BACKGROUND: The primary analysis (median follow-up 34.9 months across all arms) of the phase 3 POSEIDON study demonstrated a statistically significant overall survival (OS) improvement with first-line tremelimumab plus durvalumab and chemotherapy (T+D+CT) versus CT in patients with EGFR/ALK-wild-type metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC). D+CT showed a trend for OS improvement versus CT that did not reach statistical significance. This paper reports prespecified OS analyses after longer-term follow-up (median >5 years).
METHODS: 1013 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to T+D+CT, D+CT, or CT, stratified by tumor cell (TC) PD-L1 expression (≥50% vs <50%), disease stage (IVA vs IVB), and histology (squamous vs nonsquamous). Serious adverse events were collected during follow-up.
RESULTS: After median follow-up of 63.4 months across all arms, T+D+CT showed sustained OS benefit versus CT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% CI: 0.64-0.89; 5-year OS: 15.7% vs 6.8%). OS improvement with D+CT versus CT (HR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72-1.00; 5-year OS: 13.0%) was consistent with the primary analysis. OS benefit with T+D+CT versus CT remained more pronounced in nonsquamous (HR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.56-0.85) versus squamous (HR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.65-1.10) mNSCLC. OS benefit with T+D+CT versus CT was still evident regardless of PD-L1 expression, including patients with PD-L1 TC <1%, and remained evident in STK11-mutant (nonsquamous), KEAP1-mutant, and KRAS-mutant (nonsquamous) mNSCLC. No new safety signals were identified.
CONCLUSIONS: After median follow-up of >5 years, T+D+CT showed durable long-term OS benefit versus CT, supporting its use as first-line treatment in mNSCLC, including in patient subgroups with harder-to-treat disease.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy is first-line treatment for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Growing evidence suggests that radiation, specifically stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), may enhance the immunogenic response as well as cytoreduce tumor burden. The primary objective of the study is to determine the progression free survival for patients with newly diagnosed ES-SCLC treated with combination multisite SBRT and chemo-immunotherapy (carboplatin, etoposide, and durvalumab).
METHODS: This is a multicenter, single arm, phase 2 study. Patients with treatment-naïve, ES-SCLC will be eligible for this study. Patients will receive durvalumab 1500mg IV q3w, carboplatin AUC 5 to 6 mg/mL q3w, and etoposide 80 to 100 mg/m2 on days 1 to 3 q3w for four cycles, followed by durvalumab 1500mg IV q4w until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Ablative radiation will be delivered 1 to 4 extracranial sites in 3 or 5 fractions, determined by location, during cycle 2. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival, measured from day 1 of chemoimmunotherapy. Secondary endpoints include grade ≥3 toxicity by CTCAE v5.0 within three months of RT, overall survival, response rate, time to second line systemic therapy, and time to new distant progression.
CONCLUSIONS: Now that immunotherapy is an established part of ES-SCLC management, it is important to further optimize its use and effect. This study will investigate the progression-free survival of combined SBRT and chemo-immunotherapy in patients with ES-SCLC. In addition, the data from this study may further inform the immunogenic role of SBRT with chemo-immunotherapy, as well as identify clinical, biological, or radiomic prognostic features.

BACKGROUND: The optimal subsequent treatment strategy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and consolidative durvalumab therapy remains unknown. We aimed to determine the optimal subsequent treatment strategy for this clinical population.
METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 523 consecutive patients with LA-NSCLC treated with CRT and analyzed the treatment outcomes of subsequent therapy after progression following CRT and consolidative durvalumab therapy. Patients who received tyrosine kinase inhibitors as subsequent therapy were excluded.
RESULTS: Out of 122 patients who received subsequent chemotherapy, 55% underwent platinum-based, 25% non-platinum-based, and 20% immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-containing therapies. In the platinum-based group, patients with a durvalumab-progression-free survival (Dur-PFS) ≥ 1 year had a significantly longer median subsequent therapy-PFS (SubTx-PFS) than those with Dur-PFS < 1 year (13.2 months vs. 4.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.21-0.97; P = .04). Furthermore, among patients receiving non-platinum-based chemotherapy, the median SubTx-PFS was longer in the combined with angiogenesis inhibitor group than in the without group, although the difference was not statistically significant. No significant difference of SubTx-PFS was observed between the reason for durvalumab discontinuation and the outcomes of ICI-containing therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, platinum-based chemotherapy rechallenge is frequently employed following progression subsequent to CRT and consolidative durvalumab therapy for LA-NSCLC. Optimal treatment strategies may consider Dur-PFS and angiogenesis inhibitor feasibility. Further research is warranted to identify clinical biomarkers that can help identify patients who would benefit from ICI rechallenge.

UNASSIGNED: Immune checkpoint inhibitor plus platinum-etoposide (PE) improved overall survival (OS) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). While the CASPIAN trial demonstrated the efficacy of durvalumab plus PE, the clinical trial results may not be representative of the general, real-world population because clinical trials often have strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. We herein report the efficacy and safety of durvalumab plus PE in patients with ES-SCLC in real-world, clinical practice.
UNASSIGNED: The present, monocentric, retrospective study evaluated patients with ES-SCLC or recurrent, limited-stage SCLC who received durvalumab plus PE between September 2020 and February 2023. The efficacy and incidence of adverse events (AEs) were also evaluated.
UNASSIGNED: The study included 40 patients, of whom 17 were elderly (age >70 years), and 15 had performance status (PS) 2 or 3. The median follow-up time was 13.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 8.0-22.2 months]. The objective response rate was 80.0% (95% CI: 63.1-91.6%), and the disease control rate was 88.6% (95% CI: 73.3-96.8%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.9 months (95% CI: 4.9-6.9), and the median OS was 25.4 months (95% CI: 4.6-46.2). Factors such as advanced age, poor PS, and presence of brain metastases were not associated with lower PFS and OS. Twenty-six patients (65.0%) experienced grade 3 or higher AEs, mainly hematological toxicity. AEs leading to treatment discontinuation occurred in three patients (8%).
UNASSIGNED: Durvalumab plus PE in patients with ES-SCLC showed good efficacy and safety according to our real-world data, suggesting that this treatment is well tolerated in clinical practice, even in elderly patients and those with poor PS.

Evidence from the Phase III PACIFIC trial established durvalumab, a monoclonal antibody (mAb) targeting PD-L1, following concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) as a global standard of care for patients with unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). There remains an unmet need to improve upon the outcomes achieved with the PACIFIC regimen. Combining durvalumab with other immunotherapies may improve outcomes further. Two such immunotherapies include oleclumab, an mAb targeting CD73, and monalizumab, an mAb targeting NKG2A. Both agents demonstrated antitumor activity in early-phase trials. PACIFIC-9 (NCT05221840) is an international, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase III trial comparing durvalumab plus either oleclumab or monalizumab with durvalumab plus placebo in patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC and no disease progression following cCRT.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05221840 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
Durvalumab is a treatment that helps the body\'s immune system to identify and attack cancer cells by binding to a protein called PD-L1. Studies show that durvalumab lowers the risk of cancer growing or spreading, and prolongs survival, when administered after chemotherapy and radiation therapy (‘chemoradiotherapy’) in patients with a type of lung cancer called stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for whom surgery is not an option.Two antibody treatments have been developed that may help a patient\'s immune system to identify and attack cancer cells. Oleclumab binds to a protein on cancer cells called CD73, which prevents the production of adenosine, a chemical that obstructs the immune system from attacking the cancer. Monalizumab binds to NKG2A, a protein on immune cells that inhibits their ability to destroy cancer cells. Early studies suggest that combining either of these treatments with durvalumab may be better than durvalumab alone for slowing the growth and spread of cancer in patients with NSCLC.PACIFIC-9 is a study that aims to recruit approximately 999 patients with stage III NSCLC for whom surgery is not an option and who have completed chemoradiotherapy without the cancer growing or spreading. Patients will be randomly assigned in equal numbers to receive up to a year of treatment with durvalumab plus oleclumab, durvalumab plus monalizumab or durvalumab plus placebo. The primary measure of efficacy is the length of time that patients remain alive without the cancer growing or spreading for each combination versus durvalumab plus placebo.

