Safety and efficacy analysis of pembrolizumab dosing patterns in patients with advanced melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
Aim To evaluate the impact of discrepancy between prescribed and recommended fixed 200 mg dose (P-F discrepancy) on immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and treatment efficacy in patients with advanced melanoma and NSCLC. Methods This retrospective study included 177 patients with advanced melanoma or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received at least one cycle of single-agent pembrolizumab. We defined P-F discrepancy as the differences between prescribed pembrolizumab dose and 200 mg recommended dose, expressed in percentages. Our primary outcome was immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and our secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Results The median P-F discrepancy was –21.5%, with the 25th and 75th percentile at –32% and –5.0% respectively. ROC curve analyses did not show any optimal cutoffs to prognosticate irAEs (AUC = 0.558 for all patients) or cancer mortality (AUC = 0.583 for melanoma; AUC = 0.539 for NSCLC) in either cancer type. Separate multivariable Cox analyses suggested no statistically significant association between P-F discrepancy and overall survival in patients with melanoma (HR 1.012, 95%CI 0.987–1.038, P = 0.362) or NSCLC (HR 0.998, 95%CI 0.978–1.019, P = 0.876). Conclusion There was no optimal pembrolizumab cut-off point to predict irAEs or treatment efficacy. We supported the use of weight-based pembrolizumab dosing, given the potential cost-saving and no differences in terms of irAEs or treatment efficacy in patients with advanced melanoma or NSCLC. Future studies on province- or national-level would be important to validate our findings.
