Cancer Immunotherapy in Second-Line Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer - Is There a Need to Change the Approach to the Assessment of Clinical Benefits?

• Autorzy: Anna Panasiuk , Rafał Wójcik , Małgorzata Budasz-Świderska , Marcin Kaczor
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Background: The mechanism of action distinctive for immunotherapy leads to the specific pattern of tumour response, different form the one observed with cytotoxic therapy. To enable a complete assessment of immunotherapeutic agents modified criteria for the evaluation of antitumour responses were developed, mainly on the basis of the ipilimumab trials in melanoma. Methods: We conducted a review of RCTs that assessed PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors in previously treated patients with NSCLC, to describe the overall survival results in comparison to the progression-free survival outcomes, as assessed with conventional RECIST and/or with modified criteria of tumour response. Results: Five RCTs were eligible. The studies were heterogeneous with respect to population characteristics and other methodological features. All of the trials showed significant OS improvement in the immunotherapy arms, with the results in the histology and PD-L1-expression subgroups consistent with ITT analyses. The OS gain was not accompanied with the evidence of PFS prolongation. The use of the modified criteria resulted in prolonged median PFS estimates in the immunotherapy-treated patients. Conclusion: Our results in second-line NSCLC population are in line with the previous findings, that the conventional RECIST criteria do not fully capture the benefit of the immunotherapy. In the routine practice the premature diagnosis of a progressive disease may result in treatment withdrawal in patients that might benefit from the continuation of the immunotherapy. Further research and the agreement on the relevant modified criteria are needed for the use in the future immunotherapy clinical trials and to inform real-world clinical decisions.(original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Medical treatment; Illness

PL

Leczenie; Choroby

• Czasopismo: Journal of Health Policy and Outcomes Research
• Rocznik: 2017
• Numer: nr 2
• Strony: 65--77

Twórcy

autor

Anna Panasiuk

• Aestimo s.c., Kraków, Poland

autor

Rafał Wójcik

• Aestimo s.c., Kraków, Poland

autor

Małgorzata Budasz-Świderska

• Roche Polska Sp. z o.o., Warszawa, Poland

autor

Marcin Kaczor

• Aestimo s.c., Kraków, Poland ; Uniwersytet Jagielloński Collegium Medicum, Kraków, Poland

Bibliografia

• Hoos A, Eggermont AM, Janetzki S, Hodi FS, Ibrahim R, Anderson A, et al. Improved endpoints for cancer immunotherapy trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(18):1388-97.
• Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, Verweij J, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(3):205-16.
• Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228-47.
• WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. Geneva (Switzerland): World Health Organization Offset Publication No. 48, 1979.
• Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981;47:207-14.
• Dranitsaris G, Cohen RB, Acton G, Keltner L, Price M, Amir E, et al. Statistical Considerations in Clinical Trial Design of Immunotherapeutic Cancer Agents. J Immunother. 2015;38(7):259-66.
• Johnson P, Greiner W, Al-Dakkak I, Wagner S. Which Metrics Are Appropriate to Describe the Value of New Cancer Therapies? Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:865101.
• Miernik K, Czarny-Ozga I, Walczak J. Assessment of quality and clinical significance of endpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Journal of Health Policy and Outcomes Research 2015; 2:45-66.
• Wolchok JD, Hoos A, O'Day S, Weber JS, Hamid O, Lebbé C, et al. Guidelines for the evaluation of immune therapy activity in solid tumors: immune-related response criteria. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15(23):7412-20.
• Nishino M, Giobbie-Hurder A, Gargano M, Suda M, Ramaiya NH, Hodi FS. Developing a common language for tumor response to immunotherapy: immune-related response criteria using unidimensional measurements. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19(14):3936-43.
• Nishino M, Gargano M, Suda M, Ramaiya NH, Hodi FS. Optimizing immune-related tumor response assessment: does reducing the number of lesions impact response assessment in melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab? J Immunother Cancer. 2014;2:17.
• Nishino M, Tirumani SH, Ramaiya NH, Hodi FS. Cancer immunotherapy and immune-related response assessment: The role of radiologists in the new arena of cancer treatment. Eur J Radiol. 2015;84:1259-68.
• Nishino M, Ramaiya NH, Chambers ES, Adeni AE, Hatabu H, Jänne PA, et al. Immune-related response assessment during PD-1 inhibitor therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients. J Immunother Cancer. 2016;4:84.
• Novello S, Barlesi F, Califano R, Cufer T, Ekman S, Levra MG, et al. ESMO Guidelines Committee. Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(suppl 5):v1-v27.
• National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®). Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Version 1.2018 - November 17, 2017. Available from: NCCN.org [Accessed November 20, 2017].
• Nishino M. Immune-related response evaluations during immune-checkpoint inhibitor therapy: establishing a "common language" for the new arena of cancer treatment. Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer. 2016;4:30.
• Schreiber RD, Old LJ, Smyth MJ. Cancer immunoediting: integrating immunity's roles in cancer suppression and promotion. Science. 2011;331(6024):1565-70.
• Anagnostou VK, Brahmer JR. Cancer immunotherapy: a future paradigm shift in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21(5):976-84.
• He J, Hu Y, Hu M, Li B. Development of PD-1/PD-L1 Pathway in Tumor Immune Microenvironment and Treatment for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Scientific Reports. 2015;5:13110.
• European Medicines Agency (EMA). Product information: Opdivo (nivolumab). Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/medicines/human/medicines/003985/human_med_001876.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058001d124 [Accessed November 20, 2017].
• European Medicines Agency (EMA). Product information: Tecentriq (atezolizumab). Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/medicines/human/medicines/004143/human_med_002166.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058001d124 [Accessed November 20, 2017].
• European Medicines Agency (EMA). Product information: Keytruda (pembrolizumab). Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/medicines/human/medicines/003820/human_med_001886.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058001d124 [Accessed November 20, 2017].
• Hanna N, Johnson D, Temin S, Baker S Jr, Brahmer J, Ellis PM, et al. Systemic Therapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(30):3484-3515.
• Fehrenbacher L, Spira A, Ballinger M, Kowanetz M, Vansteenkiste J, Mazieres J, et al.; POPLAR Study Group. Atezolizumab versus docetaxel for patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (POPLAR): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10030):1837-46.
• Smith DA, Vansteenkiste JF, Fehrenbacher L, Park K, Mazieres J, Rittmeyer A, et. al. Updated survival and biomarker analyses of a randomized phase II study of atezolizumab vs docetaxel in 2L/3L NSCLC (POPLAR). J Clin Oncol 34, 2016 (suppl; abstr 9028).
• Mazieres J, Fehrenbacher L, Rittmeyer A, Spira AI, Park K, Smith DA, et. al. Non-classical response measured by immune-modified RECIST and post-progression treatment effects of atezolizumab in 2L/3L NSCLC: results from the randomized phase II study POPLAR. J Clin Oncol 34, 2016 (suppl; abstr 9032).
• Mazieres J, Fehrenbacher L, Rittmeyer A, Spira AI, Park K, Smith DA, et. al. Non-classical response measured by immune-modified RECIST and post-progression treatment effects of atezolizumab in 2L/3L NSCLC: results from the randomized phase II study POPLAR. American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Meeting - June 3-7, 2016, Chicago, IL, USA. Poster

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.7365/JHPOR.2018.1.9