PL02.01 Durvalumab ± Tremelimumab + Chemotherapy as First-line Treatment for mNSCLC: Results from the Phase 3 POSEIDON Study

Brain metastases and lung cancer: molecular biology, natural history, prediction of response and efficacy of immunotherapy

Brain metastases stemming from lung cancer represent a common and challenging complication that significantly impacts patients' overall health. The migration of these cancerous cells from lung lesions to the central nervous system is facilitated by diverse molecular changes and a specific environment that supports their affinity for neural tissues. The advent of immunotherapy and its varied combinations in non-small cell lung cancer has notably improved patient survival rates, even in cases involving brain metastases. These therapies exhibit enhanced penetration into the central nervous system compared to traditional chemotherapy. This review outlines the molecular mechanisms underlying the development of brain metastases in lung cancer and explores the efficacy of novel immunotherapy approaches and their combinations.

Comparison of the profiles of first-line PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for advanced NSCLC lacking driver gene mutations: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

Background

Numerous first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) were developed for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) lacking driver gene mutations. However, this group consists of a heterogeneous patient population, for whom the optimal therapeutic choice is yet to be confirmed.

Objective

To identify the best first-line immunotherapy regimen for overall advanced NSCLC patients and different subgroups.

Design

Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods

We searched several databases to retrieve relevant literature. We performed Bayesian NMA for the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and treatment-related adverse events (tr-AEs) with a grade equal or more than 3 (grade ⩾ 3 tr-AEs). Subgroup analysis was conducted according to programed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) levels, histologic type, central nervous system (CNS) metastases and tobacco use history.

Results

For the PD-L1 non-selective patients, sintilimab plus chemotherapy (sinti-chemo) provided the best OS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI):0.42-0.83]. Nivolumab plus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy (nivo-bev-chemo) was comparable to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy (atezo-bev-chemo) in prolonging PFS (HR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.51-1.91). Atezo-bev-chemo remarkably elevated the ORR than chemotherapy (OR = 3.13, 95% CI: 1.51-6.59). Subgroup analysis showed pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (pembro-chemo) ranked first in OS in subgroups of PD-L1 < 1%, non-squamous, no CNS metastases, with or without smoking history, and ranked second in OS in subgroups of PD-L1 ⩾ 1% and PD-L1 1-49%. Cemiplimab and sugemalimab plus chemotherapy ranked first in OS and PFS for squamous subgroup, respectively. For patients with CNS metastases, nivolumab plus ipilimumab plus chemotherapy (nivo-ipili-chemo) and camrelizumab plus chemotherapy provided the best OS and PFS, respectively.

Conclusions

Sinti-chemo and nivo-bev-chemo were two effective first-line regimens ranked first in OS and PFS for overall patients, respectively. Pembro-chemo was favorable for patients in subgroups of PD-L1 < 1%, PD-L1 ⩾ 1%, PD-L1 1-49%, non-squamous, no CNS metastases, with or without smoking history. Addition of bevacizumab consistently provided with favorable PFS results in patients of all PD-L1 levels. Cemiplimab was the best option in squamous subgroup and nivo-ipili-chemo in CNS metastases subgroup due to their advantages in OS.

A multicenter, open-label phase Ib/II study of cadonilimab (anti PD-1 and CTLA-4 bispecific antibody) monotherapy in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (AK104-202 study)

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cadonilimab (anti PD-1 and CTLA-4 bispecific antibody) in patients with previously treated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

In this multicenter, open-label, phase Ib/II study, patients with previously treated NSCLC were enrolled in three different cohorts: Cohort A, patients who had failed previous platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and were immunotherapy naïve; Cohort B, patients who had failed previous platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and had primary resistance to immunotherapy (IO); Cohort C, patients who had failed previous platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and had acquired resistance to IO. Eligible patients were given cadonilimab 6 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1.

RESULTS

A total of 53 patients were enrolled: including 30 patients in cohort A, 7 in cohort B, and 16 in cohort C. ORR was 10% in cohort A, and there were no responder in cohort B and cohort C. Median overall survival was 19.61 (95% CI 11.30-NE) months, 4.93 (95% CI 1.97-NE) months and 13.16 (95% CI 6.18-NE) months in cohort A, B and C, respectively. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 6 (11.3 %) patients, including alanine aminotransferase increased (1.9%), rash (1.9%), chest discomfort (1.9%), hypercalcaemia (1.9%), anaemia (1.9%) and infusion related reaction (1.9%).

CONCLUSION

The study did not meet its primary endpoint. Cadonilimab demonstrated limited efficacy in patients with IO failure, especially in cases of primary resistance. However, cadonilimab might play a role as a second-line immune monotherapy after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy failure and IO naïve, as its efficacy is similar to other immune checkpoint inhibitors after first-line chemotherapy. Cadonilimab was well-tolerated with mild toxicity, making it a potential candidate for the combination strategy. Clinical trial number NCT04172454.

Current immune therapeutic strategies in advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

ABSTRACT

Immune escape mechanisms in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) can disrupt every step of the anti-cancer immune response. In recent years, an increased understanding of the specific mechanisms fueling immune escape has allowed for the development of numerous immunotherapeutic treatments that have been introduced into the clinical practice. The advent of immunotherapy has dramatically changed the current treatment landscape of advanced or metastatic NSCLC because of its durable efficacy and manageable toxicity. In this review, we will first present a brief overview of recent evidence on immune escape mechanisms in NSCLC. We will then discuss the current promising immunotherapeutic strategies in advanced or metastatic NSCLC tumors.

