•Nivolumab showed prolonged OS benefit in patients with R/M SCCHN post-platinum.•Long-term OS benefit was observed irrespective of PD-L1 expression or HPV status.•No new safety concerns were ...identified from long-term nivolumab treatment.
We report 2-year results from CheckMate 141 to establish the long-term efficacy and safety profile of nivolumab and outcomes by tumor PD-L1 expression in patients with recurrent or metastatic (R/M),platinum-refractory squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN).
Patients with R/M SCCHN with tumor progression/recurrence within 6 months of platinum therapy were randomized 2:1 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or investigator’s choice (IC). Primary endpoint: overall survival (OS). Data cutoff: September 2017.
With 24.2 months’ minimum follow-up, nivolumab (n = 240) continued to improve OS vs IC (n = 121), hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 (95% CI 0.54–0.86). Nivolumab nearly tripled the estimated 24-month OS rate (16.9%) vs IC (6.0%), and demonstrated OS benefit across patients with tumor PD-L1 expression ≥1% (HR 95% CI = 0.55 0.39–0.78) and < 1% (HR 95% CI = 0.73 0.49–1.09), and regardless of tumor HPV status. Estimated OS rates at 18, 24, and 30 months with nivolumab were consistent irrespective of PD-L1 expression (<1%/≥1%). In the nivolumab arm, there were no observed differences in baseline characteristics or safety profile between long-term survivors and the overall population. Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse event rates were 15.3% and 36.9% for nivolumab and IC, respectively.
Nivolumab significantly improved OS at the primary analysis and demonstrated prolonged OS benefit vs IC and maintenance of a manageable and consistent safety profile with 2-year follow-up. OS benefit was observed with nivolumab irrespective of PD-L1 expression and HPV status. (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02105636)
In the randomized, phase 3 CheckMate 141 trial, nivolumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus investigator's choice (IC) of chemotherapy at primary analysis among 361 patients with ...recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN) post-platinum therapy. Nivolumab versus IC as first-line treatment also improved OS among patients with R/M SCCHN who progressed on platinum therapy for locally advanced disease in the adjuvant or primary setting at 1-year follow-up. In the present long-term follow-up analysis of patients receiving first-line treatment, OS benefit with nivolumab (n = 50) versus IC (n = 26) was maintained (median: 7.7 months versus 3.3 months; hazard ratio: 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.94) at 2 years. No new safety signals were identified. In summary, this long-term 2-year analysis of CheckMate 141 supports the use of nivolumab as a first-line treatment for patients with platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN.
Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) represents a molecularly paradigmatic tumor given the complex diversity of environmental as well as host dependent factors that are closely implicated in tissue ...transformation and carcinogenesis. Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) plays a key role in tissue invasion, hyperplasia and malignant transformation. Therefore, EBV related oncoviral proteins such as Latent Membrane Protein family (LMP1, LMP2), Epstein Barr Nuclear Antigen 1 (EBNA1) and EBV related glycoprotein B (gB) are responsible for inducing intracellular signalling aberrations leading to sustained proliferation and further acquisition of NPC related invasive nature and metastatic potential.Dysregulation of proteasome signaling seems to be centrally implicated in oncoviral protein stabilization as well as in modulating tumor microenvironment. Different studies in vitro and in vivo suggest a potential role of proteasome inhibitors in the therapeutic setting of NPC. Furthermore, alterations affecting proteasome signalling in NPC have been associated to tumor growth and invasion, distant metastasis, immune exclusion and resistance as well as to clinical poor prognosis. So on, recent studies have shown the efficacy of immunotherapy as a suitable therapeutic approach to NPC. Nevertheless, novel strategies seem to look for combinatorial regimens aiming to potentiate immune recognition as well as to restore both primary and acquired immune resistance.In this work, our goal is to thoroughly review the molecular implications of proteasome dysregulation in the molecular pathogenesis of NPC, together with their direct relationship with EBV related oncoviral proteins and their role in promoting immune evasion and resistance. We also aim to hypothesize about the feasibility of the use of proteasome inhibitors as part of immunotherapy-including combinatorial regimens for their potential role in reversing immune resistance and favouring tumor recognition and eventual tumor death.
