Four-year clinical update and treatment switching-adjusted outcomes with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in the CheckMate 9LA randomized trial

BACKGROUND

In CheckMate 9LA, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression or histology. We report updated efficacy and safety in all randomized patients with a minimum 4-year follow-up and an exploratory treatment-switching adjustment analysis in all treated patients who received chemotherapy and subsequent immunotherapy.

METHODS

Adults with stage IV/recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), no sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations, and ECOG performance status ≤1 were randomized 1:1 to nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks with chemotherapy (two cycles) or chemotherapy (four cycles, with optional maintenance pemetrexed for the nonsquamous population). Assessments included OS, progression-free survival, and objective response rate. Exploratory analyses included efficacy by tumor PD-L1 expression and histology and in patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy due to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and a treatment-switching adjustment analysis using inverse probability of censoring weighting.

RESULTS

With a 47.9-month minimum follow-up for OS, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy continued to prolong OS over chemotherapy in all randomized patients (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.87; 4-year OS rate: 21% versus 16%), regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression (HR (95% CI): PD-L1<1%, 0.66 (0.50 to 0.86) and ≥1%, 0.74 (0.60 to 0.92)) or histology (squamous, 0.64 (0.48 to 0.84) and non-squamous, 0.80 (0.66 to 0.97)). In patients who discontinued all components of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy due to TRAEs (n=61), the 4-year OS rate was 41%. With treatment-switching adjustment for the 36% of patients receiving subsequent immunotherapy in the chemotherapy arm, the estimated HR of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy was 0.66 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.80). No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In this 4-year update, patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy continued to have long-term, durable efficacy benefit over chemotherapy regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression and/or histology. A greater estimated relative OS benefit was observed after adjustment for subsequent immunotherapy use in the chemotherapy arm. These results further support nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic/recurrent NSCLC, including those with tumor PD-L1<1% or squamous histology, populations with high unmet needs.

Efficacy, safety, and biomarker analysis of nivolumab in combination with abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy in patients with HR-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: a phase II study (WJOG11418B NEWFLAME trial)

BACKGROUND

Hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer is a disease for which no immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown promise as effective therapies. Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors synergistically increased the effectiveness of antiprogrammed cell death protein-1 (anti-PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibodies in preclinical studies.

METHODS

This non-randomized, multicohort, phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the anti-PD-1 antibody nivolumab 240 mg administered every 2 weeks in combination with the CDK4/6 inhibitor abemaciclib 150 mg twice daily and either fulvestrant (FUL) or letrozole (LET) as a first-line or second-line treatment for HR-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. The primary end point was the objective response rate (ORR), and secondary end points were toxicity, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Blood, tissue, and fecal samples were collected at multiple points for correlative studies to evaluate immunity biomarkers.

RESULTS

From June 2019 to early study termination due to safety concerns on July 2020, 17 patients were enrolled (FUL: n=12, LET: n=5). One patient with a prior treatment history in the FUL cohort was excluded. ORRs were 54.5% (6/11) and 40.0% (2/5) in the FUL and LET cohorts, respectively. Treatment-emergent (TE) adverse events (AEs) of grade ≥3 occurred in 11 (92%) and 5 (100%) patients in the FUL and LET cohorts, respectively. The most common grade ≥3 TEAEs were neutropenia (7 (58.3%) and 3 (60.0%) in the FUL and LET cohorts, respectively), followed by alanine aminotransferase elevation (5 (41.6%) and 4 (80.0%)). One treatment-related death from interstitial lung disease occurred in the LET cohort. Ten patients developed liver-related grade ≥3 AEs. Liver biopsy specimens from 3 patients showed hepatitis characterized by focal necrosis with predominant CD8+ lymphocyte infiltration. Marked elevation of tumor necrosis factor-related cytokines and interleukin-11, and a decrease in peripheral regulatory T cells (Tregs), were observed in patients with hepatotoxicity. These findings suggest that treatment-related toxicities were immune-related AEs likely caused by proinflammatory cytokine production and suppression of Treg proliferation due to the addition of abemaciclib to nivolumab therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the combination of nivolumab and abemaciclib was active, it caused severe and prolonged immune-related AEs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

JapicCTI-194782, jRCT2080224706, UMIN000036970.

Maximizing the value of phase III trials in immuno-oncology: A checklist from the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC)

The broad activity of agents blocking the programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand (the PD-(L)1 axis) revolutionized oncology, offering long-term benefit to patients and even curative responses for tumors that were once associated with dismal prognosis. However, only a minority of patients experience durable clinical benefit with immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy in most disease settings. Spurred by preclinical and correlative studies to understand mechanisms of non-response to the PD-(L)1 antagonists and by combination studies in animal tumor models, many drug development programs were designed to combine anti-PD-(L)1 with a variety of approved and investigational chemotherapies, tumor-targeted therapies, antiangiogenic therapies, and other immunotherapies. Several immunotherapy combinations improved survival outcomes in a variety of indications including melanoma, lung, kidney, and liver cancer, among others. This immunotherapy renaissance, however, has led to many combinations being advanced to late-stage development without definitive predictive biomarkers, limited phase I and phase II data, or clinical trial designs that are not optimized for demonstrating the unique attributes of immune-related antitumor activity-for example, landmark progression-free survival and overall survival. The decision to activate a study at an individual site is investigator-driven, and generalized frameworks to evaluate the potential for phase III trials in immuno-oncology to yield positive data, particularly to increase the number of curative responses or otherwise advance the field have thus far been lacking. To assist in evaluating the potential value to patients and the immunotherapy field of phase III trials, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) has developed a checklist for investigators, described in this manuscript. Although the checklist focuses on anti-PD-(L)1-based combinations, it may be applied to any regimen in which immune modulation is an important component of the antitumor effect.

Survival outcomes and independent response assessment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: 42-month follow-up of a randomized phase 3 clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The extent to which response and survival benefits with immunotherapy-based regimens persist informs optimal first-line treatment options. We provide long-term follow-up in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) receiving first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) versus sunitinib (SUN) in the phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial. Survival, response, and safety outcomes with NIVO+IPI versus SUN were assessed after a minimum of 42 months of follow-up.

METHODS

Patients with aRCC were enrolled from October 16, 2014, through February 23, 2016. Patients stratified by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk and region were randomized to nivolumab (3 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg/kg) every 2 weeks; or SUN (50 mg) once per day for 4 weeks (6-week cycle). Primary endpoints: overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) per independent radiology review committee in IMDC intermediate-risk/poor-risk patients. Secondary endpoints: OS, PFS, and ORR in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety. Favorable-risk patient outcomes were exploratory.

RESULTS

Among ITT patients, 550 were randomized to NIVO+IPI (425 intermediate/poor risk; 125 favorable risk) and 546 to SUN (422 intermediate/poor risk; 124 favorable risk). Among intermediate-risk/poor-risk patients, OS (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55-0.80) and PFS (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.90) benefits were observed, and ORR was higher (42.1% vs 26.3%) with NIVO+IPI versus SUN. In ITT patients, both OS benefits (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61-0.86) and higher ORR (39.1% vs 32.6%) were observed with NIVO+IPI versus SUN. In favorable-risk patients, HR for death was 1.19 (95% CI, 0.77-1.85) and ORR was 28.8% with NIVO+IPI versus 54.0% with SUN. Duration of response was longer (HR, 0.46-0.54), and more patients achieved complete response (10.1%-12.8% vs 1.4%-5.6%) with NIVO+IPI versus SUN regardless of risk group. The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was consistent with previous reports.

CONCLUSIONS

NIVO+IPI led to improved efficacy outcomes versus SUN in both intermediate-risk/poor-risk and ITT patients that were maintained through 42 months' minimum follow-up. A complete response rate >10% was achieved with NIVO+IPI regardless of risk category, with no new safety signals detected in either arm. These results support NIVO+IPI as a first-line treatment option with the potential for durable response.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02231749.

PCSK9: a key modulator of cardiovascular health

Since the discovery of proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin 9 (PCSK9) in 2003, this PC has attracted a lot of attention from the scientific community and pharmaceutical companies. Secreted into the plasma by the liver, the proteinase K-like serine protease PCSK9 binds the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor at the surface of hepatocytes, thereby preventing its recycling and enhancing its degradation in endosomes/lysosomes, resulting in reduced LDL-cholesterol clearance. Surprisingly, in a nonenzymatic fashion, PCSK9 enhances the intracellular degradation of all its target proteins. Rare gain-of-function PCSK9 variants lead to higher levels of LDL-cholesterol and increased risk of cardiovascular disease; more common loss-of-function PCSK9 variants are associated with reductions in both LDL-cholesterol and risk of cardiovascular disease. It took 9 years to elaborate powerful new PCSK9-based therapeutic approaches to reduce circulating levels of LDL-cholesterol. Presently, PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies that inhibit its function on the LDL receptor are evaluated in phase III clinical trials. This review will address the biochemical, genetic, and clinical aspects associated with PCSK9's biology and pathophysiology in cells, rodent and human, with emphasis on the clinical benefits of silencing the expression/activity of PCSK9 as a new modality in the treatment of hypercholesterolemia and associated pathologies.