Conditional survival and long‐term efficacy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma

Robert J. Motzer(Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center), David F. McDermott(Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center), Bernard Escudier(Institut Gustave Roussy), Mauricio Burotto, Toni K. Choueiri(Brigham and Women's Hospital), Hans J. Hammers(The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center), Philippe Barthélémy(Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg), Elizabeth R. Plimack(Fox Chase Cancer Center), Camillo Porta(University of Pavia), Saby George(Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center), Thomas Powles(National Health Service), Frede Donskov(Aarhus University Hospital), Howard Gurney(Westmead Hospital), Christian Kollmannsberger(BC Cancer Agency), Marc‐Oliver Grimm(Jena University Hospital), Carlos H. Barrios(Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul), Yoshihiko Tomita(Niigata University), Daniel Castellano(Centre for Biomedical Network Research on Rare Diseases), Viktor Grünwald, Brian I. Rini(Vanderbilt University Medical Center), M. Brent McHenry(Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States)), Chung‐Wei Lee(Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States)), Jennifer L. McCarthy(Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States)), Flavia Ejzykowicz(Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States)), Nizar M. Tannir(The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center)
Cancer
April 5, 2022
Cited by 261Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Conditional survival estimates provide critical prognostic information for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Efficacy, safety, and conditional survival outcomes were assessed in CheckMate 214 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02231749) with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. METHODS: Patients with untreated aRCC were randomized to receive nivolumab (NIVO) (3 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (IPI) (1 mg/kg) every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, then either NIVO monotherapy or sunitinib (SUN) (50 mg) daily (four 6-week cycles). Efficacy was assessed in intent-to-treat, International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate-risk/poor-risk, and favorable-risk populations. Conditional survival outcomes (the probability of remaining alive, progression free, or in response 2 years beyond a specified landmark) were analyzed. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 67.7 months; overall survival (median, 55.7 vs 38.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.72), progression-free survival (median, 12.3 vs 12.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.86), and objective response (39.3% vs 32.4%) benefits were maintained with NIVO+IPI versus SUN, respectively, in intent-to-treat patients (N = 550 vs 546). Point estimates for 2-year conditional overall survival beyond the 3-year landmark were higher with NIVO+IPI versus SUN (intent-to-treat patients, 81% vs 72%; intermediate-risk/poor-risk patients, 79% vs 72%; favorable-risk patients, 85% vs 72%). Conditional progression-free survival and response point estimates were also higher beyond 3 years with NIVO+IPI. Point estimates for conditional overall survival were higher or remained steady at each subsequent year of survival with NIVO+IPI in patients stratified by tumor programmed death ligand 1 expression, grade ≥3 immune-mediated adverse event experience, body mass index, and age. CONCLUSIONS: Durable clinical benefits were observed with NIVO+IPI versus SUN at 5 years, the longest phase 3 follow-up for a first-line checkpoint inhibitor-based combination in patients with aRCC. Conditional estimates indicate that most patients who remained alive or in response with NIVO+IPI at 3 years remained so at 5 years.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis