Nivolumab versus pembrolizumab in previously-treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients: A propensity-matched real-world analysis.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Nivolumab and pembrolizumab have been the standard of care in patients with previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of nivolumab and pembrolizumab. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data of advanced NSCLC patients with PD-L1 (Programmed death-ligand 1) [clone22C3] positive tumors (Tumor proportion score [TPS] ≥ 1%) who had been treated with nivolumab or pembrolizumab as second- or subsequent line from 2015 to 2021.Propensity score matching was performed to reduce potential selection bias. We analyzed the clinical outcomes including objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). RESULTS: Among a total of 202 eligible patients, 72 pairs of patients from each group were identified after propensity score matching. There were no significant differences in ORR, PFS, and OS between the two agents (nivolumab vs. pembrolizumab ORR, 23.6% vs. 20.8%, median PFS, 3.7 months vs. 4.6 months, hazard ratio [HR] 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.46; p = 0.92, and median OS, 27.4 months vs. 19.6 months, HR 0.78; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.20; p = 0.24). Additionally, PFS was similar between the treatments in the PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50% subgroup (median PFS, 3.7 months vs. 4.6 months, HR 0.94; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.59; p = 0.82) and PD-L1 TPS 1-49% subgroup (median PFS, 3.7 months vs.4.6 months, HR 1.13; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.85; p = 0.61). There was also no significant difference in the frequency of grade ≥ 3 irAEs (9.7% vs. 11.1%; p = 1.0). CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference in the efficacy and safety between nivolumab and pembrolizumab in advanced NSCLC patients with PD-L1-positive tumors in the subsequent line setting.