Correlations between objective response rate and survival-based endpoints in first-line advanced non-small cell lung Cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The study objective was to estimate the relationship between objective response and survival-based endpoints by drug class, in first-line advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of first-line aNSCLC therapies reporting overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and/or objective response rate (ORR). Trial-level and arm-level linear regression models were fit, accounting for inclusion of immunotherapy (IO)-based or chemotherapy-only RCT arms. Weighted least squares-based R² were calculated along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For the main trial-level analysis of OS vs. ORR, the surrogate threshold effect was estimated. Exploratory analyses involved further stratification by: IO monotherapy vs. chemotherapy, dual-IO therapy vs. chemotherapy, and IO + chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy.

RESULTS

From 17,040 records, 57 RCTs were included. In the main analysis, trial-level associations between OS and ORR were statistically significant in both the IO-based and chemotherapy-only strata, with R² estimates of 0.54 (95% CI: 0.26-0.81) and 0.34 (0.05-0.63), respectively. OS gains associated with a given ORR benefit were statistically significantly larger within IO vs. chemotherapy comparisons compared to chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy comparisons (p < 0.001). Exploratory analysis suggested a trend by IO type: for a given change in ORR, 'pure' IO (IO monotherapy and dual-IO) vs. chemotherapy RCTs tended to have a larger OS benefit than IO + chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy RCTs. For ORR vs. PFS, trial-level correlations were strong in the IO-based vs. chemotherapy (R² = 0.84; 0.72-0.95), and chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy strata (R² = 0.69; 0.49-0.88). For OS vs. PFS, correlations were moderate in both strata (R² = 0.49; 0.20-0.78 and R² = 0.49; 0.23-0.76).

CONCLUSION

The larger OS benefit per unit of ORR benefit in IO-based RCTs compared to chemotherapy-only RCTs provides an important addition to the established knowledge regarding the durability and depth of response in IO-based treatments.

Nivolumab with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab for first-line treatment of advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

This international, randomized, double-blind phase III study (ONO-4538-52/TASUKI-52) evaluated nivolumab with bevacizumab and cytotoxic chemotherapy as first-line treatment for nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between June 2017 and July 2019, this study enrolled treatment-naïve patients with stage IIIB/IV or recurrent nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR, ALK, or ROS1 alterations. They were randomly assigned in a 1 : 1 ratio to receive nivolumab or placebo in combination with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab every 3 weeks for up to six cycles, followed by nivolumab/placebo with bevacizumab until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent radiology review committee (IRRC).

RESULTS

Overall, 550 patients from Japan, Korea, and Taiwan were randomized; of these patients, 273 and 275 received the nivolumab and placebo combinations, respectively. In the present preplanned interim analysis with a median follow up of 13.7 months, the IRRC-assessed median PFS was significantly longer in the nivolumab arm than in the placebo arm (12.1 versus 8.1 months; hazard ratio 0.56; 96.4% confidence interval 0.43-0.71; P < 0.0001). The PFS benefit was observed across all patients with any programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression levels including PD-L1-negative patients. The IRRC-assessed objective response rates were 61.5% and 50.5% in the nivolumab and placebo arms, respectively. The incidence of treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 was comparable between the two arms; treatment-related adverse events leading to death were observed in five and four patients in the nivolumab and placebo arms, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The TASUKI-52 regimen should be considered a viable new treatment strategy for treatment-naïve patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC.

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: a network meta-analysis

Aim: A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum relative to other regimens in metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSq-NSCLC). Patients & methods: Eligible studies evaluated first-line regimens in NSq-NSCLC patients without known targetable mutations. Relative treatment effects were synthesized with random effects proportional hazards Bayesian network meta-analyses. Results: The hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) for pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum was statistically significant over all platinum-doublet (HR range: 0.42–0.61), platinum-doublet + bevacizumab (HR range: 0.44–0.53) and platinum-doublet + atezolizumab regimens (HR range: 0.56–0.62). Additionally, pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum numerically improved OS over atezolizumab + paclitaxel + carboplatin + bevacizumab (HR: 0.65; 95% credible interval: 0.43, 1.01). Pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum had 95.6% probability of being the best treatment regimen for OS. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum is likely the most efficacious first-line regimen for metastatic NSq-NSCLC.