Dataset Information

Association of Programmed Cell Death Ligand 1 Expression Status With Receipt of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Initial approval for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was limited to patients with high levels of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. However, in the period after approval, it is not known how new evidence supporting efficacy of these treatments in patients with low or negative PD-L1 expression was incorporated into real-world practice.

Objective

To evaluate the association between PD-L1 testing and first-line ICI use.

Design, setting, and participants

This retrospective cohort study (January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2018) used a deidentified nationwide electronic health record-derived database reflecting real-world care at more than 280 US community and academic cancer clinics (approximately 800 sites of care). Patients included those with advanced NSCLC without other identifiable variations diagnosed in the period after the US Food and Drug Administration's initial first-line approval of ICIs for patients with high PD-L1 expression (≥50%).

Exposure

First-line ICI treatment.

Main outcomes and measures

Patterns of PD-L1 testing and first-line ICI treatment among all patients and patients stratified by tumor histologic type (squamous vs nonsquamous).

Results

A total of 45 631 patients (mean [SD] age, 68.4 [9.6] years; 21 614 [47.4%] female) with advanced NSCLC were included in the study. PD-L1 testing increased from 468 (7.2%) in 2015 to 4202 (73.2%) in 2018. Within a subset of 7785 patients receiving first-line treatment in the period after first-line approval of pembrolizumab, those who received PD-L1 testing had a greater odds of receiving an ICI (odds ratio, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.89-2.36). Among patients with high PD-L1 expression (≥50%), 1541 (83.5%) received first-line ICI treatment; 776 patients (40.3%) with low PD-L1 expression (1%-49%) and 348 (32.3%) with negative PD-L1 expression (0%) also received ICIs. In addition, 755 untested patients (32.8%) were treated with a first-line ICI. The proportion of patients who received ICIs without PD-L1 testing increased during the study period (59 [17%] in quarter 4 of 2016 to 141 [53.8%] in quarter 4 of 2018).

Conclusions and relevance

In this study, use of first-line ICI treatment increased among patients with advanced NSCLC with negative, low, or untested PD-L1 expression status in 2016 through 2018. These findings suggest that national practice was rapidly responsive to new clinical evidence rather than adhering to regulatory guidance in place at the time.

SUBMITTER: Leapman MS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7280954 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInhibitors of programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) have represented a novel approach for the management of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this study, we aimed to estimate five anti-PD-1/L1 agents (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, and avelumab) using network meta-analyses (NMAs) and the Bayesian method to provide suggestions for advanced NSCLC treatments.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Wiley Online Library for eligible studies published up to March 2020. Both pairwise analyses and NMAs were conducted with clinical outcomes, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and the incidences of adverse events. Results were presented in several patient populations according to treatment lines and PD-L1 status.ResultsNineteen randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving 11,456 patients were included in our study. PD-1/L1 inhibitors showed significant benefits over chemotherapies in OS regardless of tumor PD-L1 status [first-line settings: OS =0.85, 95% CI (0.77, 0.94), I2=37%; second- or further-line settings: OS =0.77, 95% CI (0.71, 0.84), I2=37%]. The combined regimen of pembrolizumab and chemotherapy stood out to be the most effective and safest for patients in the first-line settings. Pembrolizumab monotherapy was showed to be the best especially for patients with PD-L1 ≥50%. In the subsequent-line settings, nivolumab ranked the best in improving the survival of patients, and durvalumab had the greatest effect in tumor shrinkage. Atezolizumab, followed by nivolumab, ranked the safest in reducing adverse events, whereas durvalumab was showed with the largest side effects among the five inhibitors.ConclusionsThe combination of pembrolizumab with chemotherapy is suitable for advanced NSCLC patients who have not received any systematic treatments before, and pembrolizumab monotherapy should also be considered, especially for patients with highly-expressed PD-L1 (≥50%). Nivolumab is the best option for patients with advanced NSCLC whose tumors have progressed following chemotherapies or combined modalities of treatments including chemotherapy. However, our results need to be further validated in future head-to-head clinical trials.

Project description:Introduction: Inhibitors of programmed cell death 1 (PD1) and its ligand (PDL1) have exhibited favorable long-term survival in many types of advanced-stage cancer and current approvals have to date been granted in certain tumour types irrespective of PD-L1 status. Methods: We extracted the following information: study sample size, trial period, cancer types, intervention of treatment, type of PD-L1 antibody, immunohistochemistry (IHC) scoring method, number and percentage of PD-L1 < 1% population, and median follow- up time. PD-L1 expression was defined as percentage of number of PD-L1-stained tumor cells (TPS), area of tumor infiltrated by PD-L1-stained immune cells (IPS), number of PD-L1-stained cells (tumor cells, lymphocytes and macrophages; CPS). Different trials used distinct method to define low PD-L1 expression. The risk of bias of the included trials was assessed by using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs. Results: Here, a total of 34 trials were included to extract individual patient data (IPD) to evaluate the survival benefit of first line PD1/PDL1 inhibitors vs. standard-of-care (SOC) in patients with PDL1 < 1%. In term of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy, OS (HR = 0.90, 0.81-1.01) and PFS (HR = 1.11, 0.97-1.27) between PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor group and SOC group were comparable. In term of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 combination therapy, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor group exhibited longer OS (median 19.5 months vs. 16.3 months; HR = 0.83, 0.79-0.88, p < 0.001) and PFS than those of SOC group (median 8.11 months vs. 6.96 months; HR = 0.82, 0.77-0.87, p < 0.001).Subgroup analysis showed that survival benefit was mainly observed in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (HROS = 0.74; HRPFS = 0.69; p < 0.001), small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) (HROS = 0.58, p < 0.001; HRPFS = 0.55, p = 0.030), esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) (HROS = 0.62, p = 0.005; HRPFS = 0.79, p < 0.001), melanoma (HROS = 0.53, p < 0.001) and nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) (HRPFS = 0.35, p = 0.013). Conclusion: Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 combinational therapy rather than monotherapy exhibit survival benefit in the low PD-L1 population in the first-line setting, and the survival benefit was mainly observed in specific tumor types.

Project description:IntroductionProgrammed cell death-1/programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-1/PDL-1) inhibitors are the newest class of approved drugs for advanced urothelial cancer (AdUC). This review aims to collate the evidence for their efficacy and safety in various treatment settings.MethodsExtensive search of databases was performed (updated May 2018) and the protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42017081568). The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis statement. STATA (v 12) and Revman 5.3.5 were used for data analysis.ResultsTen nonrandomized, open-label clinical trials were included in this review. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were used as second-line, stand-alone in eight trials and as first-line in cisplatin-ineligible in two trials. Heterogeneity was observed for study design, PDL-1 testing methods, cutoff criterias used and translational markers evaluated. The pooled objective response rate (ORR) was 18.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.1-21.2, n = 1785) with PD-1/PDL-1 inhibitors in second-line settings as compared to 12.6% (95% CI 10.3-14.9, n = 736) with second-line chemotherapy and 23.7% (95% CI 19.9-27.4, n = 489) with PD-1/PDL-1 inhibitors as first-line therapy in cisplatin-ineligible patients. The median progression-free survival and overall survival was similar with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in both second- and first-line treatment settings (1.5-2.9 vs. 2.0-2.7 months and 7.9-18.2 vs. 15.9 months) and second-line chemotherapy (3.3-4.0 months and 7.4-8 months). Odds of achieving ORR was 0.10 (95% CI 0.03-0.31, n = 229) in the second-line, stand-alone setting with a combined positive score (CPS) cutoff of 25% and was 0.34 (95% CI 0.19-0.62, n = 265) with a CPS cut-off of 10% in first-line setting in the cisplatin-ineligible.ConclusionsPD-1/PDL-1 inhibitors appear to be promising in the treatment of AdUC and CPS may be a potentially reliable biomarker for predicting response but needs validation. Caution needs to be exercised until more data are available on imAEs and further studies are required to prove their worth as the standard of care.

Project description:BackgroundRacial disparities among clinical trial participants present a challenge to assess whether trial results can be generalized into patients representing diverse races and ethnicities. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of race and ethnicity on treatment response in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) treated with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors through analysis of real-world data (RWD).Materials and methodsA retrospective cohort study of 11,138 patients with lung cancer treated at hospitals within the Mount Sinai Health System was performed. Patients with confirmed aNSCLC who received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment were analyzed for clinical outcomes. Our cohort included 249 patients with aNSCLC who began nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab treatment between November 2014 and December 2018. Time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD) and overall survival (OS) were the analyzed clinical endpoints.ResultsAfter a median follow-up of 14.8 months, median TTD was 7.8 months (95% confidence interval, 5.4-not estimable [NE]) in 75 African American patients versus 4.6 (2.4-7.2) in 110 White patients (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63). Median OS was not reached (18.4-NE) in African American patients versus 11.6 months (9.7-NE) in White patients (HR, 0.58). Multivariable Cox regression conducted with potential confounders confirmed longer TTD (adjusted HR, 0.65) and OS (adjusted HR, 0.60) in African American versus White patients. Similar real-world response rate (42.6% vs. 43.5%) and disease control rate (59.6% vs. 56.5%) were observed in the African American and White patient populations. Further investigation revealed the African American patient group had lower incidence (14.7%) of putative hyperprogressive diseases (HPD) upon anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment than the White patient group (24.5%).ConclusionAnalysis of RWD showed longer TTD and OS in African American patients with aNSCLC treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Lower incidence of putative HPD is a possible reason for the favorable outcomes in this patient population.Implications for practiceThere is a significant underrepresentation of minority patients in randomized clinical trials, and this study demonstrates that real-world data can be used to investigate the impact of race and ethnicity on treatment response. In retrospective analysis of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with programmed cell death-1 or programmed cell death-ligand 1 inhibitors, African American patients had significantly longer time-to-treatment discontinuation and longer overall survival. Analysis of real-world data can yield clinical insights and establish a more complete picture of medical interventions in routine clinical practice.