Interim survival analysis of the randomized phase III GEMSTONE-302 trial: sugemalimab or placebo plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for metastatic NSCLC

The randomized, double-blinded, multi-center, phase III GEMSTONE-302 ( NCT03789604 ) study evaluated the efficacy and safety of sugemalimab versus placebo in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this study, 479 treatment-naive patients with stage IV squamous or non-squamous NSCLC without known EGFR sensitizing mutations, ALK, ROS1 or RET fusions were randomized (2:1) to receive 1,200 mg of sugemalimab (n = 320) or placebo (n = 159) every 3 weeks in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy for up to four cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with sugemalimab or placebo for squamous NSCLC and sugemalimab or placebo plus pemetrexed for non-squamous NSCLC. Placebo-treated patients could cross over to receive sugemalimab monotherapy on disease progression. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and the secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and objective response rate. Sugemalimab plus chemotherapy has demonstrated significant PFS prolongation in the primary analysis as reported previously. As of 22 November 2021, the prespecified interim OS analysis showed significant improvement with the addition of sugemalimab to chemotherapy (median OS = 25.4 versus 16.9 months; hazard ratio = 0.65; 95% confidence interval = 0.50-0.84; P = 0.0008). Sugemalimab plus chemotherapy provided superior PFS and OS compared to placebo plus chemotherapy, supporting the use of sugemalimab as a first-line treatment option for metastatic NSCLC.

Exploring the Molecular Players behind the Potentiation of Chemotherapy Effects by Durvalumab in Lung Adenocarcinoma Cell Lines

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are increasingly used in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer, yet the success of combination therapies is relatively limited. Thus, more detailed insight regarding the tumor molecular markers that may affect the responsiveness of patients to therapy is required. Here, we set out to explore the proteome of two lung adenocarcinoma cell lines (HCC-44 and A549) treated with cisplatin, pemetrexed, durvalumab, and the corresponding mixtures to establish the differences in post-treatment protein expression that can serve as markers of chemosensitivity or resistance. The mass spectrometry study showed that the addition of durvalumab to the treatment mixture resulted in cell line- and chemotherapeutic agent-dependent responses and confirmed the previously reported involvement of DNA repair machinery in the potentiation of the chemotherapy effect. Further validation using immunofluorescence also indicated that the potentiating effect of durvalumab in the case of cisplatin treatment was dependent on the tumor suppressor RB-1 in the PD-L1 weakly positive cells. In addition, we identified aldehyde dehydrogenase ALDH1A3 as the general putative resistance marker. Further studies in patient biopsy samples will be required to confirm the clinical significance of these findings.

Combined chemo-immunotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: feasible in the elderly?

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) as the most common subtype. In the past decades, immunotherapy deeply changed paradigms for care of newly diagnosed advanced NSCLC patients without oncogenic driver mutations. An immunotherapy-based regimen alone or in combination to chemotherapy was crown as the preferred option to choice, according to worldwide guideline.

AREAS COVERED

Newly diagnoses of advanced NCSLC occurred predominantly in elderly patients, representing over half of patients treated in daily practice. However, data on older patients' treatments are still lacking, because they are under-represented in clinical trials. This leads to a "black hole" of knowledge about efficacy and safety of immune-checkpoint inhibitors use in this cohort of population.

EXPERT OPINION

According to available data from subgroup analyses, immunotherapy as single agent seem to work in elderly similarly to younger patients, with no excess of toxicities. In contrast, the real impact - and not least the safety - of an immune-chemo combination use in elderly population was still unclear. Awaiting data from dedicated clinical trials, this review will discuss available results from randomized phase III clinical trials comparing immune-chemo combinations to chemotherapy alone, focusing on elderly subgroup enrolled.

The Role of Immunotherapy or Immuno-Chemotherapy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Comprehensive Review

Many new treatment modalities for non-small-cell carcinoma (NSCLC) have been described in the last two decades. Surgical resections remain the gold standard for early stages and may be considered for locally advanced tumors. Medical treatment has changed drastically in recent years, especially for advanced stages, for which the development of immunotherapy and molecular targeted therapy significantly increased survival and quality of life. The addition of radical surgical resection following immunotherapy or immuno-chemotherapy is feasible and safe with low surgical-related mortality and morbidity in selected patients with initially unresectable NSCLC. However, data from multiple ongoing trials with overall survival as the primary endpoint should be awaited before this strategy is introduced into the standard of care.

Emerging evidence and treatment paradigm of non-small cell lung cancer

Research on biomarker-driven therapy and immune check-point blockade in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is rapidly evolving. The width and depth of clinical trials have also dramatically improved in an unprecedented speed. The personalized treatment paradigm evolved every year. In this review, we summarize the promising agents that have shifted the treatment paradigm for NSCLC patients across all stages, including targeted therapy and immunotherapy using checkpoint inhibitors. Based on recent evidence, we propose treatment algorithms for NSCLC and propose several unsolved clinical issues, which are being explored in ongoing clinical trials. The results of these trials are likely to impact future clinical practice.

Immunotherapy in the first-line treatment of elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results of an International Experts Panel Meeting by the Italian Association of Thoracic Oncology (AIOT)

BACKGROUND

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the front-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is currently the standard of care. However, as clinical trials include a very limited number of elderly patients, evidence on the safety and efficacy of using ICI-based regimens is still limited.

