Real World Effectiveness of Durvalumab in Stage III Unresectable Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: What is the Role of PD-L1 Expression?
[PURPOSE] Although the European Medicines Agency approved durvalumab post-chemoradiation (CRT) only for stage III unresectable non-small cell lung cancer (UR-NSCLC) patients with PD-L1 tumor proportio
APA
Kalkhoran HA, Verschueren MV, et al. (2025). Real World Effectiveness of Durvalumab in Stage III Unresectable Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: What is the Role of PD-L1 Expression?. Clinical lung cancer, 26(7), e599-e608.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2025.07.009
MLA
Kalkhoran HA, et al.. "Real World Effectiveness of Durvalumab in Stage III Unresectable Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: What is the Role of PD-L1 Expression?." Clinical lung cancer, vol. 26, no. 7, 2025, pp. e599-e608.e2.
PMID
40769847
Abstract
[PURPOSE] Although the European Medicines Agency approved durvalumab post-chemoradiation (CRT) only for stage III unresectable non-small cell lung cancer (UR-NSCLC) patients with PD-L1 tumor proportion scores (TPS) ≥ 1%, the Netherlands offers reimbursement irrespective of PD-L1 status. This real-world study compares survival between durvalumab-treated patients with PD-L1 TPS < 1% vs. ≥ 1%, and also evaluates its effectiveness against a historic-cohort.
[PATIENTS AND METHODS] This multicenter retrospective study included 2 patient cohorts with stage III UR-NSCLC: a durvalumab cohort and a historic CRT-only cohort. The durvalumab cohort was divided into PD-L1 TPS subgroups: < 1%, ≥ 1%, and unknown. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between (1) durvalumab-treated patients with PD-L1 TPS < 1% vs. ≥ 1%, and (2) durvalumab cohort (including PD-L1 subgroups) vs. historic-cohort.
[RESULTS] 229 and 339 patients were included in the durvalumab- and historic-cohorts, respectively. Although not statistically significant, durvalumab-treated patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥ 1% experienced a modestly greater benefit in OS (2-year OS 74.3% vs. 66.5%) and PFS (2-year PFS 55.5% vs. 36.2%) compared to those with PD-L1 TPS < 1%. Survival outcomes favored durvalumab over the historic cohort across PD-L1 subgroups, though PFS improvement was not statistically significant for PD-L1 TPS < 1%.
[CONCLUSIONS] Given these findings, patients with PD-L1 TPS < 1% may also benefit from durvalumab treatment in stage III UR-NSCLC.
[PATIENTS AND METHODS] This multicenter retrospective study included 2 patient cohorts with stage III UR-NSCLC: a durvalumab cohort and a historic CRT-only cohort. The durvalumab cohort was divided into PD-L1 TPS subgroups: < 1%, ≥ 1%, and unknown. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between (1) durvalumab-treated patients with PD-L1 TPS < 1% vs. ≥ 1%, and (2) durvalumab cohort (including PD-L1 subgroups) vs. historic-cohort.
[RESULTS] 229 and 339 patients were included in the durvalumab- and historic-cohorts, respectively. Although not statistically significant, durvalumab-treated patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥ 1% experienced a modestly greater benefit in OS (2-year OS 74.3% vs. 66.5%) and PFS (2-year PFS 55.5% vs. 36.2%) compared to those with PD-L1 TPS < 1%. Survival outcomes favored durvalumab over the historic cohort across PD-L1 subgroups, though PFS improvement was not statistically significant for PD-L1 TPS < 1%.
[CONCLUSIONS] Given these findings, patients with PD-L1 TPS < 1% may also benefit from durvalumab treatment in stage III UR-NSCLC.
MeSH Terms
Humans; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Lung Neoplasms; B7-H1 Antigen; Male; Retrospective Studies; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Female; Middle Aged; Aged; Neoplasm Staging; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Survival Rate; Aged, 80 and over; Follow-Up Studies; Adult; Prognosis