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

46P - Comparison of camrelizumab, pembrolizumab, tislelizumab, and sintilimab as first-line treatment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective study

Date

28 Mar 2025

Session

Poster Display session

Presenters

Shaorong Yu

Citation

Journal of Thoracic Oncology (2025) 20 (3): S1-S97. 10.1016/S1556-0864(25)00632-X

Authors

S. Yu1, Y. Xiaoqi2

Author affiliations

  • 1 Jiangsu Cancer Hospital, Nanjing/CN
  • 2 Jiangsu Cancer Hospital & Jiangsu Institute of Cancer Research & The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing/CN

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

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

Abstract 46P

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly altered the first-line treatment paradigm for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without driver gene alterations. The efficacy and safety of different programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitors in the treatment of advanced NSCLC in Chinese real-world clinical practice remain unclear.

Methods

A total of 452 NSCLC patients treated with camrelizumab, pembrolizumab, tislelizumab, or sintilimab as first-line treatment between January 2019 and June 2023 in Jiangsu Cancer Hospital were retrospectively evaluated. Adverse events and patient responses were assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 and Response Evaluation Criteria for Solid Tumors v1.1. The progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method or Cox survival regression model and compared using the log-rank test.

Results

There were no significant differences in objective response rate (ORR) and median progression-free survival (mPFS) among the camrelizumab, pembrolizumab, tislelizumab, and sintilimab groups (ORR: 43.0% vs. 40.5% vs. 49.3% vs. 51.0%, P=0.33; mPFS: 8.51 vs. 10.97 vs. 9.43 vs. 9.79 months, P=0.31). Similar incidences of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) at any grade or ≥3 irAEs were observed in different PD-1 inhibitors (P=0.21, P=0.63). The Cox proportional hazard modeling analysis suggested that the type of PD-1 inhibitors was not an independent prognostic factor affecting PFS.

Table 46P

Treatment efficacy of different PD-1 inhibitors in patients

Best overall responseCamrelizumabPembrolizumabTislelizumabSintilimabP value
n/n(%)9312114098
CR1(1.1)04(2.9)0
PR39(41.9)49(40.5)B5(4B.4)50(51.0)
SD44(47.3)B2(51.2)5B(40.0)39(39.8)
ORR(%)43.040.549.351.00.33
mPFS(months)8.5110.979.439.790.31

Conclusions

Camrelizumab, pembrolizumab, tislelizumab, and sintilimab possess similar efficacy as first-line treatment options for patients with advanced NSCLC in Chinese clinical practice. Any grade or grade ≥3 irAEs are comparable between the four PD-1 inhibitors.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All 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.