METHODS

A virtual International Expert Panel took place in July 2022 to review the available evidence on the use of ICI-based regimens in the first-line setting in elderly patients with NSCLC and provide a position paper on the field both in clinical practice and in a research setting.

RESULTS

All panelists agreed that age per se is not a limitation for ICI treatments, as the elderly should be considered only as a surrogate for other clinical factors of frailty. Overall, ICI efficacy in the elderly population is supported by reviewed data. In addition, the panelists were confident that available data support the safety of single-agent immunotherapy in elderly patients with NSCLC. Conversely, concerns were expressed on the safety of chemo + ICI-based combination, which were considered mainly related to the toxicities of chemotherapy components. Therefore, suggestions were proposed to tailor combined approaches in the elderly patients with NSCLC. The panelists defined high, medium, and low priorities in clinical research. High priority was attributed to implementing the real-world assessment of elderly patients treated with ICIs, who are mostly underrepresented in pivotal clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current evidence, the panelists outlined the significant limitations affecting the clinical practice in elderly patients affected by NSCLC, and reached common considerations on the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of ICI monotherapy and ICI combinations in the first-line setting.

Durvalumab with or without tremelimumab versus the EXTREME regimen as first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: KESTREL, a randomized, open-label, phase III study

BACKGROUND

Patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) have a poor prognosis. The phase III KESTREL study evaluated the efficacy of durvalumab [programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody] with or without tremelimumab [cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) antibody], versus the EXTREME regimen in patients with R/M HNSCC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with HNSCC who had not received prior systemic treatment for R/M disease were randomized (2 : 1 : 1) to receive durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) plus tremelimumab 75 mg Q4W (up to four doses), durvalumab monotherapy 1500 mg Q4W, or the EXTREME regimen (platinum, 5-fluorouracil, and cetuximab) until disease progression. Durvalumab efficacy, with or without tremelimumab, versus the EXTREME regimen in patients with PD-L1-high tumors and in all randomized patients was assessed. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

Durvalumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab were not superior to EXTREME for overall survival (OS) in patients with PD-L1-high expression [median, 10.9 and 11.2 versus 10.9 months, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.32; P = 0.787 and HR = 1.05; 95% CI 0.80-1.39, respectively]. Durvalumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab prolonged duration of response versus EXTREME (49.3% and 48.1% versus 9.8% of patients remaining in response at 12 months), correlating with long-term OS for responding patients; however, median progression-free survival was longer with EXTREME (2.8 and 2.8 versus 5.4 months). Exploratory analyses suggested that subsequent immunotherapy use by 24.3% of patients in the EXTREME regimen arm contributed to the similar OS outcomes between arms. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) for durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and EXTREME were 8.9%, 19.1%, and 53.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with PD-L1-high expression, OS was comparable between durvalumab and the EXTREME regimen. Durvalumab alone, and with tremelimumab, demonstrated durable responses and reduced TRAEs versus the EXTREME regimen in R/M HNSCC.

Mocetinostat in Combination With Durvalumab for Patients With Advanced NSCLC: Results From a Phase I/II Study

BACKGROUND

Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors have potential to augment the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors and overcome treatment resistance. This dose-escalation/expansion study (NCT02805660) investigated mocetinostat (class I/IV HDAC inhibitor) plus durvalumab in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) across cohorts defined by tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and prior experience with anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (anti-PD-1) or anti-PD-L1 regimens.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sequential cohorts of patients with solid tumors received mocetinostat (starting dose: 50 mg TIW) plus durvalumab at a standard dose (1500 mg Q4W) to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D: phase I primary endpoint), based on the observed safety profile. RP2D was administered to patients with advanced NSCLC across 4 cohorts grouped by tumor PD-L1 expression (none or low/high) and prior experience with anti-PD-L1 /anti-PD-1 agents (naïve, clinical benefit: yes/no). The phase II primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR, RECIST v1.1).

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients were enrolled (phase I [n = 20], phase II [n = 63]). RP2D was mocetinostat 70 mg TIW plus durvalumab. ORR was 11.5% across the phase II cohorts, and responses were durable (median 329 days). Clinical activity was observed in NSCLC patients with disease refractory to prior checkpoint inhibitor treatment: ORR 23.1%. Across all patients, fatigue (41%), nausea (40%), and diarrhea (31%) were the most frequent treatment-related adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Mocetinostat 70 mg TIW plus durvalumab at the standard dose was generally well tolerated. Clinical activity was observed in patients with NSCLC unresponsive to prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy.

Global research landscape and trends of lung cancer immunotherapy: A bibliometric analysis

​Background

Immunotherapy for lung cancer has been a hot research area for years. This bibliometric analysis aims to present the research trends on lung cancer immunotherapy.

Method

On 1 July, 2022, the authors identified 2,941 papers on lung cancer immunotherapy by the Web of Science and extracted their general information and the total number of citations. A bibliometric analysis was carried out to present the research landscape, demonstrate the research trends, and determine the most cited papers (top papers) as well as major journals on lung cancer immunotherapy. After that, recent research hotspots were analyzed based on the latest publications in major journals.

Results

These 2,941 papers were cited a total of 122,467 times. "Nivolumab vs. docetaxel in advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer" published in 2015 by Borghaei H et al. was the most cited paper (5,854 citations). Among the journals, New England Journal of Medicine was most influential. Corresponding authors represented China took part in most articles (904) and papers with corresponding authors from the USA were most cited (139.46 citations per paper). Since 2015, anti-PD-(L)1 has become the hottest research area.

Conclusions

This bibliometric analysis comprehensively and quantitatively presents the research trends and hotspots based on thousands of publications, and further suggests future research directions. Moreover, the results can benefit researchers to select journals and find potential collaborators. This study can help researchers get a comprehensive impression of the research landscape, historical development, and recent hotspots in lung cancer immunotherapy and provide inspiration for further research.

Population pharmacokinetic modelling of tremelimumab in patients with advanced solid tumours and the impact of disease status on time-varying clearance

AIMS

Tremelimumab, a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 human monoclonal antibody of the immunoglobulin G2 κ isotype, has been studied in oncology clinical trials as both monotherapy and in combination with durvalumab. This study characterized the pharmacokinetics of tremelimumab as monotherapy and in combination with durvalumab and evaluated the impact of patient covariates on pharmacokinetics.

METHODS

A pooled-analysis population pharmacokinetics model was built using NONMEM methodology. Pharmacokinetic data from 5 studies spanning different tumour types and therapy regimens were pooled for model development (956 patients). A dataset pooled from 4 additional studies was used for external validation (554 patients). Demographic and relevant clinical covariates were explored during model development.

RESULTS

Tremelimumab exhibited linear pharmacokinetics, well described by a 2-compartment model, with time-varying clearance (0.276 L/day at baseline) associated primarily with therapy regimen and linked with changes in disease status. As monotherapy and combination therapy, tremelimumab clearance over 1 year increased by ~16% and decreased by ~17%, respectively. Pharmacokinetic behaviour was consistent across patient demographics and cancer subtypes. Patients with higher bodyweight and lower albumin levels at baseline had significantly higher clearance; however, no dosage adjustments are warranted. A flat dose (75 mg) was projected to provide comparable exposure to weight-based dosing (1 mg/kg) in adults.

CONCLUSION

Tremelimumab exhibited linear pharmacokinetics but consistently opposite trends of time-varying clearance as monotherapy and in combination with durvalumab. Baseline bodyweight and albumin were significant covariates, but conversion from weight-based dosing at 1 mg/kg to flat dosing at 75 mg had no clinically relevant impact.

Association between immune-mediated adverse events and efficacy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with durvalumab and tremelimumab

Purpose

Immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) may be associated with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. We assessed the relationship between imAE development and efficacy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with durvalumab (anti-programmed cell death ligand-1 [PD-L1]) alone or in combination with tremelimumab (anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4).

Methods

The analysis used individual patient-level data from 307 and 310 patients in the monotherapy and combination arms of MYSTIC, respectively. We evaluated the association between treatment efficacy and development of imAEs using univariate and multivariate survival analyses. Using machine learning, we built a predictive model utilizing baseline clinical and laboratory features to identify patients at risk of developing imAEs and further evaluated patient survival based on a threshold index extracted from the model.

Results

Patients who developed any grade of imAE had improved overall survival versus patients without (hazard ratio [HR] 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41–0.62). imAE development was associated with improved overall survival (HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.44–0.66) in a multivariate Cox proportional hazard model considering patient demographic features and baseline characteristics. Higher odds of imAE development were observed (odds ratio 3.023; 95% CI: 1.56–5.83) in responders versus non-responders in patients treated with immunotherapy. Based on baseline characteristics, the random forest classification algorithm was used to formulate a predictive model to identify patients at increased risk of developing imAEs during treatment.

Conclusion

Post-hoc exploratory analysis found that the efficacy of immunotherapy was improved in patients who developed on-treatment imAEs. This was independent of severity of imAEs or the need for steroid treatment, which is important in allowing patients to remain on treatment and derive optimal clinical benefit. Further research is warranted to establish the correlation between incidence of imAEs and efficacy in this patient population.

Effectiveness of immunological agents in non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) continues to claim millions of lives worldwide. Although its poor prognosis is largely attributed to the lack of adequate and precise detection technologies, cancer cells' suppression of the immune system adds on to the difficulty of identifying abnormal NSCLC tumors in their early stages. Therefore, cancer immunotherapy, which activates the immune system and helps it fight tumors, has recently become the most sought-after technique, especially in the advanced stages of NSCLC, where surgery or chemotherapy may or may not bring about the desired survival benefits in patients.

METHODS

This review focuses on the various immunotherapeutic interventions and their efficacy in advanced NSCLC clinical trials. Monoclonal antibodies like anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents and anti-CTLA-4 antibodies, cancer vaccines, oncolytic viruses and adoptive T cell therapy have been discussed in brief. Furthermore, the effects of gender, age, and race on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors and suggest plausible future approaches in the realm of immuno-oncology.

RESULTS

Immunotherapy is used alone or in combination either with other immunological agents or with chemotherapy. However, the efficacy of these strategies depends extensively on various demographic variables, as some patients respond perfectly well to immunotherapy, while others do not benefit at all or experience disease progression. By targeting a "hallmark" of cancer (immune evasion), immunotherapy has transformed NSCLC management, though several barriers prevent its complete effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

All these immunological strategies should be interpreted in the current setting of synergistic treatment, in which these agents can be combined with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and, or surgery following patient and tumor characteristics to proportionate the best-individualized treatment and achieve superior results. To better pursue this goal, further investigations on cost-effectiveness and sex-gender, race, and age differences in immunotherapy are needed.

