Protocol for a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nivolumab as a postoperative adjuvant therapy for patients with esophageal cancer treated with preoperative docetaxel, cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil treatment (PENTAGON trial).

BACKGROUND: In Japan, preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgical resection is the standard treatment for patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. However, the risk of recurrence after surgical resection remains high. Although a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of nivolumab, a fully human monoclonal anti-programmed death 1 antibody, as postoperative adjuvant therapy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery established its superior efficacy as adjuvant therapy, the efficacy for patients who received preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy has not been demonstrated. This study aims to elucidate the efficacy and safety of nivolumab as postoperative adjuvant therapy for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel and cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil followed by surgical resection. METHODS: This study is a multi-institutional, single-arm, Phase II trial. We plan to recruit 130 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients, who have undergone preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel and cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil followed by surgical resection. If the patient did not have a pathological complete response, nivolumab is started as a postoperative adjuvant therapy within 4-16 weeks after surgery. The nivolumab dose is 480 mg/day every four weeks. Nivolumab is administered for up to 12 months. The primary endpoint is disease-free survival; the secondary endpoints are overall survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and incidence of adverse events. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge this study is the first trial establishing the efficacy of nivolumab as postoperative adjuvant therapy for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel and cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil followed by surgical resection. In Japan, preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery is a well-established standard treatment for resectable, locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Therefore, developing an effective postoperative adjuvant therapy has been essential for improving oncological outcomes.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for unresectable MPM in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The regimen of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NI) has been recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology-Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (Version 1.2022) and Chinese Guidelines for the Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (2021 edition) as the first-line treatment for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM). But whether immunotherapy has a financial advantage over conventional chemotherapy (pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin, C) is uncertain. METHODS: Based on survival and safety data from the CheckMate 743 clinical trial (NCT02899299), a partitioned survival model was constructed using TreeAge Pro2022 software. The model cycle was set to 1 month and the study period was 10 years. The output indicators included total cost, quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to assess the robustness of the results, considering only direct medical costs. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The ICER for group NI versus Group C was $375,656/QALY in all randomized patients, $327,943/QALY in patients with epithelioid histology, and $115,495/QALY in patients with non-epithelioid histology. The ICERs of all three different populations all exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold (three times the per capita gross domestic product of China in 2021). The results of univariate sensitivity analysis showed that the price of pemetrexed and nivolumab had great influence on the analysis results. The results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis show that the probability of the NI scheme being more economical in all three different populations was 0. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: From the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, in patients with unresectable MPM, NI has no economic advantage over C.

SEOM SOGUG clinical guideline for treatment of kidney cancer (2022).

Renal cancer is the seventh most common cancer in men and the tenth in women. The aim of this article is to review the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of renal carcinoma accompanied by recommendations with new evidence and treatment algorithms. A new pathologic classification of RCC by the World Health Organization (WHO) was published in 2022 and this classification would be considered a "bridge" to a future molecular classification. For patients with localized disease, surgery is the treatment of choice with nephron-sparing surgery recommended when feasible. Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab is an option for intermediate-or high-risk cases, as well as patients after complete resection of metastatic disease. More data are needed in the future, including positive overall survival data. Clinical prognostic classification, preferably IMDC, should be used for treatment decision making in mRCC. Cytoreductive nephrectomy should not be deemed mandatory in individuals with intermediate-poor IMDC/MSKCC risk who require systemic therapy. Metastasectomy can be contemplated in selected subjects with a limited number of metastases or long metachronous disease-free interval. For the population of patients with metastatic ccRCC as a whole, the combination of pembrolizumab-axitinib, nivolumab-cabozantinib, or pembrolizumab-lenvatinib can be considered as the first option based on the benefit obtained in OS versus sunitinib. In cases that have an intermediate IMDC and poor prognosis, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab has demonstrated superior OS compared to sunitinib. As for individuals with advanced RCC previously treated with one or two antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, nivolumab and cabozantinib are the options of choice. When there is progression following initial immunotherapy-based treatment, we recommend treatment with an antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. While no clear sequence can be advocated, medical oncologists and patients should be aware of the recent advances and new strategies that improve survival and quality of life in the setting of metastatic RC.

Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab improves overall survival (OS) and is associated with less adverse events (AE) compared with sorafenib in the first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). But which approach is the most cost-effective remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab vs sorafenib as first-line therapy for patients with advanced HCC from the perspective of Chinese healthcare system. METHODS: A partitioned survival mode was constructed to evaluate the health and economic outcomes of nivolumab vs sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced HCC. The clinical data and outcomes were obtained from CheckMate 459 trial. Medical costs and utilities were collected from published sources. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine model uncertainty. Additional subgroup and scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS: Treatment with nivolumab yielded an additional 0.27 QALYs with an incremental cost of $65,579.19 compared with sorafenib, leading to an ICER of $236,765.93/QALY in China. One-way sensitivity analysis found the model outputs to be most affected for hazard ratio (HR) of OS and the cost of nivolumab. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the probability of nivolumab being cost-effective was 0% at the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $38,201.19/QALY. The scenario analyses indicated altering the time horizon of the model did not reverse the economic results. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab as first-line treatment could gain more health benefits for advanced HCC compared with sorafenib, but was estimated not to be cost-effective at the commonly adopted WTP threshold of China.

Real-World Outcomes of Latinx Versus Non-Latinx Patients Treated With First-Line Immunotherapy for Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding the impact of ethnicity among patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. We evaluated real-world outcomes between Latinx and non-Latinx patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line nivolumab/ipilimumab within 2 different healthcare settings. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with mRCC who received nivolumab/ipilimumab within the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC-DHS), a safety-net healthcare system, and the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center (COH), a tertiary oncology center, between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method and covariates were adjusted using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Of 94 patients, 40 patients (43%) were Latinx while the remainder were non-Latinx (44 pts [46%] White, 7 pts [7%] Asian, and 3 pts [3%] Other). Fifty (53%) and 44 (47%) patients received their care at COH and LAC-DHS, respectively. Most Latinx patients (95%) were treated at LAC-DHS, and most non-Latinx patients (89%) were treated at COH. Pooled analysis by ethnicity demonstrated significantly shorter PFS in Latinx versus non-Latinx patients (10.1 vs. 25.2 months, hazard ratios [HR] 3.61, 95% CI 1.96-6.66, P ≤ .01). Multivariate analysis revealed a HR of 3.41 (95% CI 1.31-8.84; P = .01). At a median follow-up of 11.0 months, the median OS was not reached in either arm at the time of data cutoff. CONCLUSION: Latinx patients with mRCC had a shorter PFS treated with frontline nivolumab/ipilimumab compared to their non-Latinx counterparts. No difference was observed in OS although these data were immature. Larger studies are needed to further interrogate the social and economic determinants of ethnicity on clinical outcomes in mRCC.

Perioperative Nivolumab and Chemotherapy in Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receive a diagnosis of stage III disease. There is no current consensus regarding the most appropriate treatment for these patients. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC to receive neoadjuvant nivolumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (experimental group) or chemotherapy alone (control group), followed by surgery. Patients in the experimental group who had R0 resections received adjuvant treatment with nivolumab for 6 months. The primary end point was a pathological complete response (0% viable tumor in resected lung and lymph nodes). Secondary end points included progression-free survival and overall survival at 24 months and safety. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients underwent randomization; 57 were assigned to the experimental group and 29 were assigned to the control group. A pathological complete response occurred in 37% of the patients in the experimental group and in 7% in the control group (relative risk, 5.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34 to 21.23; P = 0.02). Surgery was performed in 93% of the patients in the experimental group and in 69% in the control group (relative risk, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.74). Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival at 24 months were 67.2% in the experimental group and 40.9% in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression, disease recurrence, or death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.88). Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival at 24 months were 85.0% in the experimental group and 63.6% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.98). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 11 patients in the experimental group (19%; some patients had events of both grades) and 3 patients in the control group (10%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC, perioperative treatment with nivolumab plus chemotherapy resulted in a higher percentage of patients with a pathological complete response and longer survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; NADIM II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03838159; EudraCT number, 2018-004515-45.).

Patient-reported outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma trials using combinations versus sunitinib as first-line treatment.

