Dual immunotherapy alternating with anti-PD-1 antibody plus liposomal doxorubicin show good efficacy in prostate epithelioid hemangioendothelioma: a case report.

Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma is a rare vascular malignancy, and currently, there is no standard treatment regimen for this disease and existing treatment options have limited efficacy. In this case report, we present a patient with lung and lymph node metastases from prostate epithelioid hemangioendothelioma who achieved a significant partial response. This was accomplished through alternating nivolumab therapy with ipilimumab and liposomal doxorubicin, resulting in a progression-free-survival more than 6 months to date. The treatment was well-tolerated throughout. Our report suggests that dual immunotherapy alternating with anti-PD-1antibody plus doxorubicin may be a potential treatment modality for epithelioid hemangioendothelioma. However, larger sample studies are necessary to ascertain the effectiveness of this treatment strategy and it is essential to continue monitoring this patient to sustain progression-free survival and overall survival.

Comparison of FDG-PET/CT and CT for evaluation of tumor response to nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy and prognosis prediction in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma.

OBJECTIVES: Results for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients following first-line treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab obtained with immunotherapy-modified PERCIST (imPERCIST), shown by [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT), and modified RECIST (mRECIST), shown by CT, were compared for response evaluation and prognosis prediction. RESULTS: imPERCIST indicated nine progressive metabolic disease (PMD), eight stable metabolic disease (SMD), four partial metabolic response (PMR), and five complete metabolic response (CMR) cases. mRECIST showed nine with progressive disease (PD), nine stable disease (SD), seven partial response (PR), and one complete response (CR). Although high concordance was noted (κ = 0.827), imPERCIST correctly judged a greater percentage with CMR (15.4%). Following a median 10.0 months, 15 patients showed progression and eight died from MPM. With both, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly longer in patients without progression (CMR/PMR/SMD, CR/PR/SD, respectively) as compared to PMD/PD patients (imPERCIST p < 0.0001 and p = 0.015, respectively; mRECIST p < 0.0001 and p = 0.015, respectively). METHODS: Twenty-six patients (23 males, 3 females; median 73.5 years) with histologically proven MPM and no curative surgery received nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy. FDG-PET/CT and diagnostic CT scanning at the baseline, and after 2-4 cycles (2 in three, 3 in 17, 4 in six patients) were performed. Therapeutic response findings evaluated using imPERCIST and mRECIST were compared. PFS and OS analyses were done using log-rank and Cox methods. CONCLUSION: For unresectable MPM patient examinations, FDG-PET and CT provide accurate findings for evaluating tumor response and also prognosis prediction following first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab immunotherapy (approximately three cycles).

Adjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy for stage III gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer after gastrectomy with D2 or more extensive lymph-node dissection (ATTRACTION-5): a randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In Asia, adjuvant chemotherapy after gastrectomy with D2 or more extensive lymph-node dissection is standard treatment for people with pathological stage III gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy administered in this setting. METHODS: ATTRACTION-5 was a randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial conducted at 96 hospitals in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and China. Eligible patients were aged between 20 years and 80 years with histologically confirmed pathological stage IIIA-C gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma after gastrectomy with D2 or more extensive lymph-node dissection, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 0 or 1 and available tumour tissue for PD-L1 expression analysis. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either nivolumab plus chemotherapy or placebo plus chemotherapy via an interactive web-response system with block sizes of four. Investigational treatment, either nivolumab 360 mg or placebo, was administered intravenously for 30 min once every 3 weeks. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered as either tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil (S-1) at an initial dose of 40 mg/m2 per dose orally twice per day for 28 consecutive days, followed by 14 days off per cycle, or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin consisting of an initial dose of intravenous oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 for 2 h every 21 days and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 per dose orally twice per day for 14 consecutive days, followed by 7 days off treatment. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival by central assessment. The intention-to-treat population, consisting of all randomly assigned patients, was used for analysis of efficacy endpoints. The safety population, defined as patients who received at least one dose of trial drug, was used for analysis of safety endpoints. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03006705) and is closed. FINDINGS: Between Feb 1, 2017, and Aug 15, 2019, 755 patients were randomly assigned to receive either adjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy (n=377) or adjuvant placebo plus chemotherapy (n=378). 267 (71%) of 377 patients in the nivolumab group and 263 (70%) of 378 patients in the placebo group were male; 110 (29%) of 377 patients in the nivolumab group and 115 (31%) of 378 patients in the placebo group were female. 745 patients received assigned treatment (371 in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group; 374 in the placebo plus chemotherapy group), which was the safety population. Median time from first dose to data cutoff was 49·1 months (IQR 43·1-56·7). 3-year relapse-free survival was 68·4% (95% CI 63·0-73·2) in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group and 65·3% (59·9-70·2) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group; the hazard ratio for relapse-free survival was 0·90 (95·72% CI 0·69-1·18; p=0·44). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 366 (99%) of 371 patients in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group and 364 (98%) of 374 patients in the placebo plus chemotherapy group. Discontinuation due to adverse events was more frequent in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group (34 [9%] of 371 patients) than the placebo plus chemotherapy group (13 [4%] of 374 patients). The most common treatment-related adverse events were decreased appetite, nausea, diarrhoea, neutrophil count decreased, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. INTERPRETATION: The results of this trial do not support the addition of nivolumab to postoperative adjuvant therapy for patients with untreated, locally advanced, resectable gastric or GEJ cancer. FUNDING: Ono Pharmaceutical and Bristol Myers Squibb.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma previously treated with sorafenib: 5-year results from CheckMate 040.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab demonstrated promising clinical activity and durable responses in sorafenib-treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the CheckMate 040 study at 30.7-month median follow-up. Here, we present 5-year results from this cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to arm A [nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg Q3W (four doses)] or arm B [nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg Q3W (four doses)], each followed by nivolumab 240 mg Q2W, or arm C (nivolumab 3 mg/kg Q2W plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg Q6W). The primary objectives were safety, tolerability, investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR), and duration of response (DOR) per RECIST version 1.1. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients were randomized across treatment arms. At 60-month minimum follow-up (62.6-month median follow-up), the ORR was 34% (n = 17), 27% (n = 13), and 29% (n = 14) in arms A, B, and C, respectively. The median DOR was 51.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.6 months-not estimable (NE)], 15.2 months (95% CI 7.1 months-NE), and 21.7 months (95% CI 4.2 months-NE), respectively. The median overall survival (OS) was 22.2 months (34/50; 95% CI 9.4-54.8 months) in arm A, 12.5 months (38/49; 95% CI 7.6-16.4 months) in arm B, and 12.7 months (40/49; 95% CI 7.4-30.5 months) in arm C; 60-month OS rates were 29%, 19%, and 21%, respectively. In an exploratory analysis of OS by response (6-month landmark), the median OS was meaningfully longer for responders versus nonresponders for all arms. No new safety signals were identified with longer follow-up. There were no new discontinuations due to immune-mediated adverse events since the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the primary analysis, the arm A regimen of nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful responses and long-term survival benefit, with no new safety signals in patients with advanced HCC following sorafenib treatment, further supporting its use as a second-line treatment in these patients.

Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Locally Advanced Mismatch Repair-Deficient Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) tumors can be found in 10 to 15% of patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer. In these patients, the efficacy of chemotherapy is limited. The use of neoadjuvant immunotherapy has shown promising results, but data from studies of this approach are limited. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2 study in which patients with nonmetastatic, locally advanced, previously untreated dMMR colon cancer were treated with neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab. The two primary end points were safety, defined by timely surgery (i.e., ≤2-week delay of planned surgery owing to treatment-related toxic events), and 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary end points included pathological response and results of genomic analyses. RESULTS: Of 115 enrolled patients, 113 (98%; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 93 to 100) underwent timely surgery; 2 patients had surgery delayed by more than 2 weeks. Grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 5 patients (4%), and none of the patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events. Among the 111 patients included in the efficacy analysis, a pathological response was observed in 109 (98%; 95% CI, 94 to 100), including 105 (95%) with a major pathological response (defined as ≤10% residual viable tumor) and 75 (68%) with a pathological complete response (0% residual viable tumor). With a median follow-up of 26 months (range, 9 to 65), no patients have had recurrence of disease. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with locally advanced dMMR colon cancer, neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab had an acceptable safety profile and led to a pathological response in a high proportion of patients. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb; NICHE-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03026140.).

Safety and efficacy of multi-target TKI combined with nivolumab in check-point inhibitor-refractory patients with advanced NSCLC: a prospective, single-arm, two-stage study.

BACKGROUND: Resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represents a major unmet medical need in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibition may reverse a suppressive microenvironment and recover sensitivity to subsequent ICIs. METHODS: This phase Ib/IIa, single-arm study, comprised dose-finding (Part A) and expansion (Part B) cohorts. Patients with ICIs-refractory NSCLC were enrolled to receive anlotinib (a multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor) orally (from days 1 to 14 in a 21-day cycle) and nivolumab (360 mg every 3 weeks, intravenously) on a 21-day treatment cycle. The first 21-day treatment cycle was a safety observation period (phase Ib) followed by a phase II expansion cohort. The primary objectives were recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D, part A), safety (part B), and objective response rate (ORR, part B), respectively. RESULTS: Between November 2020 and March 2022, 34 patients were screened, and 21 eligible patients were enrolled (6 patients in Part A). The RP2D of anlotinib is 12 mg/day orally (14 days on and 7 days off) and nivolumab (360 mg every 3 weeks). Adverse events (AEs) of any cause and treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were reported in all treated patients. Two patients (9.5%) experienced grade 3 TRAE. No grade 4 or higher AEs were observed. Serious AEs were reported in 4 patients. Six patients experienced anlotinib interruption and 4 patients experienced nivolumab interruption due to TRAEs. ORR and disease control rate (DCR) was 19.0% and 76.2%, respectively. Median PFS and OS were 7.4 months (95% CI, 4.3-NE) and 15.2 months (95% CI, 12.1-NE), respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that anlotinib combined with nivolumab shows manageable safety and promising efficacy signals. Further studies are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04507906 August 11, 2020.

Comparison of target agent treatment strategies for platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare 7 newer immunotherapies and targeted therapies for platinum-resistant relapsed ovarian cancer. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library electronic databases for phase III trials involving platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer (PRrOC) patients treated with immunotherapy or targeted therapy in combination with chemotherapy. The quality of the included trials was assessed using the GRADE method. The primary outcome of comparison was progression-free survival, and secondary outcomes included overall survival and safety. RESULTS: This analysis included 7 randomized phase III controlled trials, encompassing 2485 PRrOC patients. Combining bevacizumab plus chemotherapy and lurbinectedin demonstrated statistically significant differences in progression-free survival compared to all other regimens of interest. However, no statistically significant differences were observed in the overall survival. Nivolumab and mirvetuximab exhibited fewer serious adverse events than the other regimens of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy and lurbinectedin monotherapy has significant efficacy in patients with PRrOC. For patients with PRrOC who have exhausted treatment options, nivolumab and mirvetuximab may be considered as alternatives because of their better safety profiles.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of nivolumab in the second- or later-line treatment of patients with locally advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in Türkiye: a retrospective multicenter non-interventional registry study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of nivolumab in the second-line (2L) or later-line (LL) treatment of patients with locally advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in real-life setting in Türkiye. METHODS: This study was designed as a national, multi-center, retrospective study. The study population was evaluated in two groups for the line of nivolumab therapy: those receiving nivolumab in the 2L (Group 2L) and third-line (3L) or LL (Group 3L/LL). Efficacy was evaluated based on one-year overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Safety was evaluated based on treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and nivolumab discontinuation rate. RESULTS: Of 244 patients, 52.9% were in Group 2L and 47.1% were in Group 3L/LL. Demographic and clinical characteristics did not differ between the groups. In Group 2L and Group 3L/LL, one-year OS and PFS rates were 60.8% and 61.4% (p = 0.592) and 31.2% and 21.3% (p = 0.078), respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) was 34.7% in Group 2L and 27.3% in Group 3L/LL (p = 0.262). The percentage of patients reporting at least one AE in Groups 2L and 3L/LL was 34.9% and 43.5%, respectively (p = 0.169). Fatigue was the most common (16.4%) treatment-related AE in each group. The groups were comparable regarding the AE frequency. Nivolumab was discontinued in 61 patients in Group 2L and 53 patients in Group 3L/LL, with the most common reason being disease progression (57.4% and 66.0%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Nivolumab is safe and effective in the 2L or 3L/LL treatment of locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC and associated with acceptable AEs in real-life setting.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most common type of lung cancer (around 85% of all lung cancers). Patients with NSCLC are usually diagnosed at advanced or metastatic stages. When cancer cells spread to other areas from where they first formed, it is called metastatic cancer. Surgery may not be a treatment option for such patients. Currently, immunotherapeutic agents are used in the treatment of NSCLC. Nivolumab is one of the approved immunotherapeutic agents in the treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC, who have failed after receiving chemotherapy. Our study explored the efficacy and safety of nivolumab in real-life setting in Türkiye. Nivolumab effectiveness was evaluated by overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates. OS indicates the proportion of patients who are still alive at a given time after diagnosis or treatment initiation. PFS refers to "the length of time during and after cancer treatment that a person lives with the disease but does not get worse." In the present study, one-year OS for 244 patients who received nivolumab was 61.1% and one-year PFS was 26.4%. Nivolumab safety was evaluated based on the frequency of adverse events observed during nivolumab therapy. Of the patients 38.9% had at least one side effect, with fatigue being the most common (16.4%). Our results support the earlier studies and showed that nivolumab was a safe and effective agent and is associated with acceptable side effects.

Distinct autoantibody profiles across checkpoint inhibitor types and toxicities.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are increasingly used in combination. To understand the effects of different ICI categories, we characterized changes in circulating autoantibodies in patients enrolled in the E4412 trial (NCT01896999) of brentuximab vedotin (BV) plus ipilimumab, BV plus nivolumab, or BV plus ipilimumab-nivolumab for Hodgkin Lymphoma. Cycle 2 Day 1 (C2D1) autoantibody levels were compared to pre-treatment baseline. Across 112 autoantibodies tested, we generally observed increases in ipilimumab-containing regimens, with decreases noted in the nivolumab arm. Among 15 autoantibodies with significant changes at C2D1, all nivolumab cases exhibited decreases, with more than 90% of ipilimumab-exposed cases showing increases. Autoantibody profiles also showed differences according to immune-related adverse event (irAE) type, with rash generally featuring increases and liver toxicity demonstrating decreases. We conclude that dynamic autoantibody profiles may differ according to ICI category and irAE type. These findings may have relevance to clinical monitoring and irAE treatment.

The lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio as a significant inflammatory marker associated with survival of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated using nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) is the first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). While approximately 40% of patients treated with NIVO + IPI achieve a durable response, 20% develop primary resistance with severe consequences. Therefore, there is a clinical need for criteria to select patients suitable for NIVO + IPI therapy to optimize its therapeutic efficacy. Accordingly, our aim was to evaluate the association between candidate biomarkers measured before treatment initiation and survival. METHODS: This was a multi-institutional, retrospective, cohort study of 183 patients with mRCC treated with systematic therapies between August 2015 and July 2023. Of these, 112 received NIVO + IPI as first-line therapy: mean age, 68 years; men, 83.0% (n = 93), and clear cell histology, 80.4% (n = 90). Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to evaluate associations between biomarkers and survival. RESULTS: On univariate analysis, high C-reactive protein and systemic index, a high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and a low lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) were associated with shorter overall survival (OS). On multivariable analysis, a LMR ≤ 3 was retained as an independent factor associated to shorter OS with the highest accuracy (C-index, 0.656; hazard ratio, 7.042; 95% confidence interval, 2.0-25.0; p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: A low LMR may identify patients who would be candidate for NIVO + IPI therapy for mRCC.

First-Line Nivolumab and Relatlimab Plus Chemotherapy for Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: The Phase II RELATIVITY-060 Study.

PURPOSE: Open-label phase II study (RELATIVITY-060) to investigate the efficacy and safety of first-line nivolumab, a PD-1-blocking antibody, plus relatlimab, a lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3)-blocking antibody, plus chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer (GC) or gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC). METHODS: Patients with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab + relatlimab (fixed-dose combination) + chemotherapy or nivolumab + chemotherapy. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review [BICR]) in patients whose tumors had LAG-3 expression ≥1%. RESULTS: Of 274 patients, 138 were randomly assigned to nivolumab + relatlimab + chemotherapy and 136 to nivolumab + chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 11.9 months. In patients with LAG-3 expression ≥1%, BICR-assessed ORR (95% CI) was 48% (38 to 59) in the nivolumab + relatlimab + chemotherapy arm and 61% (51 to 71) in the nivolumab + chemotherapy arm; median progression-free survival (95% CI) by BICR was 7.0 months (5.8 to 8.4) versus 8.3 months (6.9 to 12.1; hazard ratio [HR], 1.41 [95% CI, 0.97 to 2.05]), and median overall survival (95% CI) was 13.5 months (11.9 to 19.1) versus 16.0 months (10.9 to not estimable; HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.70 to 1.54]), respectively. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 69% and 61% of all treated patients, and 42% and 36% of patients discontinued because of any-grade TRAEs in the nivolumab + relatlimab + chemotherapy and nivolumab + chemotherapy arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: RELATIVITY-060 did not meet its primary end point of improved ORR in patients with LAG-3 expression ≥1% when relatlimab was added to nivolumab + chemotherapy compared with nivolumab + chemotherapy. Further studies are needed to address whether adding anti-LAG-3 to anti-PD-1 plus chemotherapy can benefit specific GC/GEJC patient subgroups.

Nivolumab + Ipilimumab as Immunotherapeutic Boost in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Studies with nivolumab, an approved therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) after platinum-based chemotherapy, demonstrate improved outcomes with added high-dose ipilimumab. Objective: To assess efficacy and safety of a tailored approach using nivolumab + ipilimumab as an immunotherapeutic boost for mUC. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this phase 2 nonrandomized trial, patients with mUC composed 2 cohorts. Cohort 1 received first-line or second-/third-line nivolumab with escalating doses of ipilimumab, and cohort 2 received second-/third-line nivolumab with high-dose ipilimumab. Recruitment spanned 26 sites in Germany and Austria from August 8, 2017, to February 18, 2021. All patients had a 70% or higher Karnofsky Performance Score and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, version 1.1. Interventions: All patients initiated 4 doses of 240-mg nivolumab (1× every 2 wk). Week 8 nonresponders received nivolumab + ipilimumab (1× every 3 wk). Cohort 1 received 2 doses of 3-mg/kg nivolumab + 1-mg/kg ipilimumab followed by 2 doses of 1-mg/kg nivolumab + 3-mg/kg ipilimumab if no response. Due to safety concerns, cohort 1 treatment was halted, and first-line cohort 2 treatment was not pursued. Cohort 2 received 2 to 4 doses of 1-mg/kg nivolumab + 3-mg/kg ipilimumab. Responders continued with nivolumab maintenance but could receive nivolumab + ipilimumab for later progression. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was objective response rate. Results: The study comprised 169 patients (118 [69.8%] men; median [range] age, 68 [37-84] years): 86 in cohort 1 (42 first-line; 44 second-/third-line) and 83 in cohort 2. The median (IQR) follow-up times were 10.4 (4.2-23.5) months (first-line cohort 1), 7.5 (3.1-23.8) months (second-/third-line cohort 1), and 6.2 (3.2-22.7) months (cohort 2). Response rates to nivolumab induction were 12/42 (29%, first-line cohort 1), 10/44 (23%, second-/third-line cohort 1), and 17/83 (20%, cohort 2). Response rates to a tailored approach were 20/42 (48% [90% CI, 34%-61%], first-line cohort 1), 12/44 (27% [90% CI, 17%-40%], second-/third-line cohort 1), and 27/83 (33% [90% CI, 23%-42%], cohort 2). Three-year overall survival rates for first-line cohort 1, second-/third-line cohort 1, and cohort 2 using the Kaplan-Meier method were 32% (95% CI, 17%-49%), 19% (95% CI, 8%-33%), and 34% (95% CI, 23%-44%), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this nonrandomized trial, although first-line cohort 1 treatment improved objective response rates, considerable progression events urge caution with this as a first-line therapy. Second-/third-line cohort 1 treatment did not improve response rates compared with nivolumab monotherapy. However, added high-dose ipilimumab may improve tumor response and survival in patients with mUC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03219775.

Nivolumab plus chemotherapy or ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (CheckMate 648): 29-month follow-up from a randomized, open-label, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: First-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab both demonstrated significant overall survival (OS) benefit versus chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in the CheckMate 648 trial, leading to approvals of both nivolumab-containing regimens in many countries. We report longer-term follow-up data. METHODS: This open-label, phase III trial (NCT03143153) enrolled adults with previously untreated, unresectable, advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to nivolumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, or chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. Hierarchical testing was performed first in patients with tumor cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of ≥1% and then in the overall population. RESULTS: A total of 970 patients were randomly assigned. After 29 months of minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus chemotherapy continued to demonstrate improvement in OS versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59 [95% CI: 0.46-0.76]) in patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1% and in the overall population (HR = 0.78 [95% CI: 0.65-0.93]) and with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.62 [95% CI: 0.48-0.80]) in patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1% and in the overall population (HR = 0.77 [95% CI: 0.65-0.92]). In patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1%, nivolumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated PFS benefit versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.51-0.89]); PFS benefit was not observed with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (HR = 1.04 [95% CI: 0.79-1.36]). Among all treated patients (n = 936), Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 151 (49%, nivolumab plus chemotherapy), 105 (32%, nivolumab plus ipilimumab), and 110 (36%, chemotherapy) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab plus chemotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful OS benefit versus chemotherapy with no new safety signals identified with longer follow-up, further supporting use as first-line standard treatment options for patients with advanced ESCC.

Capmatinib plus nivolumab in pretreated patients with EGFR wild-type advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Dysregulated MET is an established oncogenic driver in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MET signaling may also suppress anticancer immune responses. Concomitant MET inhibition with capmatinib (a MET inhibitor) synergistically enhanced the efficacy of immunotherapies in murine cancer models, regardless of tumor dependency to MET signaling. Here, we report results of a multicenter, open-label, phase 2 study of capmatinib plus nivolumab (a PD-1 inhibitor) in patients with EGFR wild-type advanced NSCLC, previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients were allocated into high-MET or low-MET groups according to MET expression determined by immunohistochemistry, MET gene copy number as assessed by fluorescence in-situ hybridization, and presence of MET exon 14 skipping mutation, then received capmatinib 400 mg, oral, twice daily in combination with nivolumab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate per RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: The primary endpoint was met in both the high-MET (N = 16) and low-MET (N = 30) groups. In the high-MET and low-MET groups, respectively, the estimated mean 6-month PFS rate (95 % credible interval) by Bayesian analysis was 68.9 % (48.5-85.7) and 50.9 % (35.6-66.4). The Kaplan-Meier median PFS (95 % CI) was 6.2 months (3.5-19.2) and 4.2 months (1.8-7.4). The overall response rate (95 % CI) was 25.0 % (7.3-52.4) and 16.7 % (5.6-34.7). Most frequent treatment-related adverse events (≥30 % any grade, N = 46) were nausea (52.2 %), peripheral edema (34.8 %), and increased blood creatinine (30.4 %). CONCLUSIONS: Capmatinib plus nivolumab showed clinical activity and manageable safety in pretreated patients with advanced EGFR wild-type NSCLC, independent of MET status. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02323126.

Comparison of Cabozantinib and Axitinib as Second-line Therapy After Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Patients With Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Comparative Analysis of Retrospective Real-world Data.

BACKGROUND: To date, no studies have compared the treatment outcomes of second-line therapies in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). This study retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of cabozantinib and axitinib as second-line treatments in patients with metastatic ccRCC who previously received immune-oncology combination therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic ccRCC treated with cabozantinib and axitinib as second-line therapy after nivolumab-ipilimumab treatment were identified among 243 patients with RCC treated between August 1, 2018 and January 31, 2022 at 34 institutions belonging to the Japanese Urological Oncology Group. Patients were assessed for treatment outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, objective response rate (ORR), and incidence rate of treatment-related adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients treated with cabozantinib and 60 treated with axitinib as second-line therapy after nivolumab-ipilimumab treatment for metastatic ccRCC were identified. The median PFS (95% confidence interval) was 11.0 months (9.0-16.0) with cabozantinib and 9.5 months (6.0-13.0) with axitinib. The ORRs were 37.5% (cabozantinib) and 38.3% (axitinib). The rates of any-grade AEs and grade ≥3 AEs were 79.2% (cabozantinib) versus 63.3% (axitinib; P = .091) and 35.4% (cabozantinib) versus 23.3% (axitinib; P = .202), respectively. In the poor-risk group, PFS was longer in the cabozantinib group than in the axitinib group (P = .033). CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety of cabozantinib and axitinib were comparable. In the poor-risk group, cabozantinib was more effective than axitinib. These findings provide valuable insights into the selection of second-line treatment options after nivolumab-ipilimumab treatment in patients with metastatic ccRCC.

Perioperative Nivolumab in Resectable Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Standard treatment with neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy significantly improves outcomes in patients with resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Perioperative treatment (i.e., neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery and adjuvant therapy) with nivolumab may further improve clinical outcomes. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned adults with resectable stage IIA to IIIB NSCLC to receive neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus placebo every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, followed by surgery and adjuvant nivolumab or placebo every 4 weeks for 1 year. The primary outcome was event-free survival according to blinded independent review. Secondary outcomes were pathological complete response and major pathological response according to blinded independent review, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: At this prespecified interim analysis (median follow-up, 25.4 months), the percentage of patients with 18-month event-free survival was 70.2% in the nivolumab group and 50.0% in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for disease progression or recurrence, abandoned surgery, or death, 0.58; 97.36% confidence interval [CI], 0.42 to 0.81; P<0.001). A pathological complete response occurred in 25.3% of the patients in the nivolumab group and in 4.7% of those in the chemotherapy group (odds ratio, 6.64; 95% CI, 3.40 to 12.97); a major pathological response occurred in 35.4% and 12.1%, respectively (odds ratio, 4.01; 95% CI, 2.48 to 6.49). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 32.5% of the patients in the nivolumab group and in 25.2% of those in the chemotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative treatment with nivolumab resulted in significantly longer event-free survival than chemotherapy in patients with resectable NSCLC. No new safety signals were observed. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb; CheckMate 77T ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04025879.).

Evaluating the efficacy and safety of nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy compared to nivolumab monotherapy in advanced cancers (excluding melanoma): a systemic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab (Nivo) and ipilimumab (Ipi) have revolutionized cancer treatment by targeting different pathways. Their combination shows promising results in various cancers, including melanoma, but not all studies have demonstrated significant benefits. A meta-analysis was performed to assess the effectiveness and safety of Nivo-Ipi compared to Nivo alone in advanced cancer types (excluding melanoma). METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a meta-analysis up to September 30, 2023, searching databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We focused on advanced solid malignancies (excluding melanoma) with specific Nivo and Ipi dosing. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), grades 3-4 adverse events (AEs), and treatment-related discontinuations. Secondary outcomes included specific adverse events. Statistical analysis in Review Manager included hazard ratio (HR) and risk ratio (RR), assessing heterogeneity (Higgins I2). RESULTS: Nine RCTs, involving 2152 patients covering various malignancies, were analyzed. The Nivo plus Ipi group exhibited a median OS of 12.3 months and a median PFS of 3.73 months, compared to monotherapy with 11.67 months and 3.98 months, respectively. OS showed no significant difference between Nivo and Ipi combination and Nivo alone (HR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.08, p = 0.61). PFS had a slight improvement with combination therapy (HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.82 to 1.00, p = 0.04). Treatment-related cumulative grades 3-4 adverse events were higher with Nivo and Ipi (RR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.30 to 1.78, p < 0.00001), as were treatment-related discontinuations (RR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.46 to 2.70, p < 0.0001). Hepatotoxicity (RR = 2.42, 95% CI: 1.39 to 4.24, p = 0.002), GI toxicity (RR = 2.84, 95% CI: 1.44 to 5.59, p = 0.002), pneumonitis (RR = 2.29, 95% CI: 1.24 to 2.23, p = 0.008), dermatitis (RR = 2.96, 95% CI: 1.08 to 8.14, p = 0.04), and endocrine dysfunction (RR = 6.22, 95% CI: 2.31 to 16.71, p = 0.0003) were more frequent with Nivo and Ipi. CONCLUSIONS: Combining nivolumab and ipilimumab did not significantly improve overall survival compared to nivolumab alone in advanced cancers (except melanoma). However, it did show slightly better PFS at the cost of increased toxicity, particularly grades 3-4 adverse events. Specific AEs occurred more frequently in the combination group. Further trials are needed to fully assess this combination in treating advanced cancers.

Case report: Durable complete response of a mucosal melanoma of the rectum after neoadjuvant immunotherapy with ipilimumab plus nivolumab.

Melanoma causes the majority of skin cancer-related deaths. Despite novel therapy options, metastatic melanoma still has a poor prognosis. Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) therapy has been shown to prolong overall survival in patients with advanced melanoma, but mucosal melanomas respond less favorably compared to melanomas of cutaneous origin. We report on a patient with a mucosal melanoma of the rectum diagnosed in June 2020. Since a surgical intervention in order to achieve a tumor-free situation would have required an amputation of the rectum, a neo-adjuvant systemic immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab was initiated. As restaging and colonoscopy after four doses of this combination immunotherapy showed a partial response, the patient decided against the pre-planned surgery and a maintenance therapy with nivolumab was started. Repeated colonoscopy showed a complete response after four doses of nivolumab. After ongoing ICI therapy with nivolumab and no evidence of tumor relapse, immunotherapy was stopped in July 2022 after nearly 2 years of continuous treatment. The patient remained tumor-free during further follow-up. Neo-adjuvant immunotherapy is getting more explored in advanced melanoma. By administering ICI therapy before surgical resection of an essentially operable tumor, a stronger and more diverse immunological response is supposed to be achieved. Our reported case demonstrates that this approach could also be effective in mucosal melanoma despite of its generally lower response to immunotherapy.

Safe Stop IPI-NIVO trial: early discontinuation of nivolumab upon achieving a complete or partial response in patients with irresectable stage III or metastatic melanoma treated with first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab - study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Patients with irresectable stage III or metastatic melanoma presenting with poor prognostic factors are usually treated with a combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), consisting of ipilimumab and nivolumab. This combination therapy is associated with severe immune related adverse events (irAEs) in about 60% of patients. In current clinical practice, patients are usually treated with ICIs for up to two years or until disease progression or the occurrence of unacceptable AEs. The incidence of irAEs gradually increases with duration of treatment. While durable tumour responses have been observed after early discontinuation of treatment, no consensus has been reached on optimal treatment duration. The objective of the Safe Stop IPI-NIVO trial is to evaluate whether early discontinuation of ICIs is safe in patients with irresectable stage III or metastatic melanoma who are treated with combination therapy. METHODS: The Safe Stop IPI-NIVO trial is a nationwide, multicentre, prospective, single-arm, interventional study in the Netherlands. A total of 80 patients with irresectable stage III or metastatic melanoma who are treated with combination therapy of ipilimumab-nivolumab and have a complete or partial response (CR/PR) according to RECIST v1.1 will be included to early discontinue maintenance therapy with anti-PD-1. The primary endpoint is the rate of ongoing response at 12 months after start of ICI. Secondary endpoints include ongoing response at 24 months, disease control at different time points, melanoma specific and overall survival, the incidence of irAEs and health-related quality of life. DISCUSSION: From a medical, healthcare and economic perspective, overtreatment should be prevented and shorter treatment duration of ICIs is preferred. If early discontinuation of ICIs is safe for patients who are treated with the combination of ipilimumab-nivolumab, the treatment duration of nivolumab could be shortened in patients with a favourable tumour response. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05652673, registration date: 08-12-2022.