Five-Year Survival Outcomes From the PACIFIC Trial: Durvalumab After Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Author(s): David R. Spigel, MD1; Corinne Faivre-Finn, MD, PhD2; Jhanelle E. Gray, MD3; David Vicente, MD4; David Planchard, MD, PhD5; Luis Paz-Ares, MD, PhD6; Johan F. Vansteenkiste, MD, PhD7; Marina C. Garassino, MD8,9; Rina Hui, PhD10; Xavier Quantin, MD, PhD11; Andreas Rimner, MD12; Yi-Long Wu, MD13; Mustafa Özgüroğlu, MD14; Ki H. Lee, MD15; Terufumi Kato, MD16; Maike de Wit, MD, PhD17; Takayasu Kurata, MD18; Martin Reck, MD, PhD19; Byoung C. Cho, MD, PhD20; Suresh Senan, PhD21; Jarushka Naidoo, MBBCH, MHS22; Helen Mann, MSc23; Michael Newton, PharmD24; Piruntha Thiyagarajah, MD23; and Scott J. Antonia, MD, PhD3 on behalf of the PACIFIC Investigators
Source: DOI: 10.1200/JCO.21.01308 Journal of Clinical Oncology 40, no. 12 (April 20, 2022) 1301-1311.
Lucio Gordan MD

Dr. Lucio Gordan's Thoughts

Remarkable study, practice-changing, showing a significant improvement in PFS and OS at 5-years. After initial learning phase insofar as management of pulmonary toxicity from IO Rx, adoption of such therapy hopefully continues to increase from historical baseline.


The phase III PACIFIC trial compared durvalumab with placebo in patients with unresectable, stage III non–small-cell lung cancer and no disease progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Consolidation durvalumab was associated with significant improvements in the primary end points of overall survival (OS; stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.87; P = .00251) and progression-free survival (PFS [blinded independent central review; RECIST v1.1]; stratified HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.65; P < .0001), with manageable safety. We report updated, exploratory analyses of survival, approximately 5 years after the last patient was randomly assigned.


Patients with WHO performance status 0 or 1 (any tumor programmed cell death-ligand 1 status) were randomly assigned (2:1) to durvalumab (10 mg/kg intravenously; administered once every 2 weeks for 12 months) or placebo, stratified by age, sex, and smoking history. Time-to-event end point analyses were performed using stratified log-rank tests. Medians and landmark survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.


Seven hundred and nine of 713 randomly assigned patients received durvalumab (473 of 476) or placebo (236 of 237). As of January 11, 2021 (median follow-up, 34.2 months [all patients]; 61.6 months [censored patients]), updated OS (stratified HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.89; median, 47.5 v 29.1 months) and PFS (stratified HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.68; median, 16.9 v 5.6 months) remained consistent with the primary analyses. Estimated 5-year rates (95% CI) for durvalumab and placebo were 42.9% (38.2 to 47.4) versus 33.4% (27.3 to 39.6) for OS and 33.1% (28.0 to 38.2) versus 19.0% (13.6 to 25.2) for PFS.


These updated analyses demonstrate robust and sustained OS and durable PFS benefit with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy. An estimated 42.9% of patients randomly assigned to durvalumab remain alive at 5 years and 33.1% of patients randomly assigned to durvalumab remain alive and free of disease progression, establishing a new benchmark for standard of care in this setting.

Author Affiliations

1Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Tennessee Oncology, Nashville, TN 2The University of Manchester and The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom 3H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL 4Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Seville, Spain 5Department of Medical Oncology, Thoracic Unit, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France 6Universidad Complutense, CiberOnc, CNIO and Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain 7University Hospitals KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium 8Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy 9Department of Hematology/Oncology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 10Westmead Hospital and the University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia 11Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM) and Montpellier Cancer Research Institute (IRCM), INSERM U1194, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France 12Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 13Department of Pulmonary Oncology, Guangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital & Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, China 14Istanbul University—Cerrahpaşa, Cerrahpaşa School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey 15Chungbuk National University Hospital, Chungbuk National University College of Medicine, Cheongju, Republic of Korea 16Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama, Japan 17Vivantes Klinikum Neukölln, Berlin, Germany 18Department of Thoracic Oncology, Kansai Medical University Hospital, Osaka, Japan 19Lung Clinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North, German Center for Lung Research, Grosshansdorf, Germany 20Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea 21Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands 22Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center and Bloomberg-Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy at John Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 23AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom 24AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

Perioperative Nivolumab in Resectable Lung Cancer

Perioperative nivolumab (Nivo) showed a 20% 18-month EFPS improvement. This is another option to consider for your patients with stage IIA-IIIB NSCLC. Of note, the study arm received chemo + Nivo x 4 cycles preoperatively, then 12 months of Nivo therapy, and toxicities were as expected.

Read More »

Plasma Proteome–Based Test for First-Line Treatment Selection in Metastatic Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

FCS medical oncologist and hematologist Ernesto Bustinza-Linares, MD has co-authored an abstract published in the American Society of Clinical Oncology Journal, JCO Precision Oncology, that uncovers a new testing method to determine personalized care options for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The abstract’s authors address the limitations of existing guidelines that recommend checkpoint immunotherapy, sometimes in combination with chemotherapy, for treating NSCLC, which often discounts patient variability and immune factors. The findings from the study show that by incorporating additional plasma proteome-based testing, combined with the standard protein inhibitor testing, clear differences in patient outcomes were observed after applying targeted treatments based on the testing results.

Read More »

Phase III, Randomized Study of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Chemotherapy in Patients With EGFR- or ALK-Mutated Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer (ATTLAS, KCSG-LU19-04)

Adding VEGF inhibitor to PD-1 blocker in addition to chemotherapy is better than a chemotherapy-alone regimen as a second-line therapy after TKI failure. This is true especially in patients with tumors with high PD-L1 expression, with not much besides chemotherapy as second-line therapy for those patients (or other clinical trials) that may be a better option that includes immunotherapy.

Read More »

Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy in Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor–Mutated Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Disease Progression on Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: Final Results of CheckMate 722

This is the same issue as the Phase III, Randomized Study of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Chemotherapy in Patients With EGFR- or ALK-Mutated Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer (ATTLAS, KCSG-LU19-04) article, this one was negative though. A question for the previous trial would be: do we need PDL-1 inhibitor, or just VEGF inhibitor, recall the pts with tumors with high PDL-1 expression did better though, so most likely we need both with chemotherapy.

Read More »