Start Your Search
EP1.01 - Advanced NSCLC (ID 150)
- Event: WCLC 2019
- Type: E-Poster Viewing in the Exhibit Hall
- Track: Advanced NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Coordinates: 9/08/2019, 08:00 - 18:00, Exhibit Hall
EP1.01-107 - Comparison of Outcomes in Responders and Nonresponders to Nivolumab as 2+ Line Treatment in Advanced Refractory NSCLC Pts (ID 550)
08:00 - 18:00 | Author(s): Daniil Stroyakovskiy
The extent to which treatment response to immunotherapy translates into quality-adjusted survival time in NSCLC pts is worthwhile. We aimed to evaluate survival outcomes adjusted to quality of life (QoL) in NSCLC pts who are responders (Rs) and nonresponders (nRs) to nivolumab (Nivo) as 2+ line treatment within expanded access program and in a real-world practice.Method
Adult pts with advanced platinum refractory NSCLC were enrolled in 11 centers in RF. All the pts received Nivo 3 mg/kg q2w. Tumor response was assessed using RECIST v. 1.1, adverse events (AEs) – NCI CTCAE v3.0. Pts with complete/partial response or disease stabilization (CR/PR or SD) at first tumor evaluation were considered as Rs, with progression or early death due to disease – as nRs. For QoL assessment pts filled out RAND SF-36 at different times during Nivo treatment. Overall survival (OS) and progressive-free survival (PFS) curves were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meyer method and compared by the log-rank test. Quality-adjusted outcomes in Rs and nRs were compared using Q-TWiST method. UTWiST and UREL were calculated on the basis of SF6D.Result
Overall, 200 pts were included in the analysis: 65% – males; median age – 62 y.o.; ECOG 0-1 – 81%; former/current smokers – 70.5%; non squamous NSCLC – 64%; ≥2 lines of previous treatment – 53%. Median follow-up – 7.5 mos; 195 pts completed Nivo treatment at cut-off. Out of 200 pts response was not evaluated in 7 pts; among 193 pts 58% were categorized as Rs, 42% – nRs (the median evaluation time – 2.1 mos). Responder status was not significantly associated with demographics, smoking status, or baseline ECOG. Median duration of PR/SD in Rs – 4.4 mos (CI 95% 0.7-33.4). Median follow-up in nRs – 1.8 mos (CI 95% 0.26-4.21). As compared with nRs, Rs had longer median OS (18.7 vs 3.5 mos, p<0.001) and PFS (9.1 vs 1.8 mos, p<0.001) as well as longer TWiST (mean 12.5 vs 1.9 mos, 95%CI of difference 8.4–12.9). Mean Q-TWiST in Rs was 11.8 mos vs 4.8 mos in nRs with 7.0 mos gain. Relative Q-TWiST gain is 88%.Conclusion
The results obtained in this observational study demonstrate acceptable treatment outcomes of Nivo in advanced refractory NSCLC pts. Response to Nivo treatment is significantly associated with better median PFS and OS and accompanied with better quality-adjusted survival outcomes in this difficult patient cohort. The Q-TWiST provides a comprehensive assessment of the benefit of response to immunotherapy into quality-adjusted survival in NCSLC pts.
Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.
OA14 - Update of Phase 3 Trials and the Role of HPD (ID 148)
- Event: WCLC 2019
- Type: Oral Session
- Track: Immuno-oncology
- Presentations: 1
OA14.02 - IMpower131: Final OS Results of Carboplatin + Nab-Paclitaxel ± Atezolizumab in Advanced Squamous NSCLC (ID 1915)
11:30 - 13:00 | Author(s): Daniil Stroyakovskiy
IMpower131 (NCT02367794) is a randomised Phase III trial of atezolizumab + chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy in Stage IV squamous NSCLC. Here we report the final OS results (Arm B vs Arm C).Method
Enrolled patients were randomised 1:1:1 to Arm A (atezolizumab 1200 mg q3w + carboplatin AUC 6 q3w + paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 q3w), Arm B (atezolizumab + carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 qw) or Arm C (carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel) for 4 or 6 cycles followed by atezolizumab maintenance therapy (Arms A and B) until loss of clinical benefit or progressive disease. Coprimary endpoints were investigator-assessed PFS and OS in the ITT population. Data cutoff: October 3, 2018.Result
1021 patients were enrolled, with 343 in Arm B and 340 in Arm C. Median age was 65 years (range, 23-83 [Arm B] and 38-86 [Arm C]) and ≈80% of patients were male. The proportion of patients with high (14% vs 13%), positive (39% vs 37%) or negative (47% vs 50%) PD-L1 expression was similar between arms. Median OS in the ITT population was 14.2 months in Arm B vs 13.5 months in Arm C (HR, 0.88 [95% CI: 0.73, 1.05]; P = 0.158; Table), not crossing the boundary for statistical significance. In the PD-L1–high subgroup, median OS was 23.4 vs 10.2 months, respectively (HR, 0.48 [95% CI: 0.29, 0.81]; not formally tested). Treatment-related Grade 3-4 AEs and treatment-related SAEs occurred in 68.0% and 21.0% (Arm B) and 57.5% and 10.5% (Arm C) of patients; no new safety signals were identified, consistent with previous analyses.Conclusion
Final OS in Arm B vs C did not cross the boundary for statistical significance. Clinically meaningful OS improvement was observed in the PD-L1–high subgroup, despite not being formally tested. No new or unexpected safety signals were reported.
Atezolizumab + Carboplatin
(n = 343)
(n = 340)
HR (95% CI)
Median OS, mo
0.88 (0.73, 1.05); P = 0.16
PD-L1 high (TC3 or IC3)
0.48 (0.29, 0.81)
PD-L1 positive (TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3)
0.86 (0.67, 1.11)
PD-L1 negative (TC0 or IC0)
0.87 (0.67, 1.13)
Median PFS, mo
0.75 (0.64, 0.88)
Confirmed ORR, n/N (%)a
a Patients were classified as missing or unevaluable when no post-baseline response assessments were available or all post-baseline response assessments were unevaluable.
CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; IC, tumour-infiltrating immune cell; ITT, intention-to-treat; OS, overall survival; ORR, objective response rate; PD-L1, programmed death-ligand 1; PFS, progression-free survival; TC, tumour cell.
TC3 or IC3: PD-L1 expression on ≥50% of TC or ≥10% of IC; TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3: PD-L1 expression on ≥1% of TC or IC; TC0 and IC0: PD-L1 expression on <1% of TC and IC.