Dataset Information

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy for patients with EGFR-mutated non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer who progressed on EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Treatment options are limited for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after treatment failure with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). This multicenter open-label, phase II study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy (cohort 1, TIS+chemo) or tislelizumab plus chemotherapy and bevacizumab (cohort 2, TIS+chemo+ beva) in EGFR-mutated non-squamous NSCLC patients who progressed on EGFR TKI therapies. Here, the primary analysis of the TIS+chemo cohort is reported.

Methods

In the TIS+chemo cohort, patients with EGFR-sensitizing mutations with prior EGFR TKI failure received tislelizumab plus carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel as induction treatment, followed by maintenance with tislelizumab plus pemetrexed. The primary endpoint was 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate. The planned sample size was 66 with a historical control of 7%, an expected value of 20%, a one-sided α of 0.05, and a power of 85%.

Results

Between July 11, 2020 and December 13, 2021, 69 patients were enrolled. As of June 30, 2022, the median follow-up was 8.2 months. Among the 62 patients in the efficacy analysis set, estimated 1-year PFS rate was 23.8% (90% CI 13.1% to 36.2%), and its lower bound of 90% CI was higher than the historical control of chemotherapy (7%), which met the primary endpoint. The median PFS was 7.6 (95% CI 6.4 to 9.8) months. Median overall survival (OS) was not reached (95% CI 14.0 to not estimable), with a 1-year OS rate of 74.5% (95% CI 56.5% to 86.0%). The objective response rate and disease control rate were 56.5% (95% CI 43.3% to 69.0%) and 87.1% (95% CI 76.1% to 94.3%), respectively. Patients who had progressed on first-generation/second-generation and third-generation EGFR-TKIs at baseline had shorter PFS than those who progressed on first-generation/second-generation EGFR-TKIs (median 7.5 vs 9.8 months, p=0.031). Patients with positive ctDNA had shorter PFS (median 7.4 vs 12.3 months, p=0.031) than those with negative ctDNA. No grade 5 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were observed. Grades 3-4 TEAEs occurred in 40.6% (28/69) of patients. Grades 3-4 immune-related AEs occurred in 5 (7.2%) patients.

Conclusion

The study met the primary endpoint for the TIS+chemo cohort. Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy is effective with an acceptable safety profile for EGFR-mutated non-squamous NSCLC after EGFR TKI failure.

SUBMITTER: Zhong H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10441075 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy for patients with <i>EGFR</i>-mutated non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer who progressed on EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy.

Zhong Hua H Zhang Xueyan X Tian Panwen P Chu Tianqing T Guo Qisen Q Yu Xinmin X Yu Zhuang Z Li Yalun Y Chen Lijuan L Liu Jie J Zhang Yan Y Guan Yan Y Shi Xun X Wang Jing J Zhao Yanqiu Y Han Baohui B

Journal for immunotherapy of cancer 20230801 8

<h4>Background</h4>Treatment options are limited for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after treatment failure with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). This multicenter open-label, phase II study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy (cohort 1, TIS+chemo) or tislelizumab plus chemotherapy and bevacizumab (cohort 2, TIS+chemo+ beva) in EGFR-mutated non-squamous NSCLC patients who progressed on EGFR TKI thera ...[more]

PMID: 37597849

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of different treatment modalities for previously untreated advanced EGFR-mutated non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).MethodsThis retrospective study included 196 advanced EGFR-mutated non-squamous NSCLC. 107 received EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) monotherapy (T), 53 received EGFR-TKI + bevacizumab (T + A), and 36 received EGFR-TKI + bevacizumab + chemotherapy (T + A + C). The endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs).ResultsThe median PFS was 27 months in the T + A + C group, 17 months in the T + A group, and 10 months in the T group. The multivariate analysis showed lower disease progression in the T + A + C group (HR, 0.377; 95% CI, 0.224-0.634; p < .001). Subgroup analysis showed that the T + A + C group did significantly improve PFS in patients with metastatic organs ≥2, brain metastases, liver metastases, and EGFR 19del compared to T + A group. No significant improvement in OS in the T + A + C group versus the T + A group, but a significant benefit in the subgroup of patients with metastatic organs ≥2. We also performed a subgroup analysis of the T + A + C group versus the T group, which similarly showed that the T + A + C group had better PFS than the T group in most subgroups, and the T + A + C group significantly improved OS in patients with metastatic organ ≥2 and liver metastases compared with the T group. The ORR was significantly higher in the T + A + C group than A + T and T groups (83.3% vs 71.7% vs 60.7%, p = .033). In safety, the T + A + C group had a higher incidence of AEs, but the majority was grade 1-2. The most frequent AEs of grade ≥ 3 were leukopenia (8.3%) and increased aminotransferase (8.3%) in the T + A + C group.ConclusionsFirst-generation EGFR-TKI plus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy was a promising strategy for advanced EGFR-mutated non-squamous NSCLC.

Project description:Background and objectiveTislelizumab is a programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor. Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line option for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), compared with chemotherapy alone, resulted in significantly prolonged survival outcomes; however, evidence regarding its relative efficacy and cost is lacking. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy compared with that of chemotherapy alone, from the health care perspective in China.MethodsA partitioned survival model (PSM) was used for this study. The survival data were obtained from the RATIONALE 304 trial. Cost-effectiveness was defined as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) less than the willingness to pay (WTP) threshold. Incremental net health benefits (INHB), incremental net monetary benefits (INMB), and subgroup analyses were also assessed. Sensitivity analyses were further established to assess the model stability.ResultsCompared with chemotherapy alone, tislelizumab plus chemotherapy increased by 0.64 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and 1.48 life-years, and yielded an increase of $16,631 in cost per patient. The INMB and INHB were $7,510 and 0.20 QALYs at a WTP threshold of $38,017/QALY, respectively. The ICER was $26,162/QALY. The outcomes were most sensitive to the HR of OS for tislelizumab plus chemotherapy arm. The probability of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy being considered cost-effective was 87.66% and >50% in most of the subgroups at the WTP threshold of $38,017/QALY. At the WTP threshold of $86,376/QALY, the probability achieved 99.81%. Furthermore, the probability of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy being considered cost-effective in subgroups of patients with liver metastases and PD-L1 expression ≥50% were 90.61 and 94.35%, respectively.ConclusionTislelizumab plus chemotherapy is likely to be cost-effective as a first-line treatment for advanced non-squamous NSCLC in China.

Project description:ImportanceThis study demonstrates that tislelizumab in combination with chemotherapy is associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (sq-NSCLC).ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety/tolerability of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment for patients with advanced sq-NSCLC.Design, setting, and participantsThis open-label, randomized phase 3 clinical trial was conducted at 46 sites in China between July 2018 and June 2019 and included patients with treatment-naive, histologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV sq-NSCLC. The data cutoff for these analyses was December 6, 2019; data extraction occurred on January 7, 2020.InterventionsPatients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive 1 of the following regimens intravenously on a 21-day cycle: tislelizumab (200 mg, day 1) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m2, day 1) and carboplatin (area under the concentration of 5, day 1) (arm A); tislelizumab plus nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2, days 1, 8, and 15) and carboplatin (arm B); and paclitaxel and carboplatin (arm C). Patients were stratified by disease stage and tumor programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (<1% vs 1%-49% vs ≥50%).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent review committee (IRC). Secondary end points included overall survival, investigator-assessed (INV) PFS, IRC-assessed objective response rate (ORR), and IRC-assessed duration of response, as well as the incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs).ResultsOverall, 355 patients (median [range] age, 62 [34-74] years; 330 men [91.7%]) with sq-NSCLC received treatment. After a median study follow-up of 8.6 months (95% CI, 8.1-9.0 months), IRC-assessed PFS was significantly improved with tislelizumab plus chemotherapy (arm A, 7.6 months; arm B, 7.6 months) vs chemotherapy alone (arm C, 5.5 months; hazard ratios were 0.524 (95% CI, 0.370-0.742; P < .001 [A vs C]) and 0.478 (95% CI, 0.336-0.679; P < .001 [B vs C]). Higher IRC-assessed ORR and longer IRC-assessed duration of response were observed in arms A (72.5%; 8.2 months) and B (74.8%; 8.6 months) vs C (49.6%; 4.2 months). No association was observed between PD-L1 expression and IRC-assessed PFS or ORR. Discontinuation of any treatment because of AEs was reported in 15 (12.5%; arm A), 35 (29.7%; arm B), and 18 (15.4%; arm C) patients. In each arm, the most common grade of 3 or greater AE was decreased neutrophil levels, which aligned with known chemotherapy toxic effects. Six treatment-related AEs leading to death occurred; however, no deaths were solely attributed to tislelizumab.Conclusions and relevanceIn this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, adding tislelizumab to chemotherapy was associated with significantly prolonged IRC-assessed PFS, higher IRC-assessed ORRs, and a manageable safety/tolerability profile in patients with advanced sq-NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03594747.

Project description:Background To date, none of randomised trials aim to compare the efficacy of programmed death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor plus chemotherapy and bevacizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This analysis pooled prospective data to compare the survival benefits of the two regimens for advanced NSCLC without targetable genetic mutations. Methods Data were pooled from three randomised phase III clinical trials: NCT03607539, NCT03134872 and NCT02954172. 466 patients received PD-1 inhibitor (200 mg) plus pemetrexed (500 mg/m²) and platinum (cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 5 mg/mL/min), while 432 patients received bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) and carboplatin (AUC 6 mg/mL/min). Propensity score matching in a 1:1 ratio was performed to balance baseline characteristics of the two arms. The endpoints of this analysis were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR). Results In total, 375 patients in each arm were matched. With a median follow-up of 23 months (IQR 21–26), results showed that median PFS was significantly prolonged in the PD-1 inhibitor arm than in the bevacizumab arm (10.1 vs 7.4 months; HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.73, p<0.001). Improved OS was also demonstrated in the PD-1 inhibitor arm (27.9 vs 20.2 months; HR 0.75 95% CI 0.61 to 0.91, p=0.004). ORR in the PD-1 inhibitor arm was 56.8%, while that in the bevacizumab arm was 45.1%. However, exploratory subgroup analysis indicated that median PFS and median OS of the two arms were comparable in patients with negative programmed death ligand 1 expression or in patients aged ≥65 years old. Conclusions PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy was associated with significant survival benefits compared with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC, which provides evidence support to guide clinical practice. Nonetheless, the comparative survival outcomes in several subgroups indicated that bevacizumab plus chemotherapy still mattered.

Project description:The RATIONALE-306 study revealed that patients with advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) could benefit from treatment with tislelizumab plus chemotherapy. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy for treating OSCC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Partitioned survival model estimated the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone for treating OSCC using RATIONALE-306 data. Costs and utilities were obtained from local databases and published studies. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), incremental net health benefits (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefits (INMB) were outcomes. Price simulation were conducted at the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to assess model robustness. Compared with chemotherapy alone, tislelizumab plus chemotherapy yielded an ICER of USD 27,896/QALY, gained an additional 0.414 QALYs and 0.751 life-years, and increased the cost by USD 11,560. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that tislelizumab plus chemotherapy was cost-effective at the WTP of USD 38,258/QALY with probability of 94.43%. When the price in China was less than USD 3.714 per mg, the price simulation results indicated that tislelizumab plus chemotherapy was cost-effective at a WTP threshold of USD 38,258. Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy yielded an INHB of 0.112 QALYs and an INMB of USD 4,279 compared with chemotherapy alone at a WTP threshold of USD 38,258. Based on the sensitivity analyses, the above results were stable. A general trend was observed for subgroups with better survival benefits related to a higher probability of cost-effectiveness. From the Chinese healthcare perspective, tislelizumab plus chemotherapy is more cost-effective than chemotherapy alone as a first-line therapy for OSCC. These findings can help clinicians make optimal clinical decisions and assist decision-makers in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab in clinical practice.