BACKGROUND: PLAnning Treatment For Oesophago-gastric Cancer: a Randomised Maintenance Therapy Trial (PLATFORM) is an adaptive phase II study assessing the role of maintenance therapies in advanced oesophago-gastric (OG) adenocarcinoma. We evaluated the role of the anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor durvalumab in these patients.
METHODS: Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative locally advanced or metastatic OG adenocarcinoma with disease control or response to 18 weeks of platinum-based first-line chemotherapy were randomised to active surveillance or maintenance durvalumab. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Safety was assessed in all patients who had commenced surveillance visits or received at least one dose of durvalumab. Exploratory survival analyses according to PD-L1 Combined Positive Score (CPS) and immune (biomarker-positive) or angiogenesis dominant (biomarker-negative) tumour microenvironment (TME) phenotypes were conducted.
RESULTS: Between March 2015 and April 2020, 205 patients were randomised to surveillance (n = 100) and durvalumab (n = 105). No significant differences were seen in PFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.84, P = 0.13] and overall survival (OS; HR 0.98, P = 0.45) between surveillance and durvalumab. Five patients randomised to durvalumab demonstrated incremental radiological responses compared with none with surveillance. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 77 (76.2%) durvalumab-assigned patients. A favourable effect in OS with durvalumab over surveillance in CPS ≥5 and immune biomarker-positive patients was observed compared with CPS <5 and biomarker-negative subgroups, respectively: CPS ≥5 versus <5: HR 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-1.22 versus HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.44-1.96; biomarker-positive versus negative: HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.29-1.23 versus HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.42-1.65.
CONCLUSIONS: Maintenance durvalumab does not improve PFS in patients with OG adenocarcinoma who respond to first-line chemotherapy but induced incremental radiological responses in a subset of patients. TME characterisation could refine patient selection for anti-PD-L1 therapy above PD-L1 CPS alone.

BACKGROUND: Durvalumab supplementation may have some potential in improving the efficacy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and this meta-analysis aims to explore the impact of durvalumab supplementation on efficacy for NSCLC.
METHODS: PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched, and we included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of durvalumab supplementation on efficacy in patients with NSCLC. Overall survival and progression-free survival were included for this meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Four RCTs were finally included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control group for NSCLC, durvalumab supplementation showed significantly improved survival rate (odd ratio [OR] = 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.31 to 2.06; P < 0.0001), overall survival ( hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.61 to 0.87; P = 0.0003), progression-free survival rate (OR = 2.31; 95% CI = 1.78 to 3.01; P < 0.00001) and progression-free survival (HR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.54 to 0.95; P = 0.02), and had the capability to reduce the incidence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events (OR = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.16 to 0.42; P < 0.00001).
CONCLUSIONS: Durvalumab supplementation is effective to improve the efficacy for NSCLC.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), the clinical efficacy of monotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) against PD-1/PD-L1 is modest. To enhance response rates to these immunotherapeutic agents and broaden the indications for their use, new approaches involving combinational therapy are needed. The immune regulator CD73 is a potential target, as it promotes tumor escape by producing immunosuppressive extracellular adenosine in the tumor microenvironment. Here, we present the results from the NSGO-OV-UMB1/ENGOT-OV-30 trial evaluating the activity of combining the anti-CD73 antibody oleclumab with the anti-PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitor durvalumab in patients with recurrent EOC.
METHODS: In this phase II open-label non-randomized study, patients with CD73-positive relapsed EOC were intravenously administered oleclumab (3000 mg, Q2W) and durvalumab (1500 mg, Q4W). The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR) at 16 weeks. The expression of PD-L1 and CD8 was assessed by immunohistochemistry of archival tumors.
RESULTS: This trial included 25 patients with a median age of 66 years (47-77 years). Twenty-two patients were evaluable for treatment activity analysis. The DCR was 27%, the median progression-free survival was 2.7 months (95% CI: 2.2-4.2) and the median overall survival was 8.4 months (95% CI: 5.0-13.4). Infiltration of CD8+ cells and PD-L1 expression on tumor cells were observed in partially overlapping sets of 74% of the tumor samples. Neither CD8- nor PD-L1-positivity were significantly associated with better DCR.
CONCLUSIONS: Combined treatment with oleclumab and durvalumab was safe and demonstrated limited anti-tumor activity in patients with recurrent EOC.

BACKGROUND: This phase II nonrandomized study evaluated the efficacy and safety of AZD4635 in combination with durvalumab (Arm A) or durvalumab plus cabazitaxel (Arm B) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with docetaxel and ≥1 novel hormonal agent.
METHODS: The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) per RECIST v1.1 (soft tissue) or the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 (bone). Secondary endpoints included safety, tolerability, overall survival, confirmed prostate-specific antigen (PSA50) response, pharmacokinetics, and objective response rate. Enrollment in Arm A was stopped following a sponsor decision unrelated to safety. The study was stopped based on the planned futility analysis due to low PSA50 response in Arm B.
RESULTS: In the final analysis (1 November 2021), 30 patients were treated (Arm A, n = 2; Arm B, n = 28). The median rPFS in Arm B was 5.8 months (95% confidence interval 4.2-not calculable). Median rPFS was 5.8 months versus 4.2 months for patients with high versus low blood-based adenosine signature. The most common treatment-related adverse events in Arm B were nausea (50.0%), diarrhea (46.4%), anemia and neutropenia (both 35.7%), asthenia (32.1%), and vomiting (28.6%). Overall, AZD4635 in combination with durvalumab or AZD4635 in combination with cabazitaxel and durvalumab showed limited efficacy in patients with mCRPC.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the safety profile of both combinations was consistent with known safety data of the individual agents, the results of this trial do not support further development of the combinations.

OBJECTIVE: IRX-2 is a multi-cytokine immune-activating agent with anti-tumor activity in non-metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Here, we evaluated combined IRX-2 and durvalumab in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic HNSCC.
METHODS: This was a phase Ib trial consisting of dose escalation and expansion. Primary endpoints were safety and biomarkers to assess the immune response in the tumor microenvironment including significant increases in PD-L1 expression and CD8 + tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) comparing pre- and on-treatment tumor biopsies. Secondary endpoints were objective response rates (ORR) and survival outcomes.
RESULTS: Sixteen patients were evaluable for response, and nine patients were evaluable for biomarkers. Thirteen patients (68 %) had exposure to prior anti-PD-1 therapy. No dose-limiting or grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events were observed. On-treatment biopsies showed significantly increased PD-L1 (p = 0.005), CD3+ (p = 0.020), CD4+ (p = 0.022), and CD8 + T cells (p = 0.017) compared to pre-treatment. Median overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) were 6.18 months (95 % CI, 2.66-8.61) and 2.53 months (95 % CI, 1.81-4.04), respectively. One patient had an objective response (ORR, 5.3 %) with an ongoing PFS of > 25 months. Disease control rate was 42 %. The responder harbored an ARID1A variant of unknown significance (VUS) that was predicted to bind her HLA-I alleles with a higher affinity than the reference peptide.
CONCLUSIONS: IRX-2 and durvalumab were safe and elicited the evidence of immune activation in the tumor microenvironment determined by increased PD-L1 expression and CD8+ TILs.
BACKGROUND: NCT03381183.