No abstract

Purpose Immunotherapy is a relatively new treatment modality for advanced non-small cell lung cancer following platinum-based chemotherapy. Nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and atezolizumab demonstrated superior outcomes and improved tolerability compared to standard treatment in randomized controlled trials; however, these studies vary significantly in inclusion criteria and study design. To our knowledge, the efficacy and safety of nivolumab and atezolizumab following platinum-based chemotherapy have not been directly compared to one another in a real-world clinic setting. Methods We retrospectively compared immunotherapy response rates and toxicity in patients with stage IV or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer following progression during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Results Among 124 eligible patients, the objective response rate was 14.8% in the nivolumab group (n = 81) vs. 13.9% in the atezolizumab group (n = 43) (p = 0.897). Median overall survival was 8.4 months with nivolumab (95% confidence interval (CI), 6.3 to 11.2) vs. 6.5 months with atezolizumab (95% CI, 4.7 to not reached). Median progression free survival was 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.7 to 2.8) and 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 2.7) in the nivolumab and atezolizumab groups, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 70.4% of patients in the nivolumab group and 65.1% in the atezolizumab group. Conclusions There was no statistically significant difference in efficacy outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer who received atezolizumab or nivolumab after progression during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Response rates in this study were numerically lower than response rates observed in the landmark randomized controlled trials leading to approval of immunotherapy in this setting. Rates of treatment-related adverse events were similar between groups.

No abstract

e20657 Background: Influenza vaccination is recommended by the CDC for cancer patients to reduce the risk of influenza-related complications. There is concern that the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) may be greater in vaccinated patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPI). We sought to interrogate if influenza vaccination in patients with NSCLC receiving ICPI therapy had an increased incidence of irAEs compared to non-vaccinated patients. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis of patients with advanced NSCLC who received PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor monotherapy between 3/2015 – 12/2018. Influenza immunization records from both institutional and state-wide registries were obtained from 2014 -2019. Comparisons of adverse event incidence between flu vaccinated and control patients were tested using chi-square statistics. Results: 117 patients were included in our analysis, 33 (28%) were vaccinated during ICPI therapy, 19 (58%) received quadrivalent influenza vaccine, 13 (39%) received trivalent influenza vaccine and 1 (3%) was undetermined. 22 (67%) vaccinated patients had an irAE vs 53 (63%) patients who were not vaccinated during ICPI therapy (p = 0.720). 8 (24%) vaccinated patients had an irAE leading to discontinuation of therapy vs 12 (14%) patients who were not vaccinated during ICPI therapy (p = 0.198). The most frequent irAE in both groups was fatigue 16 (48%) vs 28 (33%) (p = 0.128). Notable irAEs included colitis (0 vs 1), pneumonitis (3 vs 3), hepatitis (1 vs 4) in vaccinated patients vs without vaccine, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline demographics between both groups including age, race, gender, tumor histology or ECOG performance status. Conclusions: Our study suggests that irAEs are not significantly increased with vaccination for influenza during ICPI therapy. However, there is a slight trend toward increased incidence of irAE warranting ICPI discontinuation for which further investigation is needed. Limitations of this study include a small sample size and inability to grade irAE retrospectively.