Two dosing regimens of nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) for advanced (adv) melanoma: Three-year results of CheckMate 511.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9516-9516
Author(s):  
Celeste Lebbe ◽  
Nicolas Meyer ◽  
Laurent Mortier ◽  
Ivan Marquez-Rodas ◽  
Caroline Robert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Unresectable Stage ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Dosing Regimens ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive

9516 Background: NIVO 1 mg/kg plus IPI 3 mg/kg (NIVO1 + IPI3) is approved for treatment (tx) of unresectable/adv melanoma, with demonstrated durable clinical benefit on long-term follow-up. Analysis of the phase 3b/4 CheckMate 511 study (NCT02714218) at 1 y showed that NIVO 3 mg/kg plus IPI 1 mg/kg (NIVO3 + IPI1) improves the safety profile of the combination; efficacy with the 2 regimens was similar in descriptive analyses. Here we present 3-y safety/efficacy results. Methods: Patients (pts) ≥ 18 y of age with previously untreated unresectable stage III/IV melanoma were randomized 1:1 to receive NIVO3 + IPI1 Q3W × 4 (N = 180) or NIVO1 + IPI3 Q3W × 4 (N = 178), both followed by NIVO 480 mg Q4W until progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade (gr) 3–5 tx-related adverse events (TRAEs); secondary endpoints (descriptive analyses) included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The study was not powered to formally demonstrate noninferiority for efficacy endpoints. Results: At a median follow-up of 44.4 and 43.9 mo in the NIVO3 + IPI1 and NIVO1 + IPI3 groups, respectively, TRAEs led to tx discontinuation in 26% and 39% of pts; 57% and 42% of pts had received maintenance therapy. Gr 3–5 TRAE incidence remained significantly lower with NIVO3 + IPI1 than NIVO1 + IPI3 (33.9% vs 48.3%; odds ratio 0.55 [95% CI 0.36–0.84]). The most frequent TRAEs (any gr) were diarrhea (27%), fatigue (26%), and pruritus (26%) with NIVO3 + IPI1 and diarrhea (31%), pruritus (29%), and rash (27%) with NIVO1 + IPI3. In descriptive analyses, efficacy results were similar to those observed at 1 y. OS and tx-free–analysis outcomes were numerically similar in the 2 groups (table). Conclusions: At 3-y follow-up, NIVO3 + IPI1 continued to demonstrate an improved safety profile compared with NIVO1 + IPI3. In descriptive analyses, both groups demonstrated high 3-y OS rates that were numerically similar. This study provides important information regarding the benefit–risk profile of both dosing regimens of NIVO + IPI in pts with adv melanoma. Clinical trial information: NCT02714218. [Table: see text]

429 Long-term analysis of MASTERKEY-265 phase 1b trial of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) plus pembrolizumab in patients with unresectable stage IIIB-IVM1c melanoma

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A454-A454
Author(s):  
Georgina Long ◽  
Reinhard Dummer ◽  
Douglas Johnson ◽  
Olivier Michielin ◽  
Salvador Martin-Algarra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pigment Cell ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iiib ◽  
List Type ◽  
Talimogene Laherparepvec ◽  
Unresectable Stage ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Phase 1B

BackgroundPrevious findings from the MASTERKEY-265 phase 1b study showed that the combination of T-VEC and pembrolizumab was well tolerated and produced a high complete response (CR) rate of 43% in patients with advanced melanoma.1 The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates at that time were 53.6% and 71%, respectively. Here, we report the results of the long-term follow-up efficacy analyses.MethodsThe MASTERKEY-265 phase 1b trial (NCT02263508) was an open-label, single-arm study that enrolled patients who had unresectable, stage IIIB-IVM1c melanoma with injectable, measurable lesions and no prior systemic treatment. T-VEC was administered intralesionally at the approved dosing starting day 1 of week 1. Pembrolizumab (200 mg) was administered intravenously Q2W beginning on day 1 of week 6. The maximum treatment period was 2 years. The primary endpoint was dose-limiting toxicities; key secondary endpoints included objective response rate and PFS per modified irRC, OS, and safety.ResultsAs of the data cutoff (Mar 2, 2020), all 21 patients enrolled were off treatment; 6 died and 15 are in long-term follow-up. The median follow-up time was 58.6 months (range: 1.4–61.6). The CR rate remained 43% (9/21 patients). Twelve of the 13 responders (92.3%) are still in response, including all 9 patients with a CR. Median duration of response was not reached (range: 2.8+–54.3+ months). Median PFS and OS were not reached at the data cutoff. KM estimates of 4-year PFS and OS rates were 55.9% and 71.4%, respectively, which have held stable since the 3-year analysis. Patients who achieved a CR or partial response had better OS (p=0.0056) compared to those who did not respond. Median OS for non-responders was 24.4 months and was not reached for responders. No additional safety signals were detected.ConclusionsAt almost 5 years of follow-up, median PFS and OS were not reached for patients treated with the combination of T-VEC and pembrolizumab in this phase 1b study of unresectable metastatic melanoma. 92% of responders remained in response with improved OS observed in responders compared with non-responders. The corresponding randomized phase 3 trial has completed enrollment and is currently ongoing.Trial RegistrationNCT02263508Ethics ApprovalThe study was approved by the Ethics Board of each institution involved in this study and can be produced upon request.ReferenceLong G, Dummer R, Andtbacka R, et al. Follow-up analysis of MASTERKEY-265 Phase 1b (ph1b) trial of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) in combination (combo) with pembrolizumab (pembro) in patients (pts) with unresectable stage IIIB–IVM1c melanoma (MEL). Pigment Cell Melanoma Res 2019;32:133–134.

Radiation ±cisplatin for bulky stage IB cervical carcinoma; Long-term follow-up of a GOG trial

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5015-5015
Author(s):  
F. B. Stehman ◽  
S. Ali ◽  
D. G. Gallup ◽  
H. Key
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Carcinoma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Stage Ib ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Weekly Cycles ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Weekly Cisplatin

5015 Purpose: To confirm that concurrent cisplatin (CT) with radiation (RT) is associated with improved long-term progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and decreased morbidity compared to RT stage IB bulky carcinoma of the cervix, when both groups’ therapy is followed by hysterectomy. Methods: Three hundred seventy-four patients entered this trial. There were 369 evaluable patients; 186 were randomly allocated to receive RT alone and 183 to receive CT+RT. Radiation dosage was 40 Gray (Gy) in 20 fractions followed by a single low dose-rate intracavitary application of 30 Gy to Point A. Chemotherapy consisted of cisplatin 40 mg/M2 every week for up to six weekly cycles. Total extrafascial hysterectomy followed the completion of RT by 3–6 weeks. Results: Preliminary results have been published, at which time there many censored observations and limited follow-up. Patient and tumor characteristics were well-balanced between the regimens. The median patient age was 41.5 years; 81% had squamous tumors; 59% were white. Median follow-up is 101 months. The relative risk for progression was 0.61 favoring CT+RT (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43–0.85, p < 0.004). At 72 months 71% of patients receiving CT+RT were predicted to be alive and disease-free when adjusting age and for tumor size compared to 60% of those receiving RT alone. The adjusted death hazard ratio was 0.63 (95% CI: 0.43–0.91, p < 0.015) favoring CT+RT. At 72 months, 78% of CT+RT patients were predicted to be alive compared to 64% of RT patients. An increased rate of early hematologic and gastrointestinal toxicity was seen with CT+RT. There was no detectable difference in the frequency of late adverse events. Conclusion: Concurrent weekly cisplatin with RT significantly improves long term PFS and OS when compared to RT alone. Serious late effects were not increased. The inclusion of hysterectomy has been discontinued on the basis of another trial. Pending further trials, weekly cisplatin with radiation is the standard against which other regimens must be compared. Key Words: Cervical carcinoma, chemoradiotherapy. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Brigatinib (BRG) in ALK+ crizotinib (CRZ)-refractory non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Final results of the phase 1/2 and phase 2 (ALTA) trials.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9071-9071
Author(s):  
Scott N. Gettinger ◽  
Rudolf M. Huber ◽  
Dong-Wan Kim ◽  
Lyudmila Bazhenova ◽  
Karin Holmskov Hansen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Kinase Inhibitors ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

9071 Background: BRG is a kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of patients (pts) with ALK+ metastatic NSCLC; specific details for BRG use vary by indication and country. We report long-term efficacy and safety results of the Phase 1/2 and Phase 2 (ALTA) trials of BRG. Methods: The Phase 1/2 study was a single-arm, open-label trial (NCT01449461) of BRG 30–300 mg/d in pts with advanced malignancies. ALTA (NCT02094573) randomized pts with CRZ-refractory ALK+ NSCLC to receive BRG at 90 mg qd (arm A) or 180 mg qd with 7-d lead-in at 90 mg (arm B). For the Phase 1/2 study, investigator assessments of confirmed objective response rate (cORR; RECIST v1.1), duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety in pts with ALK+ NSCLC are reported. The primary endpoint of ALTA was cORR per investigator; secondary endpoints included cORR per independent review committee (IRC), DoR, PFS, and OS. Results: In the Phase 1/2 study, 137 pts received BRG; of these, 79 pts had ALK+ NSCLC (71/79 had prior CRZ; 28/79 received 180 mg qd [7-d lead-in at 90 mg]; 14/79 received 90 mg qd). In ALTA, 222 pts with CRZ-refractory ALK+ NSCLC were randomized (n = 112/110, arm A/B). At the end of the Phase 1/2 study (Feb 18, 2020), with median 27.7 mo follow-up (̃67 mo after last pt enrolled), 4 pts remained on BRG. At the end of ALTA (Feb 27, 2020), with median 19.6/28.3 mo follow-up in arm A/B (̃53 mo after last pt enrolled), 10/17 pts in arm A/B were still on treatment. Table shows efficacy results from final analyses with long-term follow-up. In ALTA, the IRC-assessed intracranial cORR in pts with measurable baseline brain metastases was 50% (13/26) in arm A and 67% (12/18) in arm B; Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimated median intracranial DoR was 9.4 mo (95% CI, 3.7, not reached [NR]) in arm A and 16.6 mo (3.7, NR) in arm B. With long-term follow-up, no new safety signals were identified. Treatment-emergent adverse events led to dose interruption (Phase 1/2: 59%; ALTA arm A/B: 49%/61%), dose reduction (13%; 8%/33%), or discontinuation (10%; 4%/13%). Conclusions: BRG showed sustained long-term activity, PFS, and manageable safety in pts with CRZ-refractory ALK+ NSCLC. The 180 mg/d dose after 7-d lead-in at 90 mg/d led to numerically higher median PFS and OS. Final results are similar to those reported for other approved ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT01449461, NCT02094573. [Table: see text]

Nivolumab (NIVO) + low-dose ipilimumab (IPI) in previously treated patients (pts) with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Long-term follow-up.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 635-635 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Overman ◽  
Sara Lonardi ◽  
Ka Yeung Mark Wong ◽  
Heinz-Josef Lenz ◽  
Fabio Gelsomino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3

635 Background: In the phase II CheckMate-142 trial, NIVO + low-dose IPI (1 mg/kg) provided meaningful clinical benefit in previously treated MSI-H/dMMR mCRC pts after a median follow-up of 13.4 mo. Here, we present long-term follow-up (median 25.4 mo) of these pts. Methods: Pts received NIVO 3 mg/kg + low-dose IPI Q3W (4 doses) followed by NIVO 3 mg/kg Q2W until disease progression. Primary endpoint was investigator (INV)-assessed objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v1.1). Results: Of 119 treated pts, 76% had ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy. ORR and disease control rates (DCR) were 58 and 81%, respectively (Table). Complete response (CR) rate increased with long-term follow-up from 3 (13.4 mo) to 6% (25.4 mo). Median duration of response (DOR) was not reached, with 68% of responses ongoing at data cutoff. At 24 mo, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 60 and 74%, respectively; OS rates were 96, 56, and 29% in pts with CR or partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), and progressive disease (PD), respectively. Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 31% of pts; 10% (grade 3–4) and 13% (any grade) of pts had TRAEs leading to discontinuation. Conclusions: Long-term follow-up with NIVO + low-dose IPI provides durable clinical benefit with deepening of response and a manageable safety profile with no new safety signals, demonstrating long-term benefit of NIVO + low-dose IPI for previously treated pts with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT02060188. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Long-Term Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab or Nivolumab Alone Versus Ipilimumab in Patients With Advanced Melanoma

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jedd D. Wolchok ◽  
Vanna Chiarion-Sileni ◽  
Rene Gonzalez ◽  
Jean-Jacques Grob ◽  
Piotr Rutkowski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
End Points ◽  
Unresectable Stage

PURPOSE In the phase III CheckMate 067 trial, durable clinical benefit was demonstrated previously with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and nivolumab alone versus ipilimumab. Here, we report 6.5-year efficacy and safety outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with previously untreated unresectable stage III or stage IV melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses) followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks (n = 314), nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks (n = 316), or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses; n = 315). Coprimary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab versus ipilimumab. Secondary end points included objective response rate, descriptive efficacy assessments of nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab alone, and safety. Melanoma-specific survival (MSS; descriptive analysis), which excludes deaths unrelated to melanoma, was also evaluated. RESULTS Median OS (minimum follow-up, 6.5 years) was 72.1, 36.9, and 19.9 months in the combination, nivolumab, and ipilimumab groups, respectively. Median MSS was not reached, 58.7, and 21.9 months, respectively; 6.5-year OS rates were 57%, 43%, and 25% in patients with BRAF-mutant tumors and 46%, 42%, and 22% in those with BRAF–wild-type tumors, respectively. In patients who discontinued treatment, the median treatment-free interval was 27.6, 2.3, and 1.9 months, respectively. Since the 5-year analysis, no new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION These 6.5-year CheckMate 067 results, which include the longest median OS in a phase III melanoma trial reported to date and the first report of MSS, showed durable, improved clinical outcomes with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab versus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma and, in descriptive analyses, with the combination over nivolumab monotherapy.

Prevalence and outcomes of patients (pts) with EGFR S492R ectodomain mutations in ASPECCT: Panitumumab (pmab) vs. cetuximab (cmab) in pts with chemorefractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 740-740 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Jay Price ◽  
Kathryn Newhall ◽  
Marc Peeters ◽  
Tae Won Kim ◽  
Jin Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Droplet Pcr ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Clinical Trial Information

740 Background: Mutations resistant to anti-EGFR treatment (tx), beyond those in RAS, have been reported and include EGFR S492R. We report results for pts with EGFR S492R mutations in the phase 3 ASPECCT trial. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive pmab or cmab. Crossover was not allowed. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. EGFR S492R was evaluated by digital droplet PCR in plasma samples collected pre-tx and post-tx (safety follow-up 4 wks after the last dose). Outcomes were analyzed by EGFR S492 status. Results: Of 999 pts randomized and treated, post-tx samples were available for EGFR S492 assessment from 53% of pts (261/496) in the pmab arm and 57% of pts (285/503) in the cmab arm. EGFR S492R was detected in 1% of pts in the pmab arm and 16% of pts in the cmab arm in post-tx samples. EGFR S492R was not detected in pre-tx samples. Results are shown (table). Conclusions: In a retrospective analysis of pts with available samples from ASPECCT, 16% of pts in the cmab arm and 1% of pts in the pmab developed EGFR S492R mutations. Pts with EGFR S492R in the cmab arm had longer tx duration before progressive disease (PD) and appeared to have worse OS vs pts with wild-type S492 in the cmab arm. Clinical trial information: NCT01001377. [Table: see text]

Clinical outcomes of sunitinib (Su) for patients (pts) with desmoid tumors (DT).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11052-11052
Author(s):  
Salvatora tindara Miano ◽  
Guido Francini ◽  
Serenella Civitelli ◽  
Roberto Petrioli ◽  
Edoardo Francini
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Radiological Progression ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive

11052 Background: The incidence of DT is steadily increasing in pts affected by familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and represents the first cause of death for pts who underwent preventive proctocolectomy. Currently, there is no standard therapy for DT and Tamoxifen (20 mg once daily) + Meloxicam (15 mg once daily) (TM) is the most commonly used regimen in clinical routine. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of Su, the most active PDGFR TKI, as first-line therapy for pts with DT. Methods: In this phase II IRB approved prospective study, pts with progressive, symptomatic, or recurrent DT were randomized to receive either Su (52 mg once daily) or TM. The primary end point was progression-free survival, defined as time from treatment start to clinical or radiological progression, whichever came first, at 2 years (2yr-PFS). Secondary endpoints were rates of objective response (OR), evaluated per RECIST criteria version 1.1, time to OR (ttOR), and toxicity. Adverse events (AE) were assessed per NCI-CTCAE version 4.02. Results: Of the 32 pts enrolled, 22 received Su and 10 TM. In both groups, median age at diagnosis was 43.5 years No OR was observed in the TM group. In the Su group, 17 pts had a partial response and 5 stable disease and the ORR was 75% (95% CI, 50 to 100). At a median follow-up of 27 months, the 2yr-PFS was 81% (95% CI, 69-96) and 36% (95% CI, 22-57) in the Su cohort and TM cohort, respectively (HR = 0.13; 95% CI, 0.05- 0.31; P<0.001). The median ttOR among pts who had an OR was 24 months. In the TM group, no toxicity was observed. The most frequently reported AE in the Su group were grade 1 or 2 hypothyroidism (73%), fatigue (67%), hypertension (55%), and diarrhea (51%). (HR: 0.260; p = 0.0035). All AE responded to dose reduction (37.5 mg). Conclusions: In a cohort of pts with progressive, recurrent, or symptomatic DT, Su seems to be well tolerated and improve 2yr-PFS and OR rate compared with TM therapy. Further prospective studies with larger samples are needed to verify these results.

Subgroup analysis from JAVELIN Renal 101: Outcomes for avelumab plus axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 544-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Matthew T. Campbell ◽  
Boris Y. Alekseev ◽  
Motohide Uemura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive

544 Background: In the ongoing phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial, progression-free survival (PFS) was longer (median, 13.8 vs 8.4 mo; hazard ratio, 0.69; p=0.0001) and the objective response rate (ORR) was higher (51% vs 26%) with A + Ax vs S in patients with previously untreated aRCC. Here we report outcomes from an analysis of several prespecified subgroups. Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive A (10 mg/kg) IV every 2 weeks + Ax (5 mg) PO twice daily or S (50 mg) PO once daily for 4 wk (6-wk cycle). Primary and key secondary endpoints were PFS per independent review committee (IRC; RECIST v1.1) and OS in patients with PD-L1+ tumors (≥1% of immune cells) and in patients irrespective of PD-L1 expression; other secondary endpoints included OR per IRC (RECIST v1.1). Results: A total of 886 patients were randomized; 560 (63%) had PD-L1+ tumors. At data cut-off (Jun 2018), median follow-up was 12.0 vs 11.5 mo for A + Ax vs S groups. The table shows PFS and ORR by MSKCC and IMDC risk groups (F, favorable; I, intermediate; P, poor) and PD-L1 subgroup. Similar results for prognostic risk were seen in patients with PD-L1+ tumors. Outcome data (including PFS2) for additional clinical subgroups by baseline demographics and features will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006. Conclusions: A + Ax demonstrated PFS and OR benefit across all prognostic risk groups and PD-L1 subgroups vs S in aRCC.[Table: see text]

Update on overall survival in COLUMBUS: A randomized phase III trial of encorafenib (ENCO) plus binimetinib (BINI) versus vemurafenib (VEM) or ENCO in patients with BRAF V600–mutant melanoma.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9512-9512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriella Liszkay ◽  
Helen Gogas ◽  
Mario Mandalà ◽  
ANA Maria Arance Fernandez ◽  
Claus Garbe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Mek Inhibitor ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Landmark Analyses

9512 Background: BRAF/MEK-inhibitor combinations have a central role in the treatment of BRAF V600–mutant melanoma based on demonstrated benefits on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Because of these meaningful improvements in outcome, mature landmark analyses of PFS and OS, as well as analyses of some prognostic subgroups, require long-term follow-up. Here we report an updated analysis of OS and other endpoints from the COLUMBUS trial. Methods: In Part 1 of COLUMBUS, 577 patients with advanced/metastatic BRAF V600‒mutant melanoma, untreated or progressed after first-line immunotherapy, were randomized 1:1:1 to ENCO 450 mg QD + BINI 45 mg BID (COMBO450) vs VEM 960 mg BID (VEM) or ENCO 300 mg QD (ENCO300). An updated analysis including PFS, OS, objective response rate (ORR), safety and tolerability, and analyses of results by prognostic subgroups including elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and degree of organ involvement was conducted after an additional 12 months’ follow-up. Results: At data cutoff, there were 116, 113, and 138 deaths in the COMBO450, ENCO300, and VEM treatment arms, respectively. Across arms, median follow-up for OS was 48.6 months (mo), with median OS of 33.6 mo (95% CI, 24.4–39.2) for COMBO450, 23.5 mo (95% CI, 19.6–33.6) for ENCO300, and 16.9 mo (95% CI, 14.0–24.5) for VEM. Compared to VEM, COMBO450 decreased the risk of death by 39% (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.48–0.79). Updated median PFS was COMBO450, 14.9 mo (95% CI, 11.0–20.2), ENCO300, 9.6 mo (95% CI, 7.4–14.8), and VEM, 7.3 mo (95% CI, 5.6–8.2). PFS was longer for COMBO450 vs VEM (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.40–0.67). Landmark OS and PFS results, as well as subgroup analyses and updated safety and tolerability, will be presented. Conclusions: Updated PFS and OS results for COMBO 450 from the COLUMBUS trial continue to represent new benchmarks for combined BRAF/MEK-inhibitor combinations for treatment of BRAF V600‒mutated melanoma. Clinical trial information: NCT01909453.

Final analysis of the CheckMate 025 trial comparing nivolumab (NIVO) versus everolimus (EVE) with >5 years of follow-up in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 617-617 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Scott S. Tykodi ◽  
Bernard Escudier ◽  
Stephane Oudard ◽  
Hans J. Hammers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3

617 Background: CheckMate 025 demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) in previously treated patients (pts) with aRCC, with improved safety and tolerability in the NIVO arm compared with EVE. The primary analysis was based on 14-months minimum follow-up. Here, we report an updated, final analysis with an extended minimum follow-up of 64 months. Methods: Previously treated pts with predominantly clear cell aRCC were randomized (1:1) to NIVO 3 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks or EVE 10 mg orally once daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Confirmed ORR and PFS were per investigator (inv) using RECIST v1.1. Results: Overall, 410 vs 411 pts were randomized to NIVO vs EVE, respectively. OS benefit was maintained and PFS favored NIVO vs EVE with long-term follow-up (HR 0.84 (95% CI 0.72–0.99). (Table) ORR was higher (23% vs 4%) with NIVO vs EVE and median duration of response (DOR) was longer (18.2 vs 14.0 months). Ongoing response was observed in 28% vs 18% of pts with NIVO vs EVE. Most pts received subsequent systemic anticancer therapy: 276 pts in the NIVO arm (67%; most commonly EVE [35%] or axitinib [33%]) and 296 pts in the EVE arm (72%; most commonly axitinib [41%] or NIVO [26%]). No new safety signals or treatment-related deaths emerged with long-term follow-up in either arm. More pts in the EVE arm (37%) experienced a grade 3/4 treatment-related AE compared with pts in the NIVO arm (21%). Conclusions: At >5-years minimum follow-up, response rates and survival remain superior with NIVO vs EVE, and 28% of responses to NIVO are ongoing. Long-term follow-up highlights the efficacy and safety of NIVO monotherapy in pts with aRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT01668784. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document