Long-term survival with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis

BACKGROUND

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolongs survival versus chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We further characterized clinical benefit with this regimen in a large pooled patient population and assessed the effect of response on survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were pooled from four studies of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced NSCLC (CheckMate 227 Part 1, 817 cohort A, 568 Part 1, and 012). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, duration of response, and safety were assessed. Landmark analyses of OS by response status at 6 months and by tumor burden reduction in responders to nivolumab plus ipilimumab were also assessed.

RESULTS

In the pooled population (N = 1332) with a minimum follow-up of 29.1-58.9 months, median OS was 18.6 months, with a 3-year OS rate of 35%; median PFS was 5.4 months (3-year PFS rate, 17%). Objective response rate was 36%; median duration of response was 23.7 months, with 38% of responders having an ongoing response at 3 years. In patients with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) <1%, ≥1%, 1%-49%, or ≥50%, 3-year OS rates were 30%, 38%, 30%, and 48%. Three-year OS rates were 30% and 38% in patients with squamous or non-squamous histology. Efficacy outcomes in patients aged ≥75 years were similar to the overall pooled population (median OS, 20.1 months; 3-year OS rate, 34%). In the pooled population, responders to nivolumab plus ipilimumab at 6 months had longer post-landmark OS than those with stable or progressive disease; 3-year OS rates were 66%, 22%, and 14%, respectively. Greater depth of response was associated with prolonged survival; in patients with tumor burden reduction ≥80%, 50% to <80%, or 30% to <50%, 3-year OS rates were 85%, 72%, and 44%, respectively. No new safety signals were identified in the pooled population.

CONCLUSION

Long-term survival benefit and durable response with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in this large patient population further support this first-line treatment option for advanced NSCLC.

Safety of First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Patients With Metastatic NSCLC: A Pooled Analysis of CheckMate 227, CheckMate 568, and CheckMate 817

INTRODUCTION

We characterized the safety of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) in a large patient population with metastatic NSCLC and efficacy outcomes after NIVO+IPI discontinuation owing to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).

METHODS

We pooled data from three first-line NIVO+IPI studies (NIVO, 3 mg/kg or 240 mg every 2 wk; IPI, 1 mg/kg every 6 wk) in metastatic NSCLC (CheckMate 227 part 1, CheckMate 817 cohort A, CheckMate 568 part 1). Safety end points included TRAEs and immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs) in the pooled population and patients aged 75 years or older.

RESULTS

In the pooled population (N = 1255), any-grade TRAEs occurred in 78% of the patients, grade 3 or 4 TRAEs in 34%, and discontinuation of any regimen component owing to TRAEs in 21%. The most frequent TRAE and IMAE were diarrhea (20%; grade 3 or 4, 2%) and rash (17%; grade 3 or 4, 3%), respectively. The most common grade 3 or 4 IMAEs were hepatitis (5%) and diarrhea/colitis and pneumonitis (4% each). Pneumonitis was the most common cause of treatment-related death (5 of 16). Safety in patients aged 75 years or older (n = 174) was generally similar to the overall population, but discontinuation of any regimen component owing to TRAEs was more common (29%). In patients discontinuing NIVO+IPI owing to TRAEs (n = 225), 3-year overall survival was 50% (95% confidence interval: 42.6-56.0), and 42% (31.2-52.4) of 130 responders remained in response 2 years after discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

First-line NIVO+IPI was well tolerated in this large population with metastatic NSCLC and in patients aged 75 years or older. Discontinuation owing to TRAEs did not reduce long-term survival.

The Effect of Frailty on Walking Recovery After Hip Fracture: A Secondary Analysis of the Community Ambulation Project

BACKGROUND

The impact of frailty on walking recovery after hip fracture has not been reported. We describe the prevalence of frailty approximately 3 months after hip fracture, and identify the impact of baseline frailty on ambulation recovery.

METHODS

Data from the Community Ambulation Project, that examined the effects of 2 multicomponent home exercise programs on 6-minute walk test in participants post hip fracture, were used to reconstruct the 5-item frailty phenotype. We detailed the prevalence of frailty by subgroup and assessed the comparability between frailty groups for the categorical variable of achieving 300 m in 6-minute walk test (community ambulation threshold), and the continuous variable of total distance in 6-minute walk test before and after 16 weeks of intervention.

RESULTS

Of the 210 participants, 9% were nonfrail, 59% were prefrail, and 32% were frail. The odds of a nonfrail participant achieving the 300-m threshold were 14.4 (95% CI: 2.4-87.6) times the odds of a frail participant, while a prefrail participant's odds were 6.1 (95% CI: 1.3-28.4) times after controlling for treatment group and baseline walking distance. The nonfrail participants had an increase of 92.1 m from baseline to 16 weeks, the prefrail had a 50.8 m increase, and the frail group had the smallest increase of 36.6 m (p < .001 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Prefrailty and frailty were highly prevalent in this sample of community-dwelling survivors of a recent hip fracture. Gains in walking distance and attaining a level of community ambulation were affected significantly by the level of baseline frailty.

First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced NSCLC: 4-Year Outcomes From the Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 CheckMate 227 Part 1 Trial

INTRODUCTION

In CheckMate 227, nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in patients with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) greater than or equal to 1% (primary end point) or less than 1% (prespecified descriptive analysis). We report results with minimum 4 years' follow-up.

METHODS

Adults with previously untreated stage IV or recurrent NSCLC were randomized (1:1:1) to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, or chemotherapy (PD-L1 ≥1%); or to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy (PD-L1 <1%). Efficacy included OS and other measures. Safety included timing and management of immune-mediated adverse events (AEs). A post hoc analysis evaluated efficacy in patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to treatment-related AEs (TRAEs).

RESULTS

After 54.8 months' median follow-up, OS remained longer with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with PD-L1 greater than or equal to 1% (hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.90) and PD-L1 less than 1% (0.64; 0.51-0.81); 4-year OS rate with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy was 29% versus 18% (PD-L1 ≥1%); and 24% versus 10% (PD-L1 <1%). Benefits were observed in both squamous and nonsquamous histologies. In a descriptive analysis, efficacy was improved with nivolumab plus ipilimumab relative to nivolumab (PD-L1 ≥1%) and nivolumab plus chemotherapy (PD-L1 <1%). Safety was consistent with previous reports. The most common immune-mediated AE with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, and nivolumab plus chemotherapy was rash; most immune-mediated AEs (except endocrine events) occurred within 6 months from start of treatment and resolved within 3 months after, mainly with systemic corticosteroids. Patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to TRAEs had long-term OS benefits, as seen in the all randomized population.

CONCLUSIONS

At more than 4 years' minimum follow-up, with all patients off immunotherapy treatment for at least 2 years, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate durable long-term efficacy in patients with advanced NSCLC. No new safety signals were identified. Immune-mediated AEs occurred early and resolved quickly with guideline-based management. Discontinuation of nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to TRAEs did not have a negative impact on the long-term benefits seen in all randomized patients.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone (four cycles) in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: CheckMate 9LA 2-year update

BACKGROUND

To further characterize survival benefit with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, we report updated data from the phase III CheckMate 9LA trial with a 2-year minimum follow-up.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult patients were treatment naïve, with stage IV/recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer, no known sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1. Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks with two cycles of chemotherapy, or four cycles of chemotherapy. Updated efficacy and safety outcomes are reported, along with progression-free survival (PFS) after next line of treatment (PFS2), treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) by treatment cycle, and efficacy outcomes in patients who discontinued all treatment components in the experimental arm due to TRAEs.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 30.7 months, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy continued to prolong overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy. Median OS was 15.8 versus 11.0 months [hazard ratio 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.61-0.86)]; 2-year OS rate was 38% versus 26%. Two-year PFS rate was 20% versus 8%. ORR was 38% versus 25%, respectively; 34% versus 12% of all responses were ongoing at 2 years. Median PFS2 was 13.9 versus 8.7 months. Improved efficacy outcomes in the experimental versus control arm were observed across most subgroups, including by programmed death-ligand 1 and histology. No new safety signals were observed; onset of grade 3/4 TRAEs was mostly observed during the first two treatment cycles in the experimental arm. In patients who discontinued all components of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy treatment due to TRAEs (n = 61) median OS was 27.5 months; 56% of responders had an ongoing response ≥1 year after discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

With a 2-year minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy provided durable efficacy benefits over chemotherapy with a manageable safety profile and remains an efficacious first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

First-line nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) plus two cycles of chemotherapy (chemo) versus chemo alone (4 cycles) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Two-year update from CheckMate 9LA

9000

Background: In the randomized phase 3 CheckMate 9LA trial (NCT03215706), first-line NIVO + IPI combined with 2 cycles of chemo significantly improved overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) vs chemo alone (4 cycles). Clinical benefit was observed regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression level and histology. Here we report data with 2 years’ minimum follow-up from this study. Methods: Adult patients (pts) with stage IV / recurrent NSCLC, ECOG performance status ≤ 1, and no known sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations were stratified by PD-L1 (< 1% vs ≥ 1%), sex, and histology (squamous vs non-squamous) and were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 360 mg Q3W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W + chemo (2 cycles; n = 361) or chemo alone (4 cycles; n = 358). Pts with non-squamous NSCLC in the chemo-alone arm could receive pemetrexed maintenance. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included PFS and ORR by blinded independent central review, and efficacy by different PD-L1 levels. Safety was exploratory. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 24.4 months for OS (database lock: Feb 18, 2021), pts treated with NIVO + IPI + chemo continued to derive OS benefit vs chemo, with a median OS of 15.8 months vs 11.0 months, respectively (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.61–0.86]); 2-year OS rates were 38% vs 26%. Median PFS with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was 6.7 months vs 5.3 months (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56–0.79]); 8% and 37% of pts who had disease progression received subsequent immunotherapy, respectively. ORR was 38% with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs 25% with chemo. Similar clinical benefit with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was observed in all randomized pts and across the majority of subgroups, including by PD-L1 expression level (Table) or histology. Any grade and grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 92% and 48% of pts in the NIVO + IPI + chemo arm vs 88% and 38% in the chemo arm, respectively. Conclusion: With 2 years’ minimum follow-up, first-line NIVO + IPI + chemo demonstrated durable survival and benefit versus chemo in pts with advanced NSCLC; no new safety signals were identified. Clinical trial information: NCT03215706. [Table: see text]

First-line (1L) nivolumab (NIVO) plus chemotherapy (chemo) versus chemo in advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer/esophageal adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC/EAC): Expanded efficacy and safety data from CheckMate 649

4002

Background: CheckMate 649 is the largest randomized, global phase 3 study of 1L programmed death (PD)-1 inhibitor–based therapy in GC/GEJC/EAC. 1L NIVO + chemo demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) vs chemo, with progression-free survival (PFS) benefit and an acceptable safety profile in pts whose tumors expressed PD-ligand (L)1 at combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 5 and ≥ 1, and in all randomized pts (Moehler et al. Ann Oncol 2020). We report additional data for all randomized pts. Methods: Eligible pts had previously untreated, unresectable advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC/EAC. Known HER2-positive pts were excluded. Pts were randomized to receive 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 central review in PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 pts. Hierarchically tested secondary endpoints were OS in PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 and all randomized pts. Results: At 12-month minimum follow-up for 1581 randomized pts, NIVO + chemo had a statistically significant OS benefit vs chemo (HR 0.80 [99.3% CI 0.68–0.94; P = 0.0002]) in all randomized pts; PFS benefit was also seen (HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.68–0.87]). OS benefit was observed in multiple prespecified subgroups, consistent with the primary population. Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 59% (NIVO + chemo) and 44% (chemo) of pts. TRAEs with potential immunologic etiology (select TRAEs; sTRAEs) are shown in the table. Pts in the NIVO + chemo arm had decreased risk of symptom deterioration on treatment vs those in the chemo arm (HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.63–0.95; P = 0.0129]). Tolerability as measured by the FACT-Ga GP5 item was similar in both treatment groups. Conclusions: The addition of NIVO to chemo demonstrated improved OS and PFS benefit in all randomized pts, along with an acceptable safety profile and maintained tolerability as well as QoL, providing further support for NIVO + chemo as a standard 1L treatment for advanced GC/GEJC/EAC. Clinical trial information: NCT02872116. [Table: see text]

Nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) versus chemotherapy (chemo) as first-line (1L) treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): 4-year update from CheckMate 227

9016

Background: 1L NIVO + IPI was shown to provide durable long-term overall survival (OS) benefit vs chemo regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC in CheckMate 227 Part 1 (NCT02477826); 3-year OS rates were 33% vs 22% in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.67–0.93]) and 34% vs 15% in pts with PD-L1 < 1% (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.51–0.81]). Here we report updated results from the study with 4 years’ minimum follow-up. Methods: Adults with previously untreated stage IV / recurrent NSCLC, no known EGFR/ ALK alterations , and ECOG performance status ≤ 1 were enrolled; pts were stratified by squamous (SQ) and non-squamous (NSQ) histology. Pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% (n = 1189) were randomized 1:1:1 to receive NIVO (3 mg/kg Q2W) + IPI (1 mg/kg Q6W), NIVO alone (240 mg Q2W), or chemo. Pts with PD-L1 < 1% (n = 550) were randomized 1:1:1 to receive NIVO + IPI, NIVO (360 mg Q3W) + chemo, or chemo. OS with NIVO + IPI vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% was the primary endpoint. Results: With minimum follow-up of 49.4 months (database lock, Feb 18, 2021), pts were at least 2 years beyond the protocol-specified end of immunotherapy treatment. Pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% continued to show durable benefit with NIVO + IPI vs chemo (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.65–0.90]); 4-year OS rates were 29% (NIVO + IPI), 21% (NIVO), and 18% (chemo). At 4 years, 14% (NIVO + IPI), 10% (NIVO), and 4% (chemo) remained progression free. Among responders, 34%, 30%, and 7% remained in response, respectively. In an exploratory analysis in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 50%, 4-year OS rates were 37% (NIVO + IPI), 26% (NIVO), and 20% (chemo). In pts with PD-L1 < 1%, OS HR for NIVO + IPI vs chemo was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.51–0.81); 4-year OS rates were 24% (NIVO + IPI), 13% (NIVO + chemo) and 10% (chemo). At 4 years, 12% (NIVO + IPI), 7% (NIVO + chemo), and 0% (chemo) remained progression free. Among responders, 31%, 13%, and 0% remained in response, respectively. Among pts who progressed on NIVO + IPI vs chemo, 7% vs 40% (PD-L1 ≥ 1%), and 9% vs 33% (PD-L1 < 1%), received subsequent immunotherapy. Benefit with NIVO + IPI vs chemo was observed for both SQ and NSQ histology (Table). With long-term follow-up, no new safety signals were identified. Conclusions: With 4 years’ minimum follow-up, 1L NIVO + IPI continued to provide durable, long-term OS benefit vs chemo in pts with advanced NSCLC regardless of PD-L1 expression or histology. Clinical trial information: NCT02477826. [Table: see text]

Subgroup analyses of patients (pts) with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with nivolumab (NIVO) plus low-dose ipilimumab (IPI) as first-line (1L) therapy:Two-year clinical update

58

Background: In the phase 2 CheckMate 142 trial, NIVO + low-dose IPI had robust, durable clinical benefit and was well tolerated as 1L therapy for MSI-H/dMMR mCRC (median follow-up, 29.0 months [range, 24.2–33.7]) (Lenz et al. J Clin Oncol 2020;38:Abstract 4040; NCT02060188). Objective response rate (ORR) per investigator (INV) was achieved in 69% of pts (95% CI, 53–82); progressive disease rate was 13%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached. Median duration of treatment was 19.1 months (95% CI, 11.1–29.0). Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 22% of pts. We present the post hoc subgroup analyses of efficacy and safety outcomes in pts from the same follow-up based on demographics and baseline disease characteristics. Methods: Pts with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC and no prior treatment for metastatic disease received NIVO 3 mg/kg Q2W + low-dose IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W until disease progression or discontinuation. ORR (primary endpoint, RECIST v1.1) and PFS were assessed per INV. Post hoc subgroup analyses of efficacy (by ECOG performance status [PS], stage at initial diagnosis, primary tumor location, and BRAF/KRAS mutation status) and safety (by age and ECOG PS) are presented. Results: Among 45 treated pts, efficacy (Table) and safety were generally consistent across evaluated subgroups. ORR was similar in pt subgroups by BRAF/ KRAS mutation status, stage at initial diagnosis, primary tumor location, and ECOG PS (Table). Median PFS and OS were not reached (NR) in evaluated subgroups after a minimum follow-up of 24.2 months (Table). Incidence of grade 3–4 TRAEs for subgroups by age and ECOG PS were consistent with the overall population. Conclusions: NIVO + low-dose IPI demonstrated robust, durable clinical benefit; was well tolerated with 2-year follow-up; and was consistent in evaluated subgroups in 1L MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT02060188. [Table: see text]

Nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) combination therapy in patients (Pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC): Long-term results from CheckMate 040

269

Background: NIVO 1 mg/kg + IPI 3 mg/kg Q3W (4 doses) followed by NIVO 240 mg Q2W is approved in the US for sorafenib-treated pts with aHCC based on initial results from CheckMate 040 (NCT01658878), which reported objective response rate (ORR) of 32% and median overall survival (mOS) of 22.8 months (mo).1 We present 44-mo long-term follow-up results from the CheckMate 040 NIVO+IPI cohort. Methods: Pts were randomized to 3 arms: [A] NIVO 1 mg/kg + IPI 3 mg/kg Q3W (4 doses) or [B] NIVO 3 mg/kg + IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W (4 doses), each followed by NIVO 240 mg Q2W, or [C] NIVO 3 mg/kg Q2W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W. Treatment continued until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. Safety and tolerability, ORR (blinded independent central review per RECIST v1.1), duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), and OS were assessed. Data cutoff was May 26, 2020. Results: 148 pts were randomized. Minimum follow-up was 44 mo. mOS remained at 22.2 mo in arm A, 12.5 mo in arm B, and 12.7 mo in arm C; 36-mo OS rates were 42%, 26%, and 30%, respectively. Durable responses were achieved across treatment arms, with DOR approaching 4 years in some cases. DCR was higher in arm A than arms B and C. In all arms, responses were observed regardless of baseline programmed death ligand 1 expression ( < 1% or ≥ 1%) or baseline alpha-fetoprotein level ( < 400 µg/L or ≥ 400 µg/L). Pts with hepatitis B or C virus (HBV or HCV) etiology had higher ORR than uninfected pts in arms B (29% vs 43% vs 9%) and C (31% vs 42% vs 0%). ORR was independent of etiology in arm A (HBV, 32%; HCV, 29%; uninfected, 31%). Additional efficacy data are in the table. There were no additional discontinuations due to treatment-related adverse events or immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs) since the primary analysis. IMAEs were reported more frequently in arm A than arms B and C; the most common were rash, hepatitis, and adrenal insufficiency. Most IMAEs were reversible and resolved when treated using established algorithms. Conclusions: At a minimum follow-up of 44 mo, second-line NIVO1+IPI3 continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful responses and long-term survival benefit in aHCC. The safety profile was manageable and no new safety signals were identified with longer follow-up. Clinical trial information: NCT01658878. [Table: see text]