Head-to-head evidence
Durvalumab vs Tecentriq Hybreza (atezolizumab and hyaluronidase-tqjs)
Same mechanism, same race: design-graded trial evidence for both assets, with the grading rationale shown. Grades describe the quality of the evidence, never the merits of either security.
Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Shared mechanism: PD-L1 · full Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer pipeline
Durvalumab
Marketed by AstraZeneca and partners
NCT02125461 · Phase 3 · completed
Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio and quadruple-blinded to durvalumab or matching placebo, with 476 receiving durvalumab and 237 placebo. The prespecified primary clinical endpoints were met: progression-free survival was 16.8 versus 5.6 months (HR 0.52, p<0.0001), and overall survival also favored durvalumab (HR 0.68, p=0.00251).
Next expected readout: October 2026 · NCT06008093 (registry estimate)
Tecentriq Hybreza (atezolizumab and hyaluronidase-tqjs)
Marketed by Roche
NCT03735121 · Phase 3 · completed
This was a randomized, open-label, active-controlled phase 3 study comparing subcutaneous atezolizumab with the established IV formulation in previously treated NSCLC. The primary endpoints were pharmacokinetic measures (serum trough concentration and AUC) rather than clinical outcomes, and the non-inferiority comparisons were met for both. Because the study was open-label and the primary endpoints were surrogate PK measures, the evidence is limited despite the randomized design and adequate sample size.
The full competitive landscape for each asset (every same-race competitor with aligned evidence, sortable) is on the asset pages: Durvalumab's landscape · Tecentriq Hybreza (atezolizumab and hyaluronidase-tqjs)'s landscape