Comparing programmed death ligand 1 scores for predicting pembrolizumab efficacy in head and neck cancer

Tumor proportion score (TPS) and combined positive score ([CPS] includes immune cells), 2 methods for scoring programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, have been used in clinical trials investigating the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). These trials resulted in regulatory approval for pembrolizumab in the first- and second-line setting outside the United States. We performed a post hoc analysis of the KEYNOTE-040 study (NCT02252042) to determine whether CPS is a practical and suitable alternative scoring method to TPS. In KEYNOTE-040, patients with metastatic HNSCC received pembrolizumab or investigator choice of standard of care (SOC). The relative utility and equivalence of CPS >= 50 and TPS >= 50% for defining PD-L1 expression status in patients with HNSCC and comparability of scoring methods by tandem receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were analyzed. The cutoff for each method was also evaluated. CPS >= 50 appeared equivalent to TPS >= 50% for predicting objective response rate (ORR), overall survival, and progression-free survival. ORR for pembrolizumab versus SOC was 26.2 versus 8.5% for TPS >= 50%, 28.1 versus 7.7% for CPS >= 50, 10.6 versus 11.6% for TPS < 50%, and 10.0 versus 12.0% for CPS < 50. Tandem ROC analysis showed that TPS 50% and CPS 50 maximized delta Youden index and suggested that CPS is more sensitive than TPS at lower cutoffs (i.e., CPS >= 1). In conclusion, CPS 50 can be used interchangeably with TPS 50% to determine PD-L1 status in patients with HNSCC. CPS may be more sensitive than TPS at lower cutoffs.

Automated summary

Tumor proportion score (TPS) and combined positive score (CPS) are two methods used to evaluate PD-L1 expression, and CPS >= 50 appears to be equivalent to TPS >= 50% in predicting response rates. CPS may be more sensitive than TPS at lower cutoffs.