R S Herbst1, P Baas2, J L Perez-Gracia3, E Felip4, D-W Kim5, J-Y Han6, J R Molina7, J-H Kim8, C Dubos Arvis9, M-J Ahn10, M Majem11, M J Fidler12, V Surmont13, G de Castro14, M Garrido15, Y Shentu16, K Emancipator16, A Samkari16, E H Jensen16, G M Lubiniecki16, E B Garon17. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, Yale University School of Medicine, Yale Comprehensive Cancer Center, New Haven, USA. Electronic address: roy.herbst@yale.edu. 2. Department of Thoracic Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Oncology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. 4. Lung Cancer Unit, Department of Oncology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain; Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain. 5. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 6. Division of Translational & Clinical Research, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Republic of Korea. 7. Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA. 8. Department of Medical Oncology, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Gyeonggi-Do, Republic of Korea. 9. Department of Medicine, Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France. 10. Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 11. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain. 12. Division of Hematology Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, USA. 13. Department of Respiratory Medicine/Thoracic Oncology, Universitar Ziekenhuis Ghent, Ghent, Belgium. 14. Department of Medical Oncology, Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil. 15. Department of Hemato-Oncology, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. 16. Department of Clinical Research, Merck & Co. Inc., Kenilworth, USA. 17. Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In KEYNOTE-010, pembrolizumab versus docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) in patients with programmed death-1 protein (PD)-L1-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A prespecified exploratory analysis compared outcomes in patients based on PD-L1 expression in archival versus newly collected tumor samples using recently updated survival data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PD-L1 was assessed centrally by immunohistochemistry (22C3 antibody) in archival or newly collected tumor samples. Patients received pembrolizumab 2 or 10 mg/kg Q3W or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 Q3W for 24 months or until progression/intolerable toxicity/other reason. Response was assessed by RECIST v1.1 every 9 weeks, survival every 2 months. Primary end points were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and ≥1%; pembrolizumab doses were pooled in this analysis. RESULTS: At date cut-off of 24 March 2017, median follow-up was 31 months (range 23-41) representing 18 additional months of follow-up from the primary analysis. Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel continued to improve OS in patients with previously treated, PD-L1-expressing advanced NSCLC; hazard ratio (HR) was 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57, 0.77]. Of 1033 patients analyzed, 455(44%) were enrolled based on archival samples and 578 (56%) on newly collected tumor samples. Approximately 40% of archival samples and 45% of newly collected tumor samples were PD-L1 TPS ≥50%. For TPS ≥50%, the OS HRs were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.91) and 0.40 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.56) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In patients with TPS ≥1%, OS HRs were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.93) and 0.59 (95% CI: 0.48, 0.73) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In TPS ≥50%, PFS HRs were similar across archival [0.63 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.89)] and newly collected samples [0.53 (95% CI: 0.38, 0.72)]. In patients with TPS ≥1%, PFS HRs were similar across archival [0.82 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.02)] and newly collected samples [0.83 (95% CI: 0.68, 1.02)]. CONCLUSION:Pembrolizumab continued to improve OS over docetaxel in intention to treat population and in subsets of patients with newly collected and archival samples. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01905657.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In KEYNOTE-010, pembrolizumab versus docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) in patients with programmed death-1 protein (PD)-L1-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A prespecified exploratory analysis compared outcomes in patients based on PD-L1 expression in archival versus newly collected tumor samples using recently updated survival data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PD-L1 was assessed centrally by immunohistochemistry (22C3 antibody) in archival or newly collected tumor samples. Patients received pembrolizumab 2 or 10 mg/kg Q3W or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 Q3W for 24 months or until progression/intolerable toxicity/other reason. Response was assessed by RECIST v1.1 every 9 weeks, survival every 2 months. Primary end points were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and ≥1%; pembrolizumab doses were pooled in this analysis. RESULTS: At date cut-off of 24 March 2017, median follow-up was 31 months (range 23-41) representing 18 additional months of follow-up from the primary analysis. Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel continued to improve OS in patients with previously treated, PD-L1-expressing advanced NSCLC; hazard ratio (HR) was 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57, 0.77]. Of 1033 patients analyzed, 455(44%) were enrolled based on archival samples and 578 (56%) on newly collected tumor samples. Approximately 40% of archival samples and 45% of newly collected tumor samples were PD-L1 TPS ≥50%. For TPS ≥50%, the OS HRs were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.91) and 0.40 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.56) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In patients with TPS ≥1%, OS HRs were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.93) and 0.59 (95% CI: 0.48, 0.73) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In TPS ≥50%, PFS HRs were similar across archival [0.63 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.89)] and newly collected samples [0.53 (95% CI: 0.38, 0.72)]. In patients with TPS ≥1%, PFS HRs were similar across archival [0.82 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.02)] and newly collected samples [0.83 (95% CI: 0.68, 1.02)]. CONCLUSION:Pembrolizumab continued to improve OS over docetaxel in intention to treat population and in subsets of patients with newly collected and archival samples. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01905657.
