Efficacy of first-line atezolizumab combination therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer receiving proton pump inhibitors: post hoc analysis of IMpower150.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly used concomitant to cancer treatment and they induce gut microbiota changes. It is increasingly apparent that gut dysbiosis can reduce the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). However, little is known about PPI effects on outcomes with ICIs, particularly in combination, ICI approaches. Post hoc, Cox proportional hazard analysis of phase III trial, IMpower150 was conducted to assess the association between PPI use and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in chemotherapy-naive, metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer participants randomised atezolizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (ACP), bevacizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (BCP), or atezolizumab plus BCP (ABCP). PPI use was defined as any PPI administration between 30 days prior and 30 days after treatment initiation. Of 1202 participants, 441 (37%) received a PPI. PPI use was independently associated with worse OS (n = 748; hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 1.53 [1.21-1.95], P < 0.001) and PFS (1.34 [1.12-1.61], P = 0.002) in the pooled atezolizumab arms (ACP plus ABCP). This association was not apparent for BCP (n = 368; OS 1.01 [0.73-1.39], P = 0.969; PFS 0.97 [0.76-1.25], P = 0.827). The observed OS treatment effect (HR 95% CI) of the atezolizumab (ACP plus ABCP) arms vs BCP was 1.03 (0.77-1.36) for PPI users compared to 0.68 (0.54-0.86) for non-users (P [interaction] = 0.028). A similar association was noted for ABCP vs BCP (PPI users 0.96 [0.68-1.35]; PPI non-users 0.66 [0.50-0.87]; P [interaction] = 0.095). PPI use was a negative prognostic marker in patients treated with ACP or ABCP, but not BCP. The analysis suggests that PPIs negatively influence the magnitude of ICI efficacy.

Hopkins AM ，Kichenadasse G ，McKinnon RA ，Abuhelwa AY ，Logan JM ，Badaoui S ，Karapetis CS ，Rowland A ，Sorich MJ ... -  《-》

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (IMpower150): key subgroup analyses of patients with EGFR mutations or baseline liver metastases in a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial.

The IMpower150 trial showed significant improvements in progression-free and overall survival with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (ABCP) versus the standard-of-care bevacizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (BCP) in chemotherapy-naive patients with non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. Here, we report the efficacy of ABCP or atezolizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (ACP) versus BCP in key patient subgroups. IMpower150 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study done at 240 academic medical centres and community oncology practices across 26 countries worldwide. Patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive ABCP, ACP, or BCP every three weeks. The co-primary endpoints were overall survival and investigator-assessed progression-free survival in intention-to-treat wild-type patients (patients with epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR] or anaplastic lymphoma kinase [ALK] genetic alterations were excluded). Efficacy was assessed in key subgroups within the intention-to-treat population, including patients with EGFR mutations (both sensitising and non-sensitising; EGFR-positive) previously treated with one or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors and patients with baseline liver metastases. Overall survival in the intention-to-treat population was included among secondary efficacy endpoints. Exploratory endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving an objective response in the intention-to-treat population, including EGFR-positive patients and patients with baseline liver metastases. Data are reported as per the Jan 22, 2018, data cutoff date, at which the number of coprimary prespecified overall survival events was met in the ABCP versus BCP groups. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02366143, and is ongoing. Between March 31, 2015, and Dec 30, 2016, 1202 patients were enrolled. 400 patients were randomly assigned to ABCP, 402 to ACP, and 400 to BCP. In EGFR-positive patients (124 of 1202), median overall survival was not estimable (NE; 95% CI 17·0-NE) with ABCP (34 of 400) and 18·7 months (95% CI 13·4-NE) with BCP (45 of 400; hazard ratio [HR] 0·61 [95% CI 0·29-1·28]). Improved overall survival with ABCP versus BCP was observed in patients with sensitising EGFR mutations (median overall survival NE [95% CI NE-NE] with ABCP [26 of 400] vs 17·5 months [95% CI 11·7-NE] with BCP [32 of 400]; HR 0·31 [95% CI 0·11-0·83]) and in the intention-to-treat population (19·8 months [17·4-24·2] vs 14·9 months [13·4-17·1]; HR 0·76 [0·63-0·93]). Improved median overall survival with ABCP versus BCP was seen in patients with baseline liver metastases (13·3 months [11·6-NE] with ABCP [52 of 400] vs 9·4 months [7·9-11·7] with BCP [57 of 400]; HR 0·52 [0·33-0·82]). Median overall survival was 21·4 months (95% CI 13·8-NE) with ACP versus 18·7 months (95% CI 13·4-NE) with BCP in EGFR-positive patients (HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·51-1·68]). No overall survival benefit was seen with ACP versus BCP in patients with sensitising EGFR mutations (HR 0·90 [95% CI 0·47-1·74]), in the intention-to-treat population (HR 0·85 [0·71-1·03]), or in patients with baseline liver metastases (HR 0·87 [0·57-1·32]). In the intention-to-treat safety-evaluable population, grade 3-4 treatment-related events occurred in 223 (57%) patients in the ABCP group, in 172 (43%) in the ACP group, and in 191 (49%) in the BCP group; 11 (3%) grade 5 adverse events occurred in the ABCP group, as did four (1%) in the ACP group, and nine (2%) in the BCP group. Improved survival was noted for patients treated with ABCP compared with those given BCP in the intention-to-treat population, and in patients with baseline liver metastases. The overall survival signal in the subgroup of patients with EGFR sensitising mutations warrants further study. F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech.

Reck M ，Mok TSK ，Nishio M ，Jotte RM ，Cappuzzo F ，Orlandi F ，Stroyakovskiy D ，Nogami N ，Rodríguez-Abreu D ，Moro-Sibilot D ，Thomas CA ，Barlesi F ，Finley G ，Lee A ，Coleman S ，Deng Y ，Kowanetz M ，Shankar G ，Lin W ，Socinski MA ，IMpower150 Study Group ... -  《-》

Atezolizumab for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC.

Socinski MA ，Jotte RM ，Cappuzzo F ，Orlandi F ，Stroyakovskiy D ，Nogami N ，Rodríguez-Abreu D ，Moro-Sibilot D ，Thomas CA ，Barlesi F ，Finley G ，Kelsch C ，Lee A ，Coleman S ，Deng Y ，Shen Y ，Kowanetz M ，Lopez-Chavez A ，Sandler A ，Reck M ，IMpower150 Study Group ... -  《-》

Clinical efficacy of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy in KRAS-mutated non-small cell lung cancer with STK11, KEAP1, or TP53 comutations: subgroup results from the phase III IMpower150 trial.

The efficacy of atezolizumab (A) and/or bevacizumab (B) with carboplatin/paclitaxel (CP) chemotherapy was explored in the phase III, randomized IMpower150 study in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) according to KRAS mutations (mKRAS) and co-occurring STK11, KEAP1, or TP53 mutations. Mutation status was determined by circulating tumor DNA next-generation sequencing. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed in a mutation-evaluable intention-to-treat population (MEP; n=920) and SP263 (programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1)) biomarker-evaluable population (n=774). Within the mKRAS population (24.5% of MEP), ABCP showed numerical improvements vs BCP in median OS (19.8 vs 9.9 months; HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.72) and PFS (8.1 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.61)-greater than with ACP (OS: 11.7 vs 9.9 months; HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.91; PFS: 4.8 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.80; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.13) vs BCP. Across PD-L1 subgroups in mKRAS patients, OS and PFS were longer with ABCP vs BCP, but OS with ACP was similar to BCP in PD-L1-low and PD-L1-negative subgroups. Conversely, in KRAS-WT patients, OS was longer with ACP than with ABCP or BCP across PD-L1 subgroups. KRAS was frequently comutated with STK11, KEAP1, and TP53; these subgroups conferred different prognostic outcomes. Within the mKRAS population, STK11 and/or KEAP1 mutations were associated with inferior OS and PFS across treatments compared with STK11-WT and/or KEAP1-WT. In mKRAS patients with co-occurring mSTK11 and/or mKEAP1 (44.9%) or mTP53 (49.3%), survival was longer with ABCP than with ACP or BCP. These analyses support previous findings of mutation of STK11 and/or KEAP1 as poor prognostic indicators. While clinical efficacy favored ABCP and ACP vs BCP in these mutational subgroups, survival benefits were greater in the mKRAS and KEAP1-WT and STK11-WT population vs mKRAS and mKEAP1 and mSTK11 population, suggesting both prognostic and predictive effects. Overall, these results suggest that atezolizumab combined with bevacizumab and chemotherapy is an efficacious first-line treatment in metastatic NSCLC subgroups with mKRAS and co-occurring STK11 and/or KEAP1 or TP53 mutations and/or high PD-L1 expression.

West HJ ，McCleland M ，Cappuzzo F ，Reck M ，Mok TS ，Jotte RM ，Nishio M ，Kim E ，Morris S ，Zou W ，Shames D ，Das Thakur M ，Shankar G ，Socinski MA ... -  《Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer》

IMpower150 Final Exploratory Analyses for Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Chemotherapy in Key NSCLC Patient Subgroups With EGFR Mutations or Metastases in the Liver or Brain.

Final overall survival (OS) analyses are presented for EGFR mutations and liver or brain metastases subgroups in the phase 3 IMpower150 study (NCT02366143) evaluating atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (ABCP) or atezolizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (ACP) versus bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (BCP). Overall, 1202 patients (intention-to-treat population) with chemotherapy-naive, metastatic, nonsquamous NSCLC were randomized to ABCP, ACP, or BCP. Patients with treated, stable brain metastases were permitted. OS was evaluated in EGFR mutations and baseline liver metastases subgroups; rate and time to development of new brain metastases were evaluated in the intention-to-treat patients. At data cutoff (September 13, 2019; median follow-up, 39.3 mo), OS improvements were sustained with ABCP versus BCP in sensitizing EGFR mutations (all: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31-1.14; previous tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI]: HR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.38-1.46) and baseline liver metastases (HR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.45-1.02) subgroups. ACP did not have survival benefit versus BCP in sensitizing EGFR mutations (all: HR = 1.0; 95% CI: 0.57-1.74; previous TKI: HR = 1.22; 95% CI: 0.68-2.22) or liver metastases (HR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.68-1.51) subgroups. Overall, 100 patients (8.3%) developed new brain metastases. Although not formally evaluated, an improvement toward delayed time to development was found with ABCP versus BCP (HR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.39-1.19). This final exploratory analysis revealed OS benefits for ABCP versus BCP in patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations, including those with previous TKI failures, and with liver metastases, although these results should be interpreted with caution. The impact of ABCP on delaying the development of new brain lesions requires further investigation.

Nogami N ，Barlesi F ，Socinski MA ，Reck M ，Thomas CA ，Cappuzzo F ，Mok TSK ，Finley G ，Aerts JG ，Orlandi F ，Moro-Sibilot D ，Jotte RM ，Stroyakovskiy D ，Villaruz LC ，Rodríguez-Abreu D ，Wan-Teck Lim D ，Merritt D ，Coleman S ，Lee A ，Shankar G ，Yu W ，Bara I ，Nishio M ... -  《-》