Phase II study of nivolumab and salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab in treatment-naïve patients with advanced non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (HCRN GU16-260-Cohort B).
clinical trials, phase II as topic
immunotherapy
kidney neoplasms
Journal
Journal for immunotherapy of cancer
ISSN: 2051-1426
Titre abrégé: J Immunother Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101620585
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2023
03 2023
Historique:
accepted:
15
07
2022
entrez:
22
3
2023
pubmed:
23
3
2023
medline:
25
3
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To determine the efficacy and toxicity of nivolumab monotherapy in treatment-naïve patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) and the efficacy of nivolumab/ipilimumab salvage therapy in patients with tumors unresponsive to initial nivolumab monotherapy. Eligible patients with treatment-naïve nccRCC received nivolumab until progressive disease (PD), toxicity, or completion of 96 weeks of treatment (Part A). Patients with PD prior to, or stable disease (SD) at 48 weeks (prolonged SD) were potentially eligible to receive salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab (Part B). Patients were required to submit tissue from a metastatic lesion obtained within 12 months prior to study entry and prior to Part B for correlative studies. 35 patients with nccRCC were enrolled: 19 (54%) had papillary, 6 (17%) had chromophobe and 10 (29%) had unclassified histology. At median follow-up of 22.9 months, RECIST-defined objective response rate (ORR) was 5 of 35 (14.3% 95% CI 4.8% to 30.3%) (complete response (CR) 2 (5.7%) and partial response (PR) 3 (8.6%)). ORR by histology was: papillary-1/19 (5%); chromophobe-1/6 (17%); and unclassified-3/10 (30%). Nine patients (26%) had tumors with sarcomatoid features with 3 (33%) (2 unclassified and 1 papillary) responding. ORR was 0/18, 3/11 (27%) and 2/6 (33%) for patients with tumor progammed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of <5%, ≥5% or not measured, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 4.0 (2.7-4.3) months. Two of five responders have progressed. Thirty-two patients had PD or prolonged SD and therefore, were potentially eligible for salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab (Part B), but 15 patients did not enroll due to grade 2-3 toxicity (6) on nivolumab, symptomatic disease progression (5), or other reasons including no biopsy tissue (4). In the 17 Part B patients, there was one PR (6%) (unclassified/non-sarcomatoid). Grade Nivolumab monotherapy has limited activity in treatment-naïve nccRCC with most responses (4 of 5) seen in patients with sarcomatoid and/or unclassified tumors. Toxicity is consistent with prior nivolumab studies. Salvage treatment with nivolumab/ipilimumab was provided in half of these patients with minimal activity. NCT03117309.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
To determine the efficacy and toxicity of nivolumab monotherapy in treatment-naïve patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) and the efficacy of nivolumab/ipilimumab salvage therapy in patients with tumors unresponsive to initial nivolumab monotherapy.
METHODS
Eligible patients with treatment-naïve nccRCC received nivolumab until progressive disease (PD), toxicity, or completion of 96 weeks of treatment (Part A). Patients with PD prior to, or stable disease (SD) at 48 weeks (prolonged SD) were potentially eligible to receive salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab (Part B). Patients were required to submit tissue from a metastatic lesion obtained within 12 months prior to study entry and prior to Part B for correlative studies.
RESULTS
35 patients with nccRCC were enrolled: 19 (54%) had papillary, 6 (17%) had chromophobe and 10 (29%) had unclassified histology. At median follow-up of 22.9 months, RECIST-defined objective response rate (ORR) was 5 of 35 (14.3% 95% CI 4.8% to 30.3%) (complete response (CR) 2 (5.7%) and partial response (PR) 3 (8.6%)). ORR by histology was: papillary-1/19 (5%); chromophobe-1/6 (17%); and unclassified-3/10 (30%). Nine patients (26%) had tumors with sarcomatoid features with 3 (33%) (2 unclassified and 1 papillary) responding. ORR was 0/18, 3/11 (27%) and 2/6 (33%) for patients with tumor progammed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of <5%, ≥5% or not measured, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 4.0 (2.7-4.3) months. Two of five responders have progressed. Thirty-two patients had PD or prolonged SD and therefore, were potentially eligible for salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab (Part B), but 15 patients did not enroll due to grade 2-3 toxicity (6) on nivolumab, symptomatic disease progression (5), or other reasons including no biopsy tissue (4). In the 17 Part B patients, there was one PR (6%) (unclassified/non-sarcomatoid). Grade
CONCLUSIONS
Nivolumab monotherapy has limited activity in treatment-naïve nccRCC with most responses (4 of 5) seen in patients with sarcomatoid and/or unclassified tumors. Toxicity is consistent with prior nivolumab studies. Salvage treatment with nivolumab/ipilimumab was provided in half of these patients with minimal activity.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
NCT03117309.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36948504
pii: jitc-2022-004780
doi: 10.1136/jitc-2022-004780
pmc: PMC10040058
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Nivolumab
31YO63LBSN
Ipilimumab
0
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03117309']
Types de publication
Clinical Trial, Phase II
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P50 CA101942
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA051008
