Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint blockade in self-identified Black patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To the authors' knowledge, race-based differences in efficacy for the treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have not been studied to date due to the underrepresentation of patients of minority backgrounds in pivotal trials. In the current study, the authors examined real-world differences in outcome in a diverse patient population.

Methods

The authors retrospectively analyzed the clinical outcomes of patients with advanced NSCLC who were treated with single-agent immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) between 2013 and July 2018 at Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia. Primary efficacy comparison between Black patients and White patients was performed using bivariate and multivariate analyses for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

Data from 257 patients were analyzed. The median age of the patients was 69 years; 50.6% of the patients were female, 63.4% were White, 29.5% were Black, and 7.1% of the patients were of "other" race. ICB was the first-line treatment in 51 patients (19.9%), the second-line treatment in 161 patients (62.6%), and the third-line treatment in 33 patients (12.9%). The most commonly used agents were nivolumab (49.0%), pembrolizumab (25.2%), and atezolizumab (21.3%). No differences with regard to OS (P = .839) and PFS (P = .235) were noted between Black and White patients. The sample overall response rate was 20.6% (15.2% in Black patients and 23.1% in White patients). No differences with regard to OS (P = .081) and PFS (P = .176) were observed between female and male patients. The rate of immune-related adverse events was found to be similar in Black and White patients (20.0% vs 29.9%; P = .148). On multivariate analysis, race was not found to be significantly associated with OS or PFS.

Conclusions

Real-world analysis of the authors' institutional experience demonstrated similar efficacy and tolerability of ICB in Black versus White patients with advanced NSCLC. Larger multi-institutional studies including other US minority populations would make the findings of the current study more generalizable.

SUBMITTER: Nazha B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7717500 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically changed the first-line treatment pattern of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without driver gene alterations. However, the optimal choice for second-line treatment after initial treatment with ICIs is unclear. This study aimed to clarify the efficacy and safety of ICI rechallenge therapy in locally advanced and advanced NSCLC.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the histories of 224 patients with locally advanced or advanced NSCLC treated with programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors alone or in combination with chemotherapy and/or antiangiogenic therapy in first-line treatment. Progression-free survival 2 (PFS2) was the time from the first defined progress disease (PD) to the second disease progression or death. Efficacy evaluation was performed directly in accordance with RECIST v1.1 criteria. Adverse events (AEs) were graded following the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Survival data were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method or Cox survival regression model and compared using the log-rank test in overall cohort and other subgroups.ResultsThere were no significant differences in objective response rate (ORR) and median PFS2 (mPFS2) between the ICI rechallenge group and non-rechallenge group (ORR: 10.3% vs. 15.3%, P=0.308; mPFS2: 5.33 vs. 4.40 months, P=0.715). And the ICI rechallenge group showed no new safety signals compared with non-rechallenge group. In ICI rechallenge group, patients resistant to first-line immunotherapy had a lower ORR and shorter PFS2 compared with those who responded to initial ICIs treatment (ORR: 7.0% vs. 17.6%, P=0.038; mPFS2: 3.68 vs. 5.91 months, P=0.014). No significant difference in mPFS2 was observed among different second-line treatment groups (P=0.362). Radiotherapy in second-line treatment and ICI rechallenge therapy were not the main factors affecting PFS2.ConclusionsICI rechallenge therapy beyond disease progression did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with NSCLC, but no new safety signals emerged. However, patients with favorable response to initial ICIs treatment still showed significant efficacy of subsequent ICI rechallenge therapy.

Project description:BackgroundTherapeutic strategies with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) counteract the immunosuppressive effects of programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and ligand-1 (PD-L1). ICI treatment has emerged in first- and second-line therapy of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). As immunotherapeutic treatment with ICIs is a dynamic field where new drugs and combinations are constantly evaluated, we conducted an up-to-date systematic review on comparative efficacy and safety in patients with advanced NSCLC.MethodsWe searched PubMed up to February 2020 and Embase, CENTRAL, and clinical trial registries up to August 2018. Additionally, we checked reference lists. We dually screened titles, abstracts and, subsequently, full-texts for eligibility. Two reviewers assessed the risk of bias and graded the certainty of evidence following GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). For second-line therapy, we performed random-effects meta-analyses. Due to considerable clinical heterogeneity, we reported first-line results narratively.ResultsOf 1497 references, we identified 22 relevant publications of 16 studies. For first-line therapy, a combination of an ICI with chemotherapy improved progression-free survival and overall survival compared to chemotherapy but increased the risk of serious adverse events. Single-agent pembrolizumab increased overall and progression-free survival in patients with PD-L1 expression of ≥50% and resulted in less TRAE than chemotherapy. Compared to placebo, maintenance therapy with durvalumab increased overall and progression-free survival at the downside of higher risk of TRAE. For second-line therapy, a random-effects meta-analysis yielded a statistically significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for ICIs compared to docetaxel (HR 0.69; 95% CI: 0.63-0.75 for OS; HR 0.85; 95% CI: 0.77 - 0.93 for PFS; 6 studies, 3478 patients; median OS benefit in months: 2.4 to 4.2). In meta-analysis, risk of any treatment-related adverse events of any grade was lower for ICI than docetaxel as second-line therapy (RR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.73-0.79; 6 studies, 3763 patients).ConclusionIn first-line therapy of patients with advanced NSCLC, ICI is effective when combined with chemotherapy not depending on PD-L1 expression, or as monotherapy in high PD-L1 expressing tumors. For second-line therapy, single-agent ICI improves efficacy and safety compared to docetaxel.