Dataset Information

A Real-World, Multicenter, Observational Retrospective Study of Durvalumab After Concomitant or Sequential Chemoradiation for Unresectable Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

For unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the standard therapy consists of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by durvalumab maintenance for responding patients. The present study reports on the safety and outcome of durvalumab use after CRT in a real-world, multicenter, retrospective cohort.

Methods

Two hundred thirty-eight patients have been included. We collected data on systemic therapy, radiation therapy, the timing between CRT and durvalumab, number of durvalumab cycles, reasons for non-starting or discontinuation, incidence and grade of adverse events (AEs), and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

One hundred fifty-five patients out of 238 (65.1%) received at least one durvalumab dose: 91 (58.7%) after concomitant CRT (cCRT) and 64 (41.3%) after sequential CRT (sCRT). Programmed-death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status was unknown in 7/155 (4.5%), negative in 14 (9.1%), and positive ≥1% in 134/155 (86.4%). The main reasons for non-starting durvalumab were progression (10.1%), PD-L1 negativity (7.5%), and lung toxicity (4.6%). Median follow-up time was 14 months (range 2-29); 1-year PFS and OS were 83.5% (95%CI: 77.6-89.7) and 97.2% (95%CI: 94.6-99.9), respectively. No significant differences in PFS or OS were detected for cCRT vs. sCRT, but the median PFS was 13.5 months for sCRT vs. 23 months for cCRT. Potentially immune-related AEs were recorded in 76/155 patients (49.0%). Pneumonitis was the most frequent, leading to discontinuation in 11/155 patients (7.1%).

Conclusions

Durvalumab maintenenace after concurrent or sequential chemoradiation for unresectable, stage III NSCLC showed very promising short-term survival results in a large, multicenter, restrospective, real-world study. Durvalumab was the first drug obtaining a survival benefit over CRT within the past two decades, and the present study contributes to validating its use in clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Bruni A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8507147 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the rate disparity between outcomes (overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety) of concurrent chemoradiation (cCRT) followed by durvalumab in two patient cohorts with locally advanced (LA) stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), one non-Hispanic White (NHW), and the other Latin-American.MethodsA multicenter retrospective study was performed, including 80 Hispanic and 45 NHW LA stage III NSCLC patients treated with cCRT followed by durvalumab. Both cohorts were analyzed in terms of main outcomes (OS, PFS, and safety) and compared between them and with the PACIFIC trial population outcomes. The efficacy-effectiveness gap was assessed using an efficacy-effectiveness (EE) factor that was calculated by dividing each cohort median overall survival by the corresponding reference OS from the PACIFIC trial. In both cohorts, results of PD-L1 testing were recorded, and the main outcomes were compared according to PD-1 expression levels (≥50%, 1-49%, and <1%).ResultsFor the entire population (N=125), the overall response rate (ORR) was 57.6% (N=72), and 18.4% (N=25) achieved stable disease. OS was 26.3 months (95%CI 23.9-28.6), and PFS was 20.5 months (95%CI 18.0-23.0). PFS assessed by ethnicity showed a median for the Hispanic population of 19.4 months (95%CI 16.4-22.5) and 21.2 months (95%CI 17.2-23.3; p=0.76) for the NHW group. OS by race showed a significant difference in favor of the NHW group, with a median OS of 27.7 months (95%CI 24.6-30.9) vs. 20.0 months (95%CI 16.4-23.5) for Hispanics. (P=0.032). Unadjusted 12-month and 24-month OS was 86.6% (95%CI 79.9-88.0) and 46.6% (95%CI 40.2-48.3) for NHW compared to 82.5% (95%CI 77.1-84.2) and 17.5% (95%CI 15.6-24.5) in Hispanics. NHW had an EE factor of 0.78 and Hispanics had 0.58, showing a reduction in survival versus NHW and PACIFIC of 20% and 42%, respectively. HR for the OS among NHWs and Hispanics was 1.53 (95%CI 1.12-1.71; P=0.052) and 2.31 (95%CI 1.76-2.49; P=0.004). Fifty-six patients (44.8%) had some degree of pneumonitis due to cCRT plus durvalumab. There was no difference in the proportion of pneumonitis according to race (P=0.95), and the severity of pneumonitis was not significantly different between Hispanics and NHWs (P=0.41).ConclusionsAmong patients with LA stage III NSCLC, NHW had better survival outcomes when compared to Hispanics, with an OS that seems to favor the NHW population and with an EE factor that shows a shorter survival in Hispanics compared with NHW and with the PACIFIC trial group.

