Lucjan Wyrwicz

Abstract Standard first-line chemotherapy results in disease progression and death within one year in most patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma 1–4 . Nivolumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated superior overall survival versus chemotherapy at 12-month follow-up in gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction or oesophageal adenocarcinoma in the randomized, global CheckMate 649 phase 3 trial 5 (programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) combined positive score ≥5 and all randomized patients). On the basis of these results, nivolumab plus chemotherapy is now approved as a first-line treatment for these patients in many countries 6 . Nivolumab and the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor ipilimumab have distinct but complementary mechanisms of action that contribute to the restoration of anti-tumour T-cell function and induction of de novo anti-tumour T-cell responses, respectively 7–11 . Treatment combining 1 mg kg −1 nivolumab with 3 mg kg −1 ipilimumab demonstrated clinically meaningful anti-tumour activity with a manageable safety profile in heavily pre-treated patients with advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer 12 . Here we report both long-term follow-up results comparing nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone and the first results comparing nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy alone from CheckMate 649. After the 24.0-month minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus chemotherapy continued to demonstrate improvement in overall survival versus chemotherapy alone in patients with PD-L1 combined positive score ≥5 (hazard ratio 0.70; 95% confidence interval 0.61, 0.81) and all randomized patients (hazard ratio 0.79; 95% confidence interval 0.71, 0.88). Overall survival in patients with PD-L1 combined positive score ≥ 5 for nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy alone did not meet the prespecified boundary for significance. No new safety signals were identified. Our results support the continued use of nivolumab plus chemotherapy as standard first-line treatment for advanced gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

LBA4007 Background: KEYNOTE062 (NCT02494583) was a randomized, active controlled study of 1L P or P+C vs C in pts with PD-L1 combined positive score ≥1 (CPS ≥1), HER2-negative, advanced GC. Methods: Eligible pts were randomized 1:1:1 to P 200 mg Q3W for up to 2 y, P+C (cisplatin 80 mg/m 2 + 5-FU 800 mg/m 2 /d on d1-d5 Q3W [or capecitabine 1000 mg/m 2 BID on d1-d14 Q3W per local guideline]) or placebo Q3W + C. Randomization was stratified by region, disease status, and fluoropyrimidine treatment. Primary endpoints were OS in CPS ≥1 and CPS ≥10 for P+C vs C and P vs C and PFS (RECIST v1.1; central review) in CPS ≥1 for P+C vs C. ORR (RECIST v1.1; central review) in CPS ≥1 for P+C vs C was the secondary endpoint. Final analysis cutoff date was 26 Mar 2019. Results: 763 pts (281 with CPS ≥10) were randomized to P+C (257), P (256), or C (250) (Table). Median follow-up was 11.3 mo. P was noninferior to C for OS in CPS ≥1 per prespecified margins. P vs C prolonged OS in CPS ≥10 (median 17.4 vs 10.8 mo; HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.49-0.97) but wasn’t tested per analysis plan. P+C vs C was not superior for OS in CPS ≥1 or CPS ≥10, with a favorable trend for P+C. P+C did not significantly prolong PFS in CPS ≥1. ORR was higher for P+C vs C. Grade 3-5 drug-related AE rates were 17% (P), 73% (P+C), and 69% (C). Conclusions: As 1L therapy for advanced GC, P was noninferior to C for OS in CPS ≥1 with clinically meaningful improvement for OS in CPS ≥10. P+C did not show superior OS and PFS in CPS ≥1 and OS in CPS ≥10. The safety profile was more favorable for P vs C. Clinical trial information: NCT02494583. [Table: see text]