Urologic Oncology Clinic, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, DF, Mexico
Maria Teresa Bourlon , Bernard Escudier , Mauricio Burotto , Thomas Powles , Andrea B. Apolo , Amishi Yogesh Shah , Camillo Porta , Cristina Suárez , Carlos H. Barrios , Martin Richardet , Howard Gurney , Elizabeth R. Kessler , Yoshihiko Tomita , Jens Bedke , Fong Wang , Peter Wang , Julie Panzica , Viktor Fedorov , Robert J. Motzer , Toni K. Choueiri
Background: N+C demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) vs S in patients (pts) with previously untreated aRCC in the primary analysis of the phase 3 CheckMate 9ER trial (18.1 mo median follow-up). N+C maintained efficacy benefits vs S with 44.0 mo median follow-up. Here, we report updated efficacy in intent-to-treat (ITT) pts and by International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk, and safety with extended follow-up. Methods: Pts with aRCC were randomized to N 240 mg every 2 weeks + C 40 mg QD vs S 50 mg QD (4 weeks of 6-week cycles) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, with up to 2 y of N. 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: Overall, 323 pts were randomized to N+C and 328 to S (ITT). With 55.6 mo median (48.1 mo min.) follow-up for OS, median PFS was 16.4 vs 8.4 mo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.58, 95% CI 0.49-0.70) and median OS was 46.5 vs 36.0 mo (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.95) with N+C vs S. ORR (95% CI) was 55.7% (50.1-61.2) vs 27.7% (23.0-32.9); 13.6% vs 4.6% of pts achieved complete response (CR); 6.5% vs 13.7% had progressive disease (PD), respectively. Median (range) time to response (TTR) was 2.8 (1.0-22.2) vs 4.3 (1.7-30.4) mo for N+C vs S, and median (95% CI) duration of response (DOR) was 22.0 (18.0-25.2) vs 15.2 (10.9-19.3) mo. Efficacy by IMDC favorable (FAV) and intermediate/poor (I/P) risk groups is reported in the Table. Among all treated pts (320 pts each arm), any-grade (grade ≥ 3) treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 97.5% (67.5%) vs 93.1% (55.3%) with N+C vs S. Any-grade TRAEs led to discontinuation of N or C in 28.1% of pts (N only, 10.0%; C only, 10.3%; N+C simultaneously, 6.6%; N+C sequentially, 1.3%) and of S in 10.9% of pts. Additional analyses in subgroups of clinical interest will be presented. Conclusions: With 55.6 mo median follow-up, N+C continues to maintain meaningful long-term efficacy benefits over S. No new safety concerns were identified. These 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 | I/P N+C; n = 249 | I/P S; n = 256 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
mPFS (95% CI), mo | 21.4 (12.8–24.6) | 12.8 (9.4–16.6) | 15.4 (11.1–18.6) | 7.1 (5.7–8.9) |
PFS HR (95% CI) | 0.69 (0.48–1.00) | – | 0.56 (0.45–0.68) | – |
mOS (95% CI), mo | 52.9 (40.8–NE) | 58.9 (46.1–NE) | 43.9 (34.9–51.9) | 29.3 (23.7–36.2) |
OS HR (95% CI) | 1.10 (0.69–1.75) | – | 0.73 (0.58–0.91) | – |
ORR (95% CI), % | 66.2 (54.3–76.8) | 44.4 (32.7–56.6) | 52.6 (46.2–58.9) | 23.0 (18.0–28.7) |
CR, % | 16.2 | 8.3 | 12.9 | 3.5 |
PD, % | 2.7 | 2.8 | 7.6 | 16.8 |
mTTR (range), moa | 2.8 (1.5–19.8) | 4.3 (1.7–30.4) | 2.8 (1.0–22.2) | 4.4 (1.7–18.1) |
mDOR (95% CI), moa | 18.7 (13.9–22.2) | 17.8 (11.1–19.4) | 23.1 (17.3–30.5) | 13.8 (7.1–23.5) |
aBased on pts with an objective response. m, median; NE, not estimable.
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
2022 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Thomas Powles
2021 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Robert J. Motzer
2023 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Mauricio Burotto
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: David Cella