First-line cemiplimab monotherapy and continued cemiplimab beyond progression plus chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 50% or more (EMPOWER-Lung 1): 35-month follow-up from a mutlicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

Author(s): Prof Mustafa Özgüroğlu, MD1; Prof Saadettin Kilickap, MD2; Prof Ahmet Sezer, MD3; Prof Mahmut Gümüş, MD4; Prof Igor Bondarenko, MD5; Miranda Gogishvili, MD6; Marina Nechaeva, MD7; Prof Michael Schenker, MD8; Prof Irfan Cicin, MD9; Prof Gwo Fuang Ho, MD10; Yaroslav Kulyaba, MD11; Kasimova Zyuhal, MD12; Roxana-Ioana Scheusan, MD13; Prof Marina Chiara Garassino, MD14; Xuanyao He, PhD15; Manika Kaul, MD15; Emmanuel Okoye, MPH15; Yuntong Li, PhD15; Siyu Li, PhD15; Jean-Francois Pouliot, PhD15; Frank Seebach, MD15; Israel Lowy, MD15; Giuseppe Gullo, MD15; Petra Rietschel, MD15
Source: doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00329-7

Dr. Anjan Patel's Thoughts

The EMPOWER-Lung1 study looked at patients with metastatic NSCLC and PDL1 expression >= 50%, randomized to cemiplimab vs. chemo; no surprise, the benefit was significant in the CPI therapy group. Interestingly, they allow the patients on the CPI arm to have chemo added at the time of progression, which would be a different approach. We should see more results on this as follow-up matures.

BACKGROUND

Cemiplimab provided significant survival benefit to patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of at least 50% and no actionable biomarkers at 1-year follow-up. In this exploratory analysis, we provide outcomes after 35 months’ follow-up and the effect of adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at the time of disease progression.

METHODS

EMPOWER-Lung 1 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. We enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed squamous or non-squamous advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of 50% or more. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to intravenous cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks for up to 108 weeks, or until disease progression, or investigator’s choice of chemotherapy. Central randomisation scheme generated by an interactive web response system governed the randomisation process that was stratified by histology and geographical region. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression free survival, as assessed by a blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Patients with disease progression on cemiplimab could continue cemiplimab with the addition of up to four cycles of chemotherapy. We assessed response in these patients by BICR against a new baseline, defined as the last scan before chemotherapy initiation. The primary endpoints were assessed in all randomly assigned participants (ie, intention-to-treat population) and in those with a PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. We assessed adverse events in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540.

FINDINGS

Between May 29, 2017, and March 4, 2020, we recruited 712 patients (607 [85%] were male and 105 [15%] were female). We randomly assigned 357 (50%) to cemiplimab and 355 (50%) to chemotherapy. 284 (50%) patients assigned to cemiplimab and 281 (50%) assigned to chemotherapy had verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. At 35 months’ follow-up, among those with a verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50% median overall survival in the cemiplimab group was 26·1 months (95% CI 22·1–31·8; 149 [52%] of 284 died) versus 13·3 months (10·5–16·2; 188 [67%] of 281 died) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·46–0·71; p<0·0001), median progression-free survival was 8·1 months (95% CI 6·2–8·8; 214 events occurred) in the cemiplimab group versus 5·3 months (4·3–6·1; 236 events occurred) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·51, 95% CI 0·42–0·62; p<0·0001). Continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy as second-line therapy (n=64) resulted in a median progression-free survival of 6·6 months (6·1–9·3) and overall survival of 15·1 months (11·3–18·7). The most common grade 3–4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (15 [4%] of 356 patients in the cemiplimab group vs 60 [17%] of 343 in the control group), neutropenia (three [1%] vs 35 [10%]), and pneumonia (18 [5%] vs 13 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in ten (3%) of 356 patients treated with cemiplimab (due to autoimmune myocarditis, cardiac failure, cardio-respiratory arrest, cardiopulmonary failure, septic shock, tumour hyperprogression, nephritis, respiratory failure, [n=1 each] and general disorders or unknown [n=2]) and in seven (2%) of 343 patients treated with chemotherapy (due to pneumonia and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each], and cardiac arrest, lung abscess, and myocardial infarction [n=1 each]). The safety profile of cemiplimab at 35 months, and of continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy, was generally consistent with that previously observed for these treatments, with no new safety signals

INTERPRETATION

At 35 months’ follow-up, the survival benefit of cemiplimab for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer was at least as pronounced as at 1 year, affirming its use as first-line monotherapy for this population. Adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at progression might provide a new second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

FUNDING

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi.

Author Affiliations

1Cerrahpaşa Faculty of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Istanbul University Cerrahpaşa, Istanbul, Türkiye; 2Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Oncology, Istinye University Istanbul, Türkiye; 3Department of Medical Oncology, Başkent University, Adana, Türkiye; 4Department of Medical Oncology, School of Medicine, Istanbul Medeniyet University, Istanbul, Türkiye; 5Department of Oncology and Medical Radiology, Dnipropetrovsk Medical Academy, Dnipro, Ukraine; 6High Technology Medical Centre, University Clinic, Tbilisi, Georgia; 7Division Arkhangelsk Clinical Oncology Center, Arkhangelsk, Russia; 8Centrul de Oncologie Sf Nectarie SRL, Craiova, Romania; 9Department of Medical Oncology, Trakya University, Edirne, Türkiye; 10Clinical Oncology Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; 11Prognosis Optima LLC, Kyiv, Ukraine; 12Multiprofile Hospital for Active Treatment, Dobrich, Bulgaria; 13Oncocenter Oncologie Clinica, Timisoara, Romania; 14Department of Medicine, Section of Hematology/Oncology, Knapp Center for Biomedical Discovery, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA; 15Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY, USA

Leave a Comment

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

Related Articles

Amivantamab Plus Lazertinib in Atypical EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: Results From CHRYSALIS-2

The CHRYSALIS-2, the cohort C analysis of patients with atypical EGFR mutations showed meaningful and durable activity. Atypical mutations can be difficult to deal with as a clinician, and having concrete data on these (S768I, L861Q and G719ZX) mutations gives assurance that this doublet is active. Overall response rate (ORR) was 52% and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.1 months in refractory patients and 19.5 months in the treatment-naive population.

Read More »

Updated Overall Survival Analysis From the Phase II PHAROS Study of Encorafenib Plus Binimetinib in Patients With BRAF V600E-Mutant Metastatic Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

This update demonstrated that encorafenib plus binimetinib was associated with the longest median overall survival (mOS) reported to date among targeted therapies in patients with treatment-naïve BRAF V600E–mutant metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC). Median OS was 47.6 months in treatment-naïve patients. By the way check the authors there 😊.

Read More »

Simultaneous Durvalumab and Platinum-Based Chemoradiotherapy in Unresectable Stage III Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Phase III PACIFIC-2 Study

PACIFIC-2 was a phase III trial testing durva given concurrently with cCRT (and continued as consolidation) versus placebo + cCRT in unresectable stage III NSCLC, and it did not meet its primary endpoint. The overall response rate (ORR) was essentially identical (60.7% vs 60.6%), and pneumonitis rates were similar (any grade 28.8% vs 28.7%; grade ≥3: 4.6% vs 5.6%), but adverse events (AEs) leading to discontinuation and fatal AEs were higher with durva (25.6% vs 12.0%; 13.7% vs 10.2%), especially early on. Starting IO up front with cCRT didn’t improve outcomes and added early toxicity—consolidation durva after cCRT is still the way to go.

Read More »

Sevabertinib in Advanced HER2-Mutant Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Sevabertinib shows strong efficacy in HER2-mutant NSCLC, with an overall response rate (ORR) of 64% and median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.3 months in previously treated, HER2-TKI–naive patients, and an overall response rate (ORR) of 71% with a duration of response (DOR) of 11.0 months in first-line therapy. Activity is highest in TKD mutations, especially Y772_A775dupYVMA, and intracranial responses are seen. Safety is manageable: diarrhea is common but mostly low grade, with grade ≥3 in 5–23% and rare discontinuations. Notably, interstitial lung disease (ILD) was not observed. These data position sevabertinib as a viable oral TKI alongside ADCs for HER2-mutant NSCLC, particularly for TKD/YVMA disease.

Read More »