Emerging PD-1/PD-L1 targeting immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: Current status and future perspective in Japan, US, EU, and China

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), one of the deadliest types of cancers worldwide, has been the target of immunotherapy due to its high immune antigenicity. With the addition of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), including anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies, as an indispensable and powerful regimen for the treatment of this lethal disease, the median survival time for patients with stage IV NSCLC is approximately 2 years. In contrast, the response rate to ICIs remains less than 50%, even if the patients are selected using biomarkers such as PD-L1. Pharmaceutical companies have begun to develop additional anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies to overcome resistance and are devising further immunotherapy combinations. More than 20 anti-PD-1/PD-L1antibodies have been approved or are currently in development. Numerous combination therapies are under development, and several combination therapies have provided positive results in randomized controlled trials. This review aimed to examine the current status of approved and investigational anti-PD-1/PD-L1antibodies for NSCLC in Japan, the United States, the European Union, and China. Further, this review discusses the challenges and future perspectives for developing new ICIs in alignment with the global developments in Japan.

Immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: Past, present, and future directions

Many decades in the making, immunotherapy has demonstrated its ability to produce durable responses in several cancer types. In the last decade, immunotherapy has shown itself to be a viable therapeutic approach for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Several clinical trials have established the efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), particularly in the form of anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) antibodies, anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) antibodies and anti-programmed death 1 ligand (PD-L1) antibodies. Many trials have shown progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) benefit with either ICB alone or in combination with chemotherapy when compared to chemotherapy alone. The identification of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy continues to be evaluated. The future of immunotherapy in lung cancer continues to hold promise with the development of combination therapies, cytokine modulating therapies and cellular therapies. Lastly, we expect that innovative advances in technology, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, will begin to play a role in the future care of patients with lung cancer.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Chemoradiation for Limited-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) is a potentially curable disease. However, most patients develop disease relapse shortly after definitive treatment. The landmark trials IMpower133 and CASPIAN demonstrated a survival benefit with the addition of immunotherapy to first-line platinum/etoposide for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer. Therefore, it is critical to determine whether advancements in overall survival with immunotherapy can be translated earlier into the treatment paradigm for LS-SCLC. Decades of robust preclinical research into the synergism of radiation therapy and immunotherapy set the stage for the combination of these treatment modalities. Recently published data suggests tolerability of single agent immunotherapy concurrent with chemoradiation in LS-SCLC, along with promising efficacy. However, combination immunotherapy in the consolidation setting appears too toxic, although this may be reflective of the dosing schedule rather than inherent to any combination immune checkpoint blockade. Here, we review underlying mechanisms of synergy with the combination of radiation and immunotherapy, the safety and efficacy of respective treatment modalities, and the ongoing trials that are exploring novel therapeutic approaches for LS-SCLC. Pivotal trials in LS-SCLC are ongoing and anticipated to aid in understanding efficacy and safety of immunotherapy with concurrent platinum-based chemoradiotherapy.

Prediction of Immune-Related Adverse Events Induced by Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors With a Panel of Autoantibodies: Protocol of a Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Cohort Study

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy is markedly improving the prognosis of patients with several types of cancer. On the other hand, the growth in the use of these drugs in oncology is associated with an increase in multiple immune-related adverse events (irAEs), whose optimal prevention and management remain unclear. In this context, there is a need for reliable and validated biomarkers to predict the occurrence of irAEs in patients treated with ICIs. Thus, the main objective of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic performance of a sensitive routinely available panel of autoantibodies consisting of antinuclear antibodies, rheumatoid factor, and antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies to identify patients at risk of developing irAEs.

Methods and Analysis: A multicenter, prospective, observational, cohort study has been designed to be conducted in patients diagnosed with cancer amenable to ICI therapy. Considering the percentage of ICI-induced irAEs to be 25% and a loss to follow-up of 5%, it has been estimated that a sample size of 294 patients is required to detect an expected sensitivity of the autoantibody panel under study of 0.90 with a confidence interval (95%) of no less than 0.75. For 48 weeks, patients will be monitored through the oncology outpatient clinics of five hospitals in Spain. Immune-related adverse events will be defined and categorized according to CTCAE v. 5.0. All the patients will undergo ordinary blood tests at specific moments predefined per protocol and extraordinary blood tests at the time of any irAE being detected. Ordinary and extraordinary samples will be frozen and stored in the biobank until analysis in the same autoimmunity laboratory when the whole cohort reaches week 48. A predictive model of irAEs will be constructed with potential risk factors of immune-related toxicity including the autoantibody panel under study.

Ethics and Dissemination: This protocol was reviewed and approved by the Ethical Committee of the Basque Country and the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices. Informed consent will be obtained from all participants before their enrollment. The authors declare that the results will be submitted to an international peer-reviewed journal for their prompt dissemination.

Safety and tolerability of MEDI0562, an OX40 agonist monoclonal antibody, in combination with durvalumab or tremelimumab in adult patients with advanced solid tumors

PURPOSE

Combination therapies targeting immunological checkpoints have shown promise in treating multiple tumor types. We report safety and tolerability of MEDI0562, a humanized IgG1K OX40 monoclonal antibody, in combination with durvalumab (anti-PD-L1), or tremelimumab (anti-CTLA-4), in adult patients with previously treated advanced solid tumors.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

In this phase 1, multicenter, open-label study, patients received escalating doses of MEDI0562 (2.25, 7.5, or 22.5 mg) every two weeks (Q2W) in combination with durvalumab (1500 mg) or tremelimumab (75 or 225 mg) Q4W, intravenously, until unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease. Tumor assessments were performed Q8W. The primary objective was to evaluate safety and tolerability.

RESULTS

Among the 27 and 31 patients who received MEDI0562 + durvalumab or MEDI0562 + tremelimumab, 74.1% and 67.7% reported a treatment-related adverse event (AE), and 22.2% and 19.4% experienced a treatment‑emergent AE that led to discontinuation, respectively. The maximum tolerated dose of MEDI0562 + durvalumab was 7.5 mg MEDI0562 + 1500 mg durvalumab; the maximum administered dose of MEDI0562 + tremelimumab was 22.5 mg MEDI0562 + 225 mg tremelimumab. Three patients in the MEDI0562 + durvalumab arm had a partial response. The mean percentage of Ki67+CD4+ and Ki67+CD8+ memory T cells increased by >100% following the first dose of MEDI0562 + durvalumab or tremelimumab in all dose cohorts. A decrease in OX40+FOXP3 T regulatory cells was observed in a subset of patients with available paired biopsies.

CONCLUSIONS

Following dose escalation, moderate toxicity was observed in both treatment arms, with no clear efficacy signals demonstrated.

Management of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Updates from the European Lung Cancer Congress 2022

The recently concluded European Lung Cancer Congress 2022 (ELCC22) showcased some very exciting data, with more than 200 abstracts presented during the meeting. Through this review, we focus on selected clinically relevant abstracts that in our opinion represent significant updates in the current management of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we summarize the updates in surgical management, adjuvant therapy and therapy for advanced stage NSCLC and put these advances in context of current clinical standard of care.

A phase II clinical trial of combination nivolumab, ipilimumab, and paclitaxel in patients with untreated metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: The OPTIMAL Trial

Introduction

Most patients with advanced NSCLC will experience disease progression and death within 2 years. Novel approaches are needed to improve outcomes.

Methods

We conducted an open-label, nonrandomized, phase 2 trial in patients with treatment-naive, advanced NSCLC to assess the safety and efficacy of nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks, ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks, and four to six cycles of paclitaxel 80 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 of every 21-day treatment. The primary end point of the study was median progression-free survival (PFS), with secondary end points of safety, objective response rate, and median overall survival (OS).

Results

A total of 46 patients underwent consent and received treatment. The median age was 66 (range: 48–82) years, most had adenocarcinoma (63%), and 50% (23) had programmed death-ligand 1 greater than or equal to 1%. The median follow-up on the study as of October 2021 was 19 months. The primary end point of median PFS was 9.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.9–16.6) in all patients regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 expression. The objective response rate for patients in the study was 47.8% (95% CI: 33.4–62.3). The 12-month OS rate was 69.5% (95% CI: 53%–81%), and median OS was not yet reached. Treatment-related grade greater than or equal to 3 adverse events was found in 54.3% of the patients.

Conclusions

The toxicity observed was consistent with other reported chemo-immunotherapeutic combinations and was manageable. The primary end point of exceeding median PFS of 9 months was achieved with nivolumab, ipilimumab, and weekly paclitaxel and should be evaluated further in a randomized trial.

Research Trends and Most Influential Clinical Studies on Anti-PD1/PDL1 Immunotherapy for Cancers: A Bibliometric Analysis

In this study, a bibliometric analysis was carried out to identify the most influential clinical studies and research trends on anti-programmed cell death 1/programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (anti-PD1/PDL1) immunotherapy. On January 1, 2022, we used Web of Science to identify the 100 most frequently cited papers on clinical studies investigating anti-PD1/PDL1 immunotherapy, and extracted the following data: publication year, source title, country/region, institution, and the total number of citations. The research design and area were classified independently by the authors. Subsequently, we carried out a bibliometric analysis to determine the trends and identify the major journals on anti-PD1/PDL1 immunotherapy. The authors analyzed the current research hotspots based on papers published in major journals from 2020 to 2021. These 100 papers were cited a total of 138,840 times, and the median number of citations was 899.5 (range: 341–7,983). “Safety, activity, and immune correlates of anti-PD-1 antibody in cancer” by Topalian et al. had the highest number of citations (7,983 times). New England Journal of Medicine had the highest number of top-cited papers (40 papers), average citations per paper (1,558.3 citations), and rate of top-cited papers (65.6%). Authors from the USA contributed most of the papers (76 papers). Lung cancer (30 papers, 46,422 citations) and melanoma (20 papers, 30,881 citations) were the most cited research areas. In summary, anti-PD1/PDL1 has become standard treatment for various cancer, while adjuvant anti-PD1/PDL1 therapy is currently a research hotspot. New England Journal of Medicine was identified as the most influential journal in this area. Non-small cell lung cancer and melanoma are the most well-studied cancers, while nivolumab and pembrolizumab are the most commonly investigated anti-PD1/PDL1 antibodies. Further studies are warranted to identify effective predictive biomarkers or models, clarify the molecular mechanism of combined therapy, and establish optimal therapeutic strategies. This study may assist researchers in obtaining a comprehensive impression of the landscape and current trends in anti-PD1/PDL1 immunotherapy and gain inspiration to conduct further studies.

Durvalumab and tremelimumab with definitive chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The current standard treatment for patients with inoperable, locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT).

