Skip to main content
. 2021 May 18;2(6):100188. doi: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2021.100188

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Uptake of second-line ICI therapy. (A) Receipt of second-line ICI therapy was significantly associated with the year of second-line therapy (Pearson’s chi-square test, p < 0.001). ICI therapy included pembrolizumab and nivolumab ± ipilimumab. Traditional chemotherapy included pemetrexed, carboplatin/cisplatin, bevacizumab, gemcitabine, vinorelbine, and combinations of these medications. (B) Cumulative uptake of second-line ICI therapy among patients with MPM who had received traditional first-line chemotherapy concordant with the NCCN MPM guidelines. The vertical dashed lines in Figure 2B and C identify July 2017, when the NCCN MPM guideline was revised to include ICI therapy as an option for second-line systemic therapy. (C) Cumulative uptake of second-line ICI therapy by MPM histologic subtype. The start of second-line therapy before or after the NCCN guideline revision was a significant effect modifier for the association between MPM histologic subtype and receipt of ICI therapy (Mantel-Haenszel test of homogeneity, p = 0.079). Dec, December; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; Jan, January; Jun, June; Mar, March; MPM, malignant pleural mesothelioma; NCCN, National Comprehensive Cancer Network; Sep, September.