Over the past 5 years, several new immunotherapy treatments have been tested for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Clinical trials assessing combinations of different immunotherapies, or of an immunotherapy with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), have reported improved clinical outcomes compared with the standard of care - that is, treatments using TKIs alone. However, to understand the holistic impact of new treatments on patients, physicians must also consider effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). As patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) on HRQoL are often treated as a secondary outcome in clinical trials, their collection and reporting are non-standardized and, therefore, difficult to compare and interpret. However, results from six clinical trials indicate that two immunotherapy treatments overwhelmingly outperform sunitinib in HRQoL measurements: nivolumab plus cabozantinib (CheckMate 9ER) and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (IMmotion151). An additional two treatments generally outperform sunitinib: nivolumab plus ipilimumab (CheckMate 214) and lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (CLEAR). Of three studies that reported no difference from sunitinib, two suffered design flaws that might have obscured HRQoL benefits (JAVELIN Renal 101 and KEYNOTE-426). To ensure future HRQoL data are of the highest quality and comparable across trials, future studies should adopt best practices for the design, analysis and reporting of PROMs.

Cost Effectiveness of Treatment Sequences in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has significantly evolved in recent years. Without direct comparator trials, factors such as cost effectiveness (CE) are important to guide decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To assess the CE of guideline-recommended approved first- and second-line treatment regimens. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A comprehensive Markov model was developed to analyze the CE of the five current National Comprehensive Cancer Network-recommended first-line therapies with appropriate second-line therapy for patient cohorts with International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium favorable and intermediate/poor risk. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and total accumulated costs were estimated using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000 per QALY. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In patients with favorable risk, pembrolizumab + lenvatinib followed by cabozantinib added $32 935 in costs and yielded 0.28 QALYs, resulting in an incremental CE ratio (ICER) of $117 625 per QALY in comparison to pembrolizumab + axitinib followed by cabozantinib. In patients with intermediate/poor risk, nivolumab + ipilimumab followed by cabozantinib added $2252 in costs and yielded 0.60 QALYs compared to cabozantinib followed by nivolumab, yielding an ICER of $4184. Limitations include differences in median follow-up duration between treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab + lenvatinib followed by cabozantinib, and pembrolizumab + axitinib followed by cabozantinib were cost-effective treatment sequences for patients with favorable-risk mRCC. Nivolumab +ipilimumab followed by cabozantinib was the most cost-effective treatment sequence for patients with intermediate-/poor-risk mRCC, dominating all preferred treatments. PATIENT SUMMARY: Because new treatments for kidney cancer have not been compared head to head, comparison of their cost and efficacy can help in making decisions about the best treatments to use first. Our model showed that patients with a favorable risk profile are most likely to benefit from pembrolizumab and lenvatinib or axitinib followed by cabozantinib, while patients with an intermediate or poor risk profile will probably benefit most from nivolumab and ipilimumab followed by cabozantinib.

Sintilimab plus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: network meta-analysis.

Aim: This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum versus US FDA-approved/National Comprehensive Cancer Network-recommended immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapies for untreated advanced/metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK aberrations. Methods: Bayesian network meta-analysis was the base-case analysis and included assessment of fixed and random effects, and independent and simultaneous models, adjusting for baseline risk (placebo response). Chemotherapy was the common comparator. Results: Sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival than atezolizumab + platinum + nab-paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.57; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.40-0.82) and nivolumab + ipilimumab + pemetrexed + platinum (HR: 0.66; 95% CrI: 0.48-0.92). Sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum and pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed comparable progression-free survival (HR: 0.96; 95% CrI: 0.71-1.30). There was no significant difference in overall survival (HR range: 0.61-0.81) or overall response rates (odds ratio [OR] range: 0.29-0.75) between sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum and the other ICI combinations. The incidence of high-grade adverse events was higher with sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum than with nivolumab + ipilimumab (OR: 0.46; 95% CrI: 0.33-0.64) or without chemotherapy (OR: 0.25; 95% CrI: 0.19-0.34), with no significant difference between sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum and the other ICI combinations. Conclusion: Sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum showed comparable efficacy and safety versus US standard-of-care first-line ICI combinations for advanced/metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Sintilimab is an immunotherapy drug that was successfully developed and tested in China to treat a kind of lung cancer that has spread, called advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The ORIENT-11 clinical study showed that adding sintilimab to two types of chemotherapy (pemetrexed and platinum) as the first treatment for people in China with advanced non-squamous NSCLC was safe and effective in reducing the risk of cancer spreading, growing or getting worse, compared with chemotherapy alone. Our study combined and analyzed the results from 11 clinical studies to look at how well sintilimab with chemotherapy may work compared with immunotherapy drugs approved in the USA. The results showed that sintilimab with chemotherapy is as effective and safe as immunotherapy drugs approved in the USA to treat people with advanced non-squamous NSCLC. These results may help doctors and payers when deciding how to treat people with this disease.

Therapeutic efficacy of nivolumab plus sorafenib therapy in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy is the backbone of numerous combination regimens for improving the therapeutic response of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to investigate the therapeutic efficacy of nivolumab plus sorafenib therapy in patients with unresectable HCC. METHODS: Patients with unresectable HCC who received sorafenib and followed at Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital from January 2016 to May 2022 were selected for this study, and those treated with nivolumab plus sorafenib and those with sorafenib alone were propensity score matched. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) presented as a hazard ratio calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: In the analysis, 36 patients receiving nivolumab plus sorafenib and 36 receiving sorafenib alone were propensity score matched. The median OS for those receiving nivolumab plus sorafenib and sorafenib alone were 3.6 years and 1.2 years, respectively (p = 0.031). The hazard ratio of OS for nivolumab plus sorafenib compared to sorafenib alone was 0.36 (95 %CI, 0.19-0.70; p = 0.003). Furthermore, patients receiving nivolumab plus sorafenib with a baseline α-fetoprotein(AFP) < 10 ng/mL and early reduction in AFP had a 100 % objective response rate and disease control rate. CONCLUSION: In patients with unresectable HCC, nivolumab plus sorafenib resulted in better OS outcomes than sorafenib.

Durable Responses in Patients With Advanced Cholangiocarcinoma on Sequential Dual-agent Immunotherapy After Progressing on Single-agent Immunotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: Biliary tract tumors have a poor prognosis despite advancements in targeted therapies. More recent studies have started to investigate the use of combination immunotherapy in advanced biliary cancers. However, currently, there are no clinical trials investigating the use of dual-agent immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab as a sequential treatment after patients have progressed on single-agent immunotherapy. In this case series, we discussed 3 patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma who have an objective response to dual-agent immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab after having disease progression on pembrolizumab and multiple other failed lines of treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A case series, including 3 patients treated at the University of California, Irvine Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, was completed. RESULTS: Although none of the 3 patients had microsatellite instability or high tumor-mutation burden and were not necessarily predicted to have a response to dual-agent immunotherapy, all 3 patients had an objective radiographic and/or tumor-marker response to a combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab. CONCLUSIONS: This case series serves as proof of the concept that sequential immunotherapy can be beneficial after progression on single-agent immunotherapy for patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma. This study can also serve as the foundation to build further tests on the true effectiveness and ideal duration of sequential therapy with dual immunotherapy agents.

Case report: pathological complete response in an IIIB non-small cell lung cancer patient after preoperative neoadjuvant nivolumab therapy combined with chemotherapy.

RATIONALE: For locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the neoadjuvant therapy strategy of preoperative nivolumab combined with chemotherapy has great potential, especially for locally advanced NSCLC which are initially unresectable. They may be cured after neoadjuvant immunotherapy, and this may become a new direction of treatment. We hope that this representative medical record and literature review can provide some assistance for clinicians using immune checkpoint inhibitors to treat lung cancer. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 50-year-old male patient was admitted to Zhongshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine on April 27, 2020 due to "coughing for more than one month.". The patient had nothing of note in either his medical history or that of his family, and no history of smoking. DIAGNOSIS: The diagnosis was cT4N2M0IIIB stage right lower lung NSCLC with right hilar and mediastinal lymph node metastasis. The stage was inoperable stage IIIB NSCLC, but the patient had a strong willingness for doing surgery. INTERVENTIONS: The patient received 3 rounds of the neoadjuvant nivolumab therapy combined with TP (paclitaxel plus cisplatin) regimen, on 5-14-21, 06-07-21 and 07-07-21. OUTCOMES: The tumor's area shrunk. Then the patient underwent thoracoscopic radical resection of the cancer in the right upper lung and postoperative pathology achieved pathological complete response (pCR). LESSONS: In this case, combined with the wishes of the patient and the latest research results, we confirmed pCR by radical surgery after 3 rounds of the neoadjuvant nivolumab therapy combined with chemotherapy. This may be a modality to cure more lung cancer patients in the future.

Multi-Scale Spatial Analysis of the Tumor Microenvironment Reveals Features of Cabozantinib and Nivolumab Efficacy in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Background: Concomitant inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or its ligand PD-L1 is a standard of care for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but only a minority of patients respond, and responses are usually transient. Understanding the effects of therapies on the tumor microenvironment (TME) can provide insights into mechanisms of therapeutic resistance. Methods: 14 patients with HCC were treated with the combination of cabozantinib and nivolumab through the Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center. Among them, 12 patients (5 responders + 7 non-responders) underwent successful margin negative resection and are subjects to tissue microarray (TMA) construction containing 37 representative tumor region cores. Using the TMAs, we performed imaging mass cytometry (IMC) with a panel of 27-cell lineage and functional markers. All multiplexed images were then segmented to generate a single-cell dataset that enables (1) tumor-immune compartment analysis and (2) cell community analysis based on graph-embedding methodology. Results from these hierarchies are merged into response-associated biological process patterns. Results: Image processing on 37 multiplexed-images discriminated 59,453 cells and was then clustered into 17 cell types. Compartment analysis showed that at immune-tumor boundaries from NR, PD-L1 level on tumor cells is significantly higher than remote regions; however, Granzyme B expression shows the opposite pattern. We also identify that the close proximity of CD8+ T cells to arginase 1hi (Arg1hi) macrophages, rather than CD4+ T cells, is a salient feature of the TME in non-responders. Furthermore, cell community analysis extracted 8 types of cell-cell interaction networks termed cellular communities (CCs). We observed that in non-responders, macrophage-enriched CC (MCC) and lymphocyte-enriched CC (LCC) strongly communicate with tumor CC, whereas in responders, such communications were undermined by the engagement between MCC and LCC. Conclusion: These results demonstrate the feasibility of a novel application of multiplexed image analysis that is broadly applicable to quantitative analysis of pathology specimens in immuno-oncology and provides further evidence that CD163-Arg1hi macrophages may be a therapeutic target in HCC. The results also provide critical information for the development of mechanistic quantitative systems pharmacology models aimed at predicting outcomes of clinical trials.

Neoadjuvant Nivolumab plus Chemotherapy in Resectable Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy confers a modest benefit over surgery alone for resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In early-phase trials, nivolumab-based neoadjuvant regimens have shown promising clinical activity; however, data from phase 3 trials are needed to confirm these findings. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with stage IB to IIIA resectable NSCLC to receive nivolumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy or platinum-based chemotherapy alone, followed by resection. The primary end points were event-free survival and pathological complete response (0% viable tumor in resected lung and lymph nodes), both evaluated by blinded independent review. Overall survival was a key secondary end point. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. RESULTS: The median event-free survival was 31.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 30.2 to not reached) with nivolumab plus chemotherapy and 20.8 months (95% CI, 14.0 to 26.7) with chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio for disease progression, disease recurrence, or death, 0.63; 97.38% CI, 0.43 to 0.91; P = 0.005). The percentage of patients with a pathological complete response was 24.0% (95% CI, 18.0 to 31.0) and 2.2% (95% CI, 0.6 to 5.6), respectively (odds ratio, 13.94; 99% CI, 3.49 to 55.75; P<0.001). Results for event-free survival and pathological complete response across most subgroups favored nivolumab plus chemotherapy over chemotherapy alone. At the first prespecified interim analysis, the hazard ratio for death was 0.57 (99.67% CI, 0.30 to 1.07) and did not meet the criterion for significance. Of the patients who underwent randomization, 83.2% of those in the nivolumab-plus-chemotherapy group and 75.4% of those in the chemotherapy-alone group underwent surgery. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 33.5% of the patients in the nivolumab-plus-chemotherapy group and in 36.9% of those in the chemotherapy-alone group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with resectable NSCLC, neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy resulted in significantly longer event-free survival and a higher percentage of patients with a pathological complete response than chemotherapy alone. The addition of nivolumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not increase the incidence of adverse events or impede the feasibility of surgery. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb; CheckMate 816 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02998528.).

Immune checkpoint inhibitors for hepatocellular carcinoma - A game changer in treatment landscape.

Rapidly expanding armamentarium of systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) occurred in the recent few years. Multikinase inhibitors (MKI) or targeted therapy with antiangiogenic properties have been the focus of clinical studies in advanced HCC in the past decade. The remarkable efficacy of single agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), including nivolumab and pembrolizumab, in early phase studies led to accelerated approvals as second-line treatment for advanced HCC. The excellent toxicity profile of single agent ICI also lends support to be developed as combination therapy with other targeted therapies. The success of combining atezolizumab and bevacizumab over sorafenib as the first-line treatment in advanced HCC marked the newest paradigm shift in advanced HCC. The combination exhibited unprecedented objective response rate of 30% and a median survival of 19.2 months. Many other similar ICI-based combinations are expected to be approved in the foreseeable future. In this narrative review, the development of ICI alone and in combination in advanced HCC were described and the potential impact in all stages of HCC, safety issues of ICI-based combinations, and future perspectives were discussed.

Effect of systemic therapies or best supportive care after disease progression to both nivolumab and cabozantinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: The Meet-Uro 19BEYOND study.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab and cabozantinib are currently approved agents in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) but there are no data available for patients progressing to both treatments. The aim of this study was to compare active therapeutic options and best supportive care (BSC) after progression to nivolumab and cabozantinib in mRCC. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we selected 50 patients from eight Italian centers. The primary endpoint of the study was the overall survival (OS) of patients on active treatment versus BSC. Secondary endpoints were the progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). The efficacy of active therapy was also investigated. RESULTS: After progression to both nivolumab and cabozantinib, 57.1% of patients were given active treatment (mainly everolimus and sorafenib) while 42.9% received BSC. The median OS was 13 months (95% CI: 4-NR) in actively treated patients and 3 months (95% CI: 2-4) in BSC patients (p = 0.001). Patients treated with sorafenib had better disease control than those treated with everolimus (stable disease: 71.4% vs. 16.7%, progression disease: 14.3% vs. 58.3%; p = 0.03), with no significant differences in PFS (5 and 3 months, 95% CI: 1-6 vs. 2-5; p = 0.6) and OS (12 and 4 months, 95% CI: 3-NR vs. 2-NR; p = 0.2). CONCLUSION: After treatment with both nivolumab and cabozantinib, the choice of a safe active systemic therapy offered better outcomes than BSC.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab with or without live bacterial supplementation in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a randomized phase 1 trial.

Previous studies have suggested that the gut microbiome influences the response to checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) in patients with cancer. CBM588 is a bifidogenic live bacterial product that we postulated could augment CPI response through modulation of the gut microbiome. In this open-label, single-center study (NCT03829111), 30 treatment-naive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma with clear cell and/or sarcomatoid histology and intermediate- or poor-risk disease were randomized 2:1 to receive nivolumab and ipilimumab with or without daily oral CBM588, respectively. Stool metagenomic sequencing was performed at multiple timepoints. The primary endpoint to compare the relative abundance of Bifidobacterium spp. at baseline and at 12 weeks was not met, and no significant differences in Bifidobacterium spp. or Shannon index associated with the addition of CBM588 to nivolumab-ipilimumab were detected. Secondary endpoints included response rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity. PFS was significantly longer in patients receiving nivolumab-ipilimumab with CBM588 than without (12.7 months versus 2.5 months, hazard ratio 0.15, 95% confidence interval 0.05-0.47, P = 0.001). Although not statistically significant, the response rate was also higher in patients receiving CBM588 (58% versus 20%, P = 0.06). No significant difference in toxicity was observed between the study arms. The data suggest that CBM588 appears to enhance the clinical outcome in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab-ipilimumab. Larger studies are warranted to confirm this clinical observation and elucidate the mechanism of action and the effects on microbiome and immune compartments.

Association of the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index With the Survival of Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After Nivolumab Therapy.

The nutritional status has the potential to affect cancer immunity. We evaluated the relationship between the nutritional status and the efficacy of nivolumab in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study was a post hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter cohort study conducted at 14 institutions in Japan between July 2016 and December 2018. The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), calculated from body weight and serum albumin, was evaluated in 158 patients with NSCLC who received nivolumab. GNRI was graded as low, moderate, and high. Low GNRI was associated with significantly shorter progression-free survival [median, 1.9 mo; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.6-3.3 mo] than moderate (median, 4.0 mo; 95% CI=2.3-5.8 mo; P=0.017) and high GNRI (median, 3.0 mo; 95% CI=1.9-7.2 mo; P=0.014). Low GNRI was also linked to significantly shorter overall survival (OS) (median, 7.8 mo; 95% CI=2.6-12.0 mo) than moderate (median, 13.0 mo; 95% CI=9.6-15.2 mo; P=0.006) and high GNRI (median, 20.6 mo; 95% CI=15.6 mo-not reached; P<0.001). High GNRI was associated with significantly longer OS than moderate GNRI (P=0.015). In multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses, increased GNRI was predictive of longer progression-free survival and OS, similarly as tumor programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression. In patients with NSCLC receiving nivolumab. GNRI was predictive of survival and may be useful for predicting the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

Nivolumab versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 459): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Single-agent nivolumab showed durable responses, manageable safety, and promising survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the phase 1-2 CheckMate 040 study. We aimed to investigate nivolumab monotherapy compared with sorafenib monotherapy in the first-line setting for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at medical centres across 22 countries and territories in Asia, Australasia, Europe, and North America, patients at least 18 years old with histologically confirmed advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for, or whose disease had progressed after, surgery or locoregional treatment; with no previous systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma, with Child-Pugh class A and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and regardless of viral hepatitis status were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive nivolumab (240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02576509. FINDINGS: Between Jan 11, 2016, and May 24, 2017, 743 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (nivolumab, n=371; sorafenib, n=372). At the primary analysis, the median follow-up for overall survival was 15·2 months (IQR 5·7-28·0) for the nivolumab group and 13·4 months (5·7-25·9) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 16·4 months (95% CI 13·9-18·4) with nivolumab and 14·7 months (11·9-17·2) with sorafenib (hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·72-1·02]; p=0·075; minimum follow-up 22·8 months); the protocol-defined significance level of p=0·0419 was not reached. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (1 [<1%] of 367 patients in the nivolumab group vs 52 [14%] of patients in the sorafenib group), aspartate aminotransferase increase (22 [6%] vs 13 [4%]), and hypertension (0 vs 26 [7%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 43 (12%) patients receiving nivolumab and 39 (11%) patients receiving sorafenib. Four deaths in the nivolumab group and one death in the sorafenib group were assessed as treatment related. INTERPRETATION: First-line nivolumab treatment did not significantly improve overall survival compared with sorafenib, but clinical activity and a favourable safety profile were observed in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Thus, nivolumab might be considered a therapeutic option for patients in whom tyrosine kinase inhibitors and antiangiogenic drugs are contraindicated or have substantial risks. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb in collaboration with Ono Pharmaceutical.

[A Case of Long-Term Survival by Multidisciplinary Surgical Treatment for Metastatic Multi-Organ Metastasis after Radical Resection of Esophageal Cancer].

A 78-year-old man with advanced thoracic esophageal cancer underwent radical esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin plus 5-FU. He had left adrenal metastasis 10 months after surgery and removed it, but 3 months later he had liver metastases. After 2 courses of chemotherapy with nedaplatin plus 5-FU, resection was performed. One course of nedaplatin plus 5-FU for adjuvant chemotherapy was added, but the patient was followed up without another chemotherapy after surgery because of intestinal obstruction due to infection and increase of the lymphatic cyst in the abdominal cavity. Six months after the liver resection, nodules appeared in the right lung, and 4 months later, multiple nodules extending to both lungs were observed. Therefore, it was judged that there were multiple lung metastases, and administration of nivolumab was started. He has been 3 years since the recurrence of esophageal cancer and 17 months after the start of nivolumab administration, but the recurrence lesion is only progressing to lung metastasis.