Dataset Information

A retrospective analysis of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus pembrolizumab monotherapy for advanced or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although clinical trials have investigated the addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer, none have investigated the addition of chemotherapy to pembrolizumab.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of 71 NSCLC patients including 33 treated with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (combination therapy group) and 38 treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy (monotherapy group) from 1 May 2016 to 31 August 2020.

Results

Eleven of 33 (33.3%) patients in the combination therapy group and 37 of 38 (97.4%) patients in the monotherapy group had programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50%. Objective response rate (ORR) and median overall survival (OS) were not significantly different between the combination therapy group and monotherapy group (54.5% vs. 47.4, p = 0.637 and 16.6 vs. 27.0 months, p = 0.463). In patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥50%, ORR and median OS were not different between the combination therapy group and the monotherapy group (63.6% vs. 48.6%, p = 0.499 and not reached vs. 27.0 months, p = 0.976). Thirty-three (100%) patients experienced adverse events (AEs) in the combination therapy group and 32 (84.2%) in the monotherapy group. Treatment discontinuation at 1 year due to AEs occurred more frequently in the combination therapy group (45.2%) than in the monotherapy group (21.1%).

Conclusion

There was no significant difference in ORR and OS between the two groups, and treatment discontinuation was more frequent in the combination group. A randomized controlled trial is needed to evaluate the addition of chemotherapy to pembrolizumab for first-line treatment in patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥50%.

SUBMITTER: Isono T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8088931 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStandard first-line chemotherapy for endometrial cancer is paclitaxel plus carboplatin. The benefit of adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy remains unclear.MethodsIn this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, phase 3 trial, we assigned 816 patients with measurable disease (stage III or IVA) or stage IVB or recurrent endometrial cancer in a 1:1 ratio to receive pembrolizumab or placebo along with combination therapy with paclitaxel plus carboplatin. The administration of pembrolizumab or placebo was planned in 6 cycles every 3 weeks, followed by up to 14 maintenance cycles every 6 weeks. The patients were stratified into two cohorts according to whether they had mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) or mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) disease. Previous adjuvant chemotherapy was permitted if the treatment-free interval was at least 12 months. The primary outcome was progression-free survival in the two cohorts. Interim analyses were scheduled to be triggered after the occurrence of at least 84 events of death or progression in the dMMR cohort and at least 196 events in the pMMR cohort.ResultsIn the 12-month analysis, Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival in the dMMR cohort were 74% in the pembrolizumab group and 38% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.48; P<0.001), a 70% difference in relative risk. In the pMMR cohort, median progression-free survival was 13.1 months with pembrolizumab and 8.7 months with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.71; P<0.001). Adverse events were as expected for pembrolizumab and combination chemotherapy.ConclusionsIn patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, the addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than with chemotherapy alone. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; NRG-GY018 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03914612.).

Project description:BackgroundWhether a combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib is beneficial for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. This study aimed to summarize the currently available evidence and compare the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy alone for treating advanced NSCLC.MethodsEMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant studies. Our protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42014015015).ResultsNine randomized controlled trials with a total of 3599 patients were included. Compared to chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy plus erlotinib was superior in PFS (HR = 0.76 [95% CI 0.62, 0.92], P = 0.006), and no statistically significant difference was observed in OS (HR = 0.94 [95% CI 0.86, 1.03], P = 0.16). Intercalated erlotinib plus chemotherapy demonstrated improvements in PFS (HR = 0.67 [95% CI 0.50, 0.91], P = 0.009) and OS (HR = 0.82 [95% CI 0.69, 0.98], P = 0.03). Continuous erlotinib plus chemotherapy treatment failed to demonstrate improvements in PFS (HR = 0.91 [95% CI 0.80, 1.04], P = 0.16) and OS (HR = 0.98 [95% CI 0.89, 1.09], P = 0.75). The association of chemotherapy plus erlotinib with improvement in PFS was significant in never smoking patients (HR = 0.46 [95% CI 0.37, 0.56], P<0.00001) but not in smoking patients (HR = 0.70 [95% CI 0.49, 1.00], P = 0.05). Among patients with EGFR mutant tumors, chemotherapy plus erlotinib demonstrated significant improvements in PFS (HR = 0.31 [95% CI 0.17, 0.58], P = 0.0002) and OS (HR = 0.52 [95% CI 0.30, 0.88], P = 0.01). Among patients with EGFR wild-type tumors, no statistically significant difference was observed with respect to PFS (HR = 0.87 [95% CI 0.70, 1.08], P = 0.21) and OS (HR = 0.78 [95% CI 0.59, 1.01], P = 0.06).ConclusionCombination of chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable treatment option for patients with NSCLC, especially for patients who never smoked and patients with EGFR mutation-positive disease. In addition, intercalated administration is an effective combinatorial strategy.

Project description:Background: Pembrolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes over chemotherapy alone in patients with previously untreated advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. This study pooled data from 3 randomized controlled trials to evaluate outcomes with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC negative for PD-L1 (ie, a tumor proportion score < 1%).Methods: Individual patient data were pooled from KEYNOTE-021 cohort G (nonsquamous; NCT02039674), KEYNOTE-189 (nonsquamous; NCT02578680 and NCT03950674), and KEYNOTE-407 (squamous; NCT02775435). Treatment comprised pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (pemetrexed and platinum for nonsquamous histology and carboplatin and paclitaxel/nab-paclitaxel for squamous histology) or chemotherapy alone. Responses were assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 by blinded, independent, central review. No ? was assigned to this descriptive, exploratory analysis.Results: Four hundred forty-four of the 1328 patients (33.4%) who were enrolled across the 3 trials had PD-L1-negative tumors (256 on pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy [nonsquamous, n = 155; squamous, n = 94; other, n = 7] and 188 on chemotherapy alone [nonsquamous, n = 83; squamous, n = 99; other, n = 6]). The median time from randomization to the data cutoff was 28.0 months (range, 14.7-55.4 months). Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy improved overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50-0.79) and progression-free survival (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83) over chemotherapy. Sixteen patients in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy arm completed 2 years of treatment; the objective response rate was 87.5% (95% CI, 61.7%-98.4%), and the 3-year OS rate was 100%. Adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 99.2% of the patients who received pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and by 98.9% of the patients who received chemotherapy alone, with grade 3 or higher AEs occurring in 71.4% and 72.0%, respectively; immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions were experienced by 29.0% and 12.4%, respectively.Conclusions: Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated response and survival improvements with manageable safety in comparison with chemotherapy alone in PD-L1-negative advanced/metastatic NSCLC, and it is a standard-of-care first-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.Lay summary: Some tumors produce a protein called programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which interacts with the body's immune system and prevents an immune response against cancer. Antibody therapies such as pembrolizumab block interactions between tumor PD-L1 and the immune system and enable an immune response. Used alone, pembrolizumab provides benefit for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors that produce PD-L1. However, when it is combined with chemotherapy, which can stimulate anticancer immune responses, pembrolizumab provides a benefit, regardless of tumor PD-L1 production. This article shows that among patients with NSCLC whose tumors produce no PD-L1, outcomes are better with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in comparison with chemotherapy alone.

Project description:Objective To compare the cost-effectiveness of the combination of pembrolizumab and chemotherapy (Pembro+Chemo) versus pembrolizumab monotherapy (Pembro) as the first-line treatment for metastatic non-squamous and squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with PD-L1expression ≥50%, respectively, from a US health care perspective. Material and Methods A comprehensive Makrov model were designed to compare the health costs and outcomes associated with first-line Pembro+Chemo and first-line Pembro over a 20-years time horizon. Health states consisted of three main states: progression-free survival (PFS), progressive disease (PD) and death, among which the PFS health state was divided into two substates: PFS while receiving first-line therapy and PFS with discontinued first-line therapy. Two scenario analyses were performed to explore satisfactory long-term survival modeling. Results In base case analysis, for non-squamous NSCLC patients, Pembro+Chemo was associated with a significantly longer life expectancy [3.24 vs 2.16 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and a substantially greater healthcare cost ($341,237 vs $159,055) compared with Pembro, resulting in an ICER of $169,335/QALY; for squamous NSCLC patients, Pembro+Chemo was associated with a slightly extended life expectancy of 0.22 QALYs and a marginal incremental cost of $3,449 compared with Pembro, resulting in an ICER of $15,613/QALY. Our results were particularly sensitive to parameters that determine QALYs. The first scenario analysis yielded lower ICERs than our base case results. The second scenario analysis founded Pembro+Chemo was dominated by Pembro. Conclusion For metastatic non-squamous NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%, first-line Pembro+Chemo was not cost-effective when compared with first-line Pembro. In contrast, for the squamous NSCLC patient population, our results supported the first-line Pembro+Chemo as a cost-effective treatment. Although there are multiple approaches that are used for extrapolating long-term survival, the optimal method has yet to be determined.