Upcoming event

Nivolumab plus cabozantinib (N+C) vs sunitinib (S) for previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Final follow-up results from the CheckMate 9ER trial

  • Robert J. Motzer,
  • Bernard Escudier,
  • Mauricio Burotto,
  • Thomas Powles,
  • Andrea B Apolo,
  • Maria T. Bourlon,
  • Amishi Yogesh Shah,
  • Camillo Porta,
  • Cristina Suárez,
  • Carlos H. Barrios,
  • Martin Eduardo Richardet,
  • Howard Gurney,
  • Elizabeth R. Kessler,
  • Yoshihiko Tomita,
  • Jens Bedke,
  • Fatima A. Rangwala,
  • Margarita Askelson,
  • Julie Panzica,
  • Viktor Fedorov,
  • Toni K. Choueiri

Publication: ASCO GU25, February 2025


Background

N+C showed significant benefits vs S in progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) for patients (pts) with previously untreated aRCC from the phase 3 CheckMate 9ER trial (N Engl J Med 2021; 384:829–41). We report final results for the trial with a long-term follow-up (min, >5 y), including updated efficacy in intent-to-treat (ITT) pts and by International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk, and safety.

Methods

Pts with aRCC were randomized to receive first-line N 240 mg every 2 wk + C 40 mg QD or S 50 mg QD (4 wk of each 6-wk cycle) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (2 y N max.). The primary endpoint was PFS per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included OS, ORR per RECIST v1.1 by BICR, and safety.

Results

Median follow-up was 67.6 (range, 60.2–80.2) mo. In ITT pts (N+C, n = 323; S, n = 328), PFS favored N+C vs S (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58 [95% CI, 0.49–0.70]). Median (95% CI) PFS (mPFS) was 16.4 (12.5–19.3) vs 8.3 (7.0–9.7) mo, respectively; 60-mo PFS rates were 13.6% vs 3.6%. OS also favored N+C vs S (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.65–0.96]). Median (95% CI) OS (mOS) was 46.5 (40.6–53.8) vs 35.5 (29.2–42.8) mo, respectively; 60-mo OS rates were 40.9% vs 35.4%. ORR was greater with N+C vs S (55.7% vs 27.4%; complete response [CR], 13.9% vs 4.6%). Duration of response (DOR) rates at 60 mo with N+C vs S were 22.0% vs 10.0%, respectively. Efficacy by IMDC risk groups is reported in the Table. In all treated pts (n = 320 each arm), any-grade (grade ≥ 3) treatment-related adverse events occurred in 97.5% (67.8%) vs 93.1% (55.3%) with N+C vs S. No new deaths due to study drug toxicity occurred since the last database lock. Additional subgroup analyses will be presented.

Conclusions

Long-term efficacy benefit was observed with N+C over S in this final follow-up from CheckMate 9ER. There were no new safety signals. The results continue to support N+C as a standard of care for previously untreated aRCC.

Clinical trial information

NCT03141177

FAV
N+C; n = 74

FAV
S; n = 72

INT
N+C; n = 188

INT
S; n = 188

Poor
N+C; n = 61

Poor
S; n = 68

PFS HR (95% CI)

0.67 (0.46–0.97)

0.63 (0.50–0.80)

0.36 (0.23–0.56)

mPFS (95% CI), mo

21.4 (12.8–24.6)

12.8 (9.4–16.6)

16.6 (11.3–21.7)

8.5 (6.9–10.4)

9.9 (5.9–17.7)

4.2 (2.9–5.7)

60-mo PFS rate, %

15.1

3.9

12.7

4.7

15.7

0

OS HR (95% CI)

1.08 (0.70–1.66)

0.86 (0.67–1.11)

0.49 (0.33–0.74)

mOS (95% CI), mo

53.7 (40.8–70.7)

58.9 (46.1–NE)

47.4 (38.2–55.8)

36.2 (25.7–46.3)

34.8 (21.4–53.4)

10.5 (6.8–20.7)

60-mo OS rate, %

46.3

49.4

41.2

38.2

33.1

12.9

ORR (95% CI), %

66.2 (54.3–76.8)

43.1 (31.4–55.3)

55.9 (48.4–63.1)

27.7 (21.4–34.6)

42.6 (30.0–55.9)

10.3 (4.2–20.1)

CR, %

16.2

6.9

15.4

4.8

6.6

1.5

60-mo DOR rate, %a

22.0

NE

19.0

13.0

37.0

0