Chemoimmunotherapy improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in two phase III trials. They set the age-stratified subgroup analyses at 65 years; however, over half of the patients with lung cancer were newly diagnosed at ≥75 years in Japan. Therefore, treatment efficacy and safety in elderly patients ≥ 75 years with ES-SCLC should be evaluated through real-world Japanese evidence. Consecutive Japanese patients with untreated ES-SCLC or limited-stage SCLC unfit for chemoradiotherapy between 5 August 2019 and 28 February 2022 were evaluated. Patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy were divided into the non-elderly (<75 years) and elderly (≥75 years) groups, and efficacy, including PFS, OS, and post-progression survival (PPS) were evaluated. In total, 225 patients were treated with first-line therapy, and 155 received chemoimmunotherapy (98 non-elderly and 57 elderly patients). The median PFS and OS in non-elderly and elderly were 5.1 and 14.1 months and 5.5 and 12.0 months, respectively, without significant differences. Multivariate analyses revealed that age and dose reduction at the initiation of the first chemoimmunotherapy cycle were not correlated with PFS or OS. In addition, patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) = 0 who underwent second-line therapy had significantly longer PPS than those with ECOG-PS = 1 at second-line therapy initiation (p < 0.001). First-line chemoimmunotherapy had similar efficacy in elderly and non-elderly patients. Individual ECOG-PS maintenance during first-line chemoimmunotherapy is crucial for improving the PPS of patients proceeding to second-line therapy.

Introduction: Extensive small cell lung cancer (ES‐SCLC) are currently managed using first‐line chemotherapy options, including atezolizumab (Atezo) plus etoposide and carboplatin (CE) or durvalumab (Durva) plus etoposide with either cisplatin (PE) or carboplatin (CE). However, a definitive distinction in therapeutic effects between Atezo and Durva in these regimens remains unestablished.Methods: We analyzed data from 100 patients diagnosed with ES‐SCLC who received immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as first‐line chemotherapy. Among them, 70 were administered Atezo + CE, 12 received Durva + PE, and 18 received Durva + CE. We assessed the efficacy of the two ICIs across various factors.Results: The progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) did not significantly differ between Atezo + CE and Durva + CE/PE as first‐line chemotherapy treatments for SCLC. We observed no significant differences in age, sex, performance status (PS), liver metastasis, bone metastasis, or platinum‐based agent usage between the treatment cohorts. However, a marked improvement in PFS and OS was observed in the solitary patient with brain metastasis treated with Atezo + CE.Conclusion: The primary distinction between these treatments was observed in the management of patients with brain metastasis. The literature lacks comparative studies on the effects of first‐line ICI treatment on the central nervous system, rendering our findings significant in clinical practice. Despite the retrospective nature of this study and the potential for various biases, we recommend the preferential use of Atezo + CE in patients with brain metastasis to potentially enhance prognosis.

Pembrolizumab is a major treatment for recurrent or advanced non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, data on its use and pharmacokinetics (PK) in older patients are limited. This open‐label, multicenter, observational study evaluated real‐world data on the safety, efficacy, and PK of pembrolizumab in older patients with NSCLC. In 99 patients aged ≥75 years, PK was determined by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry on pretreatment samples. Performance status (PS), geriatric assessment (GA), overall response rate (ORR), progression‐free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. The median age was 78 (75–87) years. PS was 2–3 in 14 patients. The median ORR, PFS, and OS were 47.5%, 8.0, and 20.5 months, respectively. Although PK and ORR were not significantly associated, patients with the lowest Cycle 1‐trough quartile (Q1) experienced poorer PFS (Q1 vs. Q2–4; 3.4 vs. 11.8 months, P = 0.006) and OS (Q1 vs. Q2–4; 9.9 vs. 21.7 months, P = 0.005) than in other quartiles overall, and even in the PD‐L1 ≥50% subset (PFS, Q1 vs. Q2–4; 4.1 vs. 14.7 months, P = 0.005; OS, Q1 vs. Q2–4; 9.4 vs. 22.1 months, P = 0.010). The Q1 subgroup was characterized by poor PS and lower albumin, and more frequent “weight loss ≥ 10%” on the GA. Pembrolizumab therapy had similar PK and efficaciousness in older as well as younger patients. In patients with PS ≥2, low albumin, and vulnerable GA, early increases in PK levels are less likely, potentially diminishing efficacy even when PD‐L1 ≥50%.

The pathophysiological difference between aortic atheromas and aneurysms is unknown. We focused on the vasa vasorum (VV), which play a critical role in maintaining aortic homeostasis and are also involved in vascular diseases. We investigated the differences in VV between the atheromas and aneurysms. Human abdominal aortic samples were obtained from patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm during surgery or autopsy cases. Autopsy cases were divided into 2 groups according to atheromas. The VV were evaluated using immunohistochemical staining for von Willebrand factor. Intimal VV increased in both the atheroma and aneurysm groups, medial VV increased, and adventitial VV decreased only in the aneurysm group. We also observed that the medial VV were connected to the adventitial VV in the atheroma group and to intimal VV in the aneurysm group. We suggest the outside-in VV or inside-out VV theories. Atheroma induces hypoxia of aortic walls, and angiogenic factors might induce an increase of intimal VV derived from adventitial VV (outside-in VV). However, adventitial VV decrease induces hypoxia of aortic walls, and angiogenic factors might induce an increase of intimal VV derived from aortic lumen (inside-out VV). These differences of VV may contribute in elucidating the pathophysiology of aortic diseases.

Background: The long overall survival (OS) observed among patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with high programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) groups in previous phase III trials suggests the limited efficacy of CIT among the subgroup with ≤49% PD-L1 expression on tumor cells. Hence, sequential treatment with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy followed by second-line immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment (SEQ) is an option. This study examined whether first-line CIT would provide better outcomes than SEQ in patients with advanced NSCLC with ≤49% PD-L1 expression. Methods: This retrospective study evaluated patients with untreated NSCLC who received first-line CIT or SEQ at nine hospitals in Japan. OS, progression-free survival (PFS), PFS-2 (the time from first-line treatment to progression to second-line treatment or death), and other related outcomes were evaluated between the CIT and SEQ groups. Results: Among the 305 enrolled patients, 234 eligible patients were analyzed: 165 in the CIT group and 69 in the SEQ group. The COX proportional hazards model suggested a significant interaction between PD-L1 expression and OS (p = 0.006). OS in the CIT group was significantly longer than that in the SEQ group in the 1–49% PD-L1 expression subgroup but not in the <1% PD-L1 expression subgroup. Among the subgroup with 1–49% PD-L1 expression, the CIT group exhibited longer median PFS than the SEQ group (CIT: 9.3 months (95% CI: 6.7–14.8) vs. SEQ:5.5 months (95% CI: 4.5–6.1); p < 0.001), while the median PFS in the CIT group was not statistically longer than the median PFS-2 in the SEQ group (p = 0.586). There was no significant difference between the median PFS in the CIT and SEQ groups among the <1% PD-L1 expression subgroup (p = 0.883); the median PFS-2 in the SEQ group was significantly longer than the median PFS in the CIT group (10.5 months (95% CI: 5.9–15.3) vs. 6.4 months (95% CI: 4.9–7.5); p = 0.024). Conclusions: CIT is recommended for patients with NSCLC with 1–49% PD-L1 expression because it significantly improved OS and PFS compared to SEQ. CIT had limited benefits in patients with <1% PD-L1 expression, and the median PFS-2 in the SEQ group was significantly longer than the median PFS in the CIT group. These findings will help physicians select the most suitable treatment option for patients with NSCLC, considering PD-L1 expressions.

Despite advancements in diagnosing and treating non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the prognosis remains poor. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown promise in enhancing survival rates. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the safety of nivolumab administration with concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) in patients with unresectable locally advanced NSCLC. Twelve patients with unresectable locally advanced NSCLC at Kansai Medical University Hospital and Izumi City General Medical Center were enrolled from May 2018 to September 2020. They received nivolumab (360 mg) tri-weekly twice, weekly carboplatin (AUC 2 min × mg/mL) and paclitaxel (40 mg/m²) for 6 weeks, and thoracic radiotherapy (60 Gy/30 fractions), followed by maintenance nivolumab therapy (360 mg, tri-weekly) for 6 months. The primary endpoint was incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and the secondary endpoints included safety, response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), 2-year survival rate, and treatment completion rate. Three patients completed the protocol. Nine discontinued due directly to interstitial pneumonia (three) and pneumonia (one). Ten patients (83.3%) experienced a grade 3 or higher event, of which three (25%) experienced a grade 4 or higher event, and of these, one (8.3%) experienced a grade 5 event. Three patients experienced DLTs. Concurrent nivolumab with CCRT was tolerated in unresectable locally advanced NSCLC, which offers potential treatment benefits.