Retrospective analysis reports clinical outcomes of first-line pembrolizumab in advanced lung cancer, indicating persistent challenges.
Background: Pembrolizumab-based therapy is a standard first-line option for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), yet pivotal clinical-trial populations may not reflect patients encountered in routine practice. Real-world cohorts enriched for Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≥2 and high metastatic burden remain underreported. We assessed real-world outcomes of first-line pembrolizumab in a heterogeneous cohort enriched for these. Methods: Retrospective cohort analysis of 45 patients with advanced NSCLC who received first-line pembrolizumab-based therapy (monotherapy or with platinum-based chemotherapy) at a single health maintenance organization in Israel between September 2017 and April 2020. Results: Mean age was 69.3 years (SD 9.0), 82.2% were male, 91.1% were current or former smokers, 37.8% had ECOG PS ≥2 (including 17.8% with ECOG ≥3), and 53.3% had three or more metastatic organ sites. PD-L1 expression was ≥50% in 46.7%, 1–49% in 13.3%, and <1% in 22.2%. After a median follow-up of 48.7 months (88.9% event rate), median overall survival (OS) was 8.87 months (95% CI, 5.88–14.32) and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.20 months (95% CI, 2.76–6.18), with an objective response rate of 46.7% and a disease control rate of 68.9%. On univariate Cox regression, the number of metastatic sites was most strongly associated with OS (HR 1.41 per site, 95% CI, 1.17–1.70, p = 0.0003). PD-L1 expression was significantly associated with both PFS (p < 0.0001) and OS (p = 0.0012), with the longest survival observed in patients with PD-L1 ≥50%. Conclusions: In this real-world cohort enriched for poor performance status and high metastatic burden, pembrolizumab-based therapy provided clinical benefit, but observed survival was substantially shorter than that reported in pivotal trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Koren et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: