Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Discussion session - NSCLC, metastatic 2

4580 - IMpower131: Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) analysis of a randomised Phase III study of atezolizumab + carboplatin + paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel vs carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel in 1L advanced squamous NSCLC


21 Oct 2018


Poster Discussion session - NSCLC, metastatic 2


Cytotoxic Therapy;  Immunotherapy

Tumour Site


Mark Socinski


M.A. Socinski1, A. Rittmeyer2, D. Shapovalov3, F. Orlandi4, M. McCleod5, R.A. Soo6, R. Palmero7, T. Kozuki8, M.R. Migliorino9, K.D. Koynov10, H. Berard11, B.G.M. Hughes12, W. Yu13, V. Graupner14, S.W. Sun15, M. Kowanetz16, T. Hoang17, W. Lin18, R.M. Jotte19

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Oncology, Florida Hospital Cancer Institute, 32803 - Orlando/US
  • 2 Medical Oncology, LKI Lungenfachklinik Immenhausen, 34376 - Immenhausen/DE
  • 3 Department Of Surgery Of Tumors Of The Chest, Communal Non-Profit Enterprise Regional Center of Oncology, Kharkiv/UA
  • 4 Chile And Prosalud Oncología, Instituto Nacional del Tórax, Santiago de Chile/CL
  • 5 Medical Oncology, Florida Cancer Specialists, Fort Myers/US
  • 6 Haematology-oncology, National University Hospital, 119074 - Singapore/SG
  • 7 Medical Oncology, Hospital Duran i Reynalds, Barcelona/ES
  • 8 Department Of Thoracic Oncology, National Hospital Organization Shikoku Cancer Center, 791-0280 - Matsuyama/JP
  • 9 Oncology Department, San Camillo Forlanini Hospital, 00152 - Roma/IT
  • 10 Department Of Medical Oncology, Multiprofile Hospital for Active Treatment Serdika, 1000 - Sofia/BG
  • 11 Service De Pneumologie, Hôpital Sainte-Anne, 83000 - Toulon/FR
  • 12 Medical Oncology, The Prince Charles Hospital and University of Queensland, Brisbane/AU
  • 13 Biostatistics, Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco/US
  • 14 Product Development Oncology - Clinical Science, F. Hoffmann - La Roche Ltd, 4070 - Basel/CH
  • 15 Product Development Development Oncology, Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco/US
  • 16 Oncology Biomarker Development, GENENTECH, INC, 94080 - South San Francisco/US
  • 17 Product Development Oncology, Genentech Inc. - Roche - USA, 94080 - South San Francisco/US
  • 18 Product Development Oncology, Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco/US
  • 19 Medical Oncology / Hematology, Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers, Denver/US


Login to access the resources on OncologyPRO.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 4580


Combining atezolizumab (atezo; anti–PD-L1) and chemotherapy (chemo) may further improve outcomes in NSCLC by enhancing immunomodulatory effects. IMpower131 (NCT02367794) is a randomised Ph III trial of atezo + chemo vs chemo alone in 1L Stage IV squamous NSCLC. In the primary analysis, PFS benefit was seen with atezo + carboplatin (carbo) + nab-paclitaxel (nab-pac) vs carbo + nab-pac (HR, 0.71; 95% CI: 0.60, 0.85; P = 0.0001), with a tolerable safety profile. Here we report updated results at the second interim OS analysis (Arm B vs C).


1021 pts were randomised 1:1:1 to Arm A (atezo 1200 mg q3w + carbo AUC 6 q3w + paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 q3w), Arm B (atezo + carbo + nab-pac 100 mg/m2 qw) or Arm C (carbo + nab-pac). Pts received chemo ± atezo for 4 or 6 cycles per investigator choice, followed by atezo maintenance (Arms A and B). Pts had chemo-naive, Stage IV squamous NSCLC and were stratified by sex, baseline liver metastases and PD-L1 expression. Coprimary endpoints are investigator-assessed PFS and OS in the ITT population.


At data cutoff (20 April 2018), minimum follow-up was 12.8 mo. Median OS was 14.6 mo in Arm B vs 14.3 mo in Arm C (HR, 0.92; 95% CI: 0.76, 1.12; P = 0.41; Table). Median PFS was 6.5 mo in Arm B vs 5.6 mo in Arm C (HR, 0.74; 95% CI: 0.62, 0.87). Treatment-related AEs occurred in 95% (Arm B) and 91% (Arm C) of pts and were Grade 3-4 in 68% (Arm B) and 57% (Arm C) of pts. Region of enrolment was balanced between treatment arms; 6% (Arm B) and 43% (Arm C) of pts received cancer immunotherapy in second or later lines.


At this second interim OS analysis, OS remained comparable in Arm B vs C; OS did not cross the boundary and continues to be followed. IMpower131 continued to show improved PFS in Arm B vs C. The safety of atezo + carbo + nab-pac was consistent with the profile for each agent, with no new or unexpected signals.

Arm B

atezo + carbo + nab-pac

N = 343

Arm C

carbo + nab-pac

N = 340

Region of enrolment, %

  Eastern Europe

  Rest of Europe

  North America/Australia

  Central/South America

  Asia Pacific











≥ 1 subsequent anti-cancer
therapy, %






Median PFS, moa



  HR (95% CI)

0.74 (0.62, 0.87)

Median OS, mo



  HR (95% CI); P value

0.92 (0.76, 1.12); 0.41

Confirmed ORR, %



Median DOR, mo



  HR (95% CI)

0.57 (0.45, 0.74)

CI, confidence interval; DOR, duration of response; HR, hazard ratio; ORR, objective response rate;
PFS, progression-free survival.

a PFS was updated as a post-hoc analysis.

Clinical trial identification


Editorial Acknowledgement

Kia Walcott, PhD, of Health Interactions, Inc.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.