Jaffer A. Ajani, MD, discusses the design and results of the CheckMate 649 study of nivolumab, ipilimumab, and chemotherapy for gastric cancers.
Jaffer A. Ajani, MD, professor in the department of gastrointestinal medical oncology, division of cancer medicine at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses the design and results of the CheckMate 649 (NCT02872116) study of nivolumab (Opdivo), ipilimumab (Yervoy), and chemotherapy for gastric cancers.
The phase 3 CheckMate 649 trial randomly assigned over 2000 previously untreated patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma 1:1:1 to receive either nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy alone. The primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review in patients receiving nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone whose tumors had a PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) of 5 or more.
In the primary analysis, there was a median follow-up of 13.1 months for nivolumab versus 11.1 months for chemotherapy alone. The hazard ratio for OS was 0.71 favoring nivolumab (98.4% CI 0.59-0.86; P < .0001). The hazard ratio for PFS also favored nivolumab (HR, 0.68; 98% CI, 0.56-0.81; P < .0001). However, at later follow-up, there was no OS benefit for nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy. Additionally, there were increased adverse events (AEs) in this arm that led the data monitoring committee to close enrollment to nivolumab/ipilimumab early.
Ajani says nivolumab plus chemotherapy will be used based on these results, but nivolumab plus ipilimumab will not.
TRANSCRIPTION:
0:08 | It was a very unique trial because it had not only more than 2000 patients, but it had 2 experimental arms and 1 standard arm. One experimental arm was nivolumab plus ipilimumab. and the second one was nivolumab plus chemotherapy. It turned out that nivolumab plus chemotherapy, particularly in those patients with a tumor having a CPS score of 5 or higher, had significant benefit in PFS, response rate, OS, and there was no significant safety signals. So it all looks very good.
0:59 | However, [with] the nivolumab plus ipilimumab, it turned out to be a safety concern [with] a lot of AEs. So that arm was stopped [enrolling] by the data monitoring committee early because they saw all the safety signals. However, when nivolumab plus ipilimumab was compared with the control arm [of] chemotherapy, it was not better. So it looks like for adenocarcinoma, nivolumab plus ipilimumab is not going to be used, but nivolumab plus chemotherapy will definitely be used.
Therapy Type and Site of Metastases Factor into HR+, HER2+ mBC Treatment
December 20th 2024During a Case-Based Roundtable® event, Ian Krop, MD, and participants discussed considerations affecting first- and second-line treatment of metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer in the first article of a 2-part series.
Read More
Advancing Neoadjuvant Therapy for HER2+ Breast Cancer Through ctDNA Monitoring
December 19th 2024In an interview with Targeted Oncology, Adrienne Waks, MD, provided insights into the significance of the findings from the DAPHNe trial and their clinical implications for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer.
Read More
Supportive Care Helps Manage AEs With Teclistamab in R/R Multiple Myeloma
December 13th 2024During a Case-Based Roundtable® event, Hana Safah, MD, discussed updated data and adverse event management related to teclistamab in patients with multiple myeloma in the second article of a 2-part series.
Read More