Time to next treatment or death as a candidate surrogate endpoint for overall survival in advanced melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: an insight from the phase III CheckMate 067 trial.

BACKGROUND: Time to next treatment or death (TNT-D) may be a patient-relevant endpoint in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. This study investigated TNT-D as a surrogate endpoint (SE) for overall survival (OS) in previously untreated advanced melanoma patients. METHODS: Patient-level data from the 60-month results of the CheckMate 067 randomised, controlled trial were used. Analyses were carried out for nivolumab monotherapy or nivolumab with ipilimumab versus ipilimumab monotherapy. The SE 1-step validation method based on a joint frailty-copula model was used where the country of enrolment was applied to define clusters. Kendall's τ and the coefficient of determination (R2trial) were estimated for respective measurements of association at the individual and cluster levels. The surrogate threshold effect, the maximum threshold hazard ratio for TNT-D that would translate into OS benefit, was estimated. A leave-one-out cross-validation analysis was carried out to evaluate model robustness. RESULTS: Fifteen clusters of data were generated from 945 patients. For both nivolumab-containing arms, the association between TNT-D and OS was deemed acceptable at the individual level (Kendall's τ > 0.60) and strong at the cluster level, with R2trial fairly close to 1, with narrow confidence intervals. The estimated surrogate threshold effects were 0.61 for nivolumab versus ipilimumab and 0.49 for nivolimub + ipilimumab versus ipilimumab. Cross-validation results showed minimum variation of the correlation measures and satisfactory predictive accuracy for the model. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that TNT-D may be a valuable SE in previously untreated advanced melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Surrogacy analyses considering multiple randomised controlled trials are warranted for confirming these findings.

A matching-adjusted indirect comparison of combination nivolumab plus ipilimumab with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors for the treatment of BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma☆.

BACKGROUND: Approved first-line treatments for patients with BRAF V600-mutant advanced melanoma include nivolumab (a programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor) plus ipilimumab (a cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 inhibitor; NIVO+IPI) and the BRAF/MEK inhibitors dabrafenib plus trametinib (DAB+TRAM), encorafenib plus binimetinib (ENCO+BINI), and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib (VEM+COBI). Results from prospective randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing these treatments have not yet been reported. This analysis evaluated the relative efficacy and safety of NIVO+IPI versus DAB+TRAM, ENCO+BINI, and VEM+COBI in patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma using a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review identified RCTs for DAB+TRAM, ENCO+BINI, and VEM+COBI in patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma. Individual patient-level data for NIVO+IPI were derived from the phase III CheckMate 067 trial (BRAF-mutant cohort) and restricted to match the inclusion/exclusion criteria of the comparator trials. Treatment effects for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards and time-varying hazard ratio (HR) models. Safety outcomes (grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events) with NIVO+IPI and the comparators were compared. RESULTS: In the Cox proportional hazards analysis, NIVO+IPI showed improved OS compared with DAB+TRAM (HR = 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-0.73), ENCO+BINI (HR = 0.60; CI, 0.42-0.85), and VEM+COBI (HR = 0.50; CI, 0.36-0.70) for the overall study period. In the time-varying analysis, NIVO+IPI was associated with significant improvements in OS and PFS compared with the BRAF/MEK inhibitors 12 months after treatment initiation. There were no significant differences between NIVO+IPI and BRAF/MEK inhibitor treatment from 0 to 12 months. Safety outcomes favored DAB+TRAM over NIVO+IPI, whereas NIVO+IPI was comparable to VEM+COBI. CONCLUSION: Results of this MAIC demonstrated durable OS and PFS benefits for patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma treated with NIVO+IPI compared with BRAF/MEK inhibitors, with the greatest benefits noted after 12 months.

Real-world systemic therapy treatment patterns for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in Canada.

Background: In the present study, we examined real-world treatment patterns for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (scchn) in Canada, which are largely unknown. Methods: Oncologists across Canada provided data for disease history, characteristics, and treatment patterns during May-July 2016 for 6-8 consecutive patients receiving first-line or second-line drug treatment for scchn (including locally advanced and recurrent or metastatic disease). Results: Information from 16 physicians for 109 patients receiving drug treatment for scchn was provided; 1 patient was excluded from the treatment-pattern analysis. Median age in the cohort was 63 years [interquartile range (iqr): 57-68 years], and 24% were current smokers, with a mean exposure of 26.2 ± 12.7 pack-years. The most common tumour site was the oropharynx (48%). Most patients (84%) received platinum-based regimens as first-line treatment (44% received cisplatin monotherapy). Use of cetuximab-based regimens as first-line treatment was limited (17%). Of 53 patients receiving second-line treatment, 87% received a first-line platinum-based regimen. Median time between first-line treatment with a platinum-based regimen and initiation of second-line treatment was 55 days (iqr: 20-146 days). The most common second-line regimen was cetuximab monotherapy (43%); platinum-based regimens were markedly infrequent (13%). Conclusions: Our analysis provides real-world insight into scchn clinical practice patterns in Canada, which could inform reimbursement decision-making. High use of platinum-based regimens in first-line drug treatment was generally reflective of treatment guidelines; cetuximab use in the second-line was higher than anticipated. Additional real-world studies are needed to understand the effect of novel therapies such as immuno-oncology agents on clinical practice and outcomes, particularly for recurrent or metastatic scchn.