7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Third-Line Nivolumab Monotherapy in Recurrent SCLC: CheckMate 032

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction:

          For patients with recurrent SCLC, topotecan remains the only approved second-line treatment, and the outcomes are poor. CheckMate 032 is a phase 1/2, multicenter, open-label study of nivolumab or nivolumab plus ipilimumab in SCLC or other advanced/metastatic solid tumors previously treated with one or more platinum-based chemotherapies. We report results of third- or later-line nivolumab monotherapy treatment in SCLC.

          Methods:

          In this analysis, patients with limited-stage or extensive-stage SCLC and disease progression after two or more chemotherapy regimens received nivolumab monotherapy, 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate. Secondary end points included duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety.

          Results:

          Between December 4, 2013, and November 30, 2016, 109 patients began receiving third- or later-line nivolumab monotherapy. At a median follow-up of 28.3 months (from first dose to database lock), the objective response rate was 11.9% (95% confidence interval: 6.5–19.5) with a median duration of response of 17.9 months (range 3.0–42.1). At 6 months, 17.2% of patients were progression-free. The 12-month and 18-month overall survival rates were 28.3% and 20.0%, respectively. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 11.9% of patients. Three patients (2.8%) discontinued because of treatment-related adverse events.

          Conclusions:

          Nivolumab monotherapy provided durable responses and was well tolerated as a third- or later-line treatment for recurrent SCLC. These results suggest that nivolumab monotherapy is an effective third- or later-line treatment for this patient population.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

          Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions. A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Tumor Mutational Burden and Response Rate to PD-1 Inhibition

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Lung Cancer with a High Tumor Mutational Burden

              Nivolumab plus ipilimumab showed promising efficacy for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a phase 1 trial, and tumor mutational burden has emerged as a potential biomarker of benefit. In this part of an open-label, multipart, phase 3 trial, we examined progression-free survival with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy among patients with a high tumor mutational burden (≥10 mutations per megabase). We enrolled patients with stage IV or recurrent NSCLC that was not previously treated with chemotherapy. Those with a level of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of at least 1% were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab monotherapy, or chemotherapy; those with a tumor PD-L1 expression level of less than 1% were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy. Tumor mutational burden was determined by the FoundationOne CDx assay. Progression-free survival among patients with a high tumor mutational burden was significantly longer with nivolumab plus ipilimumab than with chemotherapy. The 1-year progression-free survival rate was 42.6% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 13.2% with chemotherapy, and the median progression-free survival was 7.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.5 to 13.2) versus 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.4 to 5.8) (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.58; 97.5% CI, 0.41 to 0.81; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 45.3% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 26.9% with chemotherapy. The benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab over chemotherapy was broadly consistent within subgroups, including patients with a PD-L1 expression level of at least 1% and those with a level of less than 1%. The rate of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was 31.2% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 36.1% with chemotherapy. Progression-free survival was significantly longer with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab than with chemotherapy among patients with NSCLC and a high tumor mutational burden, irrespective of PD-L1 expression level. The results validate the benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in NSCLC and the role of tumor mutational burden as a biomarker for patient selection. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 227 Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT02477826 .)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                101274235
                33311
                J Thorac Oncol
                J Thorac Oncol
                Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer
                1556-0864
                1556-1380
                7 April 2021
                10 October 2018
                February 2019
                16 April 2021
                : 14
                : 2
                : 237-244
                Affiliations
                [a ]Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
                [b ]Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
                [c ]Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori Milano and University of Milan, Milan, Italy
                [d ]Krankenhaus Nordwest-Institut für Klinisch–Onkologische Forschung, UCT-University Cancer Center, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
                [e ]Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Hospital, New York, New York
                [f ]New York Uuniversity Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, New York
                [g ]Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Tennessee Oncology, Nashville, Tennessee
                [h ]START Madrid-FJD. Hospital Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain
                [i ]Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, Surrey, United Kingdom
                [j ]Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland
                [k ]Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, Connecticut
                [l ]Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, United Kingdom
                [m ]Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey
                [n ]H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author: Address for correspondence: Neal Ready, MD, 25178 Morris Bldg., 200 Trent Dr., Box 3198, Durham, NC 27710. neal.ready@ 123456duke.edu
                Article
                NIHMS1685197
                10.1016/j.jtho.2018.10.003
                8050700
                30316010
                c7305044-7828-49ed-92a9-f61ea60b1b35

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.

                History
                Categories
                Article

                sclc,third-line,nivolumab,pd-1 inhibitor,immunotherapy
                sclc, third-line, nivolumab, pd-1 inhibitor, immunotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content295

                Cited by139

                Most referenced authors758