No abstract

No abstract

Background: Patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) have few treatment options and dismal survival. Phase I/II data show activity of nivolumab in previously treated SCLC.Patients and methods: CheckMate 331 is a randomized, open-label, phase III trial of nivolumab versus standard chemotherapy in relapsed SCLC. Patients with relapse after first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks or chemotherapy (topotecan or amrubicin) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Results: Overall, 284 patients were randomized to nivolumab and 285 to chemotherapy. Minimum follow-up was 15.8 months. No significant improvement in OS was seen with nivolumab versus chemotherapy [median OS, 7.5 versus 8.4 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-1.04; P ¼ 0.11]. A survival benefit with nivolumab was suggested in patients with baseline lactate dehydrogenase upper limit of normal and in those without baseline liver metastases. OS (nivolumab versus chemotherapy) was similar in patients with programmed death-ligand 1 combined positive score !1% versus <1%. Median progression-free survival was 1.4 versus 3.8 months (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.18-1.69). Objective response rate was 13.7% versus 16.5% (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.50-1.27); median duration of response was 8.3 versus 4.5 months. Rates of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were 13.8% versus 73.2%. Conclusion: Nivolumab did not improve survival versus chemotherapy in relapsed SCLC. No new safety signals were seen. In exploratory analyses, select baseline characteristics were associated with improved OS for nivolumab.

PURPOSE In extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC), response rates to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy are robust, but responses lack durability. CheckMate 451, a double-blind phase III trial, evaluated nivolumab plus ipilimumab and nivolumab monotherapy as maintenance therapy following first-line chemotherapy for ED-SCLC. METHODS Patients with ED-SCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, and no progression after ≤ 4 cycles of first-line chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 12 weeks followed by nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks, nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks, or placebo for ≤ 2 years or until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus placebo. Secondary end points were hierarchically tested. RESULTS Overall, 834 patients were randomly assigned. The minimum follow-up was 8.9 months. OS was not significantly prolonged with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.12; P = .37; median, 9.2 v 9.6 months). The HR for OS with nivolumab versus placebo was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.69 to 1.02); the median OS for nivolumab was 10.4 months. Progression-free survival HRs versus placebo were 0.72 for nivolumab plus ipilimumab (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.87) and 0.67 for nivolumab (95% CI, 0.56 to 0.81). A trend toward OS benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab was observed in patients with tumor mutational burden ≥ 13 mutations per megabase. Rates of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were nivolumab plus ipilimumab (52.2%), nivolumab (11.5%), and placebo (8.4%). CONCLUSION Maintenance therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab did not prolong OS for patients with ED-SCLC who did not progress on first-line chemotherapy. There were no new safety signals.

In advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC), there is a need to identify biomarkers of response to therapies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors. Experimental Design:In post-hoc exploratory analyses from CheckMate 032 (GC/GEJC cohort), we evaluated associations between nivolumab ± ipilimumab (NIVO±IPI) efficacy and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, defined by tumor cells (% TC) or combined positive score (CPS; sum of PD-L1-staining TCs + immune cells, divided by total viable TCs, × 100) using the Dako PD-L1 IHC 28-8 pharmDx assay, or inflammatory gene expression.Results: There was a trend toward increased efficacy (objective response and overall survival) when PD-L1 expression was determined by CPS compared with % TC at higher cutoffs of ≥5 and ≥10 in the pooled analysis of all treatment regimens. In this analysis, 19% and 26% of patients with PD-L1-positive tumors at a CPS cutoff of ≥5 and ≥10, respectively, had an objective response compared with 8% and 9% of patients at the equivalent %TC cutoffs. Longer survival was demonstrated in patients with PD-L1-positive (defined by CPS cutoffs of ≥5 and ≥10) versus PD-L1-negative status.Similar results were observed in the NIVO 1 mg/kg + IPI 3 mg/kg (NIVO1+IPI3) subgroup. Multiple inflammatory gene signatures/transcripts, including a signature consisting of 4 genes (CD274, CD8A, LAG3, and STAT1), showed associations with response to NIVO±IPI.Research.