Bristol Myers Squibb
Background:First-line NIVO+IPI has provided substantial long-term survival benefits over SUN in patients (pts) with aRCC in CheckMate 214. We report survival, response per independent radiology review committee (IRRC) and safety after 6 y minimum (80 mo median) follow-up in all randomized pts, by IMDC risk and in pts with overall survival (OS) ≥ 6 y (long-term survivors; LTS). Longer follow-up data (minimum, 7.5 y) will be presented.Methods:Pts with clear cell aRCC were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 3 mg/kg + IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W×4 then NIVO 3 mg/kg Q2W vs SUN 50 mg QD for 4 wk on, 2 wk off. Endpoints: OS, progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR; both per IRRC using RECIST v1.1) in IMDC intermediate/poor risk (IP; primary), intent-to-treat (ITT; secondary) and favorable risk (FAV; exploratory) pts. Exploratory outcomes in LTS pts were assessed post hoc.Results:OS with NIVO+IPI vs SUN remained superior in ITT (HR 0.72) and IP (HR 0.68) pts; OS benefits were similar between arms in FAV pts (HR 0.87; Table). Median PFS was consistent with previous reports. ORR per IRRC was higher with NIVO+IPI vs SUN, with more ongoing responses in ITT (60% vs 50%) and IP (60% vs 50%) pts. In FAV pts, ORR was lower with NIVO+IPI vs SUN, yet more responses were ongoing (59% vs 52%, respectively). Median duration of response (DOR) was longer and complete response (CR) rate was higher with NIVO+IPI vs SUN regardless of IMDC risk. Incidence of any and grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events remained largely unchanged. One additional drug-related death occurred with NIVO+IPI and zero with SUN since the previous database lock. In the LTS subgroup (NIVO+IPI, n = 208; SUN, n = 151), ORR was higher (66% vs 53%), more pts had a CR (27% vs 9%) and fewer progressed (4% vs 11%) with NIVO+IPI vs SUN. Median DOR was longer with NIVO+IPI (n = 137) vs SUN (n = 80) among LTS with confirmed response (76 vs 40 mo). Updated survival, response and safety data with 7.5 y minimum follow-up, along with additional subgroup analyses, will be presented.Conclusions:NIVO+IPI demonstrated long-term survival and more durable response benefits vs SUN in ITT and IP pts. CR rates were higher and median DOR was longer with NIVO+IPI vs SUN regardless of IMDC risk group, and in LTS pts. No new safety signals emerged. Clinical trial information: NCT02231749.
ITT | IP | FAV | ||||
Arm; n | NIVO+IPI; 550 | SUN; 546 | NIVO+IPI; 425 | SUN; 422 | NIVO+IPI; 125 | SUN; 124 |
OS HR (95% CI) | 0.72 (0.62-0.83) | 0.68 (0.58-0.81) | 0.87 (0.62-1.24) | |||
mOS (95% CI), mo | 53 (46-65) | 37 (32-44) | 47 (35-56) | 26 (22-33) | 79 (65-NE) | 68 (56-79) |
PFS per IRRC, HR (95% CI) | 0.86 (0.73-1.01) | 0.73 (0.61-0.87) | 1.60 (1.13-2.26) | |||
mPFS (95% CI), mo | 12 (10-16) | 12 (10-15) | 11 (8-16) | 8 (7-10) | 12 (10-18) | 29 (22-38) |
ORR per IRRC, % (95% CI) | 39 (35–44) | 32 (29-37) | 42 (37-47) | 27 (23-31) | 30 (22-38) | 52 (43-61) |
CR per IRRC, % | 12 | 3 | 11 | 2 | 13 | 6 |
mDOR (95% CI), mo | 75 (59-76) | 25 (20-30) | 75 (51-76) | 20 (15-25) | 61 (28-NE) | 33 (25-51) |