Correlations of response rate and progression-free survival with overall survival in immunotherapy trials for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: an FDA pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: Radiographic changes might not fully capture the treatment effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We aimed to assess correlations of overall response rate and progression-free survival with overall survival in trials of ICIs for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: To assess trial-level and patient-level correlations of overall response rate and progression-free survival with overall survival, we conducted a pooled analysis of first-line randomised trials (including patients aged ≥18 years with metastatic squamous and non-squamous NSCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1) submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration from June 24, 2016, to March 16, 2021. Eligible trials evaluated at least one ICI in the experimental group versus chemotherapy in the control group. At the trial level, we used weighted linear regression to derive coefficients of determination (R2). At the patient level, we used Cox proportional hazards models to compare overall survival between responders versus non-responders per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1). FINDINGS: A total of 13 trials including 9285 patients evaluated ICIs alone or in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. At the trial level, the R2 was 0·61 (95% CI 0·32-0·84) for correlation of overall response rate with overall survival and 0·70 (0·40-0·89) for correlation of progression-free survival with overall survival. Correlations ranged from weak to moderate when evaluating subgroups by PD-L1 expression and were consistent across trials evaluating ICIs alone or in combination with chemotherapy. At the patient level, responders had longer overall survival than non-responders (hazard ratio [HR] 0·28 [95% CI 0·26-0·30]). Among responders, overall survival was longer in patients enrolled in experimental groups than in control groups (HR 0·54 [95% CI 0·48-0·61]). INTERPRETATION: Correlations of overall response rate and progression-free survival with overall survival were generally moderate in this pooled analysis. The findings support routine analysis of mature overall survival data, where feasible, in first-line randomised trials of ICIs for metastatic NSCLC. FUNDING: US Food and Drug Administration.

Validity of Natural Language Processing for Ascertainment of EGFR and ALK Test Results in SEER Cases of Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: SEER registries do not report results of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) mutation tests. To facilitate population-based research in molecularly defined subgroups of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we assessed the validity of natural language processing (NLP) for the ascertainment of EGFR and ALK testing from electronic pathology (e-path) reports of NSCLC cases included in two SEER registries: the Cancer Surveillance System (CSS) and the Kentucky Cancer Registry (KCR). METHODS: We obtained 4,278 e-path reports from 1,634 patients who were diagnosed with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC from September 1, 2011, to December 31, 2013, included in CSS. We used 855 CSS reports to train NLP systems for the ascertainment of EGFR and ALK test status (reported v not reported) and test results (positive v negative). We assessed sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values in an internal validation sample of 3,423 CSS e-path reports and repeated the analysis in an external sample of 1,041 e-path reports from 565 KCR patients. Two oncologists manually reviewed all e-path reports to generate gold-standard data sets. RESULTS: NLP systems yielded internal validity metrics that ranged from 0.95 to 1.00 for EGFR and ALK test status and results in CSS e-path reports. NLP showed high internal accuracy for the ascertainment of EGFR and ALK in CSS patients-F scores of 0.95 and 0.96, respectively. In the external validation analysis, NLP yielded metrics that ranged from 0.02 to 0.96 in KCR reports and F scores of 0.70 and 0.72, respectively, in KCR patients. CONCLUSION: NLP is an internally valid method for the ascertainment of EGFR and ALK test information from e-path reports available in SEER registries, but future work is necessary to increase NLP external validity.