Reply to: “Beyond Response Rates: Interpreting Long-Term Benefit in CheckMate 743” and “Beyond Statistical Significance: Methodological Fragility and Censoring Bias in the 5-Year Update of CheckMate 743”
Five-Year Clinical Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Versus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Unresectable Pleural Mesothelioma in CheckMate 743
In this 5-year follow-up from the CheckMate 743 study in patients with unresectable pleural mesothelioma (PM), we evaluated updated efficacy and safety outcomes and biomarkers and performed treatment-switching analyses with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy. With a median follow-up of 66.8 months, nivolumab plus ipilimumab demonstrated continued overall survival (OS) benefit versus chemotherapy in all randomly assigned patients (5-year OS rates, 14% v 6%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.74 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.88]); similar benefit was observed regardless of tumor histology. Of biomarker-evaluable patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 242), high baseline monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cell (M-MDSC) levels correlated with worse OS versus low M-MDSC levels (HR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.09 to 1.43]). After adjusting for 24% of patients in the chemotherapy arm who received subsequent immunotherapy, nivolumab plus ipilimumab demonstrated continued OS benefit versus chemotherapy (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.78]). No new safety signals were observed. These results demonstrate long-term, durable clinical benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy, which continued to be preserved even after treatment-switching adjustment in the chemotherapy arm. Exploratory analyses suggested greater benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in the low M-MDSC subgroup. These results further support first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab as standard of care for unresectable PM.
Stratifying lung adenocarcinoma risk with multi-ancestry polygenic risk scores in East Asian never-smokers
Abstract Background Lung adenocarcinoma in never-smokers is a major public health burden, especially among East Asian women. Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) are promising for risk stratification but are primarily developed in European-ancestry populations. We aimed to develop and validate single- and multi-ancestry PRSs for East Asian never-smokers to improve lung adenocarcinoma risk prediction. Methods PRSs were developed using genome-wide association study summary statistics from East Asian (8002 cases; 20 782 controls) and European (2058 cases; 5575 controls) populations. Single-ancestry models included a PRS with 25 single nucleotide variants (PRS-25), PRS clumping and thresholding (CT), and LDpred2; multi-ancestry models included LDpred2 plus European PRS-128, PRS-CSx, and clumping and thresholding, super learning, empirical Bayes (CT-SLEB). Performance was evaluated in independent East Asian data from the Female Lung Cancer Consortium and externally validated in the Nanjing Lung Cancer Cohort. We assessed predictive accuracy via area under the curve operating procedure (AUC), with 10-year and (ages 30-80 years) absolute risks estimates. Results The best multi-ancestry PRS, using East Asian and European data via CT-SLEB, outperformed the best East Asian-only (LDpred2; AUC = 0.629, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.618 to 0.641), achieving an AUC of 0.640 (95% CI = 0.629 to 0.653) and odds ratio of 1.71 (95% CI = 1.61 to 1.82) per standard deviation increase. Nanjing Lung Cancer Cohort validation confirmed robust performance (AUC = 0.649, 95% CI = 0.623 to 0.676). The top 20% PRS group had a 3.92-fold higher lung adenocarcinoma risk than the bottom 20%. Further, the top 5% PRS group reached a 6.69% lifetime absolute risk. Notably, this group reached the average population 10-year lung adenocarcinoma risk at age 50 years (0.42%) by age 41 years, 9 years earlier. Conclusions Multi-ancestry PRS approaches enhance lung adenocarcinoma risk stratification in East Asian never-smokers, with consistent external validation, suggesting future clinical utility.