Patient-Reported Outcomes with Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab Versus Standard Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer (MYSTIC)

Edward B. Garon, Byoung Chul Cho, Niels Reinmuth, Ki Hyeong Lee, Alexander Luft, Myung Ju Ahn, Gilles Robinet, Sylvestre Le Moulec, Ronald Natale, Jeffrey Schneider, Frances A. Shepherd, Marina Chiara Garassino, Sarayut Lucien Geater, Zsolt Papai Szekely, Tran Van Ngoc, Feng Liu, Urban Scheuring, Nikunj Patel, Solange Peters, Naiyer A. Rizvi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: The phase 3 MYSTIC study of durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus chemotherapy in metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with tumor cell (TC) programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥ 25% did not meet its primary endpoints. We report patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Patients and Methods: Treatment-naïve patients were randomized (1:1:1) to durvalumab, durvalumab + tremelimumab, or chemotherapy. PROs were assessed in patients with PD-L1 TC ≥ 25% using EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30/LC13. Changes from baseline (12 months) for prespecified PRO endpoints of interest were analyzed by mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) and time to deterioration (TTD) by stratified log-rank tests. Results: There were no between-arm differences in baseline PROs (N = 488). Between-arm differences in MMRM-adjusted mean changes from baseline favored at least one of the durvalumab-containing arms versus chemotherapy (nominal P < .01) for C30 fatigue: durvalumab (−9.5; 99% confidence interval [CI], −17.0 to −2.0), durvalumab + tremelimumab (−11.7; 99% CI, −19.4 to −4.1); and for C30 appetite loss: durvalumab (−11.9; 99% CI, −21.1 to −2.7). TTD was longer with at least one of the durvalumab-containing arms versus chemotherapy (nominal P < .01) for global health status/quality of life: durvalumab (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-1.0), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-1.0); and for physical functioning: durvalumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.8), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9) (both C30); as well as for the key symptoms of dyspnea: durvalumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-1.0) (both LC13); fatigue: durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.8); and appetite loss: durvalumab (HR = 0.5; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9) (both C30). Conclusion: Durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus chemotherapy reduced symptom burden and improved TTD of PROs, suggesting it had no detrimental effects on quality of life in metastatic NSCLC patients. We investigated the impact of durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus chemotherapy on patient-reported symptoms, functioning, and global health status/quality of life in the phase 3 MYSTIC trial of metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer in patients with tumor cell programmed cell death ligand 1 expression ≥ 25%. Durvalumab ± tremelimumab reduced symptom burden and improved times to deterioration, suggesting there were no detrimental effects with treatment.

Original languageEnglish
JournalClinical Lung Cancer
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2021

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Oncology
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cancer Research

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Patient-Reported Outcomes with Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab Versus Standard Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer (MYSTIC)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this