Conditional survival and long-term efficacy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma Journal Article


Authors: Motzer, R. J.; McDermott, D. F.; Escudier, B.; Burotto, M.; Choueiri, T. K.; Hammers, H. J.; Barthélémy, P.; Plimack, E. R.; Porta, C.; George, S.; Powles, T.; Donskov, F.; Gurney, H.; Kollmannsberger, C. K.; Grimm, M. O.; Barrios, C.; Tomita, Y.; Castellano, D.; Grünwald, V.; Rini, B. I.; McHenry, M. B.; Lee, C. W.; McCarthy, J.; Ejzykowicz, F.; Tannir, N. M.
Article Title: Conditional survival and long-term efficacy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma
Abstract: Background: Conditional survival estimates provide critical prognostic information for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Efficacy, safety, and conditional survival outcomes were assessed in CheckMate 214 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02231749) with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Methods: Patients with untreated aRCC were randomized to receive nivolumab (NIVO) (3 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (IPI) (1 mg/kg) every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, then either NIVO monotherapy or sunitinib (SUN) (50 mg) daily (four 6-week cycles). Efficacy was assessed in intent-to-treat, International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate-risk/poor-risk, and favorable-risk populations. Conditional survival outcomes (the probability of remaining alive, progression free, or in response 2 years beyond a specified landmark) were analyzed. Results: The median follow-up was 67.7 months; overall survival (median, 55.7 vs 38.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.72), progression-free survival (median, 12.3 vs 12.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.86), and objective response (39.3% vs 32.4%) benefits were maintained with NIVO+IPI versus SUN, respectively, in intent-to-treat patients (N = 550 vs 546). Point estimates for 2-year conditional overall survival beyond the 3-year landmark were higher with NIVO+IPI versus SUN (intent-to-treat patients, 81% vs 72%; intermediate-risk/poor-risk patients, 79% vs 72%; favorable-risk patients, 85% vs 72%). Conditional progression-free survival and response point estimates were also higher beyond 3 years with NIVO+IPI. Point estimates for conditional overall survival were higher or remained steady at each subsequent year of survival with NIVO+IPI in patients stratified by tumor programmed death ligand 1 expression, grade ≥3 immune-mediated adverse event experience, body mass index, and age. Conclusions: Durable clinical benefits were observed with NIVO+IPI versus SUN at 5 years, the longest phase 3 follow-up for a first-line checkpoint inhibitor-based combination in patients with aRCC. Conditional estimates indicate that most patients who remained alive or in response with NIVO+IPI at 3 years remained so at 5 years. © 2022 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.
Keywords: cancer survival; controlled study; protein expression; treatment response; aged; major clinical study; overall survival; prednisone; sunitinib; advanced cancer; cancer combination chemotherapy; drug efficacy; drug safety; monotherapy; cancer patient; outcome assessment; follow up; ipilimumab; progression free survival; multiple cycle treatment; randomized controlled trial; renal cell carcinoma; age; survival time; body mass; population research; probability; phase 3 clinical trial; long-term follow-up; immunopathology; programmed death 1 ligand 1; intermediate risk patient; clinical outcome; phase 3; immune checkpoint inhibitor; nivolumab; human; male; female; article; advanced renal cell carcinoma; nivolumab plus ipilimumab; durable response; checkmate 214; dual checkpoint inhibition
Journal Title: Cancer
Volume: 128
Issue: 11
ISSN: 0008-543X
Publisher: Wiley Blackwell  
Date Published: 2022-06-01
Start Page: 2085
End Page: 2097
Language: English
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34180
PROVIDER: scopus
PUBMED: 35383908
PMCID: PMC9543316
DOI/URL:
Notes: Article -- Export Date: 1 June 2022 -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Robert Motzer
    1247 Motzer