4.5 Article

Nivolumab and brain metastases in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer

期刊

LUNG CANCER
卷 129, 期 -, 页码 35-40

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2018.12.025

关键词

Non-small cell lung cancer; Non-squamous; Brain metastasis; Immune checkpoint inhibitors; Nivolumab

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Brain metastases are common among patients with non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and result in a poor prognosis. Consequently, such patients are often excluded from clinical trials. In Italy an expanded access program (EAP) was used to evaluate nivolumab efficacy and safety in this sub population outside a clinical trial. Materials and methods: In this EAP, nivolumab was available for patients with non-squamous NSCLC in progression after at least one systemic treatment for stage IIIB/IV disease. Nivolumab 3 mg/kg was administered intravenously every 2 weeks. Patients with brain metastases could be included if they were asymptomatic, neurologically stable and either off corticosteroids or on a stable or decreasing dose of <= 10 mg/day prednisone. Results: 409 out of 1588 patients included had asymptomatic or controlled brain metastases. A median of 7 doses (range 1-45) were delivered. Median follow-up was 6.1 months (range 0.1-21.9). The disease control rate was 39%: 4 patients had a complete response, 64 a partial response and 96 showed stable disease. At baseline, 118 patients were on corticosteroids and 74 were undergoing concomitant radiotherapy. The median overall survival in this subpopulation was 8.6 months (95% CI: 6.4-10.8). 337 discontinued treatment for various reasons, 23 (7%) of whom due to adverse events, in line with that observed in the overall population and in previous studies. Conclusions: Our results confirm that nivolumab is active in non-squamous NSCLC patients with brain metastases, despite their poor prognosis. Its safety profile is also concordant with results in the EAP overall population and in patients with other malignancies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据