4.8 Article

Atezolizumab plus stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for medically inoperable patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a multi-institutional phase I trial

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-40813-w

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is a standard-of-care for medically-inoperable-early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A phase I study tested the addition of atezolizumab to SABR in high risk, medically inoperable, early-stage NSCLC, and found that it was well tolerated and showed efficacy signals.
Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is a standard-of-care for medically-inoperable-early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). One third of patients progress and chemotherapy is rarely used in this population. We questioned if addition of the immune-checkpoint-inhibitor (ICI) atezolizumab to standard-of-care SABR can improve outcomes. We initiated a multi-institutional single-arm phase I study (NCT02599454) enrolling twenty patients with the primary endpoint of maximum tolerated dose (MTD); secondary endpoints of safety and efficacy; and exploratory mechanistic correlatives. Treatment is well tolerated and full dose atezolizumab (1200 mg) is the MTD. Efficacy signals include early responses (after 2 cycles of ICI, before initiation of SABR) in 17% of patients. Biomarkers of functional adaptive immunity, including T cell activation in the tumor and response to ex-vivo stimulation by circulating T cells, are highly predictive of benefit. These results require validation and are being tested in a phase III randomized trial. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is standard-of-care for patients with medically inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), however the risk of systemic recurrences remains high. Here the authors report the results of a phase I study testing the addition of atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) to SABR in high risk, medically inoperable, early-stage, NSCLC.

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

4.8
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