Thoracic / Lung
SBRT monotherapy holds as standard for inoperable early NSCLC; IO augmentation strategies need rethinking after S1914.
SWOG/NRG S1914 NCT04214262
ForInoperable early-stage NSCLC T1-3N0M0 โค7cm, โฅ1 recurrence risk factor
TL;DRNo OS benefit from adding atezolizumab to SBRT (HR 1.15, p=0.63); closed for futility; Gโฅ3 AEs 12% vs 2%.
vs leading data
- Contradicts prior phase II (PMID 37478883) that suggested IO benefit added to SBRT
7 details
Methods
- ๐ Phase III RCT; N=403 eligible (201 SBRT / 202 atezo+SBRT); accrual closed at first interim for OS + PFS futility per prespecified design
- ๐ T1-3N0M0 NSCLC โค7cm, inoperable or declined surgery, โฅ1 recurrence risk factor; atezo 1200mg Q3W x8 cycles; SBRT 3-8 fx BED โฅ100Gy initiated cycle 3
- ๐ Former/never smoker subgroup (56%): AS worse than S
- OS: HR 2.50 (1.11-5.59), p=0.03
- PFS: HR 2.16 (1.15-4.04), p=0.01
CONSORT flow
Assessed / enrolled 417
โ 14 excluded
Randomized 403
โ
SBRT
allocated 201
SBRT + atezolizumab
allocated 202
Results
- ๐ Efficacy outcomes: SBRT vs SBRT + atezolizumab
Endpoint HR (95% CI) p 2yr SBRT 2yr SBRT+atezo OS (1ยฐ EP) 1.15 (0.65-2.01) 0.63 82% 80% PFS 1.35 (0.89-2.06) 0.16 71% 60% - ๐ Failure patterns at cutoff
Pattern SBRT SBRT + atezo Local 7% 13% Regional 2% 3% Distant 4% 5%
Critique
- โ ๏ธ Gโฅ3 AEs: 12% atezo arm (21 G3, 1 G4, 1 G5 respiratory failure) vs 2% SBRT (3 G3, 1 G4)
- โ ๏ธ Median f/u 12 mo among survivors; 49 OS events at cutoff; local recurrence central review, PD-L1, and QoL analyses pending
Open questions
- Whether PD-L1-high or other biomarker-defined subsets benefit from IO addition
- Mechanism behind excess local failures in the atezo arm
- Durability of SBRT-alone outcomes beyond 2 years in high-risk pts
๐ Sources ยท ๐ 1 paper
SWOG/NRG S1914: Randomized phase III trial of induction/consolidation atezolizumab + SBRT versus SBRT alone in high risk, early-stage NSCLC.
Abstract
8003 Background: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is the standard of care (SoC) for early stage, medically inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). While rates of in-field control exceed 90%, regional and distant control after SBRT remain suboptimal. A prior phase II randomized trial suggested a benefit to adding immunotherapy (PMID 37478883). SWOG/NRG S1914 (NCT#04214262) is a randomized phase III trial evaluating neoadjuvant, concurrent and adjuvant atezolizumab plus SBRT for early-stage NSCLC vs SoC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) had T1-3N0M0 NSCLC โค7cm, were medically inoperable or declined surgery, and had โฅ1 risk factor for increased recurrence: tumor diameter โฅ2 cm, โฅ6.2, moderately/poorly/undifferentiated histology. Randomization was to SoC SBRT (S [3-8 fractions, biologically effective dose โฅ100 Gy]) or neoadjuvant, concurrent and adjuvant atezolizumab (AS [1200 mg IV Q3 week, 8 cycles]) with SBRT initiated with cycle 3, stratifying by tumor location (central vs peripheral), size (<4 cm vs โฅ4cm) and ECOG performance status (PS, 0-1 vs 2). The primary objective was to compare overall survival (OS) between the arms. Secondary objectives included comparisons of progression free survival (PFS), failure patterns, toxicity and quality of life (QoL). OS and PFS were compared using a 1-sided stratified log-rank test at the 2.5% level, confidence intervals (CI) are 95%. The accrual goal was 432 eligible pts. Results: From 8/13/20 - 9/6/24, 417 pts were randomized, 403 met eligibility [201 to S, 202 to AS]. Accrual closed at the first interim analysis for futility based on OS and PFS per design. Median follow-up for pts still alive was 12 (range: 0.03-49) months. Median age was 73 (41-91) years and 89% had PS 0-1. Median tumor diameter was 2.3 cm. No protocol treatment was received for 6 pts on S and 8 on AS. With 49 deaths, OS was not different between the arms (HR (CI): 1.15(0.65-2.01), p=0.63; 2-year OS: 82% S vs 80% AS). With 88 events, PFS was not better with AS (HR (CI): 1.35(0.89-2.06), p=0.16); 2-year PFS was 71% on S vs 60% on AS. Regional (2% vs 3%) and distant (4% vs 5%) failures were not different; there were more local failures with AS (13% vs 7%). Among former (53%)/never (3%) smokers, AS had worse OS and PFS than S (HR(CI): 2.50 (1.11-5.59), p=0.03); HR(CI): 2.16(1.15-4.04), p=0.01), respectively. Grade (G) โฅ3 adverse event (AE) rates were 12% on AS (N=21 G3, 1 G4, 1 G5 respiratory failure) vs 2% on S (N=3 G3, 1 G4). Conclusions: In the first reported phase III trial to assess immunotherapy (IO) added to SBRT in early-stage NSCLC, IO failed to improve survival. More G โฅ3 adverse events were reported with AS. Central review of local recurrence events is ongoing. Additional investigation into subgroups, PD-L1 status, QoL and blood/tissue are pending to determine whether there are subsets who can benefit from this combination and shed further insights into these findings. Clinical trial information: NCT04214262 .
๐ https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.8003