The Effects of GCSF Primary Prophylaxis on Survival Outcomes and Toxicity in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer on First-Line Chemoimmunotherapy: A Sub-Analysis of the Spinnaker Study.

GCSF prophylaxis is recommended in patients on chemotherapy with a >20% risk of febrile neutropenia and is to be considered if there is an intermediate risk of 10−20%. GCSF has been suggested as a possible adjunct to immunotherapy due to increased peripheral neutrophil recruitment and PD-L1 expression on neutrophils with GCSF use and greater tumour volume decrease with higher tumour GCSF expression. However, its potential to increase neutrophil counts and, thus, NLR values, could subsequently confer poorer prognoses on patients with advanced NSCLC. This analysis follows on from the retrospective multicentre observational cohort Spinnaker study on advanced NSCLC patients. The primary endpoints were OS and PFS. The secondary endpoints were the frequency and severity of AEs and irAEs. Patient information, including GCSF use and NLR values, was collected. A secondary comparison with matched follow-up duration was also undertaken. Three hundred and eight patients were included. Median OS was 13.4 months in patients given GCSF and 12.6 months in those not (p = 0.948). Median PFS was 7.3 months in patients given GCSF and 8.4 months in those not (p = 0.369). A total of 56% of patients receiving GCSF had Grade 1−2 AEs compared to 35% who did not receive GCSF (p = 0.004). Following an assessment with matched follow-up, 41% of patients given GCSF experienced Grade 1−2 irAEs compared to 23% of those not given GCSF (p = 0.023). GCSF prophylaxis use did not significantly affect overall or progression-free survival. Patients given GCSF prophylaxis were more likely to experience Grade 1−2 adverse effects and Grade 1−2 immunotherapy-related adverse effects.

Impact of extended interval dosing of immune checkpoint inhibitors in lung cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID 19-pandemic has led physicians to change their approach to treating non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to reduce hospital stays for patients. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the toxicity and efficacy of extended interval (EI) dosing of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) compared to standard dosing (SD). METHODS: In this retrospective two-center study, we included patients with stage III/IV NSCLC who were treated with ICIs with or without maintenance pemetrexed during the month before March 2020. Adverse events and efficacy were collected until June 2021. Toxicity and survival were assessed using multivariate Cox models. RESULTS: Among the 134 patients identified (8 stage III and 126 stage IV; 66 first line and 60 second or subsequent lines), 70.9% received EI dosing. In the EI group, 12.6% of patients developed grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events versus 15.4% in the SD group (P- value = 0.8). Treatment was definitively discontinued due to toxicity in 9 patients in the EI group and in 5 in the SD group (P-value =0.5). Overall survival was not associated with dosage regimen or toxicity analyzed as a time-dependent variable. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that EI dosing of ICIs did not affect toxicity and overall survival in lung cancer patients.