Outcomes of patients with solid tumour malignancies treated with first-line immuno-oncology agents who do not meet eligibility criteria for clinical trials

Eur J Cancer. 2021 Jul:151:115-125. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.04.004. Epub 2021 May 8.

Abstract

Background: Immuno-oncology (IO)-based therapies have been approved based on randomised clinical trials, yet a significant proportion of real-world patients are not represented in these trials. We sought to compare the outcomes of trial-ineligible vs. -eligible patients with advanced solid tumours treated with first-line (1L) IO therapy.

Patients and methods: Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) Database Consortium and the Alberta Immunotherapy Database, patients with advanced RCC, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or melanoma treated with 1L PD-(L)1 inhibition-based therapy were included. Trial eligibility was retrospectively determined as per commonly used exclusion criteria. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), treatment duration (TD) and time to next treatment (TTNT).

Results: A total of 395 of 1241 (32%) patients were deemed trial-ineligible. The main reasons for ineligibility based on preselected exclusion criteria were Karnofsky performance status <70%/Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >1 (40%, 158 of 395), brain metastases (32%, 126 of 395), haemoglobin < 9 g/dL (16%, 63 of 395) and estimated glomerular filtration rate <40 mL/min (15%, 61 of 395). Between the ineligible vs. eligible groups, the median OS, ORR, median TD and median TTNT were 10.2 vs. 39.7 months (p < 0.01), 36% vs. 47% (p < 0.01), 2.7 vs. 6.9 months (p < 0.01) and 6.0 vs. 16.8 months (p < 0.01), respectively. Subgroup analyses showed statistically significant inferior OS, TD and TTNT for trial-ineligible vs. -eligible patients across all tumour types. Adjusted hazard ratios for death in RCC, NSCLC and melanoma were 1.84 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-2.77), 2.21 (95% CI 1.58-3.11) and 1.82 (95% CI 1.21-2.74), respectively..

Conclusions: Thirty-two percent of real-world patients treated with contemporary 1L IO-based therapies were ineligible for clinical trials. Although one-third of the trial-ineligible patients responded to treatment, the overall trial-ineligible population had inferior outcomes than trial-eligible patients. These data may guide patient counselling and temper expectations of benefit.

Keywords: Clinical outcomes; Clinical trial ineligible; IMDC; Immuno-oncology; Immunotherapy; Melanoma; Non–small-cell lung cancer; Real-world patients; Renal cell carcinoma; Trial eligibility.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung / drug therapy
  • Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung / immunology
  • Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung / pathology
  • Carcinoma, Renal Cell / drug therapy
  • Carcinoma, Renal Cell / immunology
  • Carcinoma, Renal Cell / pathology
  • Clinical Trials as Topic*
  • Databases, Factual
  • Eligibility Determination
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors / adverse effects
  • Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors / therapeutic use*
  • Kidney Neoplasms / drug therapy
  • Kidney Neoplasms / immunology
  • Kidney Neoplasms / pathology
  • Lung Neoplasms / drug therapy
  • Lung Neoplasms / immunology
  • Lung Neoplasms / pathology
  • Male
  • Melanoma / drug therapy
  • Melanoma / immunology
  • Melanoma / pathology
  • Middle Aged
  • Neoplasms / drug therapy*
  • Neoplasms / immunology
  • Neoplasms / mortality
  • Neoplasms / pathology
  • Patient Selection*
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Skin Neoplasms / drug therapy
  • Skin Neoplasms / immunology
  • Skin Neoplasms / pathology
  • Time Factors
  • Treatment Outcome

Substances

  • Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors