| Literature DB >> 35256515 |
Khalid Jazieh1, Mohammadhadi Khorrami2, Anas Saad3, Mohamed Gad1, Amit Gupta4, Pradnya Patil5, Vidya Sankar Viswanathan2, Prabhakar Rajiah6, Charles J Nock7, Michael Gilkey2, Pingfu Fu8, Nathan A Pennell5, Anant Madabhushi9,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The landmark study of durvalumab as consolidation therapy in NSCLC patients (PACIFIC trial) demonstrated significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with locally advanced, unresectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with durvalumab (immunotherapy, IO) therapy after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). In clinical practice in the USA, durvalumab continues to be used in patients across all levels of programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression. While immune therapies have shown promise in several cancers, some patients either do not respond to the therapy or have cancer recurrence after an initial response. It is not clear so far who will benefit of this therapy or what the mechanisms behind treatment failure are.Entities:
Keywords: immunotherapy; tumor biomarkers
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35256515 PMCID: PMC8905876 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2021-003778
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Immunother Cancer ISSN: 2051-1426 Impact factor: 12.469
Demographics and clinical characteristics of 133 patients
| Characteristics | D1 cohort (n=59) | D2 cohort (n=59) | D3 cohort (n=15) | P value | |
| Sex, n (%) | Male | 28 (47) | 31 (53) | 14 (93) | 0.0035 |
| Female | 31 (53) | 28 (47) | 1 (7) | ||
| Age, median (range) | 68 (48–89) | 68 (50–84) | 72 (60–82) | ||
| Race, n (%) | White | 41 (69) | 52 (88) | 14 (93) | 0.018 |
| Black | 18 (31) | 7 (12) | 1 (7) | ||
| Smoking, n (%) | Never | 2 (3) | 2 (3) | 13 (87) | <0.0001 |
| Former/current | 57 (97) | 57 (97) | 2 (13) | ||
| Stage, n (%) | IIIA | 34 (58) | 23 (39) | 10 (67) | 0.125 |
| IIIB | 20 (34) | 32 (54) | 4 (27) | ||
| IIIC | 5 (8) | 4 (7) | 1 (6) | ||
| Histology, n (%) | Adenocarcinoma | 28 (47) | 29 (49) | 10 (67) | 0.762 |
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 28 (47) | 27 (46) | 5 (33) | ||
| Large cell carcinoma | 3 (6) | 3 (5) | 0 | ||
| Median follow-up (PFS) | Months | 14.5 (0.23–30.2) | 14.9 (1.6–30.5) | 10.5 (0.2–34.8) | |
| Median follow-up (OS) | Months | 16.5 (3.4–30.2) | 16.5 (2.5–30.5) | 10.5 (0.2–35.7) | |
OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival.
Figure 1(A–G) Kaplan-Meier PFS curves for race, gender, smoking status, clinical stage, tumor type, lymph node status, and PD-L1 expression. Kaplan-Meier PFS curves based on the (H) training set (D1) and (I) the test set (D2). A significant association of the radiomic risk score with PFS was shown in the D1 and D2 sets. PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand-1; PFS, progression-free survival.
Figure 2Segmented tumor regions and heat map of Haralick entropy feature in the pretreatment CT scans for progressor (second row) and non-progressor (first row) patients. The texture heat maps appear to suggest higher textural information values for progressor compared with the non-progressor.
Figure 3(A) Integrated clinical and radiomic nomogram for patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer treated with chemoradiation plus durvalumab estimating the probability of PFS. (B) Calibration curve for 2-year PFS. (C) Decision curve analysis for each model (clinical (Clin) model, radiomic (Rad) model and integrated Rad+Clin model). The analysis was performed across the full range of threshold probabilities at which a patient would be selected to undergo follow-up imaging. PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand-1; PFS, progression-free survival.
Figure 4Kaplan-Meier survival curves based on the (A) training set (D1) and (B) test set (D2). A significant association of the radiomic risk score with overall survival was shown in the D1 set (p=0.00059) and D2 set (p=0.00018).
Distribution of each biomarker, such as RRS, age, sex, race, tumor histology, tumor stage, PD-L1 expression, and smoking status, based on low-risk and high-risk groups
| Biomarker | High-risk | Low-risk | P value |
| RRS | Median=0.47 | Median=0.6 | 1.14e-21 |
| PD-L1 | 8 high PD-L1 | 25 high PD-L1 | 0.0012 |
| Smoking | 16 current smoker | 18 current smoker | 0.68 |
| Pack per year | Median=45.5 | Median=42 | 0.32 |
| Age | Median=66 | Median=69 | 0.63 |
| Sex | 23 male | 28 male | 0.58 |
| Race | 49 white | 46 white | 0.65 |
| Tumor histology | 28 squamous | 27 squamous | 0.24 |
| Stage | 25 stage IIIA | 29 stage IIIA | 0.72 |
N/A, not available; PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand-1; RRS, radiomic signature risk score.
Figure 5Radiomic signature risk score is associated with progression-free survival (between low and high risk) in the high PD-L1 (A) and low PD-L1 (B) groups based on the 50% cut-off criteria. PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand-1.