Project description:BackgroundIn the PACIFIC trial, durvalumab significantly improved progression-free and overall survival (PFS/OS) versus placebo, with manageable safety, in unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients without progression after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). We report exploratory analyses of outcomes by tumour cell (TC) programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression.Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned (2:1) to intravenous durvalumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or placebo ≤12 months, stratified by age, sex, and smoking history, but not PD-L1 status. Where available, pre-CRT samples were tested for PD-L1 expression (immunohistochemistry) and scored at pre-specified (25%) and post hoc (1%) TC cut-offs. Treatment-effect hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated from unstratified Cox proportional hazards models (Kaplan-Meier-estimated medians).ResultsIn total, 713 patients were randomly assigned, 709 of whom received at least 1 dose of study treatment durvalumab (n = 473) or placebo (n = 236). Some 451 (63%) were PD-L1-assessable: 35%, 65%, 67%, 33%, and 32% had TC ≥25%, <25%, ≥1%, <1%, and 1%-24%, respectively. As of 31 January 2019, median follow-up was 33.3 months. Durvalumab improved PFS versus placebo (primary-analysis data cut-off, 13 February 2017) across all subgroups [HR, 95% confidence interval (CI); medians]: TC ≥25% (0.41, 0.26-0.65; 17.8 versus 3.7 months), <25% (0.59, 0.43-0.82; 16.9 versus 6.9 months), ≥1% (0.46, 0.33-0.64; 17.8 versus 5.6 months), <1% (0.73, 0.48-1.11; 10.7 versus 5.6 months), 1%-24% [0.49, 0.30-0.80; not reached (NR) versus 9.0 months], and unknown (0.59, 0.42-0.83; 14.0 versus 6.4 months). Durvalumab improved OS across most subgroups (31 January 2019 data cut-off; HR, 95% CI; medians): TC ≥ 25% (0.50, 0.30-0.83; NR versus 21.1 months), <25% (0.89, 0.63-1.25; 39.7 versus 37.4 months), ≥1% (0.59, 0.41-0.83; NR versus 29.6 months), 1%-24% (0.67, 0.41-1.10; 43.3 versus 30.5 months), and unknown (0.60, 0.43-0.84; 44.2 versus 23.5 months), but not <1% (1.14, 0.71-1.84; 33.1 versus 45.6 months). Safety was similar across subgroups.ConclusionsPFS benefit with durvalumab was observed across all subgroups, and OS benefit across all but TC <1%, for which limitations and wide HR CI preclude robust conclusions.

Project description:BackgroundIn the phase III PACIFIC study, durvalumab improved survival versus placebo in patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose disease had not progressed after platinum-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy. The appraisal by the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) included a cost-effectiveness analysis based on an early data readout from PACIFIC [March 2018 data cut-off (DCO); median follow-up duration 25.2 months; range 0.2-43.1]. Uncertainties regarding long-term survival outcomes with durvalumab led to some challenges in estimating the cost effectiveness of this therapy.ObjectiveHere, we validate the survival extrapolations used in the original company base-case analysis by benchmarking them against updated survival data from the 4-year follow-up analysis of PACIFIC (i.e. approximately 4 years after the last patient was randomised; March 2020 DCO; median follow-up duration 34.2 months; range 0.2-64.9). Moreover, we update the original analysis with these more mature survival data to examine the consistency of key economic outputs with the original analysis.MethodsThe original analysis used a semi-Markov (state-transition) approach and was based on patients whose tumours expressed programmed cell death-ligand 1 on ≥ 1% of cells (to reflect the European licence for durvalumab). We benchmarked the survival extrapolations used in the original company base-case analysis against survival data from the 4-year follow-up of PACIFIC and updated the cost-effectiveness analysis with these more mature survival data. Early deaths avoided by the adoption of durvalumab into the UK Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) in March 2019 were estimated using the 4-year follow-up survival data and an assumed uptake of 125 patients/year (lower estimate) and 367 patients/year (higher estimate).ResultsThe original company base-case analysis had a good visual fit with the observed overall survival (OS) distribution for the durvalumab arm and accurately predicted the 48-month OS rate (predicted 55%; observed 55%); by comparison, the fit was less precise for the placebo arm, for which the analysis underestimated the 48-month OS rate (predicted 32%; observed 38%). In the updated company base-case analysis, durvalumab yielded 2.51 incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (- 0.43 vs. the original company base-case analysis), corresponding to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £22,665/QALY (+£3298 vs. the original analysis), which falls within the upper bound of NICE's willingness-to-pay threshold (£30,000/QALY gained). We estimate that between 31 and 91 early patient deaths may have been avoided by the adoption of durvalumab into the CDF.ConclusionsThese findings reinforce the patient benefit observed with durvalumab in unresectable stage III NSCLC, support the routine use and cost effectiveness of this therapy, and demonstrate how appropriate modelling can inform the early adoption of therapies by payers to achieve patient benefit.

Project description:BackgroundReal-world evidence is limited regarding the relationship between race and use of durvalumab, an immunotherapy approved for use in adults with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) post-chemoradiotherapy (CRT). This study aimed to evaluate if durvalumab treatment patterns differed by race in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC in a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) population.Materials and methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of White and Black adults with unresectable stage III NSCLC treated with durvalumab presenting to any VHA facility in the US from January 1, 2017, to June 30, 2020. Data captured included baseline characteristics and durvalumab treatment patterns, including treatment initiation delay (TID), interruption (TI), and discontinuation (TD); defined as CRT completion to durvalumab initiation greater than 42 days, greater than 28 days between durvalumab infusions, and more than 28 days from the last durvalumab dose with no new durvalumab restarts, respectively. The number of doses, duration of therapy, and adverse events were also collected.ResultsA total of 924 patients were included in this study (White = 726; Black = 198). Race was not a significant factor in a multivariate logistic regression model for TID (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.81-2.37), TI (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 0.90-2.76), or TD (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.50-1.38). There were also no significant differences in median (interquartile range [IQR]) number of doses (White: 15 [7-24], Black: 18 [7-25]; P = .25) or median (IQR) duration of therapy (White: 8.7 months [2.9-11.8], Black: 9.8 months [3.6-12.0]; P = .08), although Black patients were less likely to experience an immune-related adverse event (28% vs. 36%, P = .03) and less likely to experience pneumonitis (7% vs. 14%, P < .01).ConclusionRace was not found to be linked with TID, TI, or TD in this real-world study of patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC treated with durvalumab at the VHA.