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced ESCC received 2 cycles of 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin, durvalumab, and tremelimumab every 3 weeks with concurrent radiation therapy (60.2 or 64.5 grays). After completing CCRT plus immunotherapy, patients received 2 cycles of consolidative durvalumab and tremelimumab followed by durvalumab monotherapy every 4 weeks for 2 years after enrollment. Their survival outcomes were compared with those from a propensity score-matched historical control group that had received CCRT alone.

RESULTS

In total, 40 patients were enrolled and analyzed. The 24-month progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival rates were 57.5% and 75%, respectively. Compared with the historical control group (n = 75), the study population had significantly longer PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.97; P = .040) and overall survival (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.98; P = .043). In the study population, patients who had PD-L1-positive tumors (n = 28) had significantly longer PFS (HR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.07-0.54; P < .001) and overall survival (HR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05-0.56; P = .001) compared with those who had PD-L1-negative tumors (n = 11). However, there was no difference in survival outcomes according to PD-L1 status in the historical control group, indicating a strong interaction between PD-L1-positive status and survival outcomes in the treatment groups (PFS, P for interaction = .003; overall survival, P for interaction = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Durvalumab and tremelimumab with definitive CCRT had promising efficacy in patients with locally advanced ESCC. In addition, PD-L1 expression had strong predictive value in the study population.

Combined Immunotherapy with Chemotherapy versus Bevacizumab with Chemotherapy in First-Line Treatment of Driver-Gene-Negative Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: A network meta-analysis was conducted to summarize randomized control trials and updated results to evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of existing first-line therapies for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients without known driver gene mutations. Patients and Methods: Eligible studies were identified following a systematic search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Wanfang Data, and the China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database from January 2000 to December 2021. Results: Nineteen trials involving 8176 patients with driver-gene-negative advanced non-squamous NSCLC were included. For patients with driver-gene-negative advanced NSCLC, immunotherapy + chemotherapy (IC) significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio (HR), 0.80; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.67−0.95) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR, 0.68; 95% CI: 0.53−0.86) compared with bevacizumab + chemotherapy (BC), with a similar objective response rate and incidence of ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) (risk ratios (RR), 0.98; 95% CI: 0.79−1.21/RR, 0.89; 95% CI: 0.61−1.28; respectively) compared with BC. IC yielded a superior PFS rate (HR, 1.59; 95% CI: 1.05−2.38) compared to BC in the subgroup of patients < 65 years old. Conclusions: Currently, IC is a more efficient first-line therapy for driver-gene-negative advanced non-squamous NSCLC patients, with prolonged PFS and OS, as well as a comparatively lower risk of ≥3 TRAEs compared to BC.

Managing Resistance to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Lung Cancer: Treatment and Novel Strategies

A proportion of patients with lung cancer experience long-term clinical benefit with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, most patients develop disease progression during treatment or after treatment discontinuation. Definitions of immune resistance are heterogeneous according to different clinical and biologic features. Primary resistance and acquired resistance, related to tumor-intrinsic and tumor-extrinsic mechanisms, are identified according to previous response patterns and timing of occurrence. The clinical resistance patterns determine differential clinical approaches. To date, several combination therapies are under development to delay or prevent the occurrence of resistance to ICIs, including the blockade of immune coinhibitory signals, the activation of those with costimulatory functions, the modulation of the tumor microenvironment, and the targeting T-cell priming. Tailoring the specific treatments with distinctive biologic resistance mechanisms would be ideal to improve the design and results of clinical trial. In this review, we reviewed the available evidence on immune resistance mechanisms, clinical definitions, and management of resistance to ICIs in lung cancer. We also reviewed data on novel strategies under investigation in this setting.

First-Line Treatment of Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer with Immune-Checkpoint Inhibitors: New Combinations and Long-Term Data

Treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) has long been based on cytotoxic chemotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), notably monoclonal antibodies directed against programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1), have transformed therapeutic standards in thoracic oncology. These ICIs are now the reference first-line therapy, and numerous phase III trials have established their efficacy in treatment-naïve patients. First-line pembrolizumab monotherapy was validated for patients with ≥ 50% of tumor cells expressing PD-L1 and, in the USA, for patients with ≥ 1% PD-L1 positivity. More recently, cemiplimab as monotherapy was also validated for patients whose tumors expressed ≥ 50% PD-L1. Several ICIs (pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab, and recently durvalumab) in combination with chemotherapy achieved overall survival gains among "all comers", compared with chemotherapy alone. The results were more contrasting for paired immunotherapies combining anti-PD-L1 and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 agents, with the benefit/risk balance not yet fully established. Recently, nivolumab-ipilimumab and two chemotherapy cycles limited patient exposure to chemotherapy and obtained positive results compared with the latter alone. However, those phase III trials included selected patients in good general condition and without active brain metastases. Little is known about immunotherapy and combination immunotherapy-chemotherapy efficacies in never-smokers or patients with tumors harboring an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation or anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocation. In this review, we report our analysis of the main results available on first-line ICI use, as monotherapy or combined or in combination with chemotherapy, to treat metastatic NSCLCs in general and also for specific populations: the elderly, never-smokers, patients with brain metastases, and those with an EGFR mutation or ALK translocation.

Sugemalimab versus placebo, in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy, as first-line treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (GEMSTONE-302): interim and final analyses of a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 clinical trial

BACKGROUND

PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy had been shown to be an effective first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, there was no robust evidence showing a PD-L1 inhibitor combined with chemotherapy benefited patients with squamous and non-squamous NSCLC. GEMSTONE-302 aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a PD-L1 inhibitor, sugemalimab, plus chemotherapy for patients with metastatic squamous or non-squamous NSCLC.