Authors: Edward B Garon; Naiyer A Rizvi; Rina Hui; Natasha Leighl; Ani S Balmanoukian; Joseph Paul Eder; Amita Patnaik; Charu Aggarwal; Matthew Gubens; Leora Horn; Enric Carcereny; Myung-Ju Ahn; Enriqueta Felip; Jong-Seok Lee; Matthew D Hellmann; Omid Hamid; Jonathan W Goldman; Jean-Charles Soria; Marisa Dolled-Filhart; Ruth Z Rutledge; Jin Zhang; Jared K Lunceford; Reshma Rangwala; Gregory M Lubiniecki; Charlotte Roach; Kenneth Emancipator; Leena Gandhi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-04-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Janis M Taube; Robert A Anders; Geoffrey D Young; Haiying Xu; Rajni Sharma; Tracee L McMiller; Shuming Chen; Alison P Klein; Drew M Pardoll; Suzanne L Topalian; Lieping Chen Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2012-03-28 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Fred R Hirsch; Abigail McElhinny; Dave Stanforth; James Ranger-Moore; Malinka Jansson; Karina Kulangara; William Richardson; Penny Towne; Debra Hanks; Bharathi Vennapusa; Amita Mistry; Rasika Kalamegham; Steve Averbuch; James Novotny; Eric Rubin; Kenneth Emancipator; Ian McCaffery; J Andrew Williams; Jill Walker; John Longshore; Ming Sound Tsao; Keith M Kerr Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2016-11-29 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Edward B Garon; Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu; Oscar Arrieta; Kumar Prabhash; Konstantinos N Syrigos; Tuncay Goksel; Keunchil Park; Vera Gorbunova; Ruben Dario Kowalyszyn; Joanna Pikiel; Grzegorz Czyzewicz; Sergey V Orlov; Conrad R Lewanski; Michael Thomas; Paolo Bidoli; Shaker Dakhil; Steven Gans; Joo-Hang Kim; Alexandru Grigorescu; Nina Karaseva; Martin Reck; Federico Cappuzzo; Ekaterine Alexandris; Andreas Sashegyi; Sergey Yurasov; Maurice Pérol Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-06-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Jamaal A Rehman; Gang Han; Daniel E Carvajal-Hausdorf; Brad E Wasserman; Vasiliki Pelekanou; Nikita L Mani; Joseph McLaughlin; Kurt A Schalper; David L Rimm Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2016-11-11 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Yuting Liu; Jon Zugazagoitia; Fahad Shabbir Ahmed; Brian S Henick; Scott N Gettinger; Roy S Herbst; Kurt A Schalper; David L Rimm Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-10-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: C Kuempers; L I S van der Linde; M Reischl; W Vogel; F Stellmacher; M Reck; D Heigener; K F Rabe; J Kirfel; S Perner; L Welker Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2019-08-07 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Marie-Julie Nokin; Elodie Darbo; Camille Travert; Benjamin Drogat; Aurélie Lacouture; Sonia San José; Nuria Cabrera; Béatrice Turcq; Valérie Prouzet-Mauleon; Mattia Falcone; Alberto Villanueva; Haiyun Wang; Michael Herfs; Miguel Mosteiro; Pasi A Jänne; Jean-Louis Pujol; Antonio Maraver; Mariano Barbacid; Ernest Nadal; David Santamaría; Chiara Ambrogio Journal: JCI Insight Date: 2020-08-06