Consolidation PD-(L)1 inhibitor after definitive chemoradiotherapy for unresectable stage III NSCLC: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Abstract
e20054 Background: Consolidation immune checkpoint inhibition after definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) improves outcomes in unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). With newer randomized evidence, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of consolidation PD-(L)1 inhibitors versus placebo after definitive CRT. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials enrolling adults with unresectable stage III NSCLC without progression after definitive CRT and randomized to consolidation PD-(L)1 inhibitor versus placebo. PFS and OS were pooled as hazard ratios (HRs) and discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs) as risk ratios (RRs) using DerSimonian-Laird random-effects; heterogeneity was assessed with I². Treatment-related deaths were summarized descriptively. Results: Three RCTs (N = 1,501) were included (PACIFIC, GEMSTONE-301, PACIFIC-5). Consolidation PD-(L)1 inhibition improved PFS (pooled HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.53-0.77; I² = 40.5%). OS favored PD-(L)1 inhibition (pooled HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52-0.93) but was interim/immature in two trials with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 63%). Discontinuation due to AEs was higher with PD-(L)1 inhibition (pooled RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.23-2.40; I² = 0%). Treatment-related deaths were rare and reported in two trials (8/526 vs 0/260; GEMSTONE-301: 4/255 vs 0/126; PACIFIC-5: 4/271 vs 0/134). Conclusions: Consolidation PD-(L)1 inhibition after definitive CRT significantly improves PFS in unresectable stage III NSCLC, with an OS signal that requires longer follow-up. Discontinuation due to AEs is increased. Longer follow-up is needed to clarify long-term survival outcomes and infrequent safety events. Sugemalimab is approved for NSCLC indications in China and the UK but is not FDA-approved in the US. Trial-level efficacy (HRs) and AE-discontinuation (counts and RRs). Footnote: Time-to-event outcomes pooled as HRs. OS was interim/immature in GEMSTONE-301 and PACIFIC-5. AE-discontinuation uses reported safety-set denominators (PACIFIC-5 efficacy mITT differs from safety set). Treatment-related deaths were not pooled. RCT Agent N (Tx/Placebo) PFS HR (95% CI) OS HR (95% CI) Discontinuation due to AEs (Tx vs placebo) RR (95% CI) PACIFIC Durvalumab 476/237 0.55 (0.45-0.68) 0.72 (0.59-0.89) 73/475 vs 23/234 1.56 (1.01-2.43) GEMSTONE-301 Sugemalimab 255/126 0.64 (0.48-0.85) 0.44 (0.27-0.73) 29/255 vs 6/126 2.39 (1.02-5.60) PACIFIC-5 Durvalumab 252/129 (mITT); 271/134 (safety) 0.75 (0.58-0.99) 0.87 (0.66-1.17) 39/271 vs 11/134 1.75 (0.93-3.31) Pooled (DL random-effects) - - 0.63 (0.53-0.77) 0.69 (0.52-0.93) - 1.72 (1.23–2.40); I²=0%
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (6)
Saba Daher
East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN
Hasan Daher
Jordan University of Science and Technology (JUST), Irbid, Jordan
Hamza Altal
East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN
Amira Eftaiha
East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN
Ban Al-Goran
East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN
Alina Haneef Bhat
East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN