National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
Andrea B. Apolo , Thomas Powles , Mauricio Burotto , Maria Teresa Bourlon , James J Hsieh , Umberto Basso , Amishi Yogesh Shah , Cristina Suarez , Camillo Porta , Carlos H. Barrios , Howard Gurney , Elizabeth R Kessler , Margitta Retz , Saby George , Bernard Escudier , Joshua Zhang , Burcin Simsek , Christian Scheffold , Robert J. Motzer , Toni K. Choueiri
Background: First-line N+C significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) vs S in aRCC patients (pts) in the phase 3 CheckMate 9ER trial, leading to FDA approval of N+C in this setting. A deeper understanding of how baseline disease characteristics may impact clinical outcomes with N+C vs S may inform clinical decision making. Methods: Pts with clear cell aRCC were randomized to N 240 mg IV Q2W + C 40 mg PO QD vs S 50 mg PO QD (4 weeks of 6-week cycles). In this post hoc exploratory analysis, PFS, OS, and ORR were evaluated across pt subgroups defined by baseline IMDC risk status, organ sites of metastases (mets), number of organs with any lesions, or target lesion size. Consistent with primary/secondary efficacy endpoints in ITT pts, PFS and ORR were evaluated per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review in subgroups. Results: Median follow-up in ITT pts was 23.5 months. PFS, OS, and ORR (including complete response [CR]) outcomes are summarized in the table across subgroups: IMDC risk (favorable [FAV], intermediate [I], poor [P]); number of organs with ≥ 1 target/nontarget lesion (T/NT; 1 and ≥ 2); sum of diameters of target lesions (sDTL; < and ≥ median [72.1 mm]), and in pts with liver, bone, or lung mets. The PFS HR favored N+C vs S and median (m) PFS was longer with N+C vs S across all subgroups. The OS HR also favored N+C vs S across most subgroups. ORR ranged from 38%–66% (N+C) vs 10%–44% (S) across subgroups, and CR benefits were seen with N+C in most subgroups. Additional outcomes including landmark OS and response details in subgroups will be reported. Conclusions: Consistent with outcomes in ITT pts, efficacy benefits with N+C vs S were observed regardless of IMDC risk status, organ site of mets, or extent of tumor burden at baseline. These results support N+C as a new first-line treatment option for pts with aRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03141177
Subgroup (N+C v S, n) | FAV risk (74 v 72) | I risk (188 v 188) | P risk (61 v 68) | 1 organ site with T/NT (61 v 68) | ≥ 2 organ sites with T/NT (261 v 258) | sDTL < 72.1 mm (160 v 167) | sDTL ≥ 72.1 mm (163 v 161) | Pts w/ lung mets (240 v 251) | Pts w/ bone mets (79 v 72) | Pts w/ liver mets (73 v 54) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PFS, HR (95%) | 0.58 (0.36–0.93) | 0.58 (0.45–0.76) | 0.36 (0.23–0.56) | 0.53 (0.32–0.88) | 0.53 (0.43–0.67) | 0.52 (0.39–0.71) | 0.53 (0.40–0.70) | 0.51 (0.40–0.64) | 0.38 (0.25–0.59) | 0.51 (0.33–0.79) |
mPFS, mo | 25 v 13 | 17 v 9 | 10 v 4 | 25 v 13 | 15 v 7 | 20 v 10 | 11 v 6 | 17 v 8 | 18 v 4 | 11 v 6 |
OS, HR (95%) | 0.94 (0.46–1.92) | 0.74 (0.50–1.08) | 0.45 (0.27–0.76) | 0.79 (0.33–1.90) | 0.63 (0.47–0.84) | 0.64 (0.38–1.06) | 0.64 (0.46–0.89) | 0.63 (0.46–0.86) | 0.64 (0.39–1.06) | 0.47 (0.27–0.82) |
ORR per RECIST v1.1 (95% CI), % | 66 (54–77) v 44 (33–57) | 56 (48–63) v 29 (22–36) | 38 (26–51) v 10 (4–20) | 62 (49–74) v 35 (24–48) | 53 (47–59) v 27 (21–33) | 62 (54–69) v 36 (29–44) | 48 (40–56) v 20 (15–28) | 56 (49–62) v 29 (24–36) | 48 (37–60) v 11 (5–21) | 49 (37–61) v 20 (11–34) |
CR, % | 9 v 10 | 11 v 3 | 5 v 1 | 20 v 4 | 7 v 4 | 16 v 8 | 2 v 0 | 8 v 4 | 6 v 0 | 1 v 2 |
Disclaimer
This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org
Abstract Disclosures
2023 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Mauricio Burotto
2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Viktor Grünwald
2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Maria Teresa Bourlon
2021 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Amishi Yogesh Shah