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: MBA, has/had an advisory role for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, Eisai, Aveo, Pfizer, Werewolf, Fathom, Pneuma, Leads, Pyxis Oncology, PACT, Elpis, X4Pharma, ValoHealth, ScholarRock, Surface, Takeda, Simcha, Roche, SAB Bio and GSK and has served as a consultant: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Exelixis, Iovance, COTA, Idera, Agenus, Apexigen, Asher Bio, Neoleukin, AstraZeneca, Calithera, SeaGen, and Sanofi. He reports research support to his institution from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck and Pfizer. He holds stock/stock options in Pyxis Oncology, Werewolf and Elpis. NBH has/had an advisory role for Merck, Eisai, Aveo, and Roche. DFM has acted as a paid consultant for and/or as a member of the advisory boards of BMS, Pfizer, Merck, Alkermes, EMD Serono, Eli Lilly and Company, Iovance, Eisai, Werewolf Technologies, Calithera Biosciences, Synthekine, Johnson & Johnson, and Aveo. He has received support to his institution from BMS, Merck, Genentech, Pfizer, Exelixis, X4 Pharma, Alkermes, Checkmate Pharmaceuticals, and CRISPR Therapeutics for work performed outside of the current study. MAB has acted as a paid consultant for and/or as a member of the advisory boards of Exelixis, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Calithera Biosciences, Genomic Health, Nektar, EMD Serono, SeaGen, and Sanofi and has received grants to his institution from Merck, Xencor, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech/Roche, SeaGen, Incyte, Nektar, AstraZeneca, Tricon Pharmaceuticals, Genome & Company, AAA, Peloton Therapeutics, and Pfizer for work performed outside of the current study. MS has consulted for Exelixis, Xencor, Janssen, Vaccitech, Bristol-Myers Squibb and reports research funding to his institution from Bellicum, Merck, Janssen, Medivation/Astellas, Advaxis, Harpoon, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genocea, Lilly, Nektar, SeaGen, Xencor, Tmunity, Exelixis. JS serves on Advisory Boards for Eisai, Apexigen, Iovance, Covus. He reports research funding to his institution from Bristol Myers Squibb, PACT and Corvus. RA has consulted for Eisai, Bayer and Janssen Oncology and participated in Speakers' Bureaus for Astellas Pharma, Janssen Oncology, Bayer, Pfizer, Exelixis, Gilead Sciences, Aveo and Bristol-Myers Squibb. ERP reports consulting or advisory roles for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Aveo, Bristol Myers Squibb, Exelixis, Merck, Natera, Pfizer, Regeneron, SeaGen and research support to institution from Astella, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech and Merck. MCO has served in consulting or advisory roles for Eisai, Exelixis, Pfizer, Aveo, Merck, and Bristol-Myers Squibb; served on speakers’ bureaus for Bristol Myers Squibb; received institutional research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Merck, AstraZeneca, Astellas, Aravive, and Surface Oncology; has received reimbursement for travel and accommodations expenses from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Exelixis. MH has served on Advisory Boards for Bristol Myers Squibb, CRISPR Therapeutics, Exelixis, Nektar Therapeutics, Janssen and has received research support to his institution from Alpine, Achilles Therapeutics, Apexigen, Arrowhead, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myer Squibb, CRISPR Therapeutics, Corvus, Eli Lilly, Endocyte, Fate Therapeutics, Genentech, Genmab, GSK, Innocrin, Iovance, KSQ, Merck, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis, Pfizer, Progenics, Sanofi Aventis, SeaGen, Tmunity, Torque, Unum He also reports Spouse salary from Gamida Cell, Arvinas. SS reports receiving commercial research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Exelixis and Novartis; is a consultant/advisory board member for Merck, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CRISPR Therapeutics AG, AACR, and NCI; and receives royalties from Biogenex. CW reports receiving research funding from Pharmacyclics and being an equity holder of BionTech. DB reports personal fees from LM Education and Exchange, Adnovate Strategies, MDedge, Cancer Network, Cancer Expert Now, OncLive, Catenion, AVEO, and grants and personal fees from Exelixis, outside the submitted work. DE reports research funding to institution from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardiff Oncology, and Puma Biotechnology, as well as discounted research sequencing from Foundation Medicine and honorarium from OncLive. HH has acted as a paid consultant for and/or as a member of the advisory boards of Exelixis, BMS, Pfizer, Merck, Corvus, Armo Biosciences, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Surface Oncology, Aveo and Novartis and has received grants to his institution from Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Surface Oncology and Aravive for work performed as outside of the current study.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2015 Nov 5;373(19):1803-13
pubmed: 26406148
J Clin Oncol. 2021 Mar 20;39(9):1020-1028
pubmed: 33529051
Eur Urol. 2021 May;79(5):659-662
pubmed: 32654802
J Clin Oncol. 2019 Dec 10;37(35):3350-3358
pubmed: 31498030
Lancet. 2021 Feb 20;397(10275):695-703
pubmed: 33592176
Mol Diagn Ther. 2017 Feb;21(1):85-93
pubmed: 27667773
J Clin Oncol. 2021 Nov 20;39(33):3725-3736
pubmed: 34491815
Ann Oncol. 2019 May 1;30(5):706-720
pubmed: 30788497
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2020 Dec;18(6):461-468.e3
pubmed: 32718906
JAMA Oncol. 2017 Aug 01;3(8):1051-1058
pubmed: 28278348
J Clin Oncol. 2020 Dec 20;38(36):4240-4248
pubmed: 33108238
J Immunother Cancer. 2018 Jan 29;6(1):9
pubmed: 29378660
J Immunother Cancer. 2022 Feb;10(2):
pubmed: 35210307
J Clin Oncol. 2022 Sep 1;40(25):2913-2923
pubmed: 35442713
Cancer. 2020 Sep 15;126(18):4156-4167
pubmed: 32673417
Cancer. 2022 Jun 1;128(11):2085-2097
pubmed: 35383908
J Clin Oncol. 2020 Jan 1;38(1):63-70
pubmed: 31721643
J Clin Oncol. 2021 Mar 20;39(9):1029-1039
pubmed: 33529058
N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 05;378(14):1277-1290
pubmed: 29562145