Advertisement


Rami Manochakian, MD, on NSCLC: Clinical Implications of Findings on Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Rami Manochakian, MD, of Mayo Clinic Florida, discusses the phase II findings of the NADIM II trial, which confirmed that, in terms of pathologic complete response as well as the feasibility of surgery, combining nivolumab and chemotherapy was superior to chemotherapy alone as a neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced, resectable stage IIIA non–small cell lung cancer (Abstract 8501).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
The NADIM II Trial is a randomized open label Phase II trial of Neoadjuvant Nivolumab with a regimen, chemotherapy regimen, of carboplatin paclitaxel versus chemotherapy alone, given in three cycles for patients with Stage 3A non-small cell lung cancer. After the three cycle of the neoadjuvant therapy, patient proceeded with surgery, and following surgery, patient received six months of Adjuvant Nivolumab. This study was done by the Spanish Lung Cancer Group Trial. The study primary endpoint was the pathological complete response rate, and secondary endpoint, there was the major pathological response rate, as well as response rate and also adverse events. This study is important, since it's really looking in particular at the Stage 3A patients with non-small cell lung cancer. This is a challenging population. There is an evolving research and trials testing in particularly this population. We have recently reported CheckMate 816, that led to the approval of Neoadjuvant Nivolumab and chemotherapy in patients from Stage 1B to Stage 3. We have the Adjuvant therapy also approved in a patient with Stage 3. We have the patient who don't undergo resection, and they receive concurrent chemoradiation. So, what this trial is come as a validation to the CheckMate 816, looking in particularly to this patient of a Stage 3A. The result of the studies were positive. The primary endpoint, which was the pathological complete response rate, was about 36% versus 7% in the patients who did not get the immunotherapy and received the chemotherapy alone. The secondary endpoint, the major pathological response rate, which means the 10% or less of viable tumor in the resected specimen and lymph node, was 52% versus 13%. The overall response rate was 74% versus 48%. And the adverse event, there was some modest increase in the adverse event, in particularly the Grade 3, 4