NEW
Tecentriq特善奇

Tecentriq

atezolizumab

Manufacturer:

Roche

Distributor:

DKSH
/
Agencia Lei Va Hong
Full Prescribing Info
Contents
Atezolizumab.
Description
One 14 mL or 20 mL vial of concentrate contains 840 mg or 1,200 mg atezolizumab*, respectively.
*Atezolizumab is an Fc-engineered, humanised IgG1 anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody produced in Chinese hamster ovary cells by recombinant DNA technology.
840 mg/14 mL: After dilution (see Special precautions for disposal and other handling under Cautions for Usage), one mL of solution contains approximately 3.2 mg of atezolizumab for the 840 mg dose and approximately 6.0 mg of atezolizumab for the 1680 mg dose.
1,200 mg/20 mL: After dilution (see Special precautions for disposal and other handling under Cautions for Usage), the final concentration of the diluted solution should be between 3.2 and 16.8 mg/mL.
Excipients/Inactive Ingredients: L-histidine, Glacial acetic acid, Sucrose, Polysorbate 20, Water for injections.
Action
Pharmacotherapeutic group: Antineoplastic agents, monoclonal antibodies. ATC code: L01XC32.
Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics: Mechanism of action: Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) may be expressed on tumour cells and/or tumour-infiltrating immune cells, and can contribute to the inhibition of the antitumour immune response in the tumour microenvironment. Binding of PD-L1 to the PD-1 and B7.1 receptors found on T-cells and antigen presenting cells suppresses cytotoxic T-cell activity, T-cell proliferation and cytokine production.
Atezolizumab is an Fc-engineered, humanised immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) monoclonal antibody that directly binds to PD-L1 and provides a dual blockade of the PD-1 and B7.1 receptors, releasing PD-L1/PD-1 mediated inhibition of the immune response, including reactivating the antitumour immune response without inducing antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. Atezolizumab spares the PD-L2/PD-1 interaction allowing PD-L2/PD-1 mediated inhibitory signals to persist.
Clinical efficacy and safety: 840 mg/14 mL: For the description of studies with Tecentriq administered every 3 weeks at 1,200 mg, refer to the Tecentriq 1,200 mg concentrate for solution for infusion SmPC.
Duration of treatment: Treatment with atezolizumab until loss of clinical benefit was permitted as defined by the following criteria: Absence of symptoms and signs (including worsening of laboratory values [e.g., new or worsening hypercalcaemia]) indicating unequivocal progression of disease; No decline in ECOG performance status; Absence of tumour progression at critical anatomical sites (e.g., leptomeningeal disease) that cannot be readily managed and stabilised by protocol-allowed medical interventions prior to repeat dosing; Evidence of clinical benefit as assessed by the investigator.
Patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC who are ineligible for cisplatin therapy and locally advanced unresectable or metastatic TNBC were treated with atezolizumab until disease progression.
Urothelial carcinoma: IMvigor211 (GO29294): Randomised trial in locally advanced or metastatic UC patients previously treated with chemotherapy: A phase III, open-label, multi-center, international, randomised study, (IMvigor211), was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab compared with chemotherapy (investigator's choice of vinflunine, docetaxel, or paclitaxel) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC who progressed during or following a platinum-containing regimen. This study excluded patients who had a history of autoimmune disease; active or corticosteroid-dependent brain metastases; administration of a live, attenuated vaccine within 28 days prior to enrolment; and administration of systemic immunostimulatory agents within 4 weeks or systemic immunosuppressive medicinal product within 2 weeks prior to enrolment. Tumour assessments were conducted every 9 weeks for the first 54 weeks, and every 12 weeks thereafter. Tumour specimens were evaluated prospectively for PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune cells (IC) and the results were used to define the PD-L1 expression subgroups for the analyses described as follows.
A total of 931 patients were enrolled. Patients were randomised (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab or chemotherapy. Randomisation was stratified by chemotherapy (vinflunine vs. taxane), PD-L1 expression status on IC (< 5% vs. ≥ 5%), number of prognostic risk factors (0 vs. 1-3), and liver metastases (yes vs. no). Prognostic risk factors included time from prior chemotherapy of < 3 months, ECOG performance status > 0 and haemoglobin < 10 g/dL.
Atezolizumab was administered as a fixed dose of 1,200 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks. No dose reduction of atezolizumab was allowed. Patients were treated until loss of clinical benefit as assessed by the investigator or unacceptable toxicity. Vinflunine was administered 320 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion on day 1 of each 3-week cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Paclitaxel was administered 175 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion over 3 hours on day 1 of each 3-week cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Docetaxel was administered 75 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion on day 1 of each 3-week cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. For all treated patients, the median duration of treatment was 2.8 months for the atezolizumab arm, 2.1 months for the vinflunine and paclitaxel arms and 1.6 months for the docetaxel arm.
The demographic and baseline disease characteristics of the primary analysis population were well balanced between the treatment arms. The median age was 67 years (range: 31 to 88), and 77.1% of patients were male. The majority of patients were white (72.1%), 53.9% of patients within the chemotherapy arm received vinflunine, 71.4% of patients had at least one poor prognostic risk factor and 28.8% had liver metastases at baseline. Baseline ECOG performance status was 0 (45.6%) or 1 (54.4%). Bladder was the primary tumour site for 71.1% of patients and 25.4% of patients had upper tract urothelial carcinoma. There were 24.2% of patients who received only prior platinum-containing adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy and progressed within 12 months.
The primary efficacy endpoint for IMvigor211 is overall survival (OS). Secondary efficacy endpoints evaluated per investigator-assessed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) v1.1 are objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and duration of response (DOR). Comparisons with respect to OS between the treatment arm and control arm within the IC2/3, IC1/2/3, and ITT (Intention-to-treat, i.e. all comers) populations were tested using a hierarchical fixed-sequence procedure based on a stratified log-rank test at two-sided level of 5% as follows: step 1) IC2/3 population; step 2) IC1/2/3 population; step 3) all comers population. OS results for each of steps 2 and 3 could be formally tested for statistical significance only if the result in the preceding step was statistically significant.
The median survival follow-up is 17 months. The primary analysis of study IMvigor211 did not meet its primary endpoint of OS. Atezolizumab did not demonstrate a statistically significant survival benefit compared to chemotherapy in patients with previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Per the pre-specified hierarchical testing order, the IC2/3 population was tested first, with an OS HR of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.63, 1.21; median OS of 11.1 vs. 10.6 months for atezolizumab and chemotherapy respectively). The stratified log-rank p-value was 0.41 and therefore the results are considered not statistically significant in this population. As a consequence, no formal tests of statistical significance could be performed for OS in the IC1/2/3 or all comer populations, and results of those analyses would be considered exploratory. The key results in the all comer population are summarised in Table 1. The Kaplan-Meier curve for OS in the all comer population is presented in Figure 1. (See Table 1 and Figure 1.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

IMvigor210 (GO29293): Single-arm trial in previously untreated urothelial carcinoma patients who are ineligible for cisplatin therapy and in urothelial carcinoma patients previously treated with chemotherapy: A phase II, multi-centre, international, two-cohort, single-arm clinical trial, IMvigor210, was conducted in patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC (also known as urothelial bladder cancer).
The study enrolled a total of 438 patients and had two patient cohorts. Cohort 1 included previously untreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC who were ineligible or unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy or had disease progression at least 12 months after treatment with a platinum-containing neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy regimen. Cohort 2 included patients who received at least one platinum-based chemotherapy regimen for locally advanced or metastatic UC or had disease progression within 12 months of treatment with a platinum-containing neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy regimen.
In Cohort 1, 119 patients were treated with atezolizumab 1,200 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks until disease progression. The median age was 73 years. Most patients were male (81%), and the majority of patients were White (91%).
Cohort 1 included 45 patients (38%) with ECOG performance status of 0, 50 patients (42%) with ECOG performance status of 1 and 24 patients (20%) with ECOG performance status of 2, 35 patients (29%) with no Bajorin risk factors (ECOG performance status ≥ 2 and visceral metastasis), 66 patients (56%) with one Bajorin risk factor and 18 patients (15 %) with two Bajorin risk factors, 84 patients (71%) with impaired renal function (glomerular filtration rate [GFR] < 60 mL/min), and 25 patients (21%) with liver metastasis.
The primary efficacy endpoint for Cohort 1 was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by an independent review facility (IRF) using RECIST v1.1.
The primary analysis was performed when all patients had at least 24 weeks of follow-up. Median duration of treatment was 15.0 weeks and median duration of survival follow-up was 8.5 months in all comers. Clinically relevant IRF-assessed ORRs per RECIST v1.1 were shown; however, when compared to a pre-specified historical control response rate of 10%, statistical significance was not reached for the primary endpoint. The confirmed ORRs per IRF-RECIST v1.1 were 21.9% (95% CI: 9.3, 40.0) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 5%, 18.8% (95% CI: 10.9, 29.0) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%, and 19.3% (95% CI: 12.7, 27.6) in all comers. The median duration of response (DOR) was not reached in any PD-L1 expression subgroup or in all comers. OS was not mature with an event patient ratio of approximately 40%. Median OS for all patient subgroups (PD-L1 expression ≥ 5 % and ≥ 1 %) and in all comers was 10.6 months.
An updated analysis was performed with a median duration of survival follow-up of 17.2 months for Cohort 1 and is summarised in Table 2. The median DOR was not reached in any PD-L1 expression subgroup or in all comers. (See Table 2.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

In Cohort 2, the co-primary efficacy endpoints were confirmed ORR as assessed by an IRF using RECIST v1.1 and investigator-assessed ORR according to Modified RECIST (mRECIST) criteria. There were 310 patients treated with atezolizumab 1,200 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks until loss of clinical benefit. The primary analysis of Cohort 2 was performed when all patients had at least 24 weeks of follow-up. The study met its co-primary endpoints in Cohort 2, demonstrating statistically significant ORRs per IRF-assessed RECIST v1.1 and investigator-assessed mRECIST compared to a pre-specified historical control response rate of 10%.
An analysis was also performed with a median duration of survival follow-up of 21.1 months for Cohort 2. The confirmed ORRs per IRF-RECIST v1.1 were 28.0% (95% CI: 19.5, 37.9) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 5%, 19.3% (95% CI: 14.2, 25.4) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%, and 15.8% (95% CI: 11.9, 20.4) in all comers. The confirmed ORR per investigator-assessed mRECIST was 29.0% (95% CI: 20.4, 38.9) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 5%, 23.7% (95% CI: 18.1, 30.1) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%, and 19.7% (95% CI: 15.4, 24.6) in all comers. The rate of complete response per IRF-RECIST v1.1 in the all comer population was 6.1% (95% CI: 3.7, 9.4). For Cohort 2, median DOR was not reached in any PD-L1 expression subgroup or in all comers, however was reached in patients with PD-L1 expression < 1% (13.3 months; 95% CI 4.2, NE). The OS rate at 12 month was 37% in all comers.
IMvigor130 (WO30070): Phase III multi-center, randomized, placebo-controlled study of atezolizumab as monotherapy and in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: Based on an independent Data Monitoring Committee (iDMC) recommendation following an early review of survival data, accrual of patients on the atezolizumab monotherapy treatment arm whose tumours have a low PD-L1 expression (less than 5% of immune cells staining positive for PD-L1 by immunohistochemistry) was stopped after observing decreased overall survival for this subgroup. The iDMC did not recommend any change of therapy for patients who had already been randomized to and were receiving treatment in the monotherapy arm. No other changes were recommended.
Non-small cell lung cancer: Second-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: OAK (GO28915): Randomised phase III trial in locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients previously treated with chemotherapy: A phase III, open-label, multi-center, international, randomised study, OAK, was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab compared with docetaxel in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC who progressed during or following a platinum-containing regimen. This study excluded patients who had a history of autoimmune disease, active or corticosteroid-dependent brain metastases, administration of a live, attenuated vaccine within 28 days prior to enrolment, administration of systemic immunostimulatory agents within 4 weeks or systemic immunosuppressive medicinal product within 2 weeks prior to enrolment. Tumour assessments were conducted every 6 weeks for the first 36 weeks, and every 9 weeks thereafter. Tumour specimens were evaluated prospectively for PD-L1 expression on tumour cells (TC) and tumour-infiltrating immune cells (IC).
A total of 1,225 patients were enrolled and per the analysis plan the first 850 randomised patients were included in the primary efficacy analysis. Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 expression status on IC, by the number of prior chemotherapy regimens, and by histology. Patients were randomised (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab or docetaxel.
Atezolizumab was administered as a fixed dose of 1,200 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks. No dose reduction was allowed. Patients were treated until loss of clinical benefit as assessed by the investigator. Docetaxel was administered 75 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion on day 1 of each 3-week cycle until disease progression. For all treated patients, the median duration of treatment was 2.1 months for the docetaxel arm and 3.4 months for the atezolizumab arm.
The demographic and baseline disease characteristics of the primary analysis population were well balanced between the treatment arms. The median age was 64 years (range: 33 to 85), and 61% of patients were male. The majority of patients were white (70%). Approximately three-quarters of patients had non-squamous histology (74%), 10% had known EGFR mutation, 0.2% had known ALK rearrangements, 10% had CNS metastases at baseline, and most patients were current or previous smokers (82%). Baseline ECOG performance status was 0 (37%) or 1 (63%). Seventy five percent of patients received only one prior platinum-based therapeutic regimen.
The primary efficacy endpoint was OS. The key results of this study with a median survival follow-up of 21 months are summarised in Table 3. Kaplan-Meier curves for OS in the ITT population are presented in Figure 2. Figure 3 summarises the results of OS in the ITT and PD-L1 subgroups, demonstrating OS benefit with atezolizumab in all subgroups, including those with PD-L1 expression < 1% in TC and IC. (See Table 3 and Figures 2 and 3.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

An improvement in OS was observed with atezolizumab compared to docetaxel in both non-squamous NSCLC patients (hazard ratio [HR] of 0.73, 95% CI: 0.60, 0.89; median OS of 15.6 vs. 11.2 months for atezolizumab and docetaxel, respectively) and squamous NSCLC patients (HR of 0.73, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.98; median OS of 8.9 vs. 7.7 months for atezolizumab and docetaxel, respectively). The observed OS improvement was consistently demonstrated across subgroups of patients including those with brain metastases at baseline (HR of 0.54, 95% CI: 0.31, 0.94; median OS of 20.1 vs. 11.9 months for atezolizumab and docetaxel respectively) and patients who were never smokers (HR of 0.71, 95% CI: 0.47, 1.08; median OS of 16.3 vs. 12.6 months for atezolizumab and docetaxel, respectively). However, patients with EGFR mutations did not show improved OS with atezolizumab compared to docetaxel (HR of 1.24, 95% CI: 0.71, 2.18; median OS of 10.5 vs. 16.2 months for atezolizumab and docetaxel, respectively).
Prolonged time to deterioration of patient-reported pain in chest as measured by the EORTC QLQ-LC13 was observed with atezolizumab compared to docetaxel (HR of 0.71, 95% CI: 0.49, 1.05; median not reached in either arm). The time to deterioration in other lung cancer symptoms (i.e. cough, dyspnoea, and arm/shoulder pain) as measured by the EORTC QLQ-LC13 was similar between atezolizumab and docetaxel. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the open-label design of the study.
POPLAR (GO28753): Randomised phase II trial in locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients previously treated with chemotherapy: A phase II, multi-centre, international, randomised, open-label, controlled study, POPLAR, was conducted in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC who progressed during or following a platinum-containing regimen, regardless of PD-L1 expression. The primary efficacy outcome was overall survival. A total of 287 patients were randomised 1:1 to receive either atezolizumab (1,200 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks until loss of clinical benefit) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion on day 1 of each 3-week cycle until disease progression). Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 expression status on IC, by the number of prior chemotherapy regimens and by histology. An updated analysis with a total of 200 deaths observed and a median survival follow-up of 22 months showed a median OS of 12.6 months in patients treated with atezolizumab, vs. 9.7 months in patients treated with docetaxel (HR of 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52, 0.92). ORR was 15.3% vs. 14.7% and median DOR was 18.6 months vs. 7.2 months for atezolizumab vs. docetaxel, respectively.
Triple-negative breast cancer: IMpassion130 (WO29522): Randomised phase III trial in locally advanced or metastatic TNBC patients previously untreated for metastatic disease: A phase III, double-blind, two-arm, multi-center, international, randomised, placebo-controlled study, IMpassion130, was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel, in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC who had not received prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients had to be eligible for taxane monotherapy (i.e. absence of rapid clinical progression, life-threatening visceral metastases, or need for rapid symptom and/or disease control) and were excluded if they had received prior chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting within the last 12 months, a history of autoimmune disease; administration of a live, attenuated vaccine within 4 weeks prior to randomisation, administration of systemic immunostimulatory agents within 4 weeks or systemic immunosuppressive medications within 2 weeks prior to randomisation; untreated, symptomatic or corticosteroid-dependent brain metastases. Tumour assessments were performed every 8 weeks (± 1 week) for the first 12 months after Cycle 1, day 1 and every 12 weeks (± 1 week) thereafter.
A total of 902 patients were enrolled and stratified by presence of liver metastases, prior taxane treatment, and by PD-L1 expression status in tumour-infiltrating immune cells (IC) (PD-L1 stained tumour-infiltrating immune cells [IC] <1% of tumour area vs. ≥ 1% of the tumour area) assessed by the VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) Assay.
Patients were randomised to receive atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo by intravenous infusions on days 1 and 15 of every 28-day cycle, plus nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2) administered via intravenous infusion on days 1, 8 and 15 of every 28-day cycle. Patients received treatment until radiographic disease progression per RECIST v1.1, or unacceptable toxicity. Treatment with atezolizumab could be continued when nab-paclitaxel was stopped due to unacceptable toxicity. The median number of treatment cycles was 7 for atezolizumab and 6 for nab-paclitaxel in each treatment arm.
The demographic and baseline disease characteristics of the study population were well balanced between the treatment arms. Most patients were women (99.6%), 67.5% were white and 17.8% Asian. The median age was 55 years (range: 20-86). Baseline ECOG performance status was 0 (58.4%) or 1 (41.3%). Overall, 41% of enrolled patients had PD-L1 expression ≥1%, 27% had liver metastases and 7% asymptomatic brain metastases at baseline. Approximately half the patients had received a taxane (51%) or anthracycline (54%) in the (neo)adjuvant setting. Patient demographics and baseline tumour disease in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥1% were generally representative of the broader study population.
The co-primary efficacy endpoints included investigator-assessed progression free survival (PFS) in the ITT population and in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1% per RECIST v1.1 as well as overall survival (OS) in the ITT population and in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%. Secondary efficacy endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) per RECIST v1.1.
PFS, ORR and DOR results of IMpassion130 for patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1% at the time of the final analysis for PFS with a median survival follow up of 13 months are summarized in Table 4 with Kaplan-Meier curves for PFS in Figure 4. Patients with PD-L1 expression <1% did not show improved PFS when atezolizumab was added to nab-paclitaxel (HR of 0.94, 95% CI 0.78, 1.13).
An updated OS analysis was performed with a median follow up of 18 months, OS results are presented in Table 4 and Kaplan-Meier curves in Figure 5. Patients with PD-L1 expression <1% did not show improved OS when atezolizumab was added to nab-paclitaxel (HR of 0.97, 95% CI 0.78, 1.20). At the time of the updated OS analysis, an exploratory PFS analysis was performed as presented in Table 4.
Exploratory subgroup analyses were performed in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%, exploring prior (neo)adjuvant treatment, BRCA1/2 mutation and asymptomatic brain metastases at baseline.
In patients who had received prior (neo) adjuvant treatment (n=242), the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.79 and 0.82 for OS while in patients who had not received prior (neo)adjuvant treatment (n=127), the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.44 and 0.53 for OS.
In the IMpassion130 study, of the 614 patients tested, 89 (15%) carried pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutations. From the PD-L1+/BRCA1/2 mutant subgroup, 19 patients received atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel and 26 placebo plus nab-paclitaxel. Based on exploratory analysis and acknowledging the small sample size, the presence of BRCA1/2 mutation does not seem to impact the PFS clinical benefit of atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel.
There was no evidence of efficacy in patients with asymptomatic brain metastases at baseline, although the number of patients treated was small; the median PFS was 2.2 months in the atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel arm (n=15) compared to 5.6 months in the placebo plus nab-paclitaxel arm (n=11) (HR 1.40; 95% CI 0.57, 3.44). (See Table 4 and Figures 4 and 5.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

The time to deterioration (a sustained ≥ 10-point decline from baseline score) of patient-reported global health status/health-related quality of life as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30 was similar in each treatment group indicating that all patients maintained their baseline HRQoL for a comparable duration of time.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Duration of treatment: Treatment with atezolizumab until loss of clinical benefit was permitted as defined by the following criteria: Absence of symptoms and signs (including worsening of laboratory values [e.g., new or worsening hypercalcaemia]) indicating unequivocal progression of disease; No decline in ECOG performance status; Absence of tumour progression at critical anatomical sites (e.g., leptomeningeal disease) that cannot be readily managed and stabilised by protocol-allowed medical interventions prior to repeat dosing; Evidence of clinical benefit as assessed by the investigator.
Patients with ES-SCLC were treated with atezolizumab until disease progression. Treatment beyond disease progression was permitted at the discretion of the physician.
Patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC who are ineligible for cisplatin therapy were treated with atezolizumab until disease progression.
Urothelial carcinoma: IMvigor211 (GO29294): Randomised trial in locally advanced or metastatic UC patients previously treated with chemotherapy: A phase III, open-label, multi-center, international, randomised study, (IMvigor211), was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab compared with chemotherapy (investigator's choice of vinflunine, docetaxel, or paclitaxel) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC who progressed during or following a platinum-containing regimen. This study excluded patients who had a history of autoimmune disease; active or corticosteroid-dependent brain metastases; administration of a live, attenuated vaccine within 28 days prior to enrolment; and administration of systemic immunostimulatory agents within 4 weeks or systemic immunosuppressive medicinal product within 2 weeks prior to enrolment. Tumour assessments were conducted every 9 weeks for the first 54 weeks, and every 12 weeks thereafter. Tumour specimens were evaluated prospectively for PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune cells (IC) and the results were used to define the PD-L1 expression subgroups for the analyses described as follows.
A total of 931 patients were enrolled. Patients were randomised (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab or chemotherapy. Randomisation was stratified by chemotherapy (vinflunine vs. taxane), PD-L1 expression status on IC (< 5% vs. ≥ 5%), number of prognostic risk factors (0 vs. 1-3), and liver metastases (yes vs. no). Prognostic risk factors included time from prior chemotherapy of < 3 months, ECOG performance status > 0 and haemoglobin < 10 g/dL.
Atezolizumab was administered as a fixed dose of 1,200 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks. No dose reduction of atezolizumab was allowed. Patients were treated until loss of clinical benefit as assessed by the investigator or unacceptable toxicity. Vinflunine was administered 320 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion on day 1 of each 3-week cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Paclitaxel was administered 175 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion over 3 hours on day 1 of each 3-week cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Docetaxel was administered 75 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion on day 1 of each 3-week cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. For all treated patients, the median duration of treatment was 2.8 months for the atezolizumab arm, 2.1 months for the vinflunine and paclitaxel arms and 1.6 months for the docetaxel arm.
The demographic and baseline disease characteristics of the primary analysis population were well balanced between the treatment arms. The median age was 67 years (range: 31 to 88), and 77.1% of patients were male. The majority of patients were white (72.1%), 53.9% of patients within the chemotherapy arm received vinflunine, 71.4% of patients had at least one poor prognostic risk factor and 28.8% had liver metastases at baseline. Baseline ECOG performance status was 0 (45.6%) or 1 (54.4%). Bladder was the primary tumour site for 71.1% of patients and 25.4% of patients had upper tract urothelial carcinoma. There were 24.2% of patients who received only prior platinum-containing adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy and progressed within 12 months.
The primary efficacy endpoint for IMvigor211 is overall survival (OS). Secondary efficacy endpoints evaluated per investigator-assessed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) v1.1 are objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and duration of response (DOR). Comparisons with respect to OS between the treatment arm and control arm within the IC2/3, IC1/2/3, and ITT (Intention-to-treat, i.e. all comers) populations were tested using a hierarchical fixed-sequence procedure based on a stratified log-rank test at two-sided level of 5% as follows: step 1) IC2/3 population; step 2) IC1/2/3 population; step 3) all comers population. OS results for each of steps 2 and 3 could be formally tested for statistical significance only if the result in the preceding step was statistically significant.
The median survival follow-up is 17 months. The primary analysis of study IMvigor211 did not meet its primary endpoint of OS. Atezolizumab did not demonstrate a statistically significant survival benefit compared to chemotherapy in patients with previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Per the pre-specified hierarchical testing order, the IC2/3 population was tested first, with an OS HR of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.63, 1.21; median OS of 11.1 vs. 10.6 months for atezolizumab and chemotherapy respectively). The stratified log-rank p-value was 0.41 and therefore the results are considered not statistically significant in this population. As a consequence, no formal tests of statistical significance could be performed for OS in the IC1/2/3 or all comer populations, and results of those analyses would be considered exploratory. The key results in the all comer population are summarised in Table 5. The Kaplan-Meier curve for OS in the all comer population is presented in Figure 6.
An exploratory updated survival analysis was performed with a median duration of survival follow up of 34 months in the ITT population. The median OS was 8.6 months (95% CI: 7.8, 9.6) in the atezolizumab arm and 8.0 months (95% CI: 7.2, 8.6) in the chemotherapy arm with a hazard ratio of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.71, 0.94). Consistent with the trend observed at primary analysis for 12-month OS rates, numerically higher 24-month and 30-month OS rates were observed for patients in the atezolizumab arm compared with the chemotherapy arm in the ITT population. The percentage of patients alive at 24 months (KM estimate) was 12.7% in the chemotherapy arm and 22.5% in the atezolizumab arm; and at 30 months (KM estimate) was 9.8% in the chemotherapy arm and 18.1% in the atezolizumab arm. (See Table 5 and Figure 6.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

IMvigor210 (GO29293): Single-arm trial in previously untreated urothelial carcinoma patients who are ineligible for cisplatin therapy and in urothelial carcinoma patients previously treated with chemotherapy: A phase II, multi-centre, international, two-cohort, single-arm clinical trial, IMvigor210, was conducted in patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC (also known as urothelial bladder cancer).
The study enrolled a total of 438 patients and had two patient cohorts. Cohort 1 included previously untreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC who were ineligible or unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy or had disease progression at least 12 months after treatment with a platinum-containing neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy regimen. Cohort 2 included patients who received at least one platinum-based chemotherapy regimen for locally advanced or metastatic UC or had disease progression within 12 months of treatment with a platinum-containing neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy regimen.
In Cohort 1, 119 patients were treated with atezolizumab 1,200 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks until disease progression. The median age was 73 years. Most patients were male (81%), and the majority of patients were White (91%).
Cohort 1 included 45 patients (38%) with ECOG performance status of 0, 50 patients (42%) with ECOG performance status of 1 and 24 patients (20%) with ECOG performance status of 2, 35 patients (29%) with no Bajorin risk factors (ECOG performance status ≥ 2 and visceral metastasis), 66 patients (56%) with one Bajorin risk factor and 18 patients (15 %) with two Bajorin risk factors, 84 patients (71%) with impaired renal function (glomerular filtration rate [GFR] < 60 mL/min), and 25 patients (21%) with liver metastasis.
The primary efficacy endpoint for Cohort 1 was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by an independent review facility (IRF) using RECIST v1.1.
The primary analysis was performed when all patients had at least 24 weeks of follow-up. Median duration of treatment was 15.0 weeks and median duration of survival follow-up was 8.5 months in all comers. Clinically relevant IRF-assessed ORRs per RECIST v1.1 were shown; however, when compared to a pre-specified historical control response rate of 10%, statistical significance was not reached for the primary endpoint. The confirmed ORRs per IRF-RECIST v1.1 were 21.9% (95% CI: 9.3, 40.0) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 5%, 18.8% (95% CI: 10.9, 29.0) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%, and 19.3% (95% CI: 12.7, 27.6) in all comers. The median duration of response (DOR) was not reached in any PD-L1 expression subgroup or in all comers. OS was not mature with an event patient ratio of approximately 40%. Median OS for all patient subgroups (PD-L1 expression ≥ 5 % and ≥ 1 %) and in all comers was 10.6 months.
An updated analysis was performed with a median duration of survival follow-up of 17.2 months for Cohort 1 and is summarised in Table 6. The median DOR was not reached in any PD-L1 expression subgroup or in all comers. (See Table 6.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

In Cohort 2, the co-primary efficacy endpoints were confirmed ORR as assessed by an IRF using RECIST v1.1 and investigator-assessed ORR according to Modified RECIST (mRECIST) criteria. There were 310 patients treated with atezolizumab 1,200 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks until loss of clinical benefit. The primary analysis of Cohort 2 was performed when all patients had at least 24 weeks of follow-up. The study met its co-primary endpoints in Cohort 2, demonstrating statistically significant ORRs per IRF-assessed RECIST v1.1 and investigator-assessed mRECIST compared to a pre-specified historical control response rate of 10%.
An analysis was also performed with a median duration of survival follow-up of 21.1 months for Cohort 2. The confirmed ORRs per IRF-RECIST v1.1 were 28.0% (95% CI: 19.5, 37.9) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 5%, 19.3% (95% CI: 14.2, 25.4) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%, and 15.8% (95% CI: 11.9, 20.4) in all comers. The confirmed ORR per investigator-assessed mRECIST was 29.0% (95% CI: 20.4, 38.9) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 5%, 23.7% (95% CI: 18.1, 30.1) in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%, and 19.7% (95% CI: 15.4, 24.6) in all comers.
The rate of complete response per IRF-RECIST v1.1 in the all comer population was 6.1% (95% CI: 3.7, 9.4). For Cohort 2, median DOR was not reached in any PD-L1 expression subgroup or in all comers, however was reached in patients with PD-L1 expression < 1% (13.3 months; 95% CI 4.2, NE). The OS rate at 12 month was 37% in all comers.
IMvigor130 (WO30070): Phase III multi-center, randomised, placebo-controlled study of atezolizumab as monotherapy and in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: Based on an independent Data Monitoring Committee (iDMC) recommendation following an early review of survival data, accrual of patients on the atezolizumab monotherapy treatment arm whose tumours have a low PD-L1 expression (less than 5% of immune cells staining positive for PD-L1 by immunohistochemistry) was stopped after observing decreased overall survival for this subgroup. The iDMC did not recommend any change of therapy for patients who had already been randomised to and were receiving treatment in the monotherapy arm. No other changes were recommended.
Non-small cell lung cancer: First-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: IMpower150 (GO29436): Randomised phase III trial in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC, in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin with or without bevacizumab: A phase III, open-label, multicenter, international, randomised study, IMpower150, was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin, with or without bevacizumab, in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC.
Patients were excluded if they had history of autoimmune disease, administration of a live, attenuated vaccine within 28 days prior to randomisation, administration of systemic immunostimulatory agents within 4 weeks or systemic immunosuppressive medicinal product within 2 weeks prior to randomisation, active or untreated CNS metastases, clear tumour infiltration into the thoracic great vessels or clear cavitation of pulmonary lesions, as seen on imaging. Tumour assessments were conducted every 6 weeks for the first 48 weeks following Cycle 1, Day 1 and then every 9 weeks thereafter. Tumour specimens were evaluated for PD-L1 expression on tumour cells (TC) and tumour-infiltrating immune cells (IC) and the results were used to define the PD-L1 expression subgroups for the analyses described as follows.
A total of 1,202 patients were enrolled and were randomised (1:1:1) to receive one of the treatment regimens described in Table 7. Randomisation was stratified by sex, presence of liver metastases and PD-L1 tumour expression on TC and IC. (See Table 7.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

The demographics and baseline disease characteristics of the study population were well balanced between the treatment arms. The median age was 63 years (range: 31 to 90), and 60% of patients were male. The majority of patients were white (82%). Approximately 10% of patients had known EGFR mutation, 4% had known ALK rearrangements, 14% had liver metastasis at baseline, and most patients were current or previous smokers (80%). Baseline ECOG performance status was 0 (43%) or 1 (57%). 51% of patients' tumours had PD-L1 expression of ≥ 1% TC or ≥ 1% IC and 49% of patients' tumours had PD-L1 expression of < 1% TC and < 1% IC.
At the time of the final analysis for PFS, patients had a median follow up time of 15.3 months. The ITT population, including patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements who should have been previously treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, demonstrated clinically meaningful PFS improvement in Arm B as compared to Arm C (HR of 0.61, 95% CI: 0.52, 0.72; median PFS 8.3 vs. 6.8 months).
At the time of the interim OS analysis, patients had a median follow-up of 19.7 months. The key results from this analysis as well as from the updated PFS analysis in the ITT population are summarised in Tables 8 and 9. The Kaplan-Meier curve for OS in the ITT population is presented in Figure 7. Figure 8 summarises the results of OS in the ITT and PD-L1 subgroups. Updated PFS results are also presented in Figures 9 and 10. (See Tables 8 and 9 and Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

In Arm B as compared to Arm C, pre-specified subgroup analyses from the interim OS analysis showed an OS improvement for patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements (hazard ratio [HR] of 0.54, 95% CI: 0.29, 1.03; median OS not reached vs. 17.5 months), and liver metastases (HR of 0.52, 95% CI: 0.33, 0.82; median OS 13.3 vs. 9.4 months). PFS improvements were also shown in patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements (HR of 0.55, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.87; median PFS 10.0 vs. 6.1 months) and liver metastases (HR of 0.41, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.62; median PFS 8.2 vs. 5.4 months). OS results were similar for patients aged < 65 and ≥ 65 subgroups, respectively. Data for patients ≥ 75 years of age are too limited to draw conclusions on this population. For all subgroup analyses, formal statistical testing was not planned.
IMpower130 (GO29537): Randomised phase III trial in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC, in combination with nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin: A phase III, open-label, randomised study, GO29537 (IMpower130), was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin, in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC. Patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements should have been previously treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors.
Patients were staged according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 7th edition. Patients were excluded if they had a history of autoimmune disease, administration of live, attenuated vaccine within 28 days prior to randomisation, administration of immunostimulatory agents within 4 weeks or systemic immunosuppressive medications within 2 weeks prior to randomisation, and active or untreated CNS metastases. Patients who had prior treatment with CD137 agonists or immune checkpoint blockade therapies (anti-PD-1, and anti-PD-L1 therapeutic antibodies) were not eligible. However, patients who had prior anti-CTLA-4 treatment could be enrolled, as long as the last dose was received at least 6 weeks prior to randomisation, and there was no history of severe immune-related adverse effects from anti-CTLA-4 (NCI CTCAE Grades 3 and 4). Tumour assessments were conducted every 6 weeks for the first 48 weeks following Cycle 1, then every 9 weeks thereafter. Tumour specimens were evaluated for PD-L1 expression on tumour cells (TC) and tumour infiltrating immune cells (IC) and the results were used to define the PD-L1 expression subgroups for the analyses described as follows.
Patients, including those with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements, were enrolled and were randomised in a 2:1 ratio to receive one of the treatment regimens described in Table 10. Randomisation was stratified by sex, presence of liver metastases and PD-L1 expression on TC and IC. Patients receiving treatment regimen B were able to crossover and receive atezolizumab monotherapy following disease progression. (See Table 10.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

The demographics and baseline disease characteristics of the study population defined as ITT-WT (n=679) were well balanced between the treatment arms. The median age was 64 years (range 18 to 86 years). The majority of the patients were male (59%) and white (90%). Fourteen point seven percent of patients had liver metastases at baseline, and most patients were current or previous smokers (90%). The majority of patients had a baseline ECOG performance status of 1 (59%) and PD-L1 expression <1% (approximately 52%). Among 107 Arm B patients who had a response status of stable disease, partial response, or complete response after induction therapy, 40 received pemetrexed switch maintenance therapy.
The primary analysis was conducted in all patients, excluding those with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements, defined as ITT-WT population (n=679). Patients had a median survival follow up time of 18.6 months and showed improved OS and PFS with atezolizumab, nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin as compared to the control. The key results are summarised in Table 11 and Kaplan-Meier curves for OS and PFS are presented in Figures 11 and 13, respectively. The exploratory results of OS and PFS by PD-L1 expression are summarised in Figures 12 and 14, respectively. Patients with liver metastases did not show improved PFS or OS with atezolizumab, nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin, compared to nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin (HR of 0.93, 95% CI: 0.59, 1.47 for PFS and HR of 1.04, 95% CI: 0.63, 1.72 for OS, respectively).
Fifty-nine percent of patients in the nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin arm received any cancer immunotherapy after disease progression, which includes atezolizumab as crossover treatment (41% of all patients), compared to 7.3% of patients in the atezolizumab, nab paclitaxel and carboplatin arm.
In an exploratory analysis with longer follow up (median: 24.1 months), the median OS for both arms was unchanged relative to the primary analysis, with HR = 0.82 (95% CI: 0.67, 1.01). (See Table 11 and Figures 11, 12, 13 and 14.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

Second-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: OAK (GO28915): Randomised phase III trial in locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients previously treated with chemotherapy: A phase III, open-label, multi-center, international, randomised study, OAK, was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab compared with docetaxel in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC who progressed during or following a platinum-containing regimen. This study excluded patients who had a history of autoimmune disease, active or corticosteroid-dependent brain metastases, administration of a live, attenuated vaccine within 28 days prior to enrolment, administration of systemic immunostimulatory agents within 4 weeks or systemic immunosuppressive medicinal product within 2 weeks prior to enrolment. Tumour assessments were conducted every 6 weeks for the first 36 weeks, and every 9 weeks thereafter. Tumour specimens were evaluated prospectively for PD-L1 expression on tumour cells (TC) and tumour-infiltrating immune cells (IC).
A total of 1,225 patients were enrolled and per the analysis plan the first 850 randomised patients were included in the primary efficacy analysis. Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 expression status on IC, by the number of prior chemotherapy regimens, and by histology. Patients were randomised (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab or docetaxel.
Atezolizumab was administered as a fixed dose of 1,200 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks. No dose reduction was allowed. Patients were treated until loss of clinical benefit as assessed by the investigator. Docetaxel was administered 75 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion on day 1 of each 3-week cycle until disease progression. For all treated patients, the median duration of treatment was 2.1 months for the docetaxel arm and 3.4 months for the atezolizumab arm.
The demographic and baseline disease characteristics of the primary analysis population were well balanced between the treatment arms. The median age was 64 years (range: 33 to 85), and 61% of patients were male. The majority of patients were white (70%). Approximately three-quarters of patients had non-squamous histology (74%), 10% had known EGFR mutation, 0.2% had known ALK rearrangements, 10% had CNS metastases at baseline, and most patients were current or previous smokers (82%). Baseline ECOG performance status was 0 (37%) or 1 (63%). Seventy-five percent of patients received only one prior platinum-based therapeutic regimen.
The primary efficacy endpoint was OS. The key results of this study with a median survival follow-up of 21 months are summarised in Table 12. Kaplan-Meier curves for OS in the ITT population are presented in Figure 15. Figure 16 summarises the results of OS in the ITT and PD-L1 subgroups, demonstrating OS benefit with atezolizumab in all subgroups, including those with PD-L1 expression < 1% in TC and IC. (See Table 12 and Figures 15 and 16.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

An improvement in OS was observed with atezolizumab compared to docetaxel in both non-squamous NSCLC patients (hazard ratio [HR] of 0.73, 95% CI: 0.60, 0.89; median OS of 15.6 vs. 11.2 months for atezolizumab and docetaxel, respectively) and squamous NSCLC patients (HR of 0.73, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.98; median OS of 8.9 vs. 7.7 months for atezolizumab and docetaxel, respectively). The observed OS improvement was consistently demonstrated across subgroups of patients including those with brain metastases at baseline (HR of 0.54, 95% CI: 0.31, 0.94; median OS of 20.1 vs. 11.9 months for atezolizumab and docetaxel respectively) and patients who were never smokers (HR of 0.71, 95% CI: 0.47, 1.08; median OS of 16.3 vs. 12.6 months for atezolizumab and docetaxel, respectively). However, patients with EGFR mutations did not show improved OS with atezolizumab compared to docetaxel (HR of 1.24, 95% CI: 0.71, 2.18; median OS of 10.5 vs. 16.2 months for atezolizumab and docetaxel, respectively).
Prolonged time to deterioration of patient-reported pain in chest as measured by the EORTC QLQ-LC13 was observed with atezolizumab compared to docetaxel (HR of 0.71, 95% CI: 0.49, 1.05; median not reached in either arm). The time to deterioration in other lung cancer symptoms (i.e. cough, dyspnoea, and arm/shoulder pain) as measured by the EORTC QLQ-LC13 was similar between atezolizumab and docetaxel. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the open-label design of the study.
POPLAR (GO28753): Randomised phase II trial in locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients previously treated with chemotherapy: A phase II, multi-centre, international, randomised, open-label, controlled study, POPLAR, was conducted in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC who progressed during or following a platinum-containing regimen, regardless of PD-L1 expression. The primary efficacy outcome was overall survival. A total of 287 patients were randomised 1:1 to receive either atezolizumab (1,200 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks until loss of clinical benefit) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion on day 1 of each 3-week cycle until disease progression). Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 expression status on IC, by the number of prior chemotherapy regimens and by histology. An updated analysis with a total of 200 deaths observed and a median survival follow-up of 22 months showed a median OS of 12.6 months in patients treated with atezolizumab, vs. 9.7 months in patients treated with docetaxel (HR of 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52, 0.92). ORR was 15.3% vs. 14.7% and median DOR was 18.6 months vs. 7.2 months for atezolizumab vs. docetaxel, respectively.
Small cell lung cancer: IMpower133 (GO30081): Randomised phase I/III trial in patients with chemotherapy-naïve extensive-stage SCLC, in combination with carboplatin and etoposide: A Phase I/III, randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, IMpower133, was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in combination with carboplatin and etoposide in patients with chemotherapy-naïve extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).
Patients were excluded if they had active or untreated CNS metastases; history of autoimmune disease; administration of live, attenuated vaccine within 4 weeks prior to randomisation; administration of systemic immunosuppressive medications within 1 week prior to randomisation. Tumour assessments were conducted every 6 weeks for the first 48 weeks following Cycle 1, Day 1 and then every 9 weeks thereafter. Patients who met established criteria and who agreed to be treated beyond disease progression had tumour assessments conducted every 6 weeks until treatment discontinuation.
A total of 403 patients were enrolled and randomised (1:1) to receive one of the treatment regimens described in Table 13. Randomisation was stratified by sex, ECOG performance status, and presence of brain metastases. (See Table 13.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

The demographic and baseline disease characteristics of the study population were well balanced between the treatment arms. The median age was 64 years (range: 26 to 90 years) with 10% of patients ≥75 years of age. The majority of patients were male (65%), white (80%), and 9% had brain metastases and most patients were current or previous smokers (97%). Baseline ECOG performance status was 0 (35%) or 1 (65%).
At the time of the primary analysis, patients had a median survival follow up time of 13.9 months. A statistically significant improvement in OS was observed with atezolizumab in combination with carboplatin and etoposide compared to the control arm (HR of 0.70, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.91; median OS of 12.3 months vs. 10.3 months). In the exploratory OS final analysis with longer follow up (median: 22.9 months), the median OS for both arms was unchanged relative to the primary OS interim analysis. The PFS, ORR and DOR results from the primary analysis as well as the exploratory OS final analysis results are summarised in Table 14. Kaplan-Meier curves for OS and PFS are presented in Figures 17 and 18. Data for patients with brain metastases are too limited to draw conclusions on this population. (See Table 14 and Figures 17 and 18.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

Hepatocellular carcinoma: IMbrave150 (YO40245): Randomised phase III trial in patients with unresectable HCC who have not received prior systemic therapy, in combination with bevacizumab: A phase III, randomised, multi-center, international, open-label study, IMbrave150, was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab, in patients with locally advanced or metastatic and/or unresectable HCC, who have not received prior systemic treatment. A total of 501 patients were randomised (2:1) to receive either atezolizumab (1,200 mg) and 15 mg/kg of bevacizumab every 3 weeks administered by intravenous infusion, or sorafenib 400 mg orally twice per day. Randomisation was stratified by geographic region, macrovascular invasion and/or extrahepatic spread, baseline α-fetoprotein (AFP) and ECOG performance status. Patients in both arms received treatment until loss of clinical benefit, or unacceptable toxicity. Patients could discontinue either atezolizumab or bevacizumab (e.g., due to adverse events) and continue on single-agent therapy until loss of clinical benefit or unacceptable toxicity associated with the single-agent.
The study enrolled adults whose disease was not amenable to or progressed after surgical and/or locoregional therapies, were Child-Pugh A, ECOG 0/1, and who had not received prior systemic treatment. Bleeding (including fatal events) is a known adverse reaction with bevacizumab and upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common and life threatening complication in patients with HCC. Hence, patients were required to be evaluated for the presence of varices within 6 months prior to treatment, and were excluded if they had variceal bleeding within 6 months prior to treatment, untreated or incompletely treated varices with bleeding or high risk of bleeding. For patients with active hepatitis B, HBV DNA < 500 IU/mL was required within 28 days prior to initiation of study treatment, and standard anti-HBV treatment for a minimum of 14 days prior to study entry and for the length of study.
Patients were also excluded if they had moderate or severe ascites; history of hepatic encephalopathy; known fibrolamellar HCC; sarcomatoid HCC, mixed cholangiocarcinoma and HCC; active co-infection of HBV and HCV; history of autoimmune disease; administration of a live, attenuated vaccine within 4 weeks prior to randomisation; administration of systemic immunostimulatory agents within 4 weeks or systemic immunosuppressive medications within 2 weeks prior to randomisation; untreated or corticosteroid-dependent brain metastases. Tumour assessments were performed every 6 weeks for the first 54 weeks following Cycle 1, Day 1, then every 9 weeks thereafter.
The demographic and baseline disease characteristics of the study population were well balanced between the treatment arms. The median age was 65 years (range: 26 to 88 years) and 83% were male. The majority of patients were Asian (57%) and white (35%). 40% were from Asia (excluding Japan), while 60% were from rest of world. Approximately 75% of patients presented with macrovascular invasion and/or extrahepatic spread and 37% had a baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL. Baseline ECOG performance status was 0 (62%) or 1 (38%). The primary risk factors for the development of HCC were Hepatitis B virus infection in 48% of patients, Hepatitis C virus infection in 22% of patients, and non-viral disease in 31% of patients. HCC was categorized as Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C in 82% of patients, stage B in 16% of patients, and stage A in 3% of patients.
The co-primary efficacy endpoints were OS and IRF-assessed PFS according to RECIST v1.1. At the time of the primary analysis, patients had a median survival follow up time of 8.6 months. The data demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in OS and PFS as assessed by IRF per RECIST v1.1 with atezolizumab + bevacizumab compared to sorafenib. A statistically significant improvement was also observed in confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by IRF per RECIST v1.1 and HCC modified RECIST (mRECIST). The key efficacy results are summarised in Table 15. Kaplan-Meier curves for OS and PFS are presented in Figures 19 and 20. (See Table 15 and Figures 19 and 20.)

