ABSTRACT
Over the past decade, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved immune checkpoint inhibitors that target programmed death-1 (PD-1) have demonstrated significant clinical benefit particularly in patients with PD-L1 expressing tumors. Toripalimab is a humanized anti-PD-1 antibody, approved by FDA for first-line treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in combination with chemotherapy. In a post hoc analysis of phase 3 studies, toripalimab in combination with chemotherapy improved overall survival irrespective of PD-L1 status in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (JUPITER-02), advanced non-small cell lung cancer (CHOICE-01) and advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (JUPITER-06). On further characterization, we determined that toripalimab is molecularly and functionally differentiated from pembrolizumab, an anti-PD-1 mAb approved previously for treating a wide spectrum of tumors. Toripalimab, which binds the FG loop of PD-1, has 12-fold higher binding affinity to PD-1 than pembrolizumab and promotes significantly more Th1- and myeloid-derived inflammatory cytokine responses in healthy human PBMCs in vitro. In an ex vivo system employing dissociated tumor cells from treatment naïve non-small cell lung cancer patients, toripalimab induced several unique genes in IFN-γ and immune cell pathways, showed different kinetics of activation and significantly enhanced IFN-γ signature. Additionally, binding of toripalimab to PD-1 induced lower levels of SHP1 and SHP2 recruitment, the negative regulators of T cell activation, in Jurkat T cells ectopically expressing PD-1. Taken together, these data demonstrate that toripalimab is a potent anti-PD-1 antibody with high affinity PD-1 binding, strong functional attributes and demonstrated clinical activity that encourage its continued clinical investigation in several types of cancer.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Esophageal Neoplasms , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma , Lung Neoplasms , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms , Humans , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/pathology , B7-H1 Antigen , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma , Esophageal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma/drug therapy , T-Lymphocytes/pathologyABSTRACT
Importance: There are currently no therapies approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Gemcitabine-cisplatin is the current standard of care for the first-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic NPC (RM-NPC). Objective: To determine whether toripalimab in combination with gemcitabine-cisplatin will significantly improve progression-free survival and overall survival as first-line treatment for RM-NPC, compared with gemcitabine-cisplatin alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: JUPITER-02 is an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind phase 3 study conducted in NPC-endemic regions, including mainland China, Taiwan, and Singapore. From November 10, 2018, to October 20, 2019, 289 patients with RM-NPC with no prior systemic chemotherapy in the RM setting were enrolled from 35 participating centers. Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive toripalimab (240 mg [n = 146]) or placebo (n = 143) in combination with gemcitabine-cisplatin for up to 6 cycles, followed by maintenance with toripalimab or placebo until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or completion of 2 years of treatment. Main Outcome: Progression-free survival as assessed by a blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included objective response rate, overall survival, progression-free survival assessed by investigator, duration of response, and safety. Results: Among the 289 patients enrolled (median age, 46 [IQR, 38-53 years; 17% female), at the final progression-free survival analysis, toripalimab treatment had a significantly longer progression-free survival than placebo (median, 21.4 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.37-0.73]). With a median survival follow-up of 36.0 months, a significant improvement in overall survival was identified with toripalimab over placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.45-0.89]; 2-sided P = .008). The median overall survival was not reached in the toripalimab group, while it was 33.7 months in the placebo group. A consistent effect on overall survival, favoring toripalimab, was found in subgroups with high and low PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1) expression. The incidence of all adverse events, grade 3 or greater adverse events, and fatal adverse events were similar between the 2 groups. However, adverse events leading to discontinuation of toripalimab or placebo (11.6% vs 4.9%), immune-related adverse events (54.1% vs 21.7%), and grade 3 or greater immune-related adverse events (9.6% vs 1.4%) were more frequent in the toripalimab group. Conclusions and Relevance: The addition of toripalimab to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for RM-NPC provided statistically significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival and overall survival benefits compared with chemotherapy alone, with a manageable safety profile. These findings support the use of toripalimab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin as the new standard of care for this patient population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03581786.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antineoplastic Agents , Cisplatin , Gemcitabine , Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Cisplatin/adverse effects , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Double-Blind Method , Gemcitabine/administration & dosage , Gemcitabine/adverse effects , Gemcitabine/therapeutic use , Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma/drug therapy , Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma/mortality , Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma/pathology , Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma/secondary , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/mortality , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/pathology , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/secondary , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/drug therapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/mortality , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , United States , InternationalityABSTRACT
