Outcomes with durvalumab by tumour PD-L1 expression in unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer in the PACIFIC trial.

BACKGROUND: In the PACIFIC trial, durvalumab significantly improved progression-free and overall survival (PFS/OS) versus placebo, with manageable safety, in unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients without progression after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). We report exploratory analyses of outcomes by tumour cell (TC) programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to intravenous durvalumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or placebo ≤12 months, stratified by age, sex, and smoking history, but not PD-L1 status. Where available, pre-CRT samples were tested for PD-L1 expression (immunohistochemistry) and scored at pre-specified (25%) and post hoc (1%) TC cut-offs. Treatment-effect hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated from unstratified Cox proportional hazards models (Kaplan-Meier-estimated medians). RESULTS: In total, 713 patients were randomly assigned, 709 of whom received at least 1 dose of study treatment durvalumab (n = 473) or placebo (n = 236). Some 451 (63%) were PD-L1-assessable: 35%, 65%, 67%, 33%, and 32% had TC ≥25%, <25%, ≥1%, <1%, and 1%-24%, respectively. As of 31 January 2019, median follow-up was 33.3 months. Durvalumab improved PFS versus placebo (primary-analysis data cut-off, 13 February 2017) across all subgroups [HR, 95% confidence interval (CI); medians]: TC ≥25% (0.41, 0.26-0.65; 17.8 versus 3.7 months), <25% (0.59, 0.43-0.82; 16.9 versus 6.9 months), ≥1% (0.46, 0.33-0.64; 17.8 versus 5.6 months), <1% (0.73, 0.48-1.11; 10.7 versus 5.6 months), 1%-24% [0.49, 0.30-0.80; not reached (NR) versus 9.0 months], and unknown (0.59, 0.42-0.83; 14.0 versus 6.4 months). Durvalumab improved OS across most subgroups (31 January 2019 data cut-off; HR, 95% CI; medians): TC ≥ 25% (0.50, 0.30-0.83; NR versus 21.1 months), <25% (0.89, 0.63-1.25; 39.7 versus 37.4 months), ≥1% (0.59, 0.41-0.83; NR versus 29.6 months), 1%-24% (0.67, 0.41-1.10; 43.3 versus 30.5 months), and unknown (0.60, 0.43-0.84; 44.2 versus 23.5 months), but not <1% (1.14, 0.71-1.84; 33.1 versus 45.6 months). Safety was similar across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: PFS benefit with durvalumab was observed across all subgroups, and OS benefit across all but TC <1%, for which limitations and wide HR CI preclude robust conclusions.

Cytology for PD-L1 testing: A systematic review.

Evaluation of tumoral programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression is standard practice for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who may be candidates for treatment targeting the programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 pathway. Currently, all of the commercially available immunohistochemistry assays have been validated for use with histology specimens although, in routine clinical practice, approximately 30-40 % of patients with advanced NSCLC have only cytology specimens available for diagnosis, staging, and biomarker analysis. This systematic review evaluated the success rate, concordance, and clinical utility of using cytology specimens to assess tumor PD-L1 expression levels compared with histology specimens from patients with advanced NSCLC. EMBASE and PubMed database searches identified 142 unique, relevant publications, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria for at least one analysis. In 709 specimens, across seven publications, the proportion of cytology specimens evaluable for PD-L1 testing was 92.0 %. Among nine studies eligible for concordance analysis between cytology and histology specimens at a PD-L1 tumor cell expression cutoff of ≥50 %, overall percentage agreement was 89.7 % (n = 428), 72.0 % for positive percentage agreement (n = 218), and 95.0 % for negative percentage agreement (n = 258); results using a tumor PD-L1 expression cutoff of ≥1 % were similar. Our analyses suggest that using cytology specimens to assess PD-L1 expression is feasible, with good levels of concordance between cytology and histology specimens using PD-L1 tumor cell expression cutoffs of ≥1 % and ≥50 %. In conclusion, there is no convincing evidence that cytology specimens are inadequate or inferior to histology specimens for assessing PD-L1 expression in patients with NSCLC.