What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to assess the efficacy of pembrolizumab-based combination therapies in distinct biomarker-defined subgroups of advanced NSCLC.

May 29, 2026

Final analysis of the biomarker-directed, randomized, phase 2 KEYNOTE-495/KeyImPaCT study of pembrolizumab (P)–based combination therapy for non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Key Points

This research aims to assess the efficacy of pembrolizumab-based combination therapies in distinct biomarker-defined subgroups of advanced NSCLC.
Patients with untreated advanced NSCLC were adaptively randomized to receive one of three pembrolizumab-based therapies.
Participants were stratified into four biomarker subgroups based on T-cell inflamed gene expression profile and tumor mutational burden.
Primary endpoint was overall response rate assessed via RECIST v1.1.
243 patients were treated, with the T-cell inflamed gene expression profile non-low tumor mutational burden non-high subgroup achieving a significant efficacy threshold.
Median follow-up was 66.5 months, showing comparable overall survival across all biomarker subgroups.
No new safety signals were identified, indicating the safety profiles were consistent with previous knowledge.

Abstract

8584 Background: KEYNOTE-495/KeyImPaCT (NCT03516981) evaluated 3 P-based regimens in participants (pts) with advanced NSCLC across 4 prospectively defined biomarker subgroups based on T-cell–inflamed gene expression profile (Tcell inf GEP) and tumor mutational burden (TMB). In interim analysis, ORR with P + lenvatinib (L) in the Tcell inf GEP non-low TMB high subgroup met the prespecified efficacy threshold. We report final analysis results. Methods: Pts with previously untreated NSCLC were assessed for Tcell inf GEP (non-low, ≥−0.16; low, 20%); PFS and OS were generally consistent with anticipated results among biomarker-defined subgroups (Table). Safety profile of each combination was consistent with the known profiles of each therapy. Conclusions: With longer follow-up, OS benefit was comparable across the 4 biomarker subgroups for the 3 combination therapies, with no new safety signals. These data continue to show the feasibility of prospective biomarker assessment to evaluate P-based therapies in advanced NSCLC. Clinical trial information: NCT03516981 . Tcell inf GEP low TMB non-high Tcell inf GEP low TMB high Tcell inf GEP non-low TMB non-high Tcell inf GEP non-low TMB high ORR, % (95% CI) P + LP + QP + F 200 mgP + F 800 mg 12.0 (2.5-31.2)11.5 (2.4-30.2)0.0 (0.0-28.5)27.3 (6.0-61.0) 33.3 (9.9-65.1)30.8 (9.1-61.4)33.3 (4.3-77.7)13.6 (2.9-34.9) 40.9 (20.7-63.6)13.6 (2.9-34.9)25.0 (3.2-65.1)- 57.1 (34.0-78.2)52.4 (29.8-74.3)60.0 (14.7-94.7)50.0 (26.0-74.0) Median (95% CI) PFS, mo P + LP + QP + F 200 mgP+ F 800 mg 5.4 (2.3-8.8)2.8 (2.0-6.0)2.1 (1.9-2.1)4.2 (1.8-12.2) 13.8 (1.5-19.4)3.9 (1.9-17.3)8.1 (1.7-NR)3.5 (2.0-8.2) 8.2 (4.2-19.7)6.1 (2.1-12.8)2.1 (0.9-6.5)- 17.8 (6.0-20.7)17.0 (9.3-29.1)6.3 (0.4-NR)20.2 (6.1-NR) Median ( OS, mo P + LP + QP + F 200 mgP + F 800 mg 16.0 (5.4-20.2)13.3 (8.4-20.0)8.6 (3.8-35.4)18.6 (3.4-41.2) 16.9 (3.8-33.2)20.1 (7.7-NR)20.8 (1.7-NR)11.1 (5.2-19.6) 22.5 (12.0-41.3)23.7 (7.9-43.1)12.6 (0.9-25.4)- 22.7 (16.9-56.0)51.6 (17.6-NR)NR (13.5-NR)NR (13.0-NR) -, no pts enrolled. NR = not reached. </jats:

Perguntar à IA

Bookmark

Cite This Study

Gutierrez et al. (Thu,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a192f07fab5b468c44184bf https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.8584

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

Perguntar à IA

Bookmark