David R. Gandara , Janakiraman Subramanian , Edgardo S. Santos , Yehuda Brody , Itamar Sela , Yehonatan Elon , Michal Harel , Anat Reiner-Benaim , Coren Lahav , Kimberly McGregor
{"title":"PROphet测试在改变医生对非小细胞肺癌检查点免疫疗法治疗决策方面的影响","authors":"David R. Gandara , Janakiraman Subramanian , Edgardo S. Santos , Yehuda Brody , Itamar Sela , Yehonatan Elon , Michal Harel , Anat Reiner-Benaim , Coren Lahav , Kimberly McGregor","doi":"10.1016/j.cllc.2024.06.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) regimens are approved for first-line treatment of metastatic nononcogene-driven NSCLC. Guidelines do not differentiate which patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% should receive ICI monotherapy. The clinically validated PROphet NSCLC plasma proteomic-based test is designed to inform this therapeutic decision.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>One hundred oncologists were presented with 3 “virtual” metastatic NSCLC cases with PD-L1 scores and asked to recommend an approved first-line regimen. They then watched an online educational webinar on the PROphetNSCLC test. Postwebinar, the same cases were represented with the addition of a PROphet result, and oncologists again recommended a first-line regimen. Responses were compared to assess the impact on first-line treatment selection.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Treatment recommendation changed in 39.6% of PROphet-tested cases, with 93% of physicians changing at least 1 case. In the PD-L1 ≥ 50% group, 89% of physicians changed their recommendation, followed by 77%, in PD-L1 < 1%, and 36% in PD-L1 1% to 49%. In the PD-L1 ≥ 50%, PROphet POSITIVE group, the recommendation for ICI monotherapy increased from 60% to 89%. For the PD-L1 ≥ 50%, PROphet NEGATIVE group, the recommendation for monotherapy dropped from 60% to 9%. In the PD-L1 < 1%, PROphet NEGATIVE group, 35% of patients were spared toxicity from ICI compared to 11% in PROphet untested cases.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Adding PROphet to PD-L1 expression impacted therapeutic decision making in first-line NSCLC. PROphet identifies those predicted to have an overall survival benefit from ICI monotherapy versus combination versus chemotherapy, improving the probability of efficacy and reducing toxicity for some patients.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10490,"journal":{"name":"Clinical lung cancer","volume":"25 6","pages":"Pages e252-e261.e4"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525730424001384/pdfft?md5=68fe4e60e1c9153f5469964a5f1d6d04&pid=1-s2.0-S1525730424001384-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of PROphet Test in Changing Physicians' Therapeutic Decision-Making for Checkpoint Immunotherapy in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer\",\"authors\":\"David R. Gandara , Janakiraman Subramanian , Edgardo S. Santos , Yehuda Brody , Itamar Sela , Yehonatan Elon , Michal Harel , Anat Reiner-Benaim , Coren Lahav , Kimberly McGregor\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cllc.2024.06.011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) regimens are approved for first-line treatment of metastatic nononcogene-driven NSCLC. Guidelines do not differentiate which patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% should receive ICI monotherapy. The clinically validated PROphet NSCLC plasma proteomic-based test is designed to inform this therapeutic decision.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>One hundred oncologists were presented with 3 “virtual” metastatic NSCLC cases with PD-L1 scores and asked to recommend an approved first-line regimen. They then watched an online educational webinar on the PROphetNSCLC test. Postwebinar, the same cases were represented with the addition of a PROphet result, and oncologists again recommended a first-line regimen. Responses were compared to assess the impact on first-line treatment selection.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Treatment recommendation changed in 39.6% of PROphet-tested cases, with 93% of physicians changing at least 1 case. In the PD-L1 ≥ 50% group, 89% of physicians changed their recommendation, followed by 77%, in PD-L1 < 1%, and 36% in PD-L1 1% to 49%. In the PD-L1 ≥ 50%, PROphet POSITIVE group, the recommendation for ICI monotherapy increased from 60% to 89%. For the PD-L1 ≥ 50%, PROphet NEGATIVE group, the recommendation for monotherapy dropped from 60% to 9%. In the PD-L1 < 1%, PROphet NEGATIVE group, 35% of patients were spared toxicity from ICI compared to 11% in PROphet untested cases.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Adding PROphet to PD-L1 expression impacted therapeutic decision making in first-line NSCLC. PROphet identifies those predicted to have an overall survival benefit from ICI monotherapy versus combination versus chemotherapy, improving the probability of efficacy and reducing toxicity for some patients.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10490,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical lung cancer\",\"volume\":\"25 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages e252-e261.e4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525730424001384/pdfft?md5=68fe4e60e1c9153f5469964a5f1d6d04&pid=1-s2.0-S1525730424001384-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical lung cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525730424001384\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical lung cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525730424001384","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of PROphet Test in Changing Physicians' Therapeutic Decision-Making for Checkpoint Immunotherapy in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Purpose
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) regimens are approved for first-line treatment of metastatic nononcogene-driven NSCLC. Guidelines do not differentiate which patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% should receive ICI monotherapy. The clinically validated PROphet NSCLC plasma proteomic-based test is designed to inform this therapeutic decision.
Methods
One hundred oncologists were presented with 3 “virtual” metastatic NSCLC cases with PD-L1 scores and asked to recommend an approved first-line regimen. They then watched an online educational webinar on the PROphetNSCLC test. Postwebinar, the same cases were represented with the addition of a PROphet result, and oncologists again recommended a first-line regimen. Responses were compared to assess the impact on first-line treatment selection.
Results
Treatment recommendation changed in 39.6% of PROphet-tested cases, with 93% of physicians changing at least 1 case. In the PD-L1 ≥ 50% group, 89% of physicians changed their recommendation, followed by 77%, in PD-L1 < 1%, and 36% in PD-L1 1% to 49%. In the PD-L1 ≥ 50%, PROphet POSITIVE group, the recommendation for ICI monotherapy increased from 60% to 89%. For the PD-L1 ≥ 50%, PROphet NEGATIVE group, the recommendation for monotherapy dropped from 60% to 9%. In the PD-L1 < 1%, PROphet NEGATIVE group, 35% of patients were spared toxicity from ICI compared to 11% in PROphet untested cases.
Conclusion
Adding PROphet to PD-L1 expression impacted therapeutic decision making in first-line NSCLC. PROphet identifies those predicted to have an overall survival benefit from ICI monotherapy versus combination versus chemotherapy, improving the probability of efficacy and reducing toxicity for some patients.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Lung Cancer is a peer-reviewed bimonthly journal that publishes original articles describing various aspects of clinical and translational research of lung cancer. Clinical Lung Cancer is devoted to articles on detection, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of lung cancer. The main emphasis is on recent scientific developments in all areas related to lung cancer. Specific areas of interest include clinical research and mechanistic approaches; drug sensitivity and resistance; gene and antisense therapy; pathology, markers, and prognostic indicators; chemoprevention strategies; multimodality therapy; and integration of various approaches.