Abstract only
6019
Background: In CheckMate 141, a randomized, phase 3 trial, nivo demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) and better tolerability in patients (pts) with PR R/M SCCHN compared ...with IC. Pts with SCCHN progressing within 6 mos of platinum in the primary treatment setting have dismal prognosis. We report outcomes in pts who were PR in the primary or adjuvant setting, and updated results in the overall population. Methods: Pts (N = 361) with PR R/M SCCHN were randomized 2:1 to nivo 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or weekly IC (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab). Primary endpoint was OS estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and confidence intervals (CIs). Additional endpoints include objective response rate (ORR) and safety. Outcomes were analyzed overall and post hoc in pts who were PR in the primary/adjuvant setting and received nivo/IC as 1L R/M therapy. Results: Characteristics of the 78 (21.6%) pts who received nivo (n = 52) or IC (n = 26) in the 1L R/M setting were similar to the overall population.Nivo significantly improved OS vs IC among 1L R/M pts (median 95% CI: 7.7 mo 3.1, 13.8 vs 3.3 mo 2.1, 6.4; HR 95% CI = 0.56 0.33, 0.95); 12-mo OS rate: 39.2% vs 15.4%. ORR was 19.2% for nivo vs 11.5% for IC in this subgroup. At 11.4-mo minimum follow-up, updated efficacy and safety in the overall population were similar to the primary analysis. Median OS (95% CI) was 7.7 mo (5.7, 8.8) for nivo vs 5.1 mo (4.0, 6.2) for IC; HR (95% CI) = 0.71 (0.55, 0.90); P = 0.0048. For nivo vs IC, the 18-mo OS rate was 21.5% vs 8.3% and ORR was 13.3% vs 5.8%. Nivo doubled the median duration of response vs IC (9.7 vs 4.0 mo). Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse event rates for nivo vs IC were 15.3% vs 36.0% overall and 27.5% vs 32.0% for 1L R/M pts; there were no new deaths due to study drug toxicity. Conclusions: Nivo significantly improved OS and increased ORR vs IC in a 1L R/M subgroup, supporting its use as 1L therapy for pts with PR R/M SCCHN. Nivo continued to show a significant survival benefit and better tolerability vs IC in pts with PR R/M SCCHN. Clinical trial information: NCT02105636.
Abstract
Background: Patients (pts) with platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN have an extremely poor prognosis and no chemotherapy (CT) options to extend survival. Nivo, a fully human anti-programmed ...death-1 monoclonal antibody, is FDA-approved and improves survival in other tumor types.
Methods: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial (NCT02105636) assigned pts (stratified by prior cetuximab) with SCCHN who progressed within 6 mo of platinum-based CT in a 2:1 ratio to nivo 3 mg/kg Q2W or weekly single-agent IC (methotrexate 40-60 mg/m2, docetaxel 30-40 mg/m2, or cetuximab 400-mg/m2 loading dose followed by 250 mg/m2 weekly). Pts must not have received systemic therapy subsequent to biopsy and prior to screening. Pts could receive nivo beyond disease progression if there was evidence of clinical benefit. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints were PFS and objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1. Additional endpoints included safety and outcomes by PD-L1 and HPV (p16 IHC) status. An interim analysis (IA) was planned after at least 195 deaths.
