatinib, the median OS for the favourable, intermediate and poor risk groups were > 47.7, 29.3 and 16.4 months, respectively, and the median PFS were 17.3, 13.2 and 8.3 months, respectively. The improvement in median OS with afatinib use compared to chemotherapy was > 12.4 months for the favourable risk group, whereas no OS benefit was apparent for the poor risk group. The improvement in median PFS with afatinib use compared to chemotherapy was 10.2 months for the favourable risk group and 3.2 months for the poor risk group. Conclusions: A prognostic tool was developed and validated to identify favourable, intermediate and poor risk groups for OS/PFS in EGFR-positive advanced NSCLC patients treated with afatinib. The prognostic groups can inform the likely absolute OS/PFS benefit expected from afatinib compared to chemotherapy in first-line treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multiple studies have indicated that patients with high body mass index (BMI) may have favourable survival outcomes following treatment with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). However, this evidence is limited by several factors, notably the minimal evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), the use of categorised BMI with inconsistent cut point definitions, and minimal investigation of contemporary combination ICI therapy. Moreover, whether overweight and obese patients gain a larger benefit from contemporary frontline chemoimmunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unclear. Methods: This secondary analysis pooled individual patient data from the intention-to-treat population of the IMpower130 and IMpower150 RCTs comparing chemoimmunotherapy versus chemotherapy. Co-primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The potentially non-linear relationship between BMI and chemoimmunotherapy treatment effect was evaluated using Multivariable Fractional Polynomial Interaction (MFPI). As a sensitivity analysis, chemoimmunotherapy treatment effect (chemoimmunotherapy versus chemotherapy) on survival was also estimated for each BMI subgroup defined by World Health Organisation classification. Exploratory analyses in the respective chemoimmunotherapy and chemotherapy cohort were undertaken to examine the survival outcomes among BMI subgroups. Results: A total of 1282 patients were included. From the MFPI analysis, BMI was not significantly associated with chemoimmunotherapy treatment effect with respect to either OS (p = 0.71) or PFS (p = 0.35). This was supported by the sensitivity analyses that demonstrated no significant treatment effect improvement in OS/PFS among overweight or obese patients compared to normal weight patients (OS: normal BMI HR = 0.74 95% CI 0.59–0.93, overweight HR = 0.78 95% CI 0.61–1.01, obese HR = 0.84 95% CI 0.59–1.20). Exploratory analyses further highlighted that survival outcomes were not significantly different across BMI subgroups in either the chemoimmunotherapy therapy cohort (Median OS: normal BMI 19.9 months, overweight 17.9 months, and obese 19.5 months, p = 0.7) or the chemotherapy cohort (Median OS: normal 14.1 months, overweight 15.9 months, and obese 16.7 months, p = 0.7). Conclusion: There was no association between high BMI (overweight or obese individuals) and enhanced chemoimmunotherapy treatment benefit in front-line treatment of advanced non-squamous NSCLC. This contrasts with previous publications that showed a superior treatment benefit in overweight and obese patients treated with immunotherapy given without chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]