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

Efficacy in elderly patients: 840 mg/14 mL: No overall differences in efficacy were observed between patients ≥ 65 years of age and younger patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy. Data for patients ≥75 years of age are too limited to draw conclusions on this population.
1,200 mg/20 mL: No overall differences in efficacy were observed between patients ≥ 65 years of age and younger patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy. In study IMpower150, age ≥ 65 was associated with a diminished effect of atezolizumab in patients receiving atezolizumab in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel.
In studies IMpower150 and IMpower133, data for patients ≥75 years of age are too limited to draw conclusions on this population.
Paediatric population: 840 mg/14 mL: The European Medicines Agency has deferred the obligation to submit the results of studies with atezolizumab in all subsets of the paediatric population in the treatment of malignant neoplasms (except central nervous system tumours, haematopoietic and lymphoid tissue neoplasms) (see Dosage & Administration for information on paediatric use).
1,200 mg/20 mL: An early phase, multi-centre open-label study was conducted in paediatric (<18, n=69) and young adult patients (18-30 years, n=18) with relapsed or progressive solid tumours as well as with Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, to evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics of atezolizumab. Patients were treated with 15 mg/kg atezolizumab IV every 3 weeks (see Dosage & Administration).
Pharmacokinetics: 840 mg/14 mL: Exposure to atezolizumab increased dose proportionally over the dose range 1 mg/kg to 20 mg/kg including the fixed dose 1,200 mg administered every 3 weeks. A population analysis that included 472 patients described atezolizumab pharmacokinetics for the dose range: 1 to 20 mg/kg with a linear two-compartment disposition model with first-order elimination. The pharmacokinetic properties of atezolizumab 840 mg administered every 2 weeks and atezolizumab 1,200 mg administered every 3 weeks are comparable. A population pharmacokinetic analysis suggests that steady-state is obtained after 6 to 9 weeks after multiple doses. The maximum systemic accumulation ratio across dosing regimens is 3.3.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Exposure to atezolizumab increased dose proportionally over the dose range 1 mg/kg to 20 mg/kg including the fixed dose 1,200 mg administered every 3 weeks. A population analysis that included 472 patients described atezolizumab pharmacokinetics for the dose range: 1 to 20 mg/kg with a linear two-compartment disposition model with first-order elimination. A population pharmacokinetic analysis suggests that steady-state is obtained after 6 to 9 weeks (2 to 3 cycles) of repeated dosing. The systemic accumulation in area under the curve, maximum concentration and trough concentration was 1.91, 1.46 and 2.75-fold, respectively.
Absorption: Atezolizumab is administered as an intravenous infusion. There have been no studies performed with other routes of administration.
Distribution: A population pharmacokinetic analysis indicates that central compartment volume of distribution is 3.28 L and volume at steady-state is 6.91 L in the typical patient.
Biotransformation: The metabolism of atezolizumab has not been directly studied. Antibodies are cleared principally by catabolism.
Elimination: A population pharmacokinetic analysis indicates that the clearance of atezolizumab is 0.200 L/day and the typical terminal elimination half-life is 27 days.
Special populations: Based on population PK and exposure-response analyses age (21-89 years), region, ethnicity, renal impairment, mild hepatic impairment, level of PD-L1 expression, or ECOG performance status have no effect on atezolizumab pharmacokinetics. Body weight, gender, positive ADA status, albumin levels and tumour burden have a statistically significant, but not clinically relevant effect on atezolizumab pharmacokinetics. No dose adjustments are recommended.
Elderly: No dedicated studies of atezolizumab have been conducted in elderly patients. The effect of age on the pharmacokinetics of atezolizumab was assessed in a population pharmacokinetic analysis. Age was not identified as a significant covariate influencing atezolizumab pharmacokinetics based on patients of age range of 21-89 years (n=472), and median of 62 years of age. No clinically important difference was observed in the pharmacokinetics of atezolizumab among patients < 65 years (n=274), patients between 65-75 years (n=152) and patients > 75 years (n=46) (see Dosage & Administration).
Paediatric population: 840 mg/14 mL: No studies have been conducted to investigate the pharmacokinetics of atezolizumab in children or adolescents.
1,200 mg/20 mL: The pharmacokinetic results from one early-phase, multi-centre open-label study that was conducted in paediatric (<18 years, n=69) and young adult patients (18-30 years, n=18), show that the clearance and volume of distribution of atezolizumab were comparable between paediatric patients receiving 15 mg/kg and young adult patients receiving 1,200 mg of atezolizumab every 3 weeks when normalized by body weight, with exposure trending lower in paediatric patients as body weight decreased. These differences were not associated with a decrease in atezolizumab concentrations below the therapeutic target exposure. Data for children <2 years is limited thus no definitive conclusions can be made.
Renal impairment: No dedicated studies of atezolizumab have been conducted in patients with renal impairment. In the population pharmacokinetic analysis, no clinically important differences in the clearance of atezolizumab were found in patients with mild (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] 60 to 89 mL/min/1.73 m2; n=208) or, moderate (eGFR 30 to 59 mL/min/1.73 m2; n=116) renal impairment compared to patients with normal (eGFR greater than or equal to 90 mL/min/1.73 m2; n=140) renal function. Only a few patients had severe renal impairment (eGFR 15 to 29 mL/min/1.73 m2; n=8) (see Dosage & Administration). The effect of severe renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of atezolizumab is unknown.
Hepatic impairment: 840 mg/14 mL: No dedicated studies of atezolizumab have been conducted in patients with hepatic impairment. In the population pharmacokinetic analysis, there were no clinically important differences in the clearance of atezolizumab between patients with mild hepatic impairment (bilirubin ≤ ULN and AST > ULN or bilirubin > 1.0 × to 1.5 × ULN and any AST, n=71) and normal hepatic function (bilirubin and AST ≤ ULN, n = 401). No data are available in patients with either moderate or severe hepatic impairment. Hepatic impairment was defined by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) criteria of hepatic dysfunction (see Dosage & Administration). The effect of moderate or severe hepatic impairment (bilirubin > 1.5 × to 3 × ULN and any AST or bilirubin > 3 × ULN and any AST) on the pharmacokinetics of atezolizumab is unknown.
1,200 mg/20 mL: No dedicated studies of atezolizumab have been conducted in patients with hepatic impairment. In the population pharmacokinetic analysis, there were no clinically important differences in the clearance of atezolizumab observed in patients with mild hepatic impairment (bilirubin ≤ ULN and AST > ULN or bilirubin > 1.0 × to 1.5 × ULN and any AST) or moderate hepatic impairment (bilirubin > 1.5 to 3x ULN and any AST) in comparison to patients with normal hepatic function (bilirubin ≤ ULN and AST ≤ ULN). No data are available in patients with severe hepatic impairment (bilirubin >3 × ULN and any AST). Hepatic impairment was defined by the National Cancer Institute-Organ Dysfunction Working Group (NCI-ODWG) criteria of hepatic dysfunction (see Dosage & Administration). The effect of severe hepatic impairment (bilirubin > 3 × ULN and any AST) on the pharmacokinetics of atezolizumab is unknown.
Toxicology: Preclinical safety data: Carcinogenicity: Carcinogenicity studies have not been performed to establish the carcinogenic potential of atezolizumab.
Mutagenicity: Mutagenicity studies have not been performed to establish the mutagenic potential of atezolizumab. However, monoclonal antibodies are not expected to alter DNA or chromosomes.
Fertility: No fertility studies have been conducted with atezolizumab; however assessment of the cynomolgus monkey male and female reproductive organs was included in the chronic toxicity study. Weekly administration of atezolizumab to female monkeys at an estimated AUC approximately 6 times the AUC in patients receiving the recommended dose caused an irregular menstrual cycle pattern and a lack of newly formed corpora lutea in the ovaries which were reversible. There was no effect on the male reproductive organs.
Teratogenicity: No reproductive or teratogenicity studies in animals have been conducted with atezolizumab. Animal studies have demonstrated that inhibition of the PD-L1/PD-1 pathway can lead to immune-related rejection of the developing foetus resulting in foetal death. Administration of atezolizumab could cause foetal harm, including embryo-foetal lethality.
Indications/Uses
840 mg/14 mL: Tecentriq as monotherapy is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC): after prior platinum-containing chemotherapy; or who are considered cisplatin ineligible, and whose tumours have a PD-L1 expression ≥ 5% (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Tecentriq as monotherapy is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC after prior chemotherapy. Patients with EGFR mutant or ALK-positive NSCLC should also have received targeted therapies before receiving Tecentriq (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Tecentriq in combination with nab-paclitaxel is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) whose tumours have PD-L1 expression ≥ 1% and who have not received prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Urothelial carcinoma: Tecentriq as monotherapy is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC): after prior platinum-containing chemotherapy; or who are considered cisplatin ineligible, and whose tumours have a PD-L1 expression ≥ 5% (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Non-small cell lung cancer: Tecentriq, in combination with bevacizumab, paclitaxel and carboplatin, is indicated for the first-line treatment of adult patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In patients with EGFR mutant or ALK-positive NSCLC, Tecentriq, in combination with bevacizumab, paclitaxel and carboplatin, is indicated only after failure of appropriate targeted therapies (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Tecentriq as monotherapy is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC after prior chemotherapy. Patients with EGFR mutant or ALK-positive NSCLC should also have received targeted therapies before receiving Tecentriq (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Tecentriq, in combination with nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin, is indicated for the first-line treatment of adult patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC who do not have EGFR mutant or ALK-positive NSCLC (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Small cell lung cancer: Tecentriq, in combination with carboplatin and etoposide, is indicated for the first-line treatment of adult patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Hepatocellular carcinoma: Tecentriq, in combination with bevacizumab, is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with advanced or unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who have not received prior systemic therapy (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Dosage/Direction for Use
Tecentriq must be initiated and supervised by physicians experienced in the treatment of cancer.
840 mg/14 mL: PD-L1 testing for patients with UC or TNBC: Patients with previously untreated UC and TNBC should be selected for treatment based on the tumour expression of PD-L1 confirmed by a validated test (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
1,200 mg/20 mL: PD-L1 testing for patients with UC: Patients with previously untreated UC should be selected for treatment based on the tumour expression of PD-L1 confirmed by a validated test (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Posology: Dose modifications during treatment: Dose reductions of Tecentriq are not recommended.
Dose delay or discontinuation (see also Precautions and Adverse Reactions): 840 mg/14 mL: See Tables 16a and 16b.

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

1,200 mg/20 mL: See Tables 17a and 17b.

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

840 mg/14 mL: Tecentriq monotherapy: The recommended dose of Tecentriq is: 840 mg administered intravenously every two weeks; or 1,680 mg administered intravenously every four weeks.
Tecentriq in combination with nab-paclitaxel in 1L mTNBC: The recommended dose of Tecentriq is 840 mg administered by intravenous infusion, followed by 100 mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel. For each 28-day cycle, Tecentriq is administered on days 1 and 15, and nab-paclitaxel is administered on days 1, 8, and 15. Refer to the full prescribing information for the combination product (see also Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Duration of treatment: It is recommended that patients are treated with Tecentriq until loss of clinical benefit (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions) or unmanageable toxicity.
For TNBC, it is recommended that patients are treated with Tecentriq until disease progression or unmanageable toxicity (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Delayed or missed doses: If a planned dose of Tecentriq is missed, it should be administered as soon as possible. The schedule of administration must be adjusted to maintain the appropriate interval between doses.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Tecentriq monotherapy: The recommended dose of Tecentriq is 1,200 mg administered intravenously every three weeks.
Tecentriq in combination therapy: Please also refer to the full prescribing information for the combination products (see also Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
1L non-squamous NSCLC: Tecentriq in combination with bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin: During the induction phase, the recommended dose of Tecentriq is 1,200 mg administered by intravenous infusion, followed by bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and then carboplatin every three weeks for four or six cycles.
The induction phase is followed by a maintenance phase without chemotherapy in which 1,200 mg Tecentriq followed by bevacizumab, is administered by intravenous infusion every three weeks.
Tecentriq in combination with nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin: During the induction phase, the recommended dose of Tecentriq is 1,200 mg administered by intravenous infusion, followed by nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin every three weeks for four or six cycles. For each 21-day cycle, Tecentriq, nab-paclitaxel, and carboplatin are administered on day 1. In addition, nab-paclitaxel is administered on days 8 and 15.
The induction phase is followed by a maintenance phase without chemotherapy in which 1,200 mg Tecentriq is administered by intravenous infusion every three weeks.
1L ES-SCLC: Tecentriq in combination with carboplatin and etoposide: During the induction phase, the recommended dose of Tecentriq is 1,200 mg administered by intravenous infusion followed by carboplatin, and then etoposide administered by intravenous infusion on day 1. Etoposide is also administered by intravenous infusion on days 2 and 3. This regimen is administered every three weeks for four cycles.
The induction phase is followed by a maintenance phase without chemotherapy in which 1,200 mg Tecentriq is administered by intravenous infusion every three weeks.
HCC: Tecentriq in combination with bevacizumab: The recommended dose of Tecentriq is 1,200 mg followed by bevacizumab 15 mg/kg of body weight, administered by intravenous infusion every three weeks.
Duration of treatment: It is recommended that patients are treated with Tecentriq until loss of clinical benefit (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions) or unmanageable toxicity.
For ES-SCLC and for first-line NSCLC, in patients given Tecentriq in combination with carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel, it is recommended that patients are treated with Tecentriq until disease progression or unmanageable toxicity. Treatment beyond disease progression may be considered at the discretion of the physician (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
Delayed or missed doses: If a planned dose of Tecentriq is missed, it should be administered as soon as possible. The schedule of administration must be adjusted to maintain a 3-week interval between doses.
Special populations: Paediatric population: The safety and efficacy of Tecentriq in children and adolescents aged below 18 years have not been established.
840 mg/14 mL: No data are available.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Currently available data are described in Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics and Pharmacokinetics under Actions and Adverse Reactions but no recommendation on a posology can be made.
Elderly: Based on a population pharmacokinetic analysis, no dose adjustment of Tecentriq is required in patients ≥ 65 years of age (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions and Adverse Reactions).
Renal impairment: Based on a population pharmacokinetic analysis, no dose adjustment is required in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment (see Pharmacology: Pharmacokinetics under Actions). Data from patients with severe renal impairment are too limited to draw conclusions on this population.
Hepatic impairment: 840 mg/14 mL: Based on a population pharmacokinetic analysis, no dose adjustment is required for patients with mild hepatic impairment. Tecentriq has not been studied in patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment (see Pharmacology: Pharmacokinetics under Actions).
1,200 mg/20 mL: Based on a population pharmacokinetic analysis, no dose adjustment is required for patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment. Tecentriq has not been studied in patients with severe hepatic impairment (see Pharmacology: Pharmacokinetics under Actions).
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≥ 2: 840 mg/14 mL: Patients with ECOG performance status ≥ 2 were excluded from the clinical trials in NSCLC, TNBC and 2nd line UC (see Precautions and Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions).
1,200 mg/20 mL: Patients with ECOG performance status ≥ 2 were excluded from the clinical trials in NSCLC, ES-SCLC, 2nd line UC and HCC (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions and Precautions).
Asian patients: 1,200 mg/20 mL: Due to increased haematologic toxicities observed in Asian patients in IMpower150, it is recommended that the starting dose of paclitaxel should be 175 mg/m2 every three weeks.
Method of administration: Tecentriq is for intravenous use. The infusions must not be administered as an intravenous push or bolus.
The initial dose of Tecentriq must be administered over 60 minutes. If the first infusion is well tolerated, all subsequent infusions may be administered over 30 minutes.
For instructions on dilution and handling of the medicinal product before administration, see Special precautions for disposal and other handling under Cautions for Usage.
Overdosage
There is no information on overdose with atezolizumab.
In case of overdose, patients should be closely monitored for signs or symptoms of adverse reactions, and appropriate symptomatic treatment instituted.
Contraindications
Hypersensitivity to atezolizumab or to any of the excipients listed in Description.
Special Precautions
Traceability: In order to improve the traceability of biological medicinal products, the trade name and the batch number of the administered product should be clearly recorded in the patient file.
Immune-related adverse reactions: Most immune-related adverse reactions occurring during treatment with atezolizumab were reversible with interruptions of atezolizumab and initiation of corticosteroids and/or supportive care. Immune-related adverse reactions affecting more than one body system have been observed. Immune-related adverse reactions with atezolizumab may occur after the last dose of atezolizumab.
For suspected immune-related adverse reactions, thorough evaluation to confirm aetiology or exclude other causes should be performed. Based on the severity of the adverse reaction, atezolizumab should be withheld and corticosteroids administered. Upon improvement to Grade ≤ 1, corticosteroid should be tapered over ≥ 1 month. Based on limited data from clinical studies in patients whose immune-related adverse reactions could not be controlled with systemic corticosteroid use, administration of other systemic immunosuppressants may be considered.
Atezolizumab must be permanently discontinued for any Grade 3 immune-related adverse reaction that recurs and for any Grade 4 immune-related adverse reactions, except for endocrinopathies that are controlled with replacement hormones (see Dosage & Administration and Adverse Reactions).
Immune-related pneumonitis: 840 mg/14 mL: Cases of pneumonitis, including fatal cases, have been observed in clinical trials with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions). Patients should be monitored for signs and symptoms of pneumonitis.
Treatment with atezolizumab should be withheld for Grade 2 pneumonitis, and 1 to 2 mg/kg/day prednisone or equivalent should be started. If symptoms improve to ≤ Grade 1, corticosteroids should be tapered over ≥ 1 month. Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed if the event improves to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks, and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day. Treatment with atezolizumab must be permanently discontinued for Grade 3 or 4 pneumonitis.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Cases of pneumonitis, including fatal cases, have been observed in clinical trials with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions). Patients should be monitored for signs and symptoms of pneumonitis and causes other than immune-related pneumonitis should be ruled out.
Treatment with atezolizumab should be withheld for Grade 2 pneumonitis, and 1 to 2 mg/kg/day prednisone or equivalent should be started. If symptoms improve to ≤ Grade 1, corticosteroids should be tapered over ≥ 1 month. Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed if the event improves to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks, and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day. Treatment with atezolizumab must be permanently discontinued for Grade 3 or 4 pneumonitis.
Immune-related hepatitis: Cases of hepatitis, some leading to fatal outcomes have been observed in clinical trials with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions). Patients should be monitored for signs and symptoms of hepatitis.
Aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and bilirubin should be monitored prior to initiation of treatment, periodically during treatment with atezolizumab and as indicated based on clinical evaluation.
For patients without HCC, treatment with atezolizumab should be withheld if Grade 2 event (ALT or AST > 3 to 5 x ULN or blood bilirubin > 1.5 to 3 x ULN) persists for more than 5 to 7 days, and 1 to 2 mg/kg/day of prednisone or equivalent should be started. If the event improves to ≤ Grade 1, corticosteroids should be tapered over ≥ 1 month.
Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed if the event improves to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day. Treatment with atezolizumab must be permanently discontinued for Grade 3 or Grade 4 events (ALT or AST > 5.0 x ULN or blood bilirubin > 3 x ULN).
1,200 mg/20 mL: For patients with HCC, treatment with atezolizumab should be withheld if ALT or AST increases to > 3 to ≤10 x ULN from normal limits at baseline, or > 5 to ≤10 x ULN from > 1 ULN to ≤3 x ULN at baseline, or > 8 to ≤10 x ULN from > 3 ULN to ≤5 x ULN at baseline, and persists for more than 5 to 7 days, and 1 to 2 mg/kg/day of prednisone or equivalent should be started. If the event improves to ≤ Grade 1, corticosteroids should be tapered over ≥ 1 month.
Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed if the event improves to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day. Treatment with atezolizumab must be permanently discontinued if ALT or AST increases to > 10 x ULN or total bilirubin increases > 3 x ULN).
Immune-related colitis: Cases of diarrhoea or colitis have been observed in clinical trials with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions). Patients should be monitored for signs and symptoms of colitis.
Treatment with atezolizumab should be withheld for Grade 2 or 3 diarrhoea (increase of ≥ 4 stools/day over baseline) or colitis (symptomatic). For Grade 2 diarrhoea or colitis, if symptoms persist > 5 days or recur, treatment with 1 to 2 mg/kg/day prednisone or equivalent should be started. For Grade 3 diarrhoea or colitis, treatment with intravenous corticosteroids (1 to 2 mg/kg/day methylprednisolone or equivalent) should be started. Once symptoms improve, treatment with 1 to 2 mg/kg/day of prednisone or equivalent should be started. If symptoms improve to ≤ Grade 1, corticosteroids should be tapered over ≥ 1 month. Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed if the event improves to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day. Treatment with atezolizumab must be permanently discontinued for Grade 4 (life threatening; urgent intervention indicated) diarrhoea or colitis.
Immune-related endocrinopathies: Hypothyroidism, hyperthyroidism, adrenal insufficiency, hypophysitis and type 1 diabetes mellitus, including diabetic ketoacidosis have been observed in clinical trials with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions).
Patients should be monitored for clinical signs and symptoms of endocrinopathies. Thyroid function should be monitored prior to and periodically during treatment with atezolizumab. Appropriate management of patients with abnormal thyroid function tests at baseline should be considered.
Asymptomatic patients with abnormal thyroid function tests can receive atezolizumab. For symptomatic hypothyroidism, atezolizumab should be withheld and thyroid hormone replacement should be initiated as needed. Isolated hypothyroidism may be managed with replacement therapy and without corticosteroids. For symptomatic hyperthyroidism, atezolizumab should be withheld and an anti-thyroid medicinal product should be initiated as needed. Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed when symptoms are controlled and thyroid function is improving.
For symptomatic adrenal insufficiency, atezolizumab should be withheld and treatment with intravenous corticosteroids (1 to 2 mg/kg/day methylprednisolone or equivalent) should be started. Once symptoms improve, treatment with 1 to 2 mg/kg/day of prednisone or equivalent should follow. If symptoms improve to ≤ Grade 1, corticosteroids should be tapered over ≥ 1 month. Treatment may be resumed if the event improves to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day and the patient is stable on replacement therapy (if required).
For Grade 2 or Grade 3 hypophysitis, atezolizumab should be withheld and treatment with intravenous corticosteroids (1 to 2 mg/kg/day methylprednisolone or equivalent) should be started, and hormone replacement should be initiated as needed. Once symptoms improve, treatment with 1 to 2 mg/kg/day of prednisone or equivalent should follow. If symptoms improve to ≤ Grade 1, corticosteroids should be tapered over ≥ 1 month. Treatment may be resumed if the event improves to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day and the patient is stable on replacement therapy (if required). Treatment with atezolizumab should be permanently discontinued for Grade 4 hypophysitis.
Treatment with insulin should be initiated for type 1 diabetes mellitus. For ≥ Grade 3 hyperglycaemia (fasting glucose > 250 mg/dL or 13.9 mmol/L), atezolizumab should be withheld. Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed if metabolic control is achieved on insulin replacement therapy.
Immune-related meningoencephalitis: Meningoencephalitis has been observed in clinical trials with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions). Patients should be monitored for clinical signs and symptoms of meningitis or encephalitis.
Treatment with atezolizumab must be permanently discontinued for any grade of meningitis or encephalitis. Treatment with intravenous corticosteroids (1 to 2 mg/kg/day methylprednisolone or equivalent) should be started. Once symptoms improve, treatment with 1 to 2 mg/kg/day of prednisone or equivalent should follow.
Immune-related neuropathies: Myasthenic syndrome/myasthenia gravis or Guillain-Barré syndrome, which may be life threatening, were observed in patients receiving atezolizumab. Patients should be monitored for symptoms of motor and sensory neuropathy.
Treatment with atezolizumab must be permanently discontinued for any grade of myasthenic syndrome / myasthenia gravis or Guillain-Barré syndrome. Initiation of systemic corticosteroids (at a dose of 1 to 2 mg/kg/day of prednisone or equivalent) should be considered.
Immune-related pancreatitis: Pancreatitis, including increases in serum amylase and lipase levels, has been observed in clinical trials with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions). Patients should be closely monitored for signs and symptoms that are suggestive of acute pancreatitis.
Treatment with atezolizumab should be withheld for ≥ Grade 3 serum amylase or lipase levels increased (> 2 x ULN), or Grade 2 or 3 pancreatitis, and treatment with intravenous corticosteroids (1 to 2 mg/kg/day methylprednisolone or equivalent) should be started. Once symptoms improve, treatment with 1 to 2 mg/kg/day of prednisone or equivalent should follow. Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed when serum amylase and lipase levels improve to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks, or symptoms of pancreatitis have resolved, and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day. Treatment with atezolizumab should be permanently discontinued for Grade 4, or any grade of recurrent pancreatitis.
Immune-related myocarditis: Myocarditis has been observed in clinical trials with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions). Patients should be monitored for signs and symptoms of myocarditis.
Treatment with atezolizumab should be withheld for Grade 2 myocarditis, and treatment with systemic corticosteroids at a dose of 1 to 2mg/kg/day of prednisone or equivalent should be started. Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed if the event improves to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks, and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day. Treatment with atezolizumab must be permanently discontinued for Grade 3 or 4 myocarditis.
Immune-related nephritis: Nephritis has been observed in clinical trials with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions). Patients should be monitored for changes in renal function.
Treatment with atezolizumab should be withheld for Grade 2 nephritis, and treatment with systemic corticosteroids at a dose of 1 to 2mg/kg/day of prednisone or equivalent should be started. Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed if the event improves to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks, and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day. Treatment with atezolizumab must be permanently discontinued for Grade 3 or 4 nephritis.
Immune-related myositis: Cases of myositis, including fatal cases, have been observed in clinical trials with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions). Patients should be monitored for signs and symptoms of myositis.
Treatment with atezolizumab should be withheld for Grade 2 or 3 myositis and corticosteroid therapy (1-2 mg/kg/day prednisone or equivalent) should be initiated. If symptoms improve to ≤ Grade 1, taper corticosteroids as clinically indicated. Treatment with atezolizumab may be resumed if the event improves to ≤ Grade 1 within 12 weeks, and corticosteroids have been reduced to ≤ 10 mg oral prednisone or equivalent per day. Treatment with atezolizumab should be permanently discontinued for Grade 4 or grade 3 recurrent myositis, or when unable to reduce the corticosteroid dose to the equivalent of ≤ 10 mg prednisone per day within 12 weeks after onset.
Infusion-related reactions: Infusion-related reactions have been observed with atezolizumab (see Adverse Reactions).
The rate of infusion should be reduced or treatment should be interrupted in patients with Grade 1 or 2 infusion-related reactions. Atezolizumab should be permanently discontinued in patients with Grade 3 or 4 infusion-related reactions. Patients with Grade 1 or 2 infusion-related reactions may continue to receive atezolizumab with close monitoring; premedication with antipyretic and antihistamines may be considered.
Disease-specific precautions: Use of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab, paclitaxel and carboplatin in metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: Physicians should carefully consider the combined risks of the four-drug regimen of atezolizumab, bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin before initiating treatment (see Adverse Reactions).
Use of atezolizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel in metastatic triple negative breast cancer: 840 mg/14 mL: Neutropenia and peripheral neuropathies occurring during treatment with atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel may be reversible with interruptions of atezolizumab and/or nab-paclitaxel. Physicians should consult the nab-paclitaxel summary of product characteristics (SmPC) for specific precautions and contraindications of this medicine.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Neutropenia and peripheral neuropathies occurring during treatment with atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel may be reversible with interruptions of nab-paclitaxel. Physicians should consult the nab-paclitaxel summary of product characteristics (SmPC) for specific precautions and contraindications of this medicine.
Use of atezolizumab in urothelial carcinoma for previously untreated patients who are considered cisplatin ineligible: The baseline and prognostic disease characteristics of the IMvigor210 Cohort 1 study population were overall comparable to patients in the clinic who would be considered cisplatin ineligible but would be eligible for a carboplatin-based combination chemotherapy. There are insufficient data for the subgroup of patients that would be unfit for any chemotherapy; therefore atezolizumab should be used with caution in these patients, after careful consideration of the potential balance of risks and benefits on an individual basis.
Use of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab, paclitaxel and carboplatin: Patients with NSCLC that had clear tumour infiltration into the thoracic great vessels or clear cavitation of pulmonary lesions, as seen on imaging, were excluded from the pivotal clinical study IMpower150 after several cases of fatal pulmonary haemorrhage were observed, which is a known risk factor of treatment with bevacizumab.
In the absence of data, atezolizumab should be used with caution in these populations after careful evaluation of the balance of benefits and risks for the patient.
Use of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab, paclitaxel and carboplatin in EGFR+ patients with NSCLC who have progressed on erlotinib+bevacizumab: In study IMpower150, there are no data on the efficacy of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab, paclitaxel and carboplatin in EGFR+ patients who have progressed previously on erlotinib+bevacizumab.
Use of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab in hepatocellular carcinoma: 1,200 mg/20 mL: Data in HCC patients with Child-Pugh B liver disease treated with atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab are very limited and there are currently no data available in HCC patients with Child-Pugh C liver disease.
Patients treated with bevacizumab have an increased risk of haemorrhage, and cases of severe gastrointestinal haemorrhage, including fatal events, were reported in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab. In patients with HCC, screening for and subsequent treatment of oesophageal varices should be performed as per clinical practice prior to starting treatment with the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab. Bevacizumab should be permanently discontinued in patients who experience Grade 3 or 4 bleeding with the combination treatment. Please refer to the bevacizumab Summary of Product Characteristics.
Diabetes mellitus can occur during treatment with atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab. Physicians should monitor blood glucose levels prior to and periodically during treatment with atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab as clinically indicated.
Patients excluded from clinical trials: 840 mg/14 mL: Patients with the following conditions were excluded from clinical trials: a history of autoimmune disease, history of pneumonitis, active brain metastasis, HIV, hepatitis B or hepatitis C infection, significant cardiovascular disease and patients with inadequate hematologic and end-organ function. Patients who were administered a live, attenuated vaccine within 28 days prior to enrolment; systemic immunostimulatory agents within 4 weeks or systemic immunosuppressive medicinal products within 2 weeks prior to study entry were excluded from clinical trials.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Patients with the following conditions were excluded from clinical trials: a history of autoimmune disease, history of pneumonitis, active brain metastasis, HIV, hepatitis B or hepatitis C infection, significant cardiovascular disease and patients with inadequate hematologic and end-organ function. Patients who were administered a live, attenuated vaccine within 28 days prior to enrolment; systemic immunostimulatory agents within 4 weeks or systemic immunosuppressive medicinal products within 2 weeks prior to study entry; therapeutic oral or IV antibiotics within 2 weeks prior to initiation of study treatment were excluded from clinical trials.
Patient alert card: All prescribers of Tecentriq must be familiar with the Physician Information and Management Guidelines. The prescriber must discuss the risks of Tecentriq therapy with the patient. The patient will be provided with the patient alert card and instructed to carry the card at all times.
Effects on ability to drive and use machines: Tecentriq has minor influence on the ability to drive and use machines. Patients experiencing fatigue should be advised not to drive and use machines until symptoms abate (see Adverse Reactions).
Use In Pregnancy & Lactation
Women of childbearing potential: Women of childbearing potential have to use effective contraception during and for 5 months after treatment with atezolizumab.
Pregnancy: There are no data from the use of atezolizumab in pregnant women. No developmental and reproductive studies were conducted with atezolizumab. Animal studies have demonstrated that inhibition of the PD-L1/PD-1 pathway in murine pregnancy models can lead to immune-related rejection of the developing foetus resulting in foetal death (see Pharmacology: Toxicology: Preclinical safety data under Actions). These results indicate a potential risk, based on its mechanism of action, that administration of atezolizumab during pregnancy could cause foetal harm, including increased rates of abortion or stillbirth.
Human immunoglobulins G1 (IgG1) are known to cross the placental barrier and atezolizumab is an IgG1; therefore, atezolizumab has the potential to be transmitted from the mother to the developing foetus.
Atezolizumab should not be used during pregnancy unless the clinical condition of the woman requires treatment with atezolizumab.
Breast-feeding: It is unknown whether atezolizumab is excreted in human milk. Atezolizumab is a monoclonal antibody and is expected to be present in the first milk and at low levels afterwards. A risk to the newborns/infants cannot be excluded. A decision must be made whether to discontinue breast-feeding or to discontinue Tecentriq therapy taking into account the benefit of breast-feeding for the child and the benefit of therapy for the woman.
Fertility: No clinical data are available on the possible effects of atezolizumab on fertility. No reproductive and development toxicity studies have been conducted with atezolizumab; however, based on the 26-week repeat dose toxicity study, atezolizumab had an effect on menstrual cycles at an estimated AUC approximately 6 times the AUC in patients receiving the recommended dose and was reversible (see Pharmacology: Toxicology: Preclinical safety data under Actions). There were no effects on the male reproductive organs.
Adverse Reactions
Summary of the safety profile: 840 mg/14 mL: The safety of atezolizumab as monotherapy is based on pooled data in 3,178 patients across multiple tumour types. The most common adverse reactions (> 10%) were fatigue (35.9%), decreased appetite (25.5%), nausea (23.5%), cough (20.8%), dyspnoea (20.5%), pyrexia (20.1%), diarrhoea (19.7%), rash (19.5%), back pain (15.3%), vomiting (15.0%), asthenia (14.5%), arthralgia (13.9%), musculoskeletal pain (13.0%), pruritus (12.6%) and urinary tract infection (11.6%).
The safety of atezolizumab given in combination with other medicinal products, has been evaluated in 2,759 patients across multiple tumour types. The most common adverse reactions (≥ 20%) were nausea (37.4%), fatigue (36.4%), neutropenia (33.7%), anaemia (33.2%), diarrhoea (29.5%), rash (28.5%), constipation (27.0%), peripheral neuropathy (26.8%), decreased appetite (24.6%), thrombocytopenia (21.2%) and cough (20.1%).
Further details on serious adverse reactions are provided in Precautions.
1,200 mg/20 mL: The safety of atezolizumab as monotherapy is based on pooled data in 3,568 patients across multiple tumour types. The most common adverse reactions (> 10%) were fatigue (34.5%), decreased appetite (24.0%), nausea (22.4%), pyrexia (20.1%), diarrhoea (19.9%), cough (19.8%), rash (19.8%), dyspnoea (19.0%), musculoskeletal pain (14.7%), back pain (14.4%), vomiting (14.1%), pruritus (14.0%), asthenia (13.9%), arthralgia (13.6%), urinary tract infection (13.1%) and headache (10.9%).
The safety of atezolizumab given in combination with other medicinal products, has been evaluated in 4,371 patients across multiple tumour types. The most common adverse reactions (≥ 20%) were anaemia (36.8 %), neutropenia (35.8%), nausea (34.4%), fatigue (33.0%), thrombocytopenia (27.7 %), rash (27.2%), diarrhoea (27.1%), alopecia (26.4%), constipation (25.7%), decreased appetite (25.0%) and peripheral neuropathy (23.0%).
Further details on serious adverse reactions are provided in Precautions.
Tabulated list of adverse reactions: The Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) are listed by MedDRA system organ class (SOC) and categories of frequency in Tables 18, 19a and 19b for atezolizumab given as monotherapy or as combination therapy. Adverse reactions known to occur with atezolizumab or chemotherapies given alone may occur during treatment with these medicinal products in combination, even if these reactions were not reported in clinical trials with combination therapy. The following categories of frequency have been used: very common (≥ 1/10), common (≥ 1/100 to < 1/10), uncommon (≥ 1/1,000 to < 1/100), rare (≥ 1/10,000 to < 1/1,000), very rare (< 1/10,000). Within each frequency grouping, adverse reactions are presented in the order of decreasing seriousness.
840 mg/14 mL: See Table 18.

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

1,200 mg/20 mL: See Tables 19a and 19b.

Click on icon to see table/diagram/image


Click on icon to see table/diagram/image

Description of selected adverse reactions: The following data reflect information for significant adverse reactions for atezolizumab as monotherapy in clinical studies (see Pharmacology: Pharmacodynamics under Actions). Details for the significant adverse reactions for atezolizumab when given in combination are presented if clinically relevant differences were noted in comparison to atezolizumab monotherapy. The management guidelines for these adverse reactions are described in Dosage & Administration and Precautions.
Immune-related pneumonitis: 840 mg/14 mL: Pneumonitis occurred in 2.7% (87/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. Of the 87 patients, one experienced a fatal event. The median time to onset was 3.4 months (range 3 days to 24.8 months). The median duration was 1.4 months (range 0 day to 21.2+ months; + denotes a censored value). Pneumonitis led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 12 (0.4%) patients. Pneumonitis requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 1.6% (51/3,178) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Pneumonitis occurred in 2.8% (99/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. Of the 99 patients, one experienced a fatal event. The median time to onset was 4.0 months (range 3 days to 24.8 months). The median duration was 1.6 months (range 0 day to 21.7+ months; + denotes a censored value). Pneumonitis led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 15 (0.4%) patients. Pneumonitis requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 1.5% (53/3,568) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
Immune-related hepatitis: 840 mg/14 mL: Hepatitis occurred in 2.0% (62/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. Of the 62 patients, two experienced a fatal event. The median time to onset was 1.5 months (range 6 days to 18.8 months). The median duration was 2.1 months (range 0 day to 22.0+ months; + denotes a censored value). Hepatitis led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 6 (< 0.2%) patients. Hepatitis requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 0.6% (18/3,178) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Hepatitis occurred in 1.8% (66/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. Of the 66 patients, two experienced a fatal event. The median time to onset was 1.5 months (range 6 days to 18.8 months). The median duration was 2.1 months (range 0 day to 22.0+ months; + denotes a censored value). Hepatitis led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 9 (0.3%) patients. Hepatitis requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 0.5% (19/3,568) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
Immune-related colitis: 840 mg/14 mL: Colitis occurred in 1.1% (34/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 4.7 months (range 15 days to 17.2 months). The median duration was 1.2 months (range 3 days to 17.8+ months; + denotes a censored value). Colitis led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 8 (0.3%) patients. Colitis requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 0.6% (19/3,178) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Colitis occurred in 1.2% (43/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 5.0 months (range 15 days to 17.2 months). The median duration was 1.2 months (range 3 days to 17.8+ months; + denotes a censored value). Colitis led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 15 (0.4%) patients. Colitis requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 0.5% (19/3,568) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
Immune-related endocrinopathies: Thyroid disorders: 840 mg/14 mL: Hypothyroidism occurred in 5.2% (164/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 4.9 months (range: 0 day to 31.3 months). Hyperthyroidism occurred in 0.9% (30/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 2.1 months (range 21 days to 15.7 months).
1,200 mg/20 mL: Hypothyroidism occurred in 6.0% (214/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 4.4 months (range: 0 day to 31.3 months). Hyperthyroidism occurred in 1.3% (47/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 2.1 months (range 21 days to 15.7 months).
Adrenal insufficiency: 840 mg/14 mL: Adrenal insufficiency occurred in 0.4% (12/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 5.5 months (range: 3 days to 19 months). The median duration was 16.8 months (range: 0 day to 16.8 months). Adrenal insufficiency led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 1 (<0.1%) patient. Adrenal insufficiency requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 0.3% (9/3,178) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Adrenal insufficiency occurred in 0.4% (13/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 5.7 months (range: 3 days to 19 months). The median duration was 16.8 months (range: 0 day to 20.9+ months; + denotes a censored value). Adrenal insufficiency led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 1 (<0.1%) patient. Adrenal insufficiency requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 0.3% (10/3,568) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
Hypophysitis: 840 mg/14 mL: Hypophysitis occurred in < 0.1% (2/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset 7.2 months (range: 24 days to 13.7 months). One patient required the use of corticosteroids and treatment with atezolizumab was discontinued.
Hypophysitis occurred in 0.8% (3/393) of patients who received atezolizumab with bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin. The median time to onset was 7.7 months (range: 5.0 to 8.8 months). Two patients required the use of corticosteroids.
Hypophysitis occurred in 0.4% (2/473) of patients who received atezolizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin. The median time to onset was 5.2 months (range: 5.1 to 5.3 months). Both patients required the use of corticosteroids.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Hypophysitis occurred in < 0.1% (3/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset 5.3 months (range: 24 days to 13.7 months). Two (<0.1%) patients required the use of corticosteroids and treatment with atezolizumab was discontinued in 1 (<0.1%) patient. Hypophysitis occurred in 0.8% (3/393) of patients who received atezolizumab with bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin. The median time to onset was 7.7 months (range: 5.0 to 8.8 months). Two patients required the use of corticosteroids.
Hypophysitis occurred in 0.4% (2/473) of patients who received atezolizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin. The median time to onset was 5.2 months (range: 5.1 to 5.3 months). Both patients required the use of corticosteroids.
Diabetes mellitus: 840 mg/14 mL: Diabetes mellitus occurred in 0.3% (11/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 3.6 months (range 3 days to 9.9 months). Diabetes mellitus led to the discontinuation of atezolizumab in < 0.1% (3/3,178) patients.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Diabetes mellitus occurred in 0.3% (11/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 4.2 months (range 3 days to 9.9 months). Diabetes mellitus requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in < 0.1% (2/3,568) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy. Diabetes mellitus led to the discontinuation of atezolizumab in < 0.1% (3/3,568) patients.
Diabetes mellitus occurred in 2.0% (10/493) of HCC patients who received atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab. The median time to onset was 4.4 months (range: 1.2 months - 8.3 months). No events of diabetes mellitus led to atezolizumab withdrawal.
Immune-related meningoencephalitis: 840 mg/14 mL: Meningoencephalitis occurred in 0.4% (13/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 15 days (range: 0 day to 12.5 months). The median duration was 26 days (range 6 days to 14.5+ months; + denotes a censored value).
Meningoencephalitis requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 0.2% (6/3,178) of patients receiving atezolizumab and four patients discontinued atezolizumab.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Meningoencephalitis occurred in 0.4% (14/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 15 days (range: 0 day to 12.5 months). The median duration was 21 days (range 6 days to 14.5+ months; + denotes a censored value).
Meningoencephalitis requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 0.2% (6/3,568) of patients receiving atezolizumab and four patients discontinued atezolizumab.
Immune-related neuropathies: 840 mg/14 mL: Guillain-Barré syndrome and demyelinating polyneuropathy occurred in 0.2% (5/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 7 months (range: 18 days to 8.1 months). The median duration was 8.0 months (range 18 days to 8.3+ months; + denotes a censored value). Guillain-Barré syndrome led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 1 patient (< 0.1%). Guillain-Barré syndrome requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in < 0.1% (2/3,178) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Guillain-Barré syndrome and demyelinating polyneuropathy occurred in 0.1% (5/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 7 months (range: 18 days to 8.1 months). The median duration was 8.0 months (range 18 days to 8.3+ months; + denotes a censored value). Guillain-Barré syndrome led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 1 patient (< 0.1%). Guillain-Barré syndrome requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in < 0.1% (2/3,568) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
Myasthenic syndrome: 840 mg/14 mL: Myasthenia gravis occurred in < 0.1% (1/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The time to onset was 1.2 months.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Myasthenia gravis occurred in < 0.1% (1/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The time to onset was 1.2 months.
Immune-related pancreatitis: 840 mg/14 mL: Pancreatitis, including amylase increased and lipase increased, occurred in 0.6% (18/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 5.0 months (range: 9 days to 16.9 months). The median duration was 24 days (range 3 days to 12.0+ months; + denotes a censored value). Pancreatitis led to the discontinuation of atezolizumab in 3 (< 0.1%) patients. Pancreatitis requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 0.1% (4/3,178) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Pancreatitis, including amylase increased and lipase increased, occurred in 0.8% (27/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 4.3 months (range: 0 days to 16.9 months). The median duration was 27 days (range 3 days to 22.4+ months; + denotes a censored value). Pancreatitis led to the discontinuation of atezolizumab in 3 (< 0.1%) patients. Pancreatitis requiring the use of corticosteroids occurred in 0.1% (4/3,568) of patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy.
Immune-related myocarditis: Myocarditis occurred in < 0.1% (2/8,000) of patients across all atezolizumab clinical trials in multiple tumour types and treatment combinations. The time to onset was 18 and 33 days. Both patients required corticosteroids and discontinued atezolizumab.
Immune-related nephritis:
840 mg/14 mL: Nephritis occurred in < 0.1% (3/3,178) of patients who received atezolizumab. The median time to onset was 13.1 months (range: 9.0 to 17.5 months). The median duration was 2.8 months (range 15 days to 9.5+ months; + denotes a censored value). Nephritis led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 2 (<0.1%) patients. One patient required corticosteroids and discontinued atezolizumab.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Nephritis occurred in 0.2% (8/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab. The median time to onset was 6.0 months (range: 2.0 to 17.5 months). Nephritis led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 4/3,568 (0.1%) patients. Two (<0.1%) patients required corticosteroids.
Immune-related myositis: 840 mg/14 mL: Myositis occurred in 0.4% (12/3178) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 5.4 months (range: 0.7 to 11.0 months). The median duration was 3.5 months (range 0.1 to 22.6+ months; + denotes a censored value). Myositis led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 1 (<0.1%) patient. Seven (0.2%) patients required the use of corticosteroids.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Myositis occurred in 0.4% (15/3,568) of patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy. The median time to onset was 2.9 months (range: 0.4 to 11.0 months). The median duration was 3.8 months (range 3 days to 22.6+ months; + denotes a censored value). Myositis led to discontinuation of atezolizumab in 1 (<0.1%) patient. Seven (0.2%) patients required the use of corticosteroids.
Use of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab, paclitaxel and carboplatin: In the first-line NSCLC study (IMpower150), an overall higher frequency of adverse events was observed in the four-drug regimen of atezolizumab, bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin compared to atezolizumab, paclitaxel and carboplatin, including Grade 3 and 4 events (63.6% compared to 57.5%), Grade 5 events (6.1% compared to 2.5%), adverse events of special interest to atezolizumab (52.4% compared to 48.0%), as well as adverse events leading to withdrawal of any study treatment (33.8% compared to 13.3%). Nausea, diarrhoea, stomatitis, fatigue, pyrexia, mucosal inflammation, decreased appetite, weight decreased, hypertension and proteinuria were reported higher (≥5% difference) in patients receiving atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab, paclitaxel and carboplatin. Other clinically significant adverse events which were observed more frequently in the atezolizumab, bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin arm were epistaxis, haemoptysis, cerebrovascular accident, including fatal events.
Immunogenicity: 840 mg/14 mL: Across multiple phase III studies, 13.1% to 36.4% of patients developed treatment-emergent anti-drug antibodies (ADAs). Overall, ADA status appeared to have no clinically relevant impact on safety. No data are available to allow conclusions to be drawn on possible effects of neutralising antibodies.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Across multiple phase III studies, 13.1 % to 36.4% of patients developed treatment-emergent anti-drug antibodies (ADAs).
Across pooled datasets for patients treated with atezolizumab monotherapy (N=2705) and with combination therapies (N= 2285), the following rates of adverse events (AEs) have been observed for the ADA-positive population compared to the ADA-negative population, respectively: Grade 3-4 AEs 49.1% vs. 44.3%, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) 42.4% vs. 37.6%, AEs leading to treatment withdrawal 6.1% vs 6.7% (for monotherapy); Grade 3-4 AEs 63.9% vs. 60.9%, SAEs 43.9% vs. 35.6%, AEs leading to treatment withdrawal 22.8% vs 18.4% (for combination therapy). However, available data do not allow firm conclusions to be drawn on possible patterns of adverse drug reactions.
Elderly patients: No overall differences in safety were observed between patients ≥ 65 years of age and younger patients receiving atezolizumab monotherapy. In study IMpower150, age ≥ 65 was associated with an increased risk of developing adverse events in patients receiving atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab, carboplatin and paclitaxel.
In studies IMpower150 and IMpower133, data for patients ≥75 years of age are too limited to draw conclusions on this population.
Paediatric population: 1,200 mg/20 mL: The safety of atezolizumab in children and adolescents has not been established. No new safety signals were observed in a clinical study with 69 paediatric patients (<18 years) and the safety profile was comparable to adults.
Drug Interactions
No formal pharmacokinetic drug interaction studies have been conducted with atezolizumab. Since atezolizumab is cleared from the circulation through catabolism, no metabolic drug-drug interactions are expected.
The use of systemic corticosteroids or immunosuppressants before starting atezolizumab should be avoided because of their potential interference with the pharmacodynamic activity and efficacy of atezolizumab. However, systemic corticosteroids or other immunosuppressants can be used to treat immune-related adverse reactions after starting atezolizumab (see Precautions).
Caution For Usage
Special precautions for disposal and other handling: Tecentriq does not contain any antimicrobial preservative or bacteriostatic agents and should be prepared by a healthcare professional using aseptic technique to ensure the sterility of prepared solutions.
Aseptic preparation, handling and storage: Aseptic handling must be ensured when preparing the infusion. Preparation should be: performed under aseptic conditions by trained personnel in accordance with good practice rules especially with respect to the aseptic preparation of parenteral products; prepared in a laminar flow hood or biological safety cabinet using standard precautions for the safe handling of intravenous agents; followed by adequate storage of the prepared solution for intravenous infusion to ensure maintenance of the aseptic conditions.
Do not shake.
Instructions for dilution: 840 mg/14 mL: For the recommended dose of 840 mg: fourteen mL of Tecentriq concentrate should be withdrawn from the vial and diluted into a 250 mL polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyolefin (PO), polyethylene (PE), or polypropylene (PP) infusion bag containing sodium chloride 9 mg/mL (0.9%) solution for injection. After dilution, one mL of solution should contain approximately 3.2 mg of Tecentriq (840 mg/264 mL).
For the recommended dose of 1680 mg: twenty-eight mL of Tecentriq concentrate should be withdrawn from two vials of Tecentriq 840 mg and diluted into a 250 mL polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyolefin (PO), polyethylene (PE), or polypropylene (PP) infusion bag containing sodium chloride 9 mg/mL (0.9%) solution for injection. After dilution, one mL of solution should contain approximately 6.0 mg of Tecentriq (1680 mg/278 mL).
The bag should be gently inverted to mix the solution in order to avoid foaming. Once the infusion is prepared it should be administered immediately (see Shelf life under Storage).
Parenteral medicinal products should be inspected visually for particulates and discolouration prior to administration. If particulates or discoloration are observed, the solution should not be used.
No incompatibilities have been observed between Tecentriq and intravenous bags with product-contacting surfaces of polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyolefin (PO), polyethylene (PE), or polypropylene (PP). In addition, no incompatibilities have been observed with in-line filter membranes composed of polyethersulfone or polysulfone, and infusion sets and other infusion aids composed of PVC, PE, polybutadiene, or polyetherurethane. The use of in-line filter membranes is optional.
Do not co-administer other medicinal products through the same infusion line.
1,200 mg/20 mL: Twenty mL of Tecentriq concentrate should be withdrawn from the vial and diluted into a polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyolefin (PO), polyethylene (PE) or polypropylene (PP) infusion bag containing sodium chloride 9 mg/mL (0.9%) solution for injection. After dilution, the final concentration of the diluted solution should be between 3.2 and 16.8mg/mL.
The bag should be gently inverted to mix the solution in order to avoid foaming. Once the infusion is prepared it should be administered immediately (see Shelf life under Storage).
Parenteral medicinal products should be inspected visually for particulates and discolouration prior to administration. If particulates or discoloration are observed, the solution should not be used.
No incompatibilities have been observed between Tecentriq and intravenous bags with product- contacting surfaces of polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyolefin (PO), polyethylene (PE), or polypropylene (PP). In addition, no incompatibilities have been observed with in-line filter membranes composed of polyethersulfone or polysulfone, and infusion sets and other infusion aids composed of PVC, PE, polybutadiene, or polyetherurethane. The use of in-line filter membranes is optional.
Do not co-administer other medicinal products through the same infusion line.
Disposal: The release of Tecentriq in the environment should be minimised. Any unused medicinal product or waste material should be disposed of in accordance with local requirements.
Incompatibilities: In the absence of compatibility studies, this medicinal product must not be mixed with other medicinal products except those previously mentioned in Special precautions for disposal and other handling.
Storage
Store in a refrigerator (2 °C - 8 °C).
Do not freeze.
Keep the vial in the outer carton in order to protect from light.
For storage conditions after dilution of the medicinal product, see Shelf life as follows.
Shelf life: Diluted solution: Chemical and physical in-use stability has been demonstrated for up to 24 hours at ≤ 30 °C and for up to 30 days at 2 °C to 8 °C from the time of preparation.
From a microbiological point of view, the prepared solution for infusion should be used immediately. If not used immediately, in-use storage times and conditions prior to use are the responsibility of the user and would normally not be longer than 24 hours at 2 °C to 8 °C or 8 hours at ambient temperature (≤ 25 °C) unless dilution has taken place in controlled and validated aseptic conditions.
ATC Classification
L01XC32 - atezolizumab ; Belongs to the class of monoclonal antibodies, other antineoplastic agents. Used in the treatment of cancer.
Presentation/Packing
Concentrate for soln for infusion (vial) (clear, colourless to slightly yellowish liquid) 840 mg/14 mL x 1's. 1,200 mg/20 mL x 1's.
Exclusive offer for doctors
Register for a MIMS account and receive free medical publications worth $768 a year.
Sign up for free
Already a member? Sign in