scholarly journals Nivolumab and Ipilimumab as Maintenance Therapy in Extensive-Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer: CheckMate 451

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (12) ◽  
pp. 1349-1359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taofeek K. Owonikoko ◽  
Keunchil Park ◽  
Ramaswamy Govindan ◽  
Neal Ready ◽  
Martin Reck ◽  
...  

PURPOSE In extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC), response rates to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy are robust, but responses lack durability. CheckMate 451, a double-blind phase III trial, evaluated nivolumab plus ipilimumab and nivolumab monotherapy as maintenance therapy following first-line chemotherapy for ED-SCLC. METHODS Patients with ED-SCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, and no progression after ≤ 4 cycles of first-line chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 12 weeks followed by nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks, nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks, or placebo for ≤ 2 years or until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus placebo. Secondary end points were hierarchically tested. RESULTS Overall, 834 patients were randomly assigned. The minimum follow-up was 8.9 months. OS was not significantly prolonged with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.12; P = .37; median, 9.2 v 9.6 months). The HR for OS with nivolumab versus placebo was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.69 to 1.02); the median OS for nivolumab was 10.4 months. Progression-free survival HRs versus placebo were 0.72 for nivolumab plus ipilimumab (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.87) and 0.67 for nivolumab (95% CI, 0.56 to 0.81). A trend toward OS benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab was observed in patients with tumor mutational burden ≥ 13 mutations per megabase. Rates of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were nivolumab plus ipilimumab (52.2%), nivolumab (11.5%), and placebo (8.4%). CONCLUSION Maintenance therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab did not prolong OS for patients with ED-SCLC who did not progress on first-line chemotherapy. There were no new safety signals.

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 1061-1068 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleg Gladkov ◽  
Rodryg Ramlau ◽  
Piotr Serwatowski ◽  
Janusz Milanowski ◽  
Janusz Tomeczko ◽  
...  

Lung Cancer ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. S31-S32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Th Giannakakis ◽  
D Mavroudis ◽  
S Papadouris ◽  
Ch Kourousis ◽  
N Ziras ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. CMO.S8001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Myung-Ju Ahn ◽  
Jong-Mu Sun ◽  
Jin Sock Ahn ◽  
Keunchil Park

Although current recommendations for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) include a maximum of six cycles of platinum-based combination therapy as a first-line approach, most patients experience progression within 3–4 months. Therefore, a new treatment strategy, maintenance therapy, has been proposed, and several large randomized prospective controlled trials have shown benefits with maintenance therapy. Maintenance therapy can be classified as either continuation maintenance, which is defined as a prolongation of a part of the first-line chemotherapy or molecularly targeted agent until progression, or switch-maintenance, which is defined as the administration of a different cytotoxic chemotherapy or molecularly targeted agent immediately after induction therapy. In this article, recent results from large randomized phase III trials regarding maintenance therapy are reviewed in order to evaluate the role of maintenance therapy in NSCLC.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (24) ◽  
pp. 3002-3011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cesare Gridelli ◽  
Fortunato Ciardiello ◽  
Ciro Gallo ◽  
Ronald Feld ◽  
Charles Butts ◽  
...  

Purpose Erlotinib prolonged survival of unselected patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were not eligible for further chemotherapy, and two phase II studies suggested it might be an alternative to first-line chemotherapy. A randomized phase III trial was designed to test whether first-line erlotinib followed at progression by cisplatin-gemcitabine was not inferior in terms of survival to the standard inverse sequence. Patients and Methods Patients with stage IIIB (with pleural effusion or supraclavicular nodes) to IV NSCLC and performance status of 0 to 1 were eligible. With a 95% CI upper limit of 1.25 for the hazard ratio (HR) for death, 80% power, a one-sided α = .025, and two interim analyses, a sample size of 900 patients was planned. Results At the first planned interim analysis with half the events, the inferiority boundary was crossed, and the Independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended early termination of the study. Seven hundred sixty patients (median age, 62 years; range, 27 to 81 years) had been randomly assigned. Baseline characteristics were balanced between study arms. As of June 1, 2011, median follow-up was 24.3 months, and 536 deaths were recorded (263 in the standard treatment arm and 273 in the experimental arm). Median survival was 11.6 months (95% CI, 10.2 to 13.3 months) in the standard arm and 8.7 months (95% CI, 7.4 to 10.5 months) in the experimental arm. Adjusted HR of death in the experimental arm was 1.24 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.47). There was no heterogeneity across sex, smoking habit, histotype, and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. Conclusion In unselected patients with advanced NSCLC, first-line erlotinib followed at progression by cisplatin-gemcitabine was significantly inferior in terms of overall survival compared with the standard sequence of first-line chemotherapy followed by erlotinib.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document