Five-Year Survival Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Versus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer in CheckMate 227

Author(s): Julie R. Brahmer, MD¹; Jong-Seok Lee, MD, PhD²; Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu, MD, PhD³; Reyes Bernabe Caro, MD, PhD⁴; Makoto Nishio, MD, PhD⁵; Laszlo Urban, MD⁶; Clarisse Audigier-Valette, MD⁷; Lorena Lupinacci, MD⁸; Randeep Sangha, MD⁹; Adam Pluzanski, MD, PhD¹⁰; Jacobus Burgers, MD, PhD¹¹; Mauricio Mahave, MD¹²; Samreen Ahmed, MD¹³; Adam J. Schoenfeld, MD¹⁴; Luis G. Paz-Ares, MD, PhD¹⁵; Martin Reck, MD, PhD¹⁶; Hossein Borghaei, DO, MS¹⁷; Kenneth J. O’Byrne, MD, PhD¹⁸; Ravi G. Gupta, MD¹⁹; Judith Bushong, BS¹⁹; Li Li, MS, DPH¹⁹; Steven I. Blum, MBA¹⁹; Laura J. Eccles, PhD¹⁹; and Suresh S. Ramalingam, MD²⁰

Source: DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.01503 Journal of Clinical Oncology 41, no. 6 (February 20, 2023) 1200-1212.

Dr. Maen Hussein's Thoughts

Combination immunotherapy beats chemotherapy, there is no data to compare against a chemo immunotherapy combination, but is an option for patients who may not tolerate chemotherapy.

PURPOSE

We present 5-year results from CheckMate 227 Part 1, in which nivolumab plus ipilimumab improved overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer, regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status.

METHODS

Adults with stage IV/recurrent non–small-cell lung cancer without EGFR mutations or ALK alterations and with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% or < 1% (n = 1739) were randomly assigned. Patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% were randomly assigned to first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab alone, or chemotherapy. Patients with tumor PD-L1 < 1% were randomly assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy. End points included exploratory 5-year results for efficacy, safety, and quality of life.

RESULTS

At a minimum follow-up of 61.3 months, 5-year OS rates were 24% versus 14% for nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 19% versus 7% (PD-L1 < 1%). The median duration of response was 24.5 versus 6.7 months (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 19.4 versus 4.8 months (PD-L1 < 1%). Among patients surviving 5 years, 66% (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 64% (PD-L1 < 1%) were off nivolumab plus ipilimumab without initiating subsequent systemic anticancer treatment by the 5-year time point. Survival benefit continued after nivolumab plus ipilimumab discontinuation because of treatment-related adverse events, with a 5-year OS rate of 39% (combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% populations). Quality of life in 5-year survivors treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab was similar to that in the general US population through the 5-year follow-up. No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSION

With all patients off immunotherapy treatment for ≥ 3 years, nivolumab plus ipilimumab increased 5-year survivorship versus chemotherapy, including long-term, durable clinical benefit regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. These data support nivolumab plus ipilimumab as an effective first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer.

Author Affiliations

¹Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD;²National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea;³Institutul Oncologic Prof Dr Ion Chiricuta and University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iuliu Hatieganu, Cluj-Napoca, Romania;⁴Hospital Universitario Virgen Del Rocio, Instituto de Biomedicina de Seville, Seville, Spain;⁵Department of Thoracic Medical Oncology, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan;⁶Matrai Gyogyintezet, Mátraháza, Hungary;⁷Orientation Oncologique, Hôpital Sainte Musse, Toulon, France;⁸Hospital Italiano De Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina;⁹Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada;¹⁰Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland;¹¹Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands;¹²Instituto Oncológico Fundación Arturo López Pérez, Santiago, Chile;¹³University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Infirmary Square, Leicester, United Kingdom;¹⁴Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY;¹⁵Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, H12O-CNIO Lung Cancer Clinical Research Unit, Universidad Complutense & CiberOnc, Madrid, Spain;¹⁶Airway Research Center North, German Center for Lung Research, Lung Clinic, Grosshansdorf, Germany;¹⁷Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA;¹⁸Princess Alexandra Hospital, Translational Research Institute and Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia;¹⁹Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ;²⁰Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA

Daraxonrasib for Previously Treated RAS-Mutant Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

This feels like the first real crack in the "undruggable" non-G12C RAS wall in lung cancer: a pan-RAS(ON) inhibitor with responses across G12D, G12V, and other alleles in patients who had already received platinum and immunotherapy. At the 160–220 mg range (the phase 3 dose is 200 mg), patients who hadn't yet received docetaxel had a 42% response rate, median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8 mos, and median overall survival (OS) of 16 mos, which looks well ahead of what we expect from docetaxel, though that's a cross-trial comparison. The catch is tolerability: about half had grade 3 or higher events, 9 in 10 got rash, and most got diarrhea, so rash prophylaxis and proactive GI management will matter just as it does on PDAC. The randomized RASolve 301 trial against docetaxel is the one to watch before this moves into practice.

SKYSCRAPER-01: Tiragolumab in Combination With Atezolizumab in Previously Untreated PD-L1–High, Locally Advanced, Unresectable or Metastatic Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

This is another nail in the anti-TIGIT coffin. In more than 500 patients with untreated PD-L1–high non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), adding tiragolumab to atezolizumab missed both primary endpoints, and the numerical progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gains never reached significance. What it did add was toxicity: twice the grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) and more discontinuations. Together with the other failed TIGIT programs, this pretty much closes the door on chemo-free anti-TIGIT combinations in first-line NSCLC, so single-agent PD-(L)1 or chemo-IO stays the standard for these patients.

First-Line Sunvozertinib in NSCLC with EGFR Exon 20 Insertion Mutations

Progression-free survival (PFS) was higher in the Sun group vs chemotherapy, 10.3 m vs 7.5 m with HR of .65 with higher responses (58.9% vs 31.1%) diarrhea high CK and anemia were the most common side effects. The issue is that amivan was not part of treatment and compared to chemotherapy ami in addition to chemotherapy had 11m PFS also in this trial few had brain mets so no evaluation for CNS protection or treatment. But an oral agent in patients who don’t want to come to the office often.

Selpercatinib in Early-Stage RET Fusion–Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

109 patients with stage II or IIIA disease, 2-year investigator-assessed event-free survival was 92% with selpercatinib and 61% with placebo (HR for disease recurrence, progression, or death, 0.17 P<0.001). Patients with stage IB, II, or IIIA non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), event-free survival at 2 years was 94% with selpercatinib and 70% with placebo. Genomic testing is expanding now for early stage NSCLC. More study in the adjuvant setting showing promise with targeted therapy.

Ensartinib in Resected ALK-Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

It seems the old cliche of more drugs than patients is becoming true for most providers here. The data needs to mature further here but likely this will be another option for Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)+ non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in the adjuvant setting. It does look like CNS protection benefits are meaningful as well.