Abstract 3462
Background
Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and nivolumab (NIVO) are key components of systemic therapies in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We tested if TKI induction followed by an early switch to NIVO improved outcome in mRCC.
Methods
Key inclusion criteria were measurable advanced or metastatic ccRCC, ECOG PS 0-2, adequate organ function, and PR or SD after sunitinib (50 mg, 4-2 regime) or pazopanib (800 mg OD) for 10-12 weeks. 1:1 randomized to either continue TKI treatment or receive nivolumab 240 or 480 mg IV q2-4wks, until PD or intolerance. Imaging occurred q12wks and health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) was assessed monthly x3 and q12wks thereafter (FKSI-15). Primary and key secondary endpoints were survival rate at 2 years and ORR, respectively. The trial stopped prematurely for low accrual after 49 of 244 patients were randomized.
Results
25 and 24 pts. were randomized to receive NIVO or TKI continuation, respectively. Median age was 65 years (range: 35-79), 40 pts. (82%) were male and 2 pts. (4%) had an ECOG PS of 2. MSKCC risk categories: favorable, intermediate, poor were (n; %): 15 (31), 32 (65) and 2 (4). Pazopanib was used in 22 (45). Response to TKI induction was PR in 29 (59) and SD in 20 (41). In the ITT population, best overall response rate measured from start of induction therapy was not significantly different for NIVO vs. TKI (64 vs. 70%, P = 0.76). However, when measured from time of randomization, ORR for NIVO vs. TKI was 16 vs. 48% (P = 0.029). Adverse events (AE) for NIVO vs. TKI occurred in 96% vs. 100% (all grades) and 44% vs. 67% (grades 3-5), respectively. Serious AE (SAE) for NIVO vs. TKI continuation were reported in 10 (40) and 9 (38), respectively.Table:
959P Best overall response to nivolumab or TKI treatment (ITT population)
From start of TKI induction | From randomization | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Category | NIVO | TKI | Total | NIVO | TKI | Total |
n | 25 | 23 | 48 | 25 | 23 | 48 |
CR | -- | 1 (4%) | 1 (2%) | -- | 1 (4%) | 1 (2%) |
PR | 16 (64%) | 15 (65%) | 31 (65%) | 4 (16%) | 10 (43%) | 14 (29) |
SD | 9 (36%) | 7 (30%) | 16 (33%) | 6 (24%) | 7 (30%) | 13 (27%) |
PD | -- | -- | -- | 11 (44%) | 3 (13%) | 14 (29%) |
NE | -- | -- | -- | 4 (16%) | 2 (9%) | 6 (12%) |
Conclusions
TKI induction followed by early switch to NIVO did not improve ORR in patients responsive to TKI. These results do not support the notion that TKI pretreatment sensitizes for nivolumab efficacy. Major limitations of our trial are the premature closure and the limited sample size.
Clinical trial identification
2016-002170-13; NCT02959554.
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
AIO-Studien-gGmbH, Berlin.
Funding
Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Disclosure
V. Grünwald: Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self), Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options: BMS; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self): Ipsen; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self): Eisai; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self): Novartis; Research grant / Funding (self): Pfizer; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self), Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options: AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy: Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Cerulean; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self): Roche; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self), Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options: MSD; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Art tempi; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Astellas; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: COCS; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: ClinSol; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: EUSAPharm; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: MedUpdate; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Merck Serono; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: MedKomAkademie; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: NewConceptOncology; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Lilly; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Johnson & Johnson; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: PharmaMar; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: PeerVoice; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: StreamedUp!; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: ThinkWired!. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
3973 - A randomized phase II study on the OPTimization of IMmunotherapy in squamous carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) – OPTIM (AIO-KHT-0117)
Presenter: Viktor Grünwald
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3489 - Overall Survival (OS) and Metastasis-Free Survival (MFS) in men with Biochemically Relapsed (BCR) Prostate Cancer after radical prostatectomy (RP) managed with deferred Androgen Deprivation Treatment (ADT): A combined Johns Hopkins and CPDR study
Presenter: Catherine Marshall
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4606 - ARCHES – the role of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with enzalutamide (ENZA) or placebo (PBO) in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC): Post hoc analyses of high and low disease volume and risk groups
Presenter: Arnulf Stenzl
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2975 - Updated survival analyses of a multicentric phase II randomized trial of docetaxel (D) plus enzalutamide (E) versus docetaxel (D) as first line chemotherapy for patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) (CHEIRON study).
Presenter: Orazio Caffo
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2708 - Real-world analysis of patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) receiving vs not receiving chemotherapy in the treatment sequence
Presenter: Alicia Morgans
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2134 - Baseline fracture risk in men with prostate cancer starting the STAMPEDE trial
Presenter: Janet Brown
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3504 - Risk of falls and fractures in patients with castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) treated with new hormonal agents – a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Presenter: Rodrigo Coutinho Mariano
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2342 - Pain progression at initiation of chemotherapy in metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) is associated with a poor prognosis: a post-hoc analysis of FIRSTANA
Presenter: Nicolas Delanoy
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5331 - Pain evaluation in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with radium-223 (Ra-223) in the PARABO observation study
Presenter: Holger Palmedo
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2823 - Time to castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and the risk of developing immune disorders
Presenter: Vincenza Conteduca
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract