The survival benefits and adverse effects of pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg intravenously (IV) every 3 weeks (Q3W) in advanced non-small lung cancer (NSCLC) are well documented in the literature. Based on pharmacokinetic models, a pembrolizumab 4 mg/kg IV every 6 weeks (Q6W) dosing regimen is also approved in some countries. To date, there is no direct comparison in the literature between these 2 regimens in advanced NSCLC. This retrospective study included 80 patients with advanced NSCLC who received pembrolizumab monotherapy 4 mg/kg Q6W between March 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021 and 80 patients with advanced NSCLC who received pembrolizumab monotherapy 2 mg/kg Q3W between January 1, 2017 and January 15, 2019 at Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec (IUCPQ). The primary outcomes of this study were to compare overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) as well as the occurrence and severity of immune-mediated adverse events (AEs) in patients with advanced NSCLC who received pembrolizumab Q6W vs Q3W. Data cutoff date was December 15, 2022. Median follow-up was 14.5 ± 8.6 months in the Q6W group and 18.3 ± 19.6 months in the Q3W group. Median PFS was 6.9 months (CI 95% 5.0-10.7) in the Q6W group vs 8.9 months (CI 95% 5.6-14.1) in the Q3W group (adjusted HR 1.27 (CI 95% 0.85-1.89), P = .25). Median OS was not reached in the Q6W group vs 20.5 months (CI 95% 13.7-29.8) in the Q3W group (adjusted HR 0.80 (CI 95% 0.50-1.29), P = .36). Immune-mediated AEs of grade ≥ 3 occurred in 18% of patients in the Q6W group and in 19% of those in the Q3W group. In this unicentric retrospective study, the pembrolizumab Q6W dosing regimen was comparable to the Q3W in terms of OS, PFS, and toxicity.

Background: There is a lack of consensus in current practice guidelines regarding routine neuroimaging in patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without neurologic symptoms, and there is a paucity of data on the impact of such imaging on overall survival (OS). Methods: This retrospective study included 257 patients with stage IV NSCLC without neurologic symptoms diagnosed between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2016 at Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec (IUCPQ). The primary objective of this study was to compare the evolution of patients with stage IV NSCLC who had baseline brain imaging versus with who did not. Secondary objectives were to determine the proportion of patients who underwent brain imaging in their initial investigation and the proportion of patients who developed metachronous central nervous system (CNS) metastasis. Results: CNS imaging, mainly with computed tomography (CT), was performed at diagnosis in 56% of patients, and the prevalence of synchronous CNS metastasis among these patients was 32%. There was no difference in median OS between patients who underwent initial CNS imaging and those who did not, but we did show a tendency for a higher cumulative incidence of metachronous CNS metastasis in patients without baseline imaging. These metachronous metastases were symptomatic and were more often not treated when compared to synchronous metastases. Conclusions: In this small, unicentric retrospective study, there was no benefit with routine neuroimaging in terms of median OS in stage IV NSCLC patients without neurologic symptoms.

The standard first-line treatment for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without oncogenic alterations and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression < 1% is a combination of chemotherapy (CT) and immunotherapy (IO). However, real-world overall survival (OS) appears more modest than in clinical trials, averaging 10–13 months. This retrospective study aimed to assess treatment patterns and real-world outcomes at the Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec (IUCPQ). Patients diagnosed between January 2019 and December 2023 with advanced PD-L1 <1% NSCLC and treated with palliative intent at IUCPQ were included and categorized by first-line treatment. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS of the CT + IO and CT groups were compared using Kaplan–Meier curves and Cox regression analyses. Data regarding regimen selection, adverse events and subsequent treatment lines were collected. Among 217 eligible patients, 82 (37.8%) received CT + IO, 32 (14.7%) CT alone, 16 (7.4%) targeted therapy, and 87 (40.1%) supportive care. Median PFS was 5.3 vs. 4.7 months (p = 0.5) and OS 14.4 vs. 13.5 months (p = 0.2) for CT + IO and CT alone, respectively. In the CT + IO group, treatment discontinuation was mainly due to disease progression (59.4%) or adverse events (36.2%). Immune-related adverse events occurred in 29.3%, most frequently pneumonitis (8.5%). Therefore, in this cohort, no statistically significant survival difference was observed between CT + IO and CT alone. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously given the non-randomized design, baseline imbalances between groups, and the limited sample size of the CT alone cohort. Tolerability of CT + IO was consistent with that observed in clinical trials.