Results: Of 361 randomized pts, median age was 60.0 yr, 76.5% were current/former smokers, 54.8% had received ?2 prior lines of CT, 91.4% had prior radiotherapy, and 98.3% had ECOG score ?1. At IA, 133 of 240 pts (55.4%) on nivo and 85 of 121 pts (70.2%) on IC had died. Nivo-treated pts had a 30% reduction in risk of death (HR, 0.70; 97.73% CI, 0.51-0.96; P = 0.010); median OS was 7.5 mo (95% CI, 5.5-9.1) with nivo vs 5.1 mo (95% CI, 4.0-6.0) with IC. Tumor PD-L1 status was evaluable in 260 pts (72.0%). Median OS in pts with PD-L1 ?1% was 8.7 mo with nivo vs 4.6 mo with IC (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.83) and, in pts with PD-L1 <1%, 5.7 vs 5.8 mo, respectively (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.54-1.45). HPV status by IHC was available in 178 pts (49.3%). Median OS in HPV+ pts was 9.1 mo with nivo vs. 4.4 mo with IC (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.32-0.99) and 7.5 mo vs. 5.8 mo, respectively, in HPV- pts (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.42-1.25). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 58.9% of pts on nivo vs 77.5% of pts on IC; TRAEs Grade 3-4 were reported in 13.1% vs 35.1% of pts, respectively. Two treatment-related deaths on the nivo arm and one on the IC arm occurred.
Conclusions: Nivo improved OS in pts with platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN compared to single-agent IC therapy. Pts with PD-L1 ?1% and HPV+ pts had significantly longer median OS with nivo than with IC, but nivo was effective regardless of PD-L1 or HPV status. As the first immunotherapy agent to increase survival in a randomized phase 3 study in R/M SCCHN, nivo is a new standard of care option for these pts.
Citation Format: Maura L. Gillison, George Blumenschein, Jérôme Fayette, Joel Guigay, A. Dimitrios Colevas, Lisa Licitra, Kevin Harrington, Stefan Kasper, Everett E. Vokes, Caroline Even, Francis Worden, Nabil F. Saba, Lara Carmen Iglesias Docampo, Robert Haddad, Tamara Rordorf, Naomi Kiyota, Makoto Tahara, Manish Monga, Mark Lynch, William J. Geese, Mark Schactman, Justin Kopit, James W. Shaw, Robert L. Ferris. Nivolumab (nivo) vs investigator's choice (IC) for recurrent or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC): CheckMate-141. abstract. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr CT099.
Abstract
Aim: Nivo is the only immunotherapy to significantly improve overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with R/M SCCHN who have progressed on or after platinum-based therapy. Here we report ...long-term data from the randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 141 study (NCT02105636).
Patients: Pts with R/M SCCHN who progressed on or after platinum-based therapy were randomized 2:1 to nivo 3 mg/kg q2wk (n = 240) or IC (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab; n = 121). Endpoints: OS (primary), progression-free survival (PFS), safety. Minimum follow-up: 24.2 mo (data cut: Sep 2017).
Results: Nivo improved OS significantly vs IC in the overall population (median 95% CI: 7.7 5.7, 8.8 mo vs 5.1 4.0, 6.2 mo; HR 95% CI: 0.68 0.54, 0.86). 2-yr OS rate (95% CI) was 16.9% (12.4, 22.0) with nivo vs 6.0% (2.7, 11.3) with IC. 8.3% of pts in the IC arm received subsequent immunotherapy. Outcomes by PD-L1 and HPV subgroups are shown in the Table. In pts with tumor PD-L1 <1%, risk of death at 2 yrs was reduced by 27% with nivo vs IC with the HR trending lower with longer follow-up; HR (95% CI) = 0.89 (0.54, 1.45), 0.83 (0.54, 1.29), and 0.73 (0.49, 1.09) at 6 mo (Dec 2015 data cut), 1 yr (Sep 2016 data cut), and 2 yrs of follow-up, respectively. Nivo also continued to improve OS vs IC in pts with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1%. Complete responses were noted in both PD-L1 ≥ 1% and <1% groups. Key baseline characteristics, including PD-L1 expression and HPV status, were similar among patients who survived 2 yrs compared with all patients in the nivo arm. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 15.3% (nivo) vs 36.9% (IC) of pts; toxicity-related deaths in 2 pts (0.8%) and 1 pt (0.9%), respectively.
Conclusion: With 2-yr follow-up, nivo continued to significantly improve OS and maintain a favorable safety profile vs IC. Nivo is the only immunotherapy to demonstrate OS benefit irrespective of PD-L1 expression in pts with SCCHN.
Table: Outcomes by PD-L1 expression and HPV statusMedian OS (95% CI), monthsMedian PFS (95% CI), monthsNivoICHR (95% CI)NivoICHR (95% CI)PD-L1 < 1%6.5 (4.4, 11.7)5.5 (3.7, 8.5)0.73 (0.49, 1.09)2.0 (1.9, 2.1)2.7 (2.0, 4.6)1.13 (0.75, 1.71)PD-L1 ≥ 1%8.2 (6.7, 9.5)4.7 (3.8, 6.2)0.55 (0.39, 0.78)2.1 (2.0, 3.5)2.0 (1.9, 3.1)0.59 (0.41, 0.84)HPV+9.1 (6.5, 11.8)4.4 (3.0, 9.8)0.60 (0.37, 0.97)2.0 (1.9, 3.3)2.0 (1.6, 2.8)0.75 (0.46, 1.23)HPV−7.7 (4.8, 13.0)6.5 (3.9, 8.7)0.59 (0.38, 0.92)2.1 (1.9, 3.1)3.3 (1.9, 4.0)1.01 (0.65, 1.56)
Citation Format: Robert L. Ferris, George R. Blumenschein, Jerome Fayette, Joel Guigay, A Dimitrios Colevas, Lisa Licitra, Kevin J. Harrington, Stefan Kasper, Everett E. Vokes, Caroline Even, Francis Worden, Nabil F. Saba, Lara Carmen Iglesias Docampo, Robert Haddad, Tamara Rordorf, Naomi Kiyota, Makoto Tahara, Mark Lynch, Vijayvel Jayaprakash, Li Li, Maura L. Gillison. Nivolumab (Nivo) vs investigator's choice (IC) in recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN): 2-yr outcomes in the overall population and PD-L1 subgroups of CheckMate 141 abstract. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT116.
Cancer of Unknown Primary (CUP) is a metastatic cancer with confirmed histology of which the primary origin is unknown after to work up initial evaluation through a pathological clinical study, the ...analytical and imaging study.
The diagnostic process includes the early obtaining of quality biopsy material. It includes its histological and immunohistochemical analysis: a study to determine the tumor line, an analysis of cytokeratins and a large battery of antibodies to confirm the specific origin of each possible tumor type.
The development of molecular platforms has allowed improving the diagnosis of CUP, increasing the number of patients who can benefit from treatment with specific therapy, significantly increasing the survival and reducing the toxicity. However, the updated guidelines (NICE, ESMO, NCCN) emphasize that the impact on the clinical benefit of the specific treatment according to the results of the molecular platforms is still controversial.
El Cáncer de Origen Desconocido (COD) es un cáncer metastásico con histología confirmada del cual se desconoce el origen primario después de realizar un
estudio diagnóstico inicial mediante el estudio clínico patológico, el estudio analítico y de imagen.
El estudio diagnóstico incluye la obtención precoz de material de biopsia de calidad. Incluye su análisis histológico e inmunohistoquímico: un estudio para
determinar la estirpe tumoral, análisis de citoqueratinas y una batería amplia de anticuerpos para confirmar el origen específico.
El desarrollo de plataformas moleculares ha mejorado su diagnóstico, incrementando el número de pacientes que se benefician del tratamiento con
terapia específica, aumentando su supervivencia y reduciendo la toxicidad. Sin embargo, las guías actualizadas (NICE, ESMO, NCCN) destacan que el impacto
en el beneficio clínico del tratamiento específico según los resultados de las plataformas moleculares es todavía controvertido.
PDF
