Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
Bradley Alexander McGregor , Daniel M. Geynisman , Mauricio Burotto , Camillo Porta , Cristina Suarez Rodriguez , Maria Teresa Bourlon , Pedro C. Barata , Shuchi Gulati , Brian Stwalley , Viviana Del Tejo , Ella X. Du , Aozhou Wu , Andi Chin , Keith A. Betts , Stephen Huo , Toni K. Choueiri
Background: Nivolumab in combination with cabozantinib (N+C) has demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and overall survival (OS), compared with sunitinib as a first-line (1L) treatment for aRCC in the phase 3 CheckMate (CM) 9ER trial. As there are no head-to-head trials comparing N+C with pembrolizumab in combination with axitinib (P+A), this study compared the efficacy of N+C with P+A as 1L treatment in aRCC. Methods: An MAIC was conducted using individual patient data on N+C (N = 323) from the CM 9ER trial (median follow-up: 23.5 months) and published data on P+A (N = 432) from the KEYNOTE (KN)-426 trialof P+A (median follow-up: 30.6 months). Individual patients within the CM 9ER trial population were reweighted to match the key patient characteristics published in KN-426 trial, including age, gender, previous nephrectomy, International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk score, and sites of metastasis. After weighting, hazards ratios (HR) of PFS, duration of response (DoR), and OS comparing N+C vs. P+A were estimated using weighted Cox proportional hazards models, and ORR was compared using a weighted Wald test. All comparisons were conducted using the corresponding sunitinib arms as an anchor. Results: After weighting, patient characteristics in the CM 9ER trial were comparable to those in the KN-426 trial. In the weighted population, N+C had a median PFS of 19.3 months (95% CI: 15.2, 22.4) compared to a median PFS of 15.7 months (95% CI: 13.7, 20.6) for P+A. Using sunitinib as an anchor arm, N+C was associated with a 30% reduction in risk of progression or death compared to P+A, (HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53, 0.93; P = 0.015; table). In addition, N+C was associated with numerically, although not statistically, higher improvement in ORR vs sunitinib (difference: 8.4%, 95% CI: -1.7%, 18.4%; P = 0.105) and improved DoR (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.47, 1.31; P = 0.359). Similar OS outcomes were observed for N+C and P+A (HR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.67, 1.44; P = 0.940). Conclusions: After adjusting for cross-trial differences, N+C had a more favorable efficacy profile compared to P+A, including statistically significant PFS benefits, numerically improved ORR and DoR, and similar OS.
N+C vs. sunitinib (CheckMate 9ER) | P+A vs. sunitinib (KEYNOTE-426) | N+C vs. P+A (anchor-based comparison) | |
---|---|---|---|
PFS, HR (95% CI) | 0.50 (0.40, 0.63)* | 0.71 (0.60, 0.84)* | 0.70 (0.53, 0.93)* |
ORR, Difference (95% CI) | 28.7% (21.0%, 36.4%)* | 20.3% (13.8%, 26.9%)* | 8.4% (-1.7%, 18.4%) |
DOR, HR (95% CI) | 0.55 (0.35, 0.85)* | 0.70 (0.53, 0.92)* | 0.79 (0.47, 1.31) |
OS, HR (95% CI) | 0.67 (0.49, 0.92)* | 0.68 (0.55, 0.85)* | 0.99 (0.67, 1.44) |
* indicates a P< 0.05.
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
2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Viktor Grünwald
2020 ASCO Virtual Scientific Program
First Author: Michael B. Atkins
2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Thomas Powles
2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Jaime Ivan Haro-Silerio