First-Line Chemoimmunotherapy versus Sequential Platinum-Based Chemotherapy Followed by Immunotherapy in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with ≤49% Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Expression: A Real-World Multicenter Retrospective Study

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) improved overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), while CIT showed limited efficacy among the subgroup with ≤49% programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Therefore, sequential treatment with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy followed by immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment (SEQ) could be an option and was compared with CIT in this study. A total of 234 eligible patients with NSCLC with ≤49% PD-L1 expression from nine hospitals in Japan were analyzed. The median PFS in the CIT group (9.3 months (95% CI: 6.7–14.8)) was longer than SEQ group (5.5 months (95% CI: 4.5–6.1)) among the subgroup with 1–49% PD-L1 expression (p < 0.001). In contrast, no significant difference was observed among the <1% PD-L1 expression subgroup (p = 0.883). The median PFS-2 (the time from first-line treatment to progression to the second-line treatment or death) in the SEQ group was significantly longer than the median PFS in the CIT group (10.5 months (95% CI: 5.9–15.9) vs. 6.4 months (95% CI: 4.9–7.5); p = 0.024). Thus, CIT is recommended for patients with NSCLC with 1–49% PD-L1 expression. ABSTRACT: Background: The long overall survival (OS) observed among patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with high programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) groups in previous phase III trials suggests the limited efficacy of CIT among the subgroup with ≤49% PD-L1 expression on tumor cells. Hence, sequential treatment with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy followed by second-line immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment (SEQ) is an option. This study examined whether first-line CIT would provide better outcomes than SEQ in patients with advanced NSCLC with ≤49% PD-L1 expression. Methods: This retrospective study evaluated patients with untreated NSCLC who received first-line CIT or SEQ at nine hospitals in Japan. OS, progression-free survival (PFS), PFS-2 (the time from first-line treatment to progression to second-line treatment or death), and other related outcomes were evaluated between the CIT and SEQ groups. Results: Among the 305 enrolled patients, 234 eligible patients were analyzed: 165 in the CIT group and 69 in the SEQ group. The COX proportional hazards model suggested a significant interaction between PD-L1 expression and OS (p = 0.006). OS in the CIT group was significantly longer than that in the SEQ group in the 1–49% PD-L1 expression subgroup but not in the <1% PD-L1 expression subgroup. Among the subgroup with 1–49% PD-L1 expression, the CIT group exhibited longer median PFS than the SEQ group (CIT: 9.3 months (95% CI: 6.7–14.8) vs. SEQ:5.5 months (95% CI: 4.5–6.1); p < 0.001), while the median PFS in the CIT group was not statistically longer than the median PFS-2 in the SEQ group (p = 0.586). There was no significant difference between the median PFS in the CIT and SEQ groups among the <1% PD-L1 expression subgroup (p = 0.883); the median PFS-2 in the SEQ group was significantly longer than the median PFS in the CIT group (10.5 months (95% CI: 5.9–15.3) vs. 6.4 months (95% CI: 4.9–7.5); p = 0.024). Conclusions: CIT is recommended for patients with NSCLC with 1–49% PD-L1 expression because it significantly improved OS and PFS compared to SEQ. CIT had limited benefits in patients with <1% PD-L1 expression, and the median PFS-2 in the SEQ group was significantly longer than the median PFS in the CIT group. These findings will help physicians select the most suitable treatment option for patients with NSCLC, considering PD-L1 expressions.