Nivolumab (NIVO) + chemotherapy (chemo) vs chemo as first-line (1L) treatment for advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer/esophageal adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC/EAC): 4 year (yr) follow-up of CheckMate 649.

Kohei Shitara(National Cancer Center Hospital East), Markus Moehler, Jaffer A. Ajani(The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center), Lin Shen(Peking University), Marcelo Garrido(Universidad Mayor), Carlos Gallardo(Fundación Arturo López Pérez), Lucjan Wyrwicz(Centrum Onkologii), Kensei Yamaguchi(The Cancer Institute Hospital), James M. Cleary(Dana-Farber Cancer Institute), Elena Elimova(Princess Margaret Cancer Centre), Ricardo Elías Brugés Maya(Instituto Nacional de Cancerología), Michalis V. Karamouzis(Laiko General Hospital of Athens), Tomasz Skoczylas(Medical University of Lublin), Arinilda Campos Bragagnoli(Hospital de Câncer de Barretos), Tianshu Liu(Sun Yat-sen University), Mustapha Tehfé(Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal), Kynan Feeney(Edith Cowan University), Rui Wang(Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States)), Raheel Nathani(Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States)), Yelena Y. Janjigian(Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center)
Journal of Clinical Oncology
January 20, 2024
Cited by 19

Abstract

306 Background: NIVO + chemo demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) and clinically meaningful progression-free survival (PFS) benefit vs chemo and an acceptable safety profile in previously untreated, advanced non-HER2+ GC/GEJC/EAC, leading to approvals in many countries. NIVO + chemo continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful improvement in efficacy at 2 and 3-yr follow-ups. We present 4-yr follow-up results for NIVO + chemo vs chemo from CheckMate 649. Methods: Adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, or metastatic GC/GEJC/EAC were enrolled, regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. HER2+ patients (pts) were excluded. Randomized pts received NIVO (360 mg Q3W or 240 mg Q2W) + chemo (XELOX Q3W or FOLFOX Q2W), NIVO + ipilimumab, or chemo. Dual primary endpoints for NIVO + chemo vs chemo were OS and PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR) in pts with PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 5. Results: 1581 pts were randomized to NIVO + chemo or chemo. At the 48-month (mo) minimum follow-up, NIVO + chemo continued to demonstrate OS and PFS benefit vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 and all randomized pts (Table) OS benefit with NIVO + chemo was observed in most prespecified subgroups. Objective response rates (ORR) were higher and responses were more durable with NIVO + chemo vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 and all randomized pts (Table). In the exploratory analysis of OS by response at the 18-week landmark timepoint, there were numerically more pts achieving response with NIVO + chemo vs chemo, and median OS (95% CI) with NIVO + chemo was numerically longer in responders vs non-responders both in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 (20.5 [17.5–25.0] vs 14.0 [11.6–15.7]) and all randomized pts (19.4 [17.5–21.7] vs 13.1 [11.6–14.4]). No new safety signals were identified, consistent with the 3-yr follow-up. Conclusions: NIVO + chemo is the first PD-1 inhibitor/chemo combination to demonstrate long-term efficacy and acceptable safety after 4 yrs of follow up in previously untreated advanced GC/GEJC/EAC. These results are consistent with earlier follow-ups, further supporting NIVO + chemo as a standard 1L treatment in these pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02872116 .[Table: see text]


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis