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 Display session

62P - Predictive value of combined positive score (CPS) and tumor proportion score (TPS) for immunotherapy response in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Date

31 Mar 2023

Session

Poster Display session

Presenters

Ezgi Ulas

Citation

Journal of Thoracic Oncology (2023) 18 (4S): S35-S88.
<article-id>elcc_Ch01

Authors

E.B. Ulas1, S. Hashemi2, I. Houda3, A. Kaynak2, J. Veltman4, M. Fransen4, T. Radonic5, I. Bahce1

Author affiliations

  • 1 Amsterdam/NL
  • 2 Amsterdam UMC - Vrije University Medical Centre (VUmc), Amsterdam/NL
  • 3 Amsterdam UMC - Vrije University Medical Centre (VUmc), 1081HV - Amsterdam/NL
  • 4 Amsterdam UMC - Vrije University Medical Centre (VUmc), 1081 HV - Amsterdam/NL
  • 5 * VU University Medical Centre, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam/NL

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

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

Abstract 62P

Background

In advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), tumor proportion score (TPS) is typically used to predict the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). However, in other cancer types, the combined positive score (CPS), which covers PD-L1 expression on both tumor and surrounding immune cells, is used. We investigated the predictive value of CPS in comparison to TPS in advanced NSCLC.

Methods

A monocenter retrospective study was performed in advanced NSCLC patients treated with ICI monotherapy between 2015 and 2021. H&E and PD-L1 were stained on baseline tumor biopsies to score PD-L1 by both TPS and CPS. Positivity for TPS and CPS was defined as a score of 1% or above. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed for TPS and CPS scores.

Results

Amongst the 187 included patients, PD-L1 positivity was found in 112 patients (59.9%) by TPS and 135 patients (72.2%) by CPS. In terms of PFS, no significant differences were observed between TPS and TPS+ or CPS and CPS+ patients (HR 0.86, p = 0.37 and HR 0.72, p = 0.065, respectively). There was no significant difference in OS between TPS and TPS+ patients (HR 0.81, 95%CI 0.59–1.12, p = 0.20). However, CPS+ patients did show a longer OS than CPS patients (HR 0.62, 95%CI 0.44–0.87, p = 0.006). OS was superior in both TPS/CPS+ and TPS+/CPS+ as compared to TPS/CPS cases (HR 0.52, p = 0.018 and HR 0.64, p = 0.015, respectively). Cases that were TPS/CPS+ had a comparable OS to TPS+/CPS+ cases (11.3 vs 9.7 months, p = 0.016).

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the largest real-world population study comparing TPS and CPS in NSCLC. We showed that CPS differentiated OS better than TPS in advanced NSCLC patients with ICI monotherapy. Remarkably, this was driven by the performance of the TPS/CPS+ subgroup, indicating that CPS may be a better predictive biomarker for ICI efficacy. These findings support the notion that ICI also have an anti-cancer efficacy through inhibiting the immune suppressive immune cells in the tumor microenvironment.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

S. Hashemi: Other, Institutional, Other, Research contracts to the institution, outside of the current study: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, GSK, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Takeda. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

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.