Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY;
Yelena Y. Janjigian , Kohei Shitara , Markus H. Moehler , Marcelo Garrido , Carlos Gallardo , Lin Shen , Kensei Yamaguchi , Lucjan Wyrwicz , Tomasz Skoczylas , Arinilda Silva Campos Bragagnoli , Tianshu Liu , Mustapha Tehfe , Elena Elimova , Ricardo Elias Bruges Maya , James M. Cleary , Michalis Karamouzis , Samira Soleymani , Ming Lei , Carlos Amaya-Chanaga , Jaffer A. Ajani
Background: NIVO + chemo demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) and clinically meaningful progression-free survival (PFS) benefit vs chemo and an acceptable safety profile in previously untreated patients (pts) with advanced GC/GEJC/EAC, leading to approvals in multiple countries including the US. NIVO + chemo continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful improvement in efficacy after 2 years of follow-up. We present efficacy and safety analyses from NIVO + chemo vs chemo from the 3-year follow-up of CheckMate 649. Methods: Adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, or metastatic GC/GEJC/EAC were enrolled, regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Pts with known HER2-positive status were excluded. Randomized pts received NIVO (360 mg Q3W or 240 mg Q2W) + chemo (XELOX Q3W or FOLFOX Q2W), NIVO + ipilimumab, or chemo. Dual primary endpoints for NIVO + chemo vs chemo were OS and PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR) in pts with PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 5. Results: 581 pts were concurrently randomized to NIVO + chemo or chemo. With 36-month (mo) minimum follow-up, NIVO + chemo continued to demonstrate OS and PFS benefit vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 and all randomized pts. The objective response rate (ORR) per BICR in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 who had measurable lesions at baseline was 60% (95% CI 55–65) with NIVO + chemo vs 45% (95% CI 40–50) with chemo; in all randomized pts, ORR per BICR was 58% (95% CI 54–62) with NIVO + chemo vs 46% (95% CI 42–50) with chemo. Responses were more durable with NIVO + chemo vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 (median [m] duration of response [mDOR] 9.6 mo [95% CI 8.2–12.4] vs 7.0 mo [95% CI 5.6–7.9], respectively) and in all randomized pts (mDOR 8.5 mo [95% CI 7.7–9.9] vs 6.9 mo [95% CI 5.8–7.2], respectively). OS benefit with NIVO + chemo was observed across most prespecified subgroups. No new safety signals were identified. A summary of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) is shown here. Conclusions: After 3 years of follow-up, NIVO + chemo continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful long-term survival benefit with an acceptable safety profile, further supporting its use as a standard 1L treatment in previously untreated pts with advanced GC/GEJC/EAC. Clinical trial information: NCT02872116.
Efficacy | PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 | All randomized | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
NIVO + chemo (n = 473) | Chemo (n = 482) | NIVO + chemo (n = 789) | Chemo (n = 792) | |
mOS (95% CI), mo | 14.4 (13.1–16.2) | 11.1 (10.0–12.1) | 13.7 (12.4–14.5) | 11.6 (10.9–12.5) |
HR (95% CI) | 0.70 (0.61–0.81) | 0.79 (0.71–0.88) | ||
mPFSa (95% CI), mo | 8.3 (7.0–9.3) | 6.1 (5.6–6.9) | 7.7 (7.1–8.6) | 6.9 (6.7–7.2) |
HR (95% CI) | 0.70 (0.60–0.81) | 0.79 (0.71–0.89) |
Safety, all treated pts, n (%) | NIVO + chemo (n = 782) | Chemo (n = 767) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Any-grade TRAEs | 739 (95) | 682 (89) | ||
Grade 3/4 | 473 (60) | 346 (45) | ||
Leading to discontinuation | 331 (42) | 198 (26) |
aper BICR.
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 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium
First Author: Kohei Shitara
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Yelena Y. Janjigian
2024 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium
First Author: Lin Shen
2023 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium
First Author: Lin Shen