METHODS

This randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial was done in 35 hospitals and academic research centres in China. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years, had histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IV squamous or non-squamous NSCLC without known EGFR sensitising mutations, ALK, ROS1, or RET fusions, no previous systemic treatment for metastatic disease, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive sugemalimab (1200 mg, intravenously, every 3 weeks) plus platinum-based chemotherapy (carboplatin [area under the curve (AUC) 5 mg/mL per min, intravenously] and paclitaxel [175 mg/m2, intravenously] for squamous NSCLC, or carboplatin [AUC 5 mg/mL per min, intravenously] and pemetrexed [500 mg/m2, intravenously] for non-squamous NSCLC; sugemalimab group) or placebo plus the same platinum-based chemotherapy regimens for squamous or non-squamous NSCLC as in the sugemalimab group; placebo group) for up to four cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with sugemalimab or placebo for squamous NSCLC, and intravenous sugemalimab 500 mg/m2 or matching placebo plus pemetrexed for non-squamous NSCLC. Randomisation was done by an interactive voice-web-response system via permuted blocks (block size was a mixture of three and six with a random order within each stratum) and stratified by ECOG performance status, PD-L1 expression, and tumour pathology. The investigators, patients, and the sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one treatment dose. Results reported are from a prespecified interim analysis (ie, when the study met the primary endpoint) and an updated analysis (prespecified final analysis for progression-free survival) with a longer follow-up. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03789604), is closed to new participants, and follow-up is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 13, 2018, and May 15, 2020, 846 patients were assessed for eligibility; 367 were ineligible, and the remaining 479 patients were randomly assigned to the sugemalimab group (n=320) or placebo group (n=159). At the preplanned interim analysis (data cutoff June 8, 2020; median follow-up 8·6 months [IQR 6·1-11·4]), GEMSTONE-302 met its primary endpoint, with significantly longer progression-free survival in the sugemalimab group compared with the placebo group (median 7·8 months [95% CI 6·9-9·0] vs 4·9 months [4·7-5·0]; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·50 [95% CI 0·39-0·64], p<0·0001]). At the final analysis (March 15, 2021) with a median follow-up of 17·8 months (IQR 15·1-20·9), the improvement in progression-free survival was maintained (median 9·0 months [95% CI 7·4-10·8] vs 4·9 months [4·8-5·1]; stratified HR 0·48 [95% CI 0·39-0·60], p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or 4 any treatment-related adverse events were neutrophil count decreased (104 [33%] of 320 with sugemalimab vs 52 [33%] of 159 with placebo), white blood cell count decreased (45 [14%] vs 27 [17%]), anaemia (43 [13%] vs 18 [11%]), platelet count decreased (33 [10%] vs 15 [9%]), and neutropenia (12 [4%] vs seven [4%]). Any treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 73 (23%) patients in the sugemalimab group and 31 (20%) patients in the placebo group. Any treatment-related deaths were reported in ten (3%) patients in the sugemalimab group (pneumonia with respiratory failure in one patient; myelosuppression with septic shock in one patient; pneumonia in two patients; respiratory failure, abdominal pain, cardiac failure, and immune-mediated pneumonitis in one patient each; the other two deaths had an unspecified cause) and in two (1%) patients in the placebo group (pneumonia and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome).

INTERPRETATION

Sugemalimab plus chemotherapy showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival improvement compared with placebo plus chemotherapy, in patients with previously untreated squamous and non-squamous metastatic NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression, and could be a newfirst-line treatment option for both squamous and non-squamous metastatic NSCLC.

FUNDING

CStone Pharmaceuticals.

TRANSLATION

For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

CCTG BR34: A randomized phase II trial of durvalumab and tremelimumab +/- platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

First-line therapy for patients with metastatic NSCLC includes checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy, dual checkpoint inhibition or in combination with chemotherapy. We compared outcomes with combination chemo-immunotherapy versus dual checkpoint inhibition as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic NSCLC.

METHODS

This open-label, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 44 sites in Canada and Australia. Patients with treatment-naïve, metastatic NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK alterations were randomized (1:1) to receive treatment with durvalumab plus tremelimumab with or without platinum doublet chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety.

RESULTS

301 patients were randomized. Median OS was 16.6 months (95%CI, 12.6-19.1) with chemotherapy plus immunotherapy and 14.1 months (95%CI, 10.6-18.3) with immunotherapy, (HR 0.88, 90%CI, 0.67-1.16; P=0.46). Median PFS with chemotherapy plus immunotherapy was 7.7 months (95%CI, 5.5-8.5) and 3.2 months (95%CI, 2.7-5.1) with immunotherapy, (HR 0.67, 95%CI, 0.52-0.88). The ORR with chemoimmunotherapy was 42.4% and 29.3% with immunotherapy, (adjusted odds ratio 1.69, 95%CI, 1.04-2.76). The percentage of patients with grade ≥3 adverse events was 82% in the chemotherapy plus immunotherapy group and 70% in the immunotherapy group. Exploratory analyses of PD-L1 expression and bTMB revealed no differential treatment effect on OS.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of chemotherapy to durvalumab plus tremelimumab in the first-line treatment of stage IV NSCLC did not improve survival compared to durvalumab plus tremelimumab alone. Further study is warranted to identify patients that benefit from initial immunotherapy alone versus combination chemotherapy plus immunotherapy as first-line treatment.