Real-world outcomes with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC: interim analysis of overall survival from PACIFIC-R.

BACKGROUND: Based on the findings of the PACIFIC trial, consolidation durvalumab following platinum-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is a global standard of care for patients with unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). An earlier analysis from the ongoing PACIFIC-R study (NCT03798535) demonstrated the effectiveness of this regimen in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). Here, we report the first planned overall survival (OS) analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PACIFIC-R is an observational/non-interventional, retrospective study of patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC who started durvalumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) within an AstraZeneca-initiated early access program between September 2017 and December 2018. Primary endpoints are OS and investigator-assessed PFS, estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: By 30 November 2021, the full analysis set included 1154 participants from 10 countries (median follow-up in censored patients: 38.7 months). Median OS was not reached, and the 3-year OS rate was 63.2% (95% confidence interval 60.3% to 65.9%). Three-year OS rates were numerically higher among patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on ≥1% versus <1% of tumor cells (TCs; 67.0% versus 54.4%) and patients who received concurrent CRT (cCRT) versus sequential CRT (sCRT) (64.8% versus 57.9%). CONCLUSIONS: PACIFIC-R data continue to provide evidence for the effectiveness of consolidation durvalumab after CRT in a large, diverse, real-world population. Better outcomes were observed among patients with PD-L1 TCs ≥1% and patients who received cCRT. Nevertheless, encouraging outcomes were still observed among patients with TCs <1% and patients who received sCRT, supporting use of consolidation durvalumab in a broad population of patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC.

[Compared with atorvastatin at the dose of 10 mg per day rosuvastatin was more effective to reach an LDL goal of < 1.00 g/l in high cardiovascular risk patients (ARIANE study)]. / A la dose identique de 10 mg/j, la rosuvastatine est plus efficace que l'atorvastatine pour atteindre l'objectif de LDL-cholestérol < 1,00 g/l chez les patients à haut risque cardiovasculaire (étude ARIANE).

Many patients at high cardiovascular risk still fail to achieve recommended LDL-C goals. Showing evidence of a difference between two statins at the same dose can significantly contribute to selecting the most appropriate strategy to reduce cardiovascular risk in these patients. ARIANE study was a randomized, open-label comparative study. 844 patients at high cardiovascular risk were recruited by primary care cardiologists in France. They were randomized to receive once-daily dose of 10 mg of rosuvastatin or atorvastatin. The primary objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of rosuvastatin with that of atorvastatin in achieving an LDL-C goal of < 1.00 g/1 at 12 weeks. High cardiovascular risk was defined by either history of cardiovascular event, or a type IIa or IIb dyslipidemia associated with more than 2 other cardiovascular risk factors or 2 risk factors and a 10-year coronary risk > 20% based on Framingham score. 790 patients were available for intention-to-treat analysis. At 12 weeks, LDL-C goal was reached by 211 of the 411 patients treated with rosuvastatin (51.3%) and 119 of 379 patients treated with atorvastatin (31.4%), the difference being statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Both treatments were well tolerated. Adverse events were equally observed in the 2 groups, one patient in the rosuvastatin group showed a CK elevation without clinical consequence. The risk profile for the patients in this study matched that which, in 2005, had led to the Afssaps lowering the LDL-C target below 1.00g/l. The doses of the two statins compared here correspond to the doses most commonly used in day-to-day clinical practice. The greater efficacy of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin at the same dose demonstrated here confirms previous data. Therefore, in high risk patients treated by primary care cardiologists, rosuvastatin allows a significantly greater proportion to reach the LDL-C goal of < 1.00 g/l compared to atorvastatin at the same dose. However, many patients remain not at goal.