Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display

3144 - Assessment of nivolumab (Nivo) benefit-risk profile from a 240-mg flat dose versus a 3-mg/kg dosing regimen in patients (Pts) with solid tumors

Date

09 Oct 2016

Session

Poster display

Presenters

Xiaochen Zhao

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2016) 27 (6): 359-378. 10.1093/annonc/mdw378

Authors

X. Zhao1, S. Suryawanshi1, M. Hruska1, Y. Feng1, X. Wang1, J. Shen1, B. McHenry2, I.M. Waxman1, A. Achanta1, A. Bello1, A. Roy1, S. Agrawal1

Author affiliations

  • 1 Clinical Pharmacology And Pharmacometrics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, 08540 - Princeton/US
  • 2 Biostatistics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, 08540 - Princeton/US
More

Resources

Abstract 3144

Background

Nivo 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W) has shown overall survival (OS) benefit over the standard of care in multiple advanced cancers and is currently approved for treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), melanoma (MEL), and squamous and non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (SQ/NSQ NSCLC) in the US, EU, and other countries. Nivo, a programmed death-1-blocking antibody, displays flat exposure-response (E-R) relationships. Relative to body weight (BW)-based dosing, a flat dose is expected to reduce prescription dosing errors, shorten pharmacy preparation time, and improve ease of administration. This integrated analysis evaluated the exposure, efficacy, and safety of a 240-mg flat dose relative to 3-mg/kg dosing in the approved indications.

Methods

A flat dose of 240 mg was selected based on equivalence to the approved 3-mg/kg dose at the median BW of ∼80 kg in pts with solid tumors. Demographic data from pts with RCC (n = 603), MEL (n = 826), or SQ/NSQ NSCLC (n = 648) across 9 CheckMate studies were included in the pooled dataset. Exposures produced by doses of 3 mg/kg or 240 mg Q2W were simulated based on established quantitative pharmacokinetic models and further used to predict efficacy and safety from E-R models in each tumor type. A safety review of clinical data in pts with solid tumors who received nivo 3 or 10 mg/kg was conducted to evaluate the association between BW or exposure measures and incidence of adverse events (AEs).

Results

The geometric mean of summary measures of nivo exposure predicted from the 240-mg flat dose Q2W was ≤5% different than corresponding exposures produced by 3-mg/kg Q2W dosing. The predicted OS benefit and risk of AEs leading to discontinuation or death were similar across tumor types for both dosing regimens. Subgroup safety analyses did not demonstrate a clinically meaningful relationship between nivo exposure or BW and frequency or severity of AEs.

Conclusions

Based on model-predicted nivo pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety, clinical safety review, and an understanding of nivo E-R relationships, no clinically meaningful difference in the benefit-risk profile of nivo is expected with 240-mg Q2W vs 3-mg/kg Q2W dosing in RCC, MEL, or NSCLC.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Sponsored by Bristol-Myers Squibb

Funding

Sponsored by Bristol-Myers Squibb

Disclosure

S. Suryawanshi, M. Hruska, B. McHenry, I.M. Waxman, A. Roy: Employee of and stock ownership in Bristol-Myers Squibb. X. Wang, J. Shen, A. Achanta, A. Bello: Employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb. S. Agrawal: Employee of and stock ownership in Bristol-Myers Squibb. Stock Ownership in Eli Lilly and Celldex. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings