Abstract
Purpose: Patients discontinuing immuno-oncology regimens may experience periods of disease control without need for ongoing anticancer therapy, but toxicity may persist.We describe treatment-free survival (TFS), with and without toxicity. Patients and Methods: Data were analyzed from the randomized phase III CheckMate 214 trial of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 550) versus sunitinib (n = 546) for treatment-naive, advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). TFS was estimated by the 42-month restricted mean times defined by the area between Kaplan-Meier curves for two time-to-event endpoints defined from randomization: Time to protocol therapy cessation and time to subsequent systemic therapy initiation or death. TFS was subdivided as TFS with and without toxicity by counting days with ≥1 grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE). Results: At 42 months since randomization, 52% of nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 39% of sunitinib intermediate/poor-risk patients were alive; 18% and 5% surviving treatment-free, respectively. Among favorable-risk patients, 70% and 73% of nivolumab plus ipilimumab and sunitinib patients were alive; 20% and 9% treatment-free. Over the 42-month period, mean TFS was over twice as long after nivolumab plus ipilimumab than sunitinib for intermediate/ poor-risk (6.9 vs. 3.1 months) and three times as long for favorable-risk patients (11.0 vs. 3.7months).MeanTFSwith grade ≥3 TRAEs was a small proportion of time for both treatments (0.6 vs. 0.3 months after nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. sunitinib for intermediate/ poor-risk, and 0.9 vs. 0.3months for favorable-risk patients). Conclusions: Patients initiating first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for aRCC spent more survival time treatment-free without toxicity versus those on sunitinib, regardless of risk group.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 6687-6695 |
Number of pages | 9 |
Journal | Clinical Cancer Research |
Volume | 27 |
Issue number | 24 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Dec 15 2021 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Oncology
- Cancer Research
Access to Document
Other files and links
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Treatment-free Survival after Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy versus Targeted Therapy for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: 42-Month Results of the CheckMate 214 Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS
Treatment-free Survival after Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy versus Targeted Therapy for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma : 42-Month Results of the CheckMate 214 Trial. / Regan, Meredith M.; Jegede, Opeyemi A.; Mantia, Charlene M. et al.
In: Clinical Cancer Research, Vol. 27, No. 24, 15.12.2021, p. 6687-6695.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Treatment-free Survival after Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy versus Targeted Therapy for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma
T2 - 42-Month Results of the CheckMate 214 Trial
AU - Regan, Meredith M.
AU - Jegede, Opeyemi A.
AU - Mantia, Charlene M.
AU - Powles, Thomas
AU - Werner, Lillian
AU - Motzer, Robert J.
AU - Tannir, Nizar M.
AU - Lee, Chung Han
AU - Tomita, Yoshihiko
AU - Voss, Martin H.
AU - Plimack, Elizabeth R.
AU - Choueiri, Toni K.
AU - Rini, Brian I.
AU - Hammers, Hans J.
AU - Escudier, Bernard
AU - Albiges, Laurence
AU - Huo, Stephen
AU - Del Tejo, Viviana
AU - Stwalley, Brian
AU - Atkins, Michael B.
AU - McDermott, David F.
N1 - Funding Information: The CheckMate 214 trial is supported by Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical Company Ltd. This research was funded by a grant from Bristol Myers Squibb (to M.M. Regan, D.F. McDermott) and funded in part by NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA006516 (to M.M. Regan, O.A. Jegede, C.M. Mantia, T.K. Choueiri, D.F. McDermott) and NIH/NCI SPORE Grant P50 CA101942 (to D.F. McDermott, O.A. Jegede, T.K. Choueiri, M.B. Atkins). Authors received no financial support or compensation for publication of this manuscript. Patients treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center were supported in part by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Support Grant (Core Grant, number P30 CA008748). The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center is supported by the NIH (grant P30 CA016672). The Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center is supported by the NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA051008. We thank the patients and their families for making this study possible, the clinical study teams who participated in the study, and Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical Company Ltd. Professional medical writing and editorial assistance were provided by Nicolette Belletier, PhD, of Parexel, funded by Bristol Myers Squibb. Funding Information: grants, personal fees, non-financial support, and other support from Roche, Pfizer, BMS, Merck, and EMD Serono outside the submitted work. In addition, T.K. Choueiri has a patent for biomarkers of activity/toxicity from IO pending, is speaker and on planning committees for ASCO/ESMO planning committees, and is involved in NCCN guidelines and NCI GU steering Committee. B.I. Rini reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from BMS during the conduct of the study; B.I. Rini also reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Merck and Pfizer, as well as personal fees from Exelixis outside the submitted work. In addition, B.I. Rini reports institutional research funding from Pfizer, F. Hoffman-La Roche, Incyte, AstraZeneca, Taris, Seattle Genetics, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Immunomedics, BMS, Mirati Therapeutics, Merck, Surface Oncology, Dragonfly Therapeutics, Aravive, and Exelixis; consulting from BMS, Pfizer, GNE/Roche, Aveo, Synthorx, Compugen, Merck, Corvus, Surface Oncology, 3DMedicines, Aravive, Alkermes, Arrowhead, GSK, Shionogi, Eisai, Nikang Therapeutics; and stock from PTC Therapeutics. H.J. Hammers reports personal fees from BMS outside the submitted work. B. Escudier reports grants and personal fees from BMS during the conduct of the study; B. Escudier also reports grants and personal fees from Ipsen, as well as personal fees from Pfizer and Oncorena outside the submitted work. L. Albiges reports other support from Pfizer, Novartis, BMS, Ipsen, Astellas, MSD, Merck & Co., Janssen, AstraZeneca, and Eisai outside the submitted work. S. Huo is an employee of BMS. V. Del Tejo is an employee of BMS. B. Stwalley reports other support from BMS during the conduct of the study. M.B. Atkins reports grants and personal fees from BMS and Merck, as well as personal fees from Novartis, Genentech/Roche, Pfizer, Eisai, Exelixis, AstraZeneca, Agenus, Adagene, Aveo, Fathom, Pyxis Oncology, Lead BioPharma, Werewolf, Elpis, Asher Bio, PACT, Iovance, Idera, Apexigen, Arrowhead, Neoleukin, Immunocore, Surface, ScholarRock, Calithera, SeaGen, Sanofi, and Takeda outside the submitted work; M.B. Atkins also reports stock options from Werewolf and Pyxis Oncology. D.F. McDermott reports personal fees from BMS, Merck, Genentech, Pfizer, and Exelixis during the conduct of the study, as well as personal fees from Janssen, Clinigen, Alkermes, and Iovance outside the submitted work. No disclosures were reported by the other authors. Funding Information: M.M. Regan reports grants from Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) and personal fees from BMS during the conduct of the study. M.M. Regan also reports grants from Novartis, Pfizer, Ipsen, TerSera, Merck, Ferring, Pierre Fabre, Roche, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and BMS; other support from Ipsen/Debiopharm; and personal fees from Tolmar outside the submitted work. C.M. Mantia reports non-financial support and other support from BMS during the conduct of the study. T. Powles reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, BMS, Exelixis, Incyte, Ipsen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Merck Serono, Astellas, Johnson & Johnson, Eisai, and Roche; grants from AstraZeneca, Roche, BMS, Exelixis, Ipsen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Merck Serono, Astellas, Johnson & Johnson, and Eisai; and other support from Roche, Pfizer, MSD, AstraZeneca, and Ipsen outside the submitted work. R.J. Motzer reports grants from BMS during the conduct of the study; R.J. Motzer also reports grants and personal fees from Pfizer, Novartis, Eisai, Exelixis, Merck, and Genentech/Roche, as well as grants from Lilly, Incyte, EMD Serono Research and Development Institute, and Aveo outside the submitted work. N.M. Tannir reports grants from BMS during the conduct of the study, as well as personal fees from BMS, Pfizer, Nektar, Exelixis, Eisai Medical Research, Eli Lilly, Oncorena, Calithera Biosciences, Novartis, Ipsen, and Merck Sharp & Dohme outside the submitted work. C.-H. Lee reports grants and personal fees from BMS, Exelixis, Eisai, Merck, Pfizer; personal fees from Amgen and EMD Serono; and grants from Calithera and Eli Lilly outside the submitted work. Y. Tomita reports personal fees from BMS; grants from Pfizer; and grants and personal fees from Ono Pharmaceutical during the conduct of the study. Y. Tomita also reports grants from Chugai, Eisai, and Taiho, as well as grants and personal fees from Astellas and Takeda outside the submitted work. M.H. Voss reports grants and personal fees from Pfizer and Roche Genentech, as well as personal fees from Corvus, Exelixis, Eisai, Calithera, Aveo, Chengdu, and Novartis outside the submitted work. E.R. Plimack reports personal fees from Aveo, Merck, BMS, Calithera, Exelixis, MEI, Novartis, and Pfizer, as well as grants from Aveo, Merck, BMS, Exelixis, Pfizer, and Peloton during the conduct of the study; E.R. Plimack also reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Infinity Pharma, Synergene, Pfizer, Clovis, Flatiron, Genentech, Horizon Pharma, Incyte, Inovio, Janssen, Merck, Roche, and Seattle Geneticsoutside thesubmitted work. T.K. Choueiri reports grants, personal fees, non-financial support, and other support from Merck, BMS, Pfizer, EMD Serono, and Roche during the conduct of the study, as well as Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Authors.
PY - 2021/12/15
Y1 - 2021/12/15
N2 - Purpose: Patients discontinuing immuno-oncology regimens may experience periods of disease control without need for ongoing anticancer therapy, but toxicity may persist.We describe treatment-free survival (TFS), with and without toxicity. Patients and Methods: Data were analyzed from the randomized phase III CheckMate 214 trial of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 550) versus sunitinib (n = 546) for treatment-naive, advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). TFS was estimated by the 42-month restricted mean times defined by the area between Kaplan-Meier curves for two time-to-event endpoints defined from randomization: Time to protocol therapy cessation and time to subsequent systemic therapy initiation or death. TFS was subdivided as TFS with and without toxicity by counting days with ≥1 grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE). Results: At 42 months since randomization, 52% of nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 39% of sunitinib intermediate/poor-risk patients were alive; 18% and 5% surviving treatment-free, respectively. Among favorable-risk patients, 70% and 73% of nivolumab plus ipilimumab and sunitinib patients were alive; 20% and 9% treatment-free. Over the 42-month period, mean TFS was over twice as long after nivolumab plus ipilimumab than sunitinib for intermediate/ poor-risk (6.9 vs. 3.1 months) and three times as long for favorable-risk patients (11.0 vs. 3.7months).MeanTFSwith grade ≥3 TRAEs was a small proportion of time for both treatments (0.6 vs. 0.3 months after nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. sunitinib for intermediate/ poor-risk, and 0.9 vs. 0.3months for favorable-risk patients). Conclusions: Patients initiating first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for aRCC spent more survival time treatment-free without toxicity versus those on sunitinib, regardless of risk group.
AB - Purpose: Patients discontinuing immuno-oncology regimens may experience periods of disease control without need for ongoing anticancer therapy, but toxicity may persist.We describe treatment-free survival (TFS), with and without toxicity. Patients and Methods: Data were analyzed from the randomized phase III CheckMate 214 trial of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 550) versus sunitinib (n = 546) for treatment-naive, advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). TFS was estimated by the 42-month restricted mean times defined by the area between Kaplan-Meier curves for two time-to-event endpoints defined from randomization: Time to protocol therapy cessation and time to subsequent systemic therapy initiation or death. TFS was subdivided as TFS with and without toxicity by counting days with ≥1 grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE). Results: At 42 months since randomization, 52% of nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 39% of sunitinib intermediate/poor-risk patients were alive; 18% and 5% surviving treatment-free, respectively. Among favorable-risk patients, 70% and 73% of nivolumab plus ipilimumab and sunitinib patients were alive; 20% and 9% treatment-free. Over the 42-month period, mean TFS was over twice as long after nivolumab plus ipilimumab than sunitinib for intermediate/ poor-risk (6.9 vs. 3.1 months) and three times as long for favorable-risk patients (11.0 vs. 3.7months).MeanTFSwith grade ≥3 TRAEs was a small proportion of time for both treatments (0.6 vs. 0.3 months after nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. sunitinib for intermediate/ poor-risk, and 0.9 vs. 0.3months for favorable-risk patients). Conclusions: Patients initiating first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for aRCC spent more survival time treatment-free without toxicity versus those on sunitinib, regardless of risk group.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85119257748&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85119257748&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-2283
DO - 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-2283
M3 - Article
C2 - 34759043
AN - SCOPUS:85119257748
SN - 1078-0432
VL - 27
SP - 6687
EP - 6695
JO - Clinical Cancer Research
JF - Clinical Cancer Research
IS - 24
ER -