Trial reportLung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2025
Randomized phase 2 trial of pembrolizumab alone or in combination with low dose chemotherapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer and poor performance status.
Trial report in Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeImmunotherapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy has become the standard of care for medically fit patients who have advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without a driver mutation. The optimal treatment for patients with poor performance status remains an active area of investigation. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients with advanced NSCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) of 2 were randomized to single-agent pembrolizumab at 200 mg every 3 weeks (Arm A) or the same dose of pembrolizumab combined with weekly carboplatin area under the curve 1 and paclitaxel 25 mg/m
results43 patients enrolled with 20 patients evaluable for response in each arm. All enrolled patients were included in survival analyses. Therapy was generally well tolerated with no treatment-related deaths in either arm. Both Arms exceeded the predefined historical control response rate of 10 % (Arm A = 35 %, P = 0.0002; Arm B = 45 %, P < 0.0001). Response rates favored Arm B but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.75). Median PFS and OS were not significantly different between the two arms. To compare survival outcomes of either pembrolizumab-based therapy to historical control of platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with PS 2, the two arms were combined. Median PFS was similar to historical control of platinum-based chemotherapy (4.6 months vs 4.6 months historical control). However, overall survival favored pembrolizumab-based therapy at 12 months (44 % vs 31 % historical control, P = 0.062) and 24 months (33 % vs 11 % historical control, P = 0.0001). Twenty patients provided optional blood samples for biomarker analyses. Consistent with prior reports, a numerically longer (but not significant) OS was observed in patients with low regulatory T cells (CD4 + FoxP3 + ) at baseline (14.5 vs 4.6 months, P = 0.068). Abundance of myeloid derived suppressor cells (CD14 + HLA DR-) at baseline did not correlate with clinical outcomes. Single-cell sequencing identified several significant differences in gene expression profiles within the CD14 + cell population for responding and non-responding patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy.
conclusionsFor patients with poor performance status, adding very low dose chemotherapy to pembrolizumab did not significantly improve clinical outcomes compared to pembrolizumab alone. Patients receiving either of these pembrolizumab-based regimens demonstrated better long-term survival when compared to historical outcomes of platinum-based chemotherapy for the PS 2 population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.