Real-World Outcomes of Stage IV NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥ 50% Treated with First-Line Pembrolizumab: Uptake of Second-Line Systemic Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Platinum-based chemotherapy was compared to single-agent pembrolizumab in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with PDL1 > 50% in KEYNOTE-024. In this trial, it was found that patients who received single-agent pembrolizumab had improved progression-free survival in addition to overall survival (OS). Based on KEYNOTE-024, only 53% of patients treated originally with pembrolizumab received second-line anticancer systemic therapy with an OS of 26.3 months. Based on these results, the objective of this study was to characterize real-world NSCLC patients who received second-line therapy after single-agent pembrolizumab. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study considering stage IV NSCLC patients diagnosed with BC Cancer between 2018 and 2021 with PD-L1 ≥ 50% who received first-line single agent pembrolizumab. Patient demographics, cancer history, treatment administered, and survival were collected retrospectively. Descriptive statistics were produced. OS was calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves and compared using the log rank test. A multivariate model evaluated characteristics associated with the receipt of second-line therapy. RESULTS: A total of 718 patients were diagnosed with Stage IV NSCLC and received at least one cycle of pembrolizumab. The median duration of treatment was 4.4 months, and the follow-up duration was 16.0 months. There were 567 (79%) patients who had disease progression, of whom 21% received second-line systemic therapy. Within the subset of patients with disease progression, the median duration of treatment was 3.0 months. It would be found that patients who received second-line therapy had better baseline ECOG performance status, were younger at diagnosis, and had a longer duration of pembrolizumab. Within the full population, the OS from the treatment initiation date was 14.0 months. OS was 5.6 months in patients who did not receive additional therapy after progression and 22.2 months in patients who received subsequent therapy. Baseline ECOG performance status was associated with improved OS in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Based on this real-world Canadian population, 21% of patients received second-line systemic therapy, despite second-line therapy being associated with prolonged survival. In this real-world population, we found that 60% fewer patients received second-line systemic therapy when compared to KEYNOTE-024. Although differences always exist when comparing a clinical and non-clinical trial population, our findings suggest undertreating stage IV NSCLC patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".