Luis Paz-Ares

Prof. Luis Paz-Ares


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
31 May 2018 in New England Journal of Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MHMatthew D. Hellmann
Matthew D. Hellmann
TCTudor Eliade Ciuleanu
Tudor Eliade Ciuleanu
APAdam Pluzanski
Adam Pluzanski
JLJong Seok Lee
Jong Seok Lee
GOGregory A. Otterson
Gregory A. Otterson
LPLuis Paz-Ares
Luis Paz-Ares
Nivolumab plus ipilimumab showed promising efficacy for the treatment of non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a phase 1 trial, and tumor mutational burden has emerged as a potential biomarker of benefit. In this part of an open-label, multipart, phase 3 trial, we examined progression-free survival with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy among patients with a high tumor mutational burden (≥10 mutations per megabase). We enrolled patients with stage IV or recurrent NSCLC that was not previously treated with chemotherapy. Those with a level of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of at least 1% were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab monotherapy, or chemotherapy; those with a tumor PD-L1 expression level of less than 1% were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy. Tumor mutational burden was determined by the FoundationOne CDx assay. Progression-free survival among patients with a high tumor mutational burden was significantly longer with nivolumab plus ipilimumab than with chemotherapy. The 1-year progression-free survival rate was 42.6% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 13.2% with chemotherapy, and the median progression-free survival was 7.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.5 to 13.2) versus 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.4 to 5.8) (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.58; 97.5% CI, 0.41 to 0.81; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 45.3% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 26.9% with chemotherapy. The benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab over chemotherapy was broadly consistent within subgroups, including patients with a PD-L1 expression level of at least 1% and those with a level of less than 1%. The rate of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was 31.2% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 36.1% with chemotherapy. Progression-free survival was significantly longer with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab than with chemotherapy among patients with NSCLC and a high tumor mutational burden, irrespective of PD-L1 expression level. The results validate the benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in NSCLC and the role of tumor mutational burden as a biomarker for patient selection. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 227 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02477826.)

1 November 2019 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LPLuis Paz-Ares
Luis Paz-Ares
MDMikhail Dvorkin
Mikhail Dvorkin
YCYuanbin Chen
Yuanbin Chen
NRNiels Reinmuth
Niels Reinmuth
KHKatsuyuki Hotta
Katsuyuki Hotta
MWMichael Williamson
Michael Williamson

2 February 2022 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
DSDavid R. Spigel
David R. Spigel
CFCorinne Faivre-Finn
Corinne Faivre-Finn
JGJhanelle E. Gray
Jhanelle E. Gray
DVDavid Vicente
David Vicente
DPDavid Planchard
David Planchard
SAScott J. Antonia
Scott J. Antonia
PURPOSE: The phase III PACIFIC trial compared durvalumab with placebo in patients with unresectable, stage III non–small-cell lung cancer and no disease progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Consolidation durvalumab was associated with significant improvements in the primary end points of overall survival (OS; stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.87; P = .00251) and progression-free survival (PFS [blinded independent central review; RECIST v1.1]; stratified HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.65; P < .0001), with manageable safety. We report updated, exploratory analyses of survival, approximately 5 years after the last patient was randomly assigned. METHODS: Patients with WHO performance status 0 or 1 (any tumor programmed cell death-ligand 1 status) were randomly assigned (2:1) to durvalumab (10 mg/kg intravenously; administered once every 2 weeks for 12 months) or placebo, stratified by age, sex, and smoking history. Time-to-event end point analyses were performed using stratified log-rank tests. Medians and landmark survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Seven hundred and nine of 713 randomly assigned patients received durvalumab (473 of 476) or placebo (236 of 237). As of January 11, 2021 (median follow-up, 34.2 months [all patients]; 61.6 months [censored patients]), updated OS (stratified HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.89; median, 47.5 v 29.1 months) and PFS (stratified HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.68; median, 16.9 v 5.6 months) remained consistent with the primary analyses. Estimated 5-year rates (95% CI) for durvalumab and placebo were 42.9% (38.2 to 47.4) versus 33.4% (27.3 to 39.6) for OS and 33.1% (28.0 to 38.2) versus 19.0% (13.6 to 25.2) for PFS. CONCLUSION: These updated analyses demonstrate robust and sustained OS and durable PFS benefit with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy. An estimated 42.9% of patients randomly assigned to durvalumab remain alive at 5 years and 33.1% of patients randomly assigned to durvalumab remain alive and free of disease progression, establishing a new benchmark for standard of care in this setting.

1 February 2021 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LPLuis Paz-Ares
Luis Paz-Ares
TCTudor-Eliade Ciuleanu
Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu
MCManuel Cobo
Manuel Cobo
MSMichael Schenker
Michael Schenker
BZBogdan Zurawski
Bogdan Zurawski
MRMartin Reck
Martin Reck

1 July 2016 in Clinical Therapeutics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JZJon Zugazagoitia
Jon Zugazagoitia
CGCristiano Guedes
Cristiano Guedes
SPSantiago Ponce
Santiago Ponce
IFIrene Ferrer
Irene Ferrer
Sonia Molina PineloSonia Molina Pinelo
Sonia Molina Pinelo
LPLuis Paz-Ares
Luis Paz-Ares

1 January 2018 in Annals of Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DWD. Westover
D. Westover
JZJ. Zugazagoitia
J. Zugazagoitia
BCByoung Chul Cho
Byoung Chul Cho
CLC.M. Lovly
C.M. Lovly
LPLuis Paz-Ares
Luis Paz-Ares
Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumours harbour activating mutations within the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) frequently derive significant clinical and radiographic benefits from treatment with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). As such, prospective identification of EGFR mutations is now the standard of care worldwide. However, acquired therapeutic resistance to these agents invariably develops. Over the past 10 years, great strides have been made in defining the molecular mechanisms of EGFR TKI resistance in an effort to design rational strategies to overcome this acquired drug resistance. Approximately 60% of patients with acquired resistance to the EGFR TKIs (erlotinib, gefitinib, and afatinib) develop a new mutation within the drug target. This mutation—T790M—has been shown to alter drug binding and enzymatic activity of the mutant EGF receptor. Less common mechanisms of acquired resistance include MET amplification, ERBB2 amplification, transformation to small-cell lung cancer, and others. Here, we present a condensed overview of the literature on EGFR-mutant NSCLC, paying particular attention to mechanisms of drug resistance, recent clinical trial results, and novel strategies for identifying and confronting drug resistance, while also striving to identify gaps in current knowledge. These advances are rapidly altering the treatment landscape for EGFR-mutant NSCLC, expanding the armamentarium of available therapies to maximize patient benefit.