Patients with advanced NSCLC experience a high symptom burden; therefore, identifying a treatment that maintains or improves QoL is important. QoL outcomes in patients with SCC NSCLC receiving nab-P/C in the induction part of the ABOUND.sqm study are reported.
Patients with stage IIIB/IV SCC NSCLC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease received 4 cycles of induction therapy with nab-P 100 mg/m2 days 1, 8, and 15 + C area under the curve 6 on day 1 (21-day cycles). Patients not progressing after induction received (2:1) maintenance nab-P 100 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 (21-day cycles) + best supportive care (BSC) or BSC alone until progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (randomization to maintenance). Patient-reported QoL (exploratory endpoint) was assessed on day 1 of each cycle using the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) and EuroQoL 5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L).
In 343 patients receiving treatment in the induction phase were evaluated. Median age was 68 years; 90% were white, 68% male, and 67% had ECOG PS 1. Of 332 patients treated for ≥ 2 cycles, 298 (90%) completed baseline + ≥ 1 postbaseline QoL assessment. During induction, the mean change from baseline in LCSS symptom burden index and total score ranged from 5.5%-7.8% and 5.5%-7.7%, respectively. Clinically meaningful improvements (≥ 10 mm [visual analog scale]) from baseline were observed in composite LCSS pulmonary symptom items of cough, shortness of breath, and hemoptysis in 44% of patients. Each individual dimension of the EQ-5D-5L was maintained/improved from baseline in the majority of patients (82%-91%), and ≥ 32% reported complete resolution at least once during treatment.
QoL was improved/maintained in patients with advanced SCC NSCLC treated with nab-P/C induction therapy. These results continue to support nab-P/C as a treatment option in patients with SCC NSCLC, as was initially demonstrated in a subset analysis of the phase III registration trial. NCT02027428.
Clinical trial identification
Legal entity responsible for the study
V. Villaflor: Research funding from Celgene and Novartis paid directly to University of Chicago. J. Knoble: Consulting or advisory role for Cardinal Health, Speakers\' bureau for Novartis, Alexion and Celgene. M. Thomas: Received honoraria for an advisory/speaker role from: Celgene, Astrazeneca, Roche, BMS, Lilly, Novartis, Boehringer. P. Staib: Honoraria, consulting or advisory role, speaker\'s bureau and research funding: Celgene. T. Chen, N. Trunova: Employment and Stock Ownership: Celgene. D.R. Spigel: Research funding, consulting or advisory role, and travel, accommodations, expenses: Celgene. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.