On August 16, 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved lenvatinib (Lenvima, Eisai Inc.) for first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Approval was based on an international, multicenter, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial (REFLECT; NCT01761266) conducted in 954 patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable HCC. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive lenvatinib (12 mg orally once daily for patients with a baseline body weight ≥60 kg and 8 mg orally once daily for patients with a baseline body weight <60 kg) or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) until radiological disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. REFLECT demonstrated that lenvatinib was noninferior but not statistically superior to sorafenib for overall survival (OS; hazard ratio, [HR] 0.92; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.79-1.06), with median OS of 13.6 and 12.3 months in the lenvatinib and sorafenib arms, respectively. REFLECT also demonstrated statistically significant improvements in investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77]; p < 0.001), corresponding to median PFS of 7.4 and 3.7 months and overall response rate of 24.1% vs 9.2% per modified RECIST for HCC (mRECIST) in the lenvatinib and sorafenib arms, respectively. Consistent results were observed by an independent review facility per RECISTv1.1 and per mRECIST. The most common adverse reactions observed in the lenvatinib-treated patients (≥20%) in decreasing frequency were hypertension, fatigue, diarrhea, decreased appetite, arthralgia/myalgia, decreased weight, abdominal pain, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, proteinuria, dysphonia, hemorrhagic events, hypothyroidism, and nausea. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article describes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's review of data from a single trial, REFLECT, that supported the approval of lenvatinib, as a single agent, for the first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). REFLECT was an open-label, noninferiority trial that randomized 954 patients with HCC who were ineligible for liver-directed therapy with no prior systemic therapy for HCC to lenvatinib or sorafenib. REFLECT demonstrated that lenvatinib-treated patients had similar survival, more responses, and longer time to progression than those receiving sorafenib. Serious side effects were more common among lenvatinib-treated patients. Lenvatinib is an effective treatment for patients with previously untreated HCC.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Liver Neoplasms , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/drug therapy , Humans , Liver Neoplasms/drug therapy , Phenylurea Compounds/adverse effects , QuinolinesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To review and summarize all U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals of programmed death (PD)-1 and PD-ligand 1 blocking antibodies (collectively referred to as PD-[L]1 inhibitors) over a 6-year period and corresponding companion/complementary diagnostic assays. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To determine the indications and pivotal trials eligible for inclusion, approval letters and package inserts available on Drugs@FDA were evaluated for approved PD-[L]1 inhibitors to identify all new indications granted from the first approval of a PD-[L]1 inhibitor on September 4, 2014, through September 3, 2020. The corresponding FDA drug and device reviews from the marketing applications for the approved indications were identified through FDA internal records. Two reviewers independently extracted information for the endpoints, efficacy data, basis for approval, type of regulatory approval, and corresponding in vitro diagnostic device test. The results were organized by organ system and tumor type. RESULTS: Of 70 Biologic Licensing Application or supplement approvals that resulted in new indications, 32 (46%) were granted based on response rate (ORR) and durability of response, 26 (37%) on overall survival, 9 (13%) on progression-free survival, 2 (3%) on recurrence-free survival, and 1 (1%) on complete response rate. Most ORR-based approvals were granted under the accelerated approval provisions and were supported with prolonged duration of response. Overall, 21% of approvals were granted with a companion diagnostic. Efficacy results according to tumor type are discussed. CONCLUSION: PD-[L]1 inhibitors are an effective anticancer therapy in a subset of patients. This class of drugs has provided new treatment options for patients with unmet need across a wide variety of cancer types. Yet, the modest response rates in several tumor types signal a lack of understanding of the biology of these diseases. Further preclinical and clinical investigation may be required to identify a more appropriate patient population, particularly as drug development continues and additional treatment alternatives become available. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The number of PD-[L]1 inhibitors in drug development and the associated companion and complementary diagnostics have led to regulatory challenges and questions regarding generalizability of trial results. The interchangeability of PD-L1 immunohistochemical assays between PD-1/PD-L1 drugs is unclear. Furthermore, robust responses in some patients with low levels of PD-L1 expression have limited the use of PD-L1 as a predictive biomarker across all cancers, particularly in the setting of diseases with few alternative treatment options. This review summarizes the biomarker thresholds and assays approved as complementary and companion diagnostics and provides regulatory perspective on the role of biomarkers in oncology drug development.
Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor , B7-H1 Antigen , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Precision Medicine , Public HealthABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the safety, efficacy and feasibility of same-day discharge after uncomplicated, minimalist TAVR. BACKGROUND: At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, we created a same-day discharge (SDD) pathway after conscious sedation, transfemoral (minimalist) TAVR to help minimize risk of viral transmission and conserve hospital resources. Studies support that next-day discharge (NDD) for carefully selected patients following minimalist TAVR is safe and feasible. There is a paucity of data regarding the safety of SDD after TAVR. METHODS: In-hospital and 30 day outcomes of consecutive patients meeting pre-specified criteria for SDD after minimalist TAVR at our institution between March and July of 2020 were reviewed. Outcomes were compared to a NDD cohort from July 2018 through July 2020 that would have met SDD criteria. Primary endpoints were mortality, delayed pacemaker placement, stroke and cardiovascular readmission at 30 days. RESULTS: Twenty nine patients were discharged via the SDD pathway after TAVR. 128 prior NDD patients were identified who met all criteria for SDD. The STS scores were similar between the two groups (SDD 2.6% ±1.5 vs. NDD 2.3% ± 1.2). There were no deaths at 30 days in either group. There was no significant difference in delayed pacemaker placement (SDD 0% vs. NDD 0.8%, p > .99) or cardiovascular readmission (SDD 0% vs. NDD 5.5%, p = .35) at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Same day discharge following uncomplicated, minimalist TAVR in selected patients appears to be safe, achieving similar 30 day outcomes as a cohort of next day discharge patients.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Patient Discharge/trends , Risk Assessment/methods , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods , Aged , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Length of Stay/trends , Male , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Time FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We examined how often new serious safety signals were identified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration within the first 2 years after approval for new molecular entities (NMEs) for treatment of cancer that required specific regulatory actions described here. METHODS: We identified, for all NMEs approved for treatment of cancer or malignant hematology indications between 2010 and 2016, substantial safety-related changes within the first 2 years after approval, which included a new Boxed Warning or Warning and Precaution; requirement for (or modification of existing) Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS); and withdrawal from the market because of safety concerns. RESULTS: Fifty-five NMEs were approved between 2010 and 2016: 32 (58%) under regular approval (RA) and 23 (42%) under accelerated approval (AA). Of these 55 NMEs, 9 (16%) had substantial safety-related changes after approval. Across all 55 NMEs, one was temporarily withdrawn from the market for safety reasons (1.8%); one (1.8%) required a new REMS; nine required labeling revisions-new Boxed Warnings were required for two NMEs (3.6%), and new Warnings and Precautions subsections were required for eight (14.6%). One drug (ponatinib) was responsible for several of the substantial safety-related changes (withdrawal, REMS, Boxed Warnings). One of 32 NMEs approved under RA required a new Warning and Precaution, whereas 7 of 23 NMEs approved under AA had substantial safety-related changes in the first 2 years after approval. CONCLUSION: Based on our analysis we conclude that although there was a greater incidence of substantial safety-related changes to AA drugs versus RA drugs, the majority of these were changes to the Warnings and Precautions and did not substantially alter the benefit-risk profile of the drug. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The majority of new cancer drugs (84%) approved in the U.S. do not have new substantial safety information being added to the label within the first 2 years of approval. Unprecedented efficacy seen in contemporary cancer drug development has led to early availability of effective cancer therapies based on large effects in smaller populations. More limited premarket safety data require diligent postmarketing safety surveillance as we continue to learn and update drug labeling throughout the product lifecycle.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents , Neoplasms , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Drug Approval , Drug Labeling , Humans , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Product Surveillance, Postmarketing , United States , United States Food and Drug AdministrationABSTRACT
On December 19, 2018, the Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval to pembrolizumab (KEYTRUDA, Merck & Co. Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ) for adult and pediatric patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). Approval was based on Cancer Immunotherapy Trials Network protocol 9, also known as KEYNOTE-017 (NCT02267603), a multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label trial that enrolled 50 patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic MCC who had not received prior systemic therapy for their advanced disease. The major efficacy outcome measures were overall response rate (ORR) and response duration assessed by blinded independent central review per RECIST 1.1. The ORR was 56% (95% confidence interval: 41, 70) with a complete response rate of 24%. The median response duration was not reached. Among the 28 patients with responses, 96% had response durations of greater than 6 months and 54% had response durations of greater than 12 months. The most common adverse reactions of pembrolizumab reported in at least 20% of patients who received pembrolizumab as a single agent were fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, decreased appetite, pruritus, diarrhea, nausea, rash, pyrexia, cough, dyspnea, constipation, pain, and abdominal pain. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This report presents key information on the basis for the Food and Drug Administration's accelerated approval of pembrolizumab for the treatment of recurrent locally advanced or metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma, including efficacy and safety information. This approval provides patients and physicians with an additional treatment option for this aggressive and life-threatening carcinoma.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Merkel Cell , Skin Neoplasms , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Merkel Cell/drug therapy , Child , Humans , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , United States , United States Food and Drug AdministrationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Evidence is lacking to standardize post-procedure care after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). OBJECTIVE: We report on the findings of the post-procedure sub-study of the multimodality, multidisciplinary but minimalist TAVR (3M TAVR) study. METHODS: A standardized protocol to guide monitoring, early mobilization, reconditioning, communication, and criteria-driven discharge was implemented in a multicenter, prospective, sequential case series study in 13 North American low, medium, and high-volume centers in 2015-2017. Outcome measures pertaining to post-procedure care included avoidance of invasive lines and delirium, in-hospital bed utilization, patient disposition at the time of discharge, and 30-day use of nonelective medical services. RESULTS: Four hundred eleven participants were enrolled. In the post-procedure phase, 365 (88.8%) participants were admitted without a temporary pacemaker; urinary catheterization was avoided in 402 (97.8%) participants. Of note, 91.7% received care in a single unit (critical care: 72.5%; cardiac telemetry: 19.2%); 99.0% were discharged home. At the time of 30-day follow-up, 6 (1.6%) participants required admission to a rehabilitation or a skilled nursing facility; 30-day emergency department visits were 13.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of the 3M TAVR standardized accelerated reconditioning protocol is a safe and effective strategy to facilitate next-day discharge home after TAVR in centers of varying size.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Length of Stay , Patient Discharge , Postoperative Care , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aortic Valve Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Valve Stenosis/physiopathology , Cardiac Pacing, Artificial , Combined Modality Therapy , Early Ambulation , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Male , North America , Patient Care Team , Postoperative Care/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Urinary CatheterizationABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides a comprehensive assessment of recent literature reports describing atypical response patterns observed with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), modifications to response evaluation criteria for ICIs, and treatment beyond progression in clinical trials. RECENT FINDINGS: Certain response patterns such as durable response, pseudoprogression, hyperprogression, and dissociated responses can be seen with ICI treatment. These patterns carry differing prognoses and are associated with varied factors. There are multiple modifications of standard Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) that have been proposed to better characterize immunotherapy response; however, standard RECIST1.1 remains most commonly used in clinical trials. Treatment beyond progression varies in frequency and benefit depending on assessment criteria and cancer type. Future research incorporating modified imaging criteria and biomarker assessments may serve to clarify who will benefit most from treatment beyond progression.
Subject(s)
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Immunotherapy , Neoplasms/therapy , Disease Progression , Humans , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prognosis , Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
On September 22, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval for pembrolizumab (Keytruda, Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ) for the treatment of patients with recurrent, locally advanced or metastatic, gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma with disease progression on or after two or more systemic therapies, including fluoropyrimidine- and platinum-containing chemotherapy and, if appropriate, HER2/neu-targeted therapy, and whose tumors express programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), as determined by an FDA-approved test. Approval was based on demonstration of durable overall response rate (ORR) in a multicenter, open-label, multicohort trial (KEYNOTE-059/Cohort 1) that enrolled 259 patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma. Among the 55% (n = 143) of patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 based on a combined positive score ≥1 and either were microsatellite stable or had undetermined microsatellite instability or mismatch repair status, the confirmed ORR as determined by blinded independent central review was 13.3% (95% CI, 8.2-20.0); 1.4% had complete responses. Response durations ranged from 2.8+ to 19.4+ months; 11 patients (58%) had response durations of 6 months or longer, and 5 patients (26%) had response durations of 12 months or longer. The most common (≥20%) adverse reactions of pembrolizumab observed in KEYNOTE-059/Cohort 1 were fatigue, decreased appetite, nausea, and constipation. The most frequent (≥2%) serious adverse drug reactions were pleural effusion, pneumonia, dyspnea, pulmonary embolism, and pneumonitis. Pembrolizumab was approved concurrently with the PD-L1 immunohistochemistry 22C3 pharmDx test (Dako, Agilent, Santa Clara, CA) for selection of patients with gastric cancer for treatment with pembrolizumab based on PD-L1 tumor expression. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This report presents key information on the basis for Food and Drug Administration approval of pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma whose tumors express PD-L1. The report discusses the basis for limiting the indication to patients with PD-L1-expressing tumors and the basis for recommending that PD-L1 status be assessed using a fresh tumor specimen if PD-L1 expression is not detected in an archival gastric or GEJ cancer specimen.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/drug therapy , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , B7-H1 Antigen/metabolism , Esophageal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Esophagogastric Junction/pathology , Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/pharmacology , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Female , Humans , Male , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients who receive immunotherapeutic drugs might develop an atypical response pattern, wherein they initially meet conventional response criteria for progressive disease but later have decreases in tumour burden. Such responses warrant further investigation into the potential benefits and risks for patients who continue immunotherapy beyond disease progression defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. METHODS: For this pooled analysis, we included all submissions of trial reports and data to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in support of marketing applications for anti-programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) antibodies (alone or in combination) for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma that allowed for continuation of the antibody beyond RECIST-defined progression in the anti-PD-1 group and were approved by FDA before Jan 1, 2017. To investigate the effect of treatment beyond progression in patients with metastatic melanoma and to better characterise which of these patients would benefit from extended treatment, we pooled individual patient data from patients who received at least one dose of an anti-PD-1 antibody in the included trials. We included any patient receiving the anti-PD-1 antibody after their RECIST-defined progression date in the treatment beyond progression cohort and analysed them descriptively at baseline and at time of progression versus the cohort not receiving treatment beyond progression. We analysed the target lesion response after progression in patients in the treatment beyond progression cohort relative to progressive disease and baseline target lesion burden. We defined a treatment beyond progression response as a decrease in target lesion tumour burden (sum of the reference diameters) of at least 30% from the burden at the time of RECIST-defined progression that did not require confirmation at a subsequent assessment. We also compared individual timepoint responses, overall survival, and adverse events in the treatment beyond progression versus no treatment beyond progression cohorts. FINDINGS: Among the eight multicentre clinical trials meeting this study's inclusion criteria, we pooled the data from 2624 patients receiving immunotherapy. 1361 (52%) had progressive disease, of whom 692 (51%) received continued anti-PD-1 antibody treatment beyond RECIST-defined progression and 669 (49%) did not. 95 (19%) of 500 patients in the treatment beyond progresssion cohort with evaluable assessments had a 30% or more decrease in tumour burden, when considering burden at RECIST-defined progression as the reference point, representing 14% of the 692 patients treated beyond progression and 4% of all 2624 patients treated with immunotherapy. Median overall survival in patients with RECIST-defined progressive disease given anti-PD-1 antibody was longer in the treatment beyond progression cohort (24·4 months, 95% CI 21·2-26·3) than in the cohort of patients who did not receive treatment beyond progression (11·2 months, 10·1-12·9). 362 (54%) of 669 patients in the no treatment beyond progression cohort had a serious adverse event up to 90 days after treatment discontinuation compared with 295 (43%) of 692 patients in the treatment beyond progression cohort. Immune-related adverse events that occurred up to 90 days from discontinuation were similar between the treatment beyond progression cohort (78 [11%] of 692 patients) and the no treatment beyond progression cohort (106 [16%] of 669). INTERPRETATION: Continuation of treatment beyond progression in the product labelling of these immunotherapies has not been recommended because the clinical benefit remains to be proven. Treatment beyond progression with anti-PD-1 antibody therapy might be appropriate for selected patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma, identified by specific criteria at the time of progression, based on the potential for late responses in the setting of the known toxicity profile. FUNDING: None.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/mortality , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Skin Neoplasms/mortality , Aged , Disease Progression , Disease-Free Survival , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Immunotherapy/methods , Male , Melanoma/pathology , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Invasiveness/pathology , Neoplasm Staging , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor/antagonists & inhibitors , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor/immunology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk Assessment , Single-Blind Method , Skin Neoplasms/pathology , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome , United States , United States Food and Drug AdministrationABSTRACT
On March 30, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved osimertinib for the treatment of patients with metastatic, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) T790M mutation-positive, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), as detected by an FDA-approved test, whose disease has progressed following EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. Approval was based on demonstration of a statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) when comparing osimertinib with chemotherapy in an international, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial (AURA3). In this confirmatory trial, which enrolled 419 patients, the PFS hazard ratio for osimertinib compared with chemotherapy per investigator assessment was 0.30 (95% confidence interval 0.23-0.41), p < .001, with median PFS of 10.1 months in the osimertinib arm and 4.4 months in the chemotherapy arm. Supportive efficacy data included PFS per blinded independent review committee demonstrating similar PFS results and an improved confirmed objective response rate per investigator assessment of 65% and 29%, with estimated median durations of response of 11.0 months and 4.2 months, in the osimertinib and chemotherapy arms, respectively. Patients received osimertinib 80 mg once daily and had a median duration of exposure of 8 months. The toxicity profile of osimertinib compared favorably with the profile of other approved EGFR TKIs and chemotherapy. The most common adverse drug reactions (>20%) in patients treated with osimertinib were diarrhea, rash, dry skin, nail toxicity, and fatigue. Herein, we review the benefit-risk assessment of osimertinib that led to regular approval, for patients with metastatic NSCLC harboring EGFR TKI whose disease has progressed on or after EGFR TKI therapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Osimertinib administered to metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring an EGFR T790M mutation, who have progressed on or following EGFR TKI therapy, demonstrated a substantial improvement over platinum-based doublet chemotherapy as well as durable intracranial responses. The ability to test for the T790M mutation in plasma using the FDA-approved cobas EGFR Mutation Test v2 (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) identifies patients with NSCLC tumors not amenable to biopsy. Since a 40% false-negative rate has been observed with the circulating tumor DNA test, re-evaluation of the feasibility of tissue biopsy is recommended to identify patients with a false-negative plasma test result who may benefit from osimertinib.
Subject(s)
Acrylamides/administration & dosage , Aniline Compounds/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Acrylamides/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aniline Compounds/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/pathology , Disease-Free Survival , ErbB Receptors/genetics , Female , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Mutation , Neoplasm Metastasis , Platinum/administration & dosage , Platinum/adverse effects , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Remission Induction , Risk Assessment , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration , Young AdultABSTRACT
On June 22, 2017, the Food and Drug Administration expanded indications for dabrafenib and trametinib to include treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring BRAF V600E mutations. Approval was based on results from an international, multicenter, multicohort, noncomparative, open-label trial, study BRF113928, which sequentially enrolled 93 patients who had received previous systemic treatment for advanced NSCLC (Cohort B, n = 57) or were treatment-naïve (Cohort C, n = 36). All patients received dabrafenib 150 mg orally twice daily and trametinib 2 mg orally once daily. In Cohort B, overall response rate (ORR) was 63% (95% confidence interval [CI] 49%-76%) with response durations ≥6 months in 64% of responders. In Cohort C, ORR was 61% (95% CI 44%-77%) with response durations ≥6 months in 59% of responders. Results were evaluated in the context of the Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique registry and a chart review of U.S. electronic health records at two academic sites, characterizing treatment outcomes data for patients with metastatic NSCLC with or without BRAF V600E mutations. The treatment effect of dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily was evaluated in 78 patients with previously treated BRAF mutant NSCLC, yielding an ORR of 27% (95% CI 18%-38%), establishing that dabrafenib alone is active, but that the addition of trametinib is necessary to achieve an ORR of >40%. The most common adverse reactions (≥20%) were pyrexia, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dry skin, decreased appetite, edema, rash, chills, hemorrhage, cough, and dyspnea. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The approvals of dabrafenib and trametinib, administered concurrently, provide a new regimen for the treatment of a rare subset of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and demonstrate how drugs active for treatment of BRAF-mutant tumors in one setting predict efficacy and can provide supportive evidence for approval in another setting. The FDA also approved the first next-generation sequencing oncology panel test for simultaneous assessment of multiple actionable mutations, which will facilitate selection of optimal, personalized therapy. The test was shown to accurately and reliably select patients with NSCLC with the BRAF V600E mutation for whom treatment with dabrafenib and trametinib is the optimal treatment.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Imidazoles/therapeutic use , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Oximes/therapeutic use , Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf/genetics , Pyridones/therapeutic use , Pyrimidinones/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/pathology , Female , Humans , Imidazoles/pharmacology , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Mutation , Oximes/pharmacology , Pyridones/pharmacology , Pyrimidinones/pharmacology , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
On April 27, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved regorafenib for the treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who had previously been treated with sorafenib. Approval was based on the results of a single, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (RESORCE) that demonstrated an improvement in overall survival (OS). Patients were randomly allocated to receive regorafenib160 mg orally once daily or matching placebo for the first 21 days of each 28-day cycle. The trial demonstrated a significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.79, p < .0001) with an estimated median OS of 10.6 months in the regorafenib arm and 7.8 months in the placebo arm. A statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) based on modified RECIST for HCC [Semin Liver Dis 2010;30:52-60] (HR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37-0.56, p < .0001) was also demonstrated; the estimated median PFS was 3.1 and 1.5 months in the regorafenib and placebo arms, respectively. The overall response rate, based on modified RECIST for HCC, was 11% in the regorafenib arm and 4% in the placebo arm. The toxicity profile was consistent with that observed in other indications; the most clinically significant adverse reactions were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, diarrhea, and hypertension. Based on the improvement in survival and acceptable toxicity, a favorable benefit-to-risk evaluation led to approval for treatment of patients with advanced HCC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Regorafenib is the first drug approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma that has progressed on sorafenib and is expected to become a standard of care for these patients.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/drug therapy , Liver Neoplasms/drug therapy , Phenylurea Compounds/therapeutic use , Pyridines/therapeutic use , Sorafenib/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Disease Progression , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Phenylurea Compounds/administration & dosage , Phenylurea Compounds/adverse effects , Pyridines/administration & dosage , Pyridines/adverse effects , Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors , Safety , Sorafenib/adverse effects , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome , Young AdultABSTRACT
On October 24, 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved pembrolizumab (Keytruda; Merck & Co., Inc., https://www.merck.com) for treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) whose tumors express programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) as determined by an FDA-approved test, as follows: (a) first-line treatment of patients with mNSCLC whose tumors have high PD-L1 expression (tumor proportion score [TPS] ≥50%), with no epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) or anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) genomic tumor aberrations, and (b) treatment of patients with mNSCLC whose tumors express PD-L1 (TPS ≥1%), with disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy. Patients with EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations should have disease progression on FDA-approved therapy for these aberrations prior to receiving pembrolizumab.Approval was based on two randomized, open-label, active-controlled trials demonstrating statistically significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients randomized to pembrolizumab compared with chemotherapy. In KEYNOTE-024, patients with previously untreated mNSCLC who received pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously [IV] every 3 weeks) had a statistically significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-0.89; p = .005), and significant improvement in PFS (HR 0.50; 95% CI: 0.37-0.68; p < .001). In KEYNOTE-010, patients with disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy received pembrolizumab IV 2 mg/kg, 10 mg/kg, or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The HR and p value for OS was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.58-0.88), p < .001 comparing pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg with chemotherapy and the HR and p value for OS was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.49-0.75), p < .001 comparing pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg with chemotherapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This is the first U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of a checkpoint inhibitor for first-line treatment of lung cancer. This approval expands the pembrolizumab indication in second-line treatment of lung cancer to include all patients with programmed death-ligand 1-expressing non-small cell lung cancer.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , B7-H1 Antigen/genetics , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/pathology , Disease Progression , Docetaxel , Drug Approval , ErbB Receptors/genetics , Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic/drug effects , Humans , Middle Aged , Taxoids/administration & dosage , United States , United States Food and Drug AdministrationABSTRACT
On August 5, 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval to pembrolizumab (KEYTRUDA injection, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Kenilworth, NJ) for treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) with disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy. Approval was based on the objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DoR) in a cohort of patients in a nonrandomized multi-cohort trial (KEYNOTE-012) that included 174 patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC who had disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy. Patients received either intravenous pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or 200 mg every 3 weeks. ORR was determined by independent review according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. ORR was 16% (95% confidence interval 11, 22) with a complete response rate of 5%. DoR ranged from 2.4+ months to 27.7+ months. Twenty-three of 28 responding patients (82%) had response durations of ≥6 months. Safety was evaluated in 192 patients with HNSCC receiving at least one dose of pembrolizumab. Frequent (≥2%) serious adverse reactions were pneumonia, dyspnea, confusional state, vomiting, pleural effusion, and respiratory failure. Clinically significant immune-mediated adverse reactions included pneumonitis, colitis, hepatitis, adrenal insufficiency, diabetes mellitus, skin toxicity, myositis, and thyroid disorders. The benefit-risk profile of pembrolizumab was considered acceptable in this patient population. As a condition of accelerated approval, Merck is required to conduct a confirmatory trial; this trial, KEYNOTE-040, is ongoing. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This accelerated approval expands the U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved indications for pembrolizumab, providing health care providers with new information regarding pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) with disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy. Pembrolizumab is the first drug to receive approval for treatment of patients with HNSCC since cetuximab was approved for this indication in 2006.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/drug therapy , Head and Neck Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/pathology , Drug Approval , Female , Head and Neck Neoplasms/pathology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Platinum Compounds/therapeutic use , Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes after minimalist and standard transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). BACKGROUND: TF-TAVR is increasingly performed with conscious sedation and transthoracic echocardiography guidance (minimalist). The safety/efficacy of this technique in patients with severe COPD is unknown. METHODS: We compared demographics, 30-day outcomes and 1-year survival of patients with severe COPD (FEV1% ≤50) who underwent minimalist vs. standard TF-TAVR between 2008 and 2015 at our institution. RESULTS: Of 88 patients with severe COPD, 46 underwent minimalist and 42 underwent standard TF-TAVR. There were no differences on baseline characteristics, except for more history of coronary artery bypass grafting (45.5% vs. 20.6%, P = 0.03) and less history of cerebrovascular disease (16.7% vs. 45.5%, P = 0.03) in the standard TF-TAVR. Seventeen minimalist TF-TAVR patients (41.0%) were transferred directly to the general medical ward with telemetry monitoring (without ICU stay); all standard TF-TAVR patients went to the ICU. Minimalist TF-TAVR patients had shorter procedure time (97 vs. 129 min, P < 0.001), ICU time (21.8 vs. 29.8 hr, P = 0.001) and length of stay (2 vs. 5 days, P = 0.001). There were no differences in procedure complications and 30-day mortality between groups. In our multivariate analysis, minimalist TF-TAVR (HR 0.28, 95%CI 0.08-0.97) and previous coronary revascularization (HR 0.24, 95%CI 0.09-0.65) were associated with increased 1-year survival. In contrast, moderate paravalvular leak (HR 7.73, 95%CI 1.94-30.84) was associated with decreased 1-year survival. CONCLUSION: In patients with severe COPD, Minimalist TF-TAVR results in less resource utilization and improved 1-year survival compared to standard approach. Our findings should be validated in a larger cohort of patients with severe COPD. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Cardiac Catheterization/methods , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/complications , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aortic Valve Stenosis/complications , Aortic Valve Stenosis/mortality , Echocardiography, Transesophageal , Female , Femoral Artery , Follow-Up Studies , Georgia/epidemiology , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/mortality , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Survival Rate/trends , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and severe aortic stenosis (AS) includes balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV), surgical (SAVR), or transcatheter (TAVR) aortic valve replacement. We compared outcomes among these strategies. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with ESRD undergoing treatment for severe AS between 07/2007 and 06/2015 was performed at our center. Patients were classified based on treatment: BAV-only, TAVR, or SAVR. Baseline characteristics and 30-day outcomes were compared among groups. A 1-year survival analysis was performed. RESULTS: Of 85 patients, 25 (29.4%) underwent BAV, 30 (35.3%) TAVR, and 30 (35.3%) SAVR. Patients in the SAVR group, compared to the BAV or TAVR patients, were younger (63 vs. 74 vs. 71 years, P = 0.02) and had less prior stroke (3.3% vs. 12.0% vs. 30.0%, P = 0.008). While all BAV patients had NYHA class III/IV, 93.3% and 76.7% of patients had NYHA class III/IV in the TAVR and SAVR group, respectively (P = 0.001). BAV patients were less likely to have atrial fibrillation than TAVR or SAVR patients (16.0% vs. 43.3% vs. 50.0%, P = 0.03). All patients were high risk, but there was a statistical trend to lower STS scores in the SAVR group (8.6% vs. 13.5% vs. 13.5%, P = 0.08). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (16.7% vs. 10.0% vs. 10.0%, P = 0.74), but BAV treated patients had an increased 1-year mortality compared to those treated with TAVR or SAVR (87.0% vs. 32.0%, vs. 36.7%, P=<0.001). Independent predictors of 1-year mortality were a higher STS score (HR 1.026, 95%CI 1.002-1.051) and BAV-only strategy (BAV vs. TAVR: HR 3.961, 95%CI 1.595-9.840), but dialysis duration and type, and SAVR versus TAVR were not. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ESRD and severe AS have a similar and higher survival with TAVR or SAVR when compared to BAV at 1-year. These results may influence patient care decisions favoring valve replacement in AS patients with ESRD. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Balloon Valvuloplasty , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Kidney Failure, Chronic/complications , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aged , Aortic Valve Stenosis/complications , Aortic Valve Stenosis/diagnosis , Aortic Valve Stenosis/mortality , Balloon Valvuloplasty/adverse effects , Balloon Valvuloplasty/mortality , Female , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/mortality , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Kidney Failure, Chronic/diagnosis , Kidney Failure, Chronic/mortality , Kidney Failure, Chronic/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Selection , Proportional Hazards Models , Renal Dialysis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Severity of Illness Index , Time Factors , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/mortality , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Pembrolizumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets the programmed death-1 receptor to induce immune-mediated clearance (CL) of tumor cells. Originally approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2014 for treating patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma, pembrolizumab is now also used to treat patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, classical Hodgkin lymphoma, head and neck cancer, and urothelial cancer. This paper describes the recently identified feature of pembrolizumab pharmacokinetics, the time-dependent or time-varying CL. Overall results indicate that CL decreases over the treatment period of a typical patient in a pattern well described by a sigmoidal function of time with three parameters: the maximum proportion change in CL from baseline (approximately Imax or exactly eImax - 1), the time to reach Imax/2 (TI50), and a Hill coefficient. Best overall response per response evaluation criteria in solid tumor category was found to be associated with the magnitude of Imax.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/pharmacokinetics , Antineoplastic Agents/pharmacokinetics , Clinical Trials as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/blood , Antineoplastic Agents/blood , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/blood , Female , Humans , Male , Melanoma/blood , Middle Aged , Time Factors , Young AdultABSTRACT
UNLABELLED: : On October 2, 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval for pembrolizumab, a breakthrough therapy-designated drug, for the treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumors express programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), as determined by an FDA-approved test, and who have disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy or targeted therapy against anaplastic lymphoma kinase or epidermal growth factor receptor, if appropriate. This indication was approved concurrently with the PD-L1 immunohistochemistry 22C3 pharmDx, a companion diagnostic test for patient selection based on PD-L1 tumor expression. The accelerated approval was granted based on durable objective response rate (ORR) and an acceptable toxicity profile demonstrated in a multicenter, open-label trial enrolling 550 patients with metastatic NSCLC. The efficacy population comprised 61 patients with tumors identified as strongly positive for PD-L1, and the confirmed ORR as determined by blinded independent central review was 41% (95% confidence interval: 28.6%, 54.3%); all were partial responses. At the time of the analysis, responses were ongoing in 21 of 25 patients (84%), with 11 patients (44%) having response duration of ≥6 months. The most commonly occurring (≥20%) adverse reactions included fatigue, decreased appetite, dyspnea, and cough. The most frequent (≥2%) serious adverse drug reactions were pleural effusion, pneumonia, dyspnea, pulmonary embolism, and pneumonitis. Immune-mediated adverse reactions occurred in 13% of patients and included pneumonitis, colitis, hypophysitis, and thyroid disorders. The accelerated approval regulations describe approval of drugs and biologic products for serious and life-threatening illnesses based on a surrogate endpoint likely to predict clinical benefit. Under these regulations, a confirmatory trial or trials is required to verify and describe the benefit of pembrolizumab for patients with metastatic NSCLC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This report presents key information on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) accelerated approval of pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer whose tumors express programmed death-ligand 1, as determined by an FDA-approved test, and who have disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy or targeted therapy against anaplastic lymphoma kinase or epidermal growth factor receptor, if appropriate. The report discusses the data supporting the approval decision, specifically highlighting the incorporation of a companion diagnostic in the key study and the optimal dose of pembrolizumab.