Summary Background Despite recent advances in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, there remains a need for effective treatments for progressive disease. We assessed the efficacy of ...pembrolizumab for patients with previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods We did this randomised, open-label, phase 2/3 study at 202 academic medical centres in 24 countries. Patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 expression on at least 1% of tumour cells were randomly assigned (1:1:1) in blocks of six per stratum with an interactive voice-response system to receive pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg, or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival both in the total population and in patients with PD-L1 expression on at least 50% of tumour cells. We used a threshold for significance of p<0·00825 (one-sided) for the analysis of overall survival and a threshold of p<0·001 for progression-free survival. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01905657. Findings Between Aug 28, 2013, and Feb 27, 2015, we enrolled 1034 patients: 345 allocated to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 346 allocated to pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg, and 343 allocated to docetaxel. By Sept 30, 2015, 521 patients had died. In the total population, median overall survival was 10·4 months with pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 12·7 months with pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg, and 8·5 months with docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly longer for pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg versus docetaxel (hazard ratio HR 0·71, 95% CI 0·58–0·88; p=0·0008) and for pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg versus docetaxel (0·61, 0·49–0·75; p<0·0001). Median progression-free survival was 3·9 months with pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 4·0 months with pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg, and 4·0 months with docetaxel, with no significant difference for pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg versus docetaxel (0·88, 0·74–1·05; p=0·07) or for pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg versus docetaxel (HR 0·79, 95% CI 0·66–0·94; p=0·004). Among patients with at least 50% of tumour cells expressing PD-L1, overall survival was significantly longer with pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg than with docetaxel (median 14·9 months vs 8·2 months; HR 0·54, 95% CI 0·38–0·77; p=0·0002) and with pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg than with docetaxel (17·3 months vs 8·2 months; 0·50, 0·36–0·70; p<0·0001). Likewise, for this patient population, progression-free survival was significantly longer with pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg than with docetaxel (median 5·0 months vs 4·1 months; HR 0·59, 95% CI 0·44–0·78; p=0·0001) and with pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg than with docetaxel (5·2 months vs 4·1 months; 0·59, 0·45–0·78; p<0·0001). Grade 3–5 treatment-related adverse events were less common with pembrolizumab than with docetaxel (43 13% of 339 patients given 2 mg/kg, 55 16% of 343 given 10 mg/kg, and 109 35% of 309 given docetaxel). Interpretation Pembrolizumab prolongs overall survival and has a favourable benefit-to-risk profile in patients with previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. These data establish pembrolizumab as a new treatment option for this population and validate the use of PD-L1 selection. Funding Merck & Co.
Summary Background Osimertinib (AZD9291) is an oral, potent, irreversible EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor selective for EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor sensitising mutations, and the EGFR Thr790Met ...resistance mutation. We assessed the efficacy and safety of osimertinib in patients with EGFR Thr790Met-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), who had progressed after previous therapy with an approved EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. Methods In this phase 2, open-label, single-arm study (AURA2), patients aged at least 18 years with centrally confirmed EGFR Thr790Met-positive mutations, locally advanced or metastatic (stage IIIB/IV) NSCLC who progressed on previous EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor therapy received osimertinib 80 mg orally once daily; treatment could continue beyond progression if the investigator observed a clinical benefit. Patients with asymptomatic, stable CNS metastases not requiring steroids were allowed to enrol. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective response by blinded independent central review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Response endpoints were assessed in the evaluable for response analysis set (ie, all patients who received at least one dose of osimertinib and had measurable disease at baseline according to blinded independent central review). Other endpoints and safety were assessed in all patients receiving at least one osimertinib dose (full analysis set). The study is ongoing and patients are still receiving treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02094261. Findings Between May 20, 2014, and Sept 12, 2014, 472 patients were screened, of whom 210 started osimertinib treatment between June 13, 2014, and Oct 27, 2014; 11 patients were excluded from the evaluable for response analysis set (n=199) due to absence of measurable disease at baseline by blinded independent central review. At data cutoff (Nov 1, 2015), 122 (58%) patients remained on treatment. The median duration of follow-up was 13·0 months (IQR 7·6–14·2). 140 (70%; 95% CI 64–77) of 199 patients achieved an objective response by blinded independent central review: confirmed complete responses were achieved in six (3%) patients and partial responses were achieved in 134 (67%) patients. The most common all-causality grade 3 and 4 adverse events were pulmonary embolism (seven 3%), prolonged electrocardiogram QT (five 2%), decreased neutrophil count (four 2%), anaemia, dyspnoea, hyponatraemia, increased alanine aminotransferase, and thrombocytopenia (three 1% each). Serious adverse events were reported in 52 (25%) patients, of which 11 (5%) were investigator assessed as possibly treatment-related to osimertinib. Seven deaths were due to adverse events; these were pneumonia (n=2), pneumonia aspiration (n=1), rectal haemorrhage (n=1), dyspnoea (n=1), failure to thrive (n=1), and interstitial lung disease (n=1). The only fatal event assessed as possibly treatment-related by the investigator was due to interstitial lung disease. Interpretation Osimertinib showed clinical activity with manageable side-effects in patients with EGFR Thr790Met-positive NSCLC. Therefore, osimertinib could be a suitable treatment for patients with EGFR Thr790Met-positive disease who have progressed on an EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. Funding AstraZeneca.
