Results: Among 50 patients with PD-L1 1% (40 Durva, 10 NoDurva), with a PIV cutoff of 332, PFS significantly differed across the four groups (log-rank p=0. 00012). Durvaₗow group had the most favorable PFS, while NoDurvaₕigh group had the poorest outcomes. In multivariable analysis, Durvaₗow was associated with a significantly lower risk of progression (HR 0. 26, 95%CI 0. 09-0. 78, p=0. 016), and NoDurvaₕigh with a higher risk (HR 3. 75, 95%CI 1. 32-10. 69, p=0. 013), compared to Durvaₕigh. However, no significant interaction between PIV and treatment group was observed, and PD-L1 was not independently associated with PFS. PIV was not associated with the risk of pneumonitis. Conclusions: PIV is a prognostic biomarker in unresectable stage III NSCLC undergoing CRT, effectively stratifying patients by risk regardless of durvalumab exposure. These findings suggest that PIV may support baseline risk assessment, but do not support a predictive role for PIV in identifying differential benefit from durvalumab. Further validation in a wider cohort is needed.
Lorca et al. (Tue,) studied this question.