SKYSCRAPER-03: A Phase III Study of Tiragolumab Plus Atezolizumab Versus Durvalumab in Locally Advanced, Unresectable, Stage III NSCLC After Platinum-Based Concurrent Chemoradiation
In brief
Tiragolumab-atezolizumab matches durvalumab but adds no survival gain
In 829 patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC after chemoradiation, the tiragolumab-atezolizumab combo produced a median progression-free survival of 19.4 months versus 16.6 months with durvalumab, a difference that was not statistically significant. Overall survival was virtually identical, and safety was comparable, indicating the combination offers no clear advantage over standard durvalumab consolidation.
- Journal
- Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (Q1)
- Published
- 6 August 2026
- Study design
- Randomized controlled trial
- Evidence level
- Level 1, High (CEBM 1b)
- Authors
- H A Wakelee, M-J Ahn, J Bradley, S Popat, K Kelly, A-M Baird, et al.
- PMID
- 42562209
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.annonc.2026.07.414
Why clinicians should know about it
- Picked for Immunology and Allergy (top studies of the week, 9 August 2026).
- Picked for Oncology and Radiation Oncology (top studies of the week, 9 August 2026): Tiragolumab + atezolizumab vs durvalumab after CRT in stage III
- Picked for Hematology (top studies of the week, 9 August 2026).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: SKYSCRAPER-03 (NCT04513925) was a phase III, open-label, randomized, study that evaluated consolidation therapy with tiragolumab plus atezolizumab versus durvalumab in patients with locally advanced, unresectable, stage III, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after platinum-based concurrent chemoradiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab (1680 mg every 4 weeks [Q4W]) plus tiragolumab (840 mg Q4W) on day 1 of each cycle, or durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or 1500 mg Q4W for those ≥30 kg body weight) on days 1 and 15 of each cycle, for 13 x 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was Independent Review Facility (IRF)-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with programmed cell death ligand-1-positive (PD-L1+; tumor cells [TC] ≥1%) NSCLC. Key secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: The PD-L1 all-comers population included 413 patients randomly assigned to tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and 416 to durvalumab; the PD-L1+ population included 209 and 210 patients in each arm, respectively. After a median follow-up of 33.0 months, median IRF-assessed PFS in PD-L1+ patients was 19.4 months with tiragolumab plus atezolizumab versus 16.6 months with durvalumab (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-1.23; p = 0.76); median PFS in PD-L1 all-comers was 14.2 versus 13.8 months, respectively (stratified HR 1.00; 95% CI, 0.84-1.19). Median OS in PD-L1+ patients was not estimable with tiragolumab plus atezolizumab versus 54.8 months with durvalumab (stratified HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.73-1.34); in PD-L1 all-comers, median OS was 45.6 versus 45.8 months, respectively (stratified HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.80-1.20). The safety profile of the combination was consistent with prior observations, and there were no new or unexpected findings. CONCLUSIONS: The primary endpoint of the SKYSCRAPER-03 study was not met. Tiragolumab plus atezolizumab was tolerated but did not offer additional benefit over durvalumab.
Abstract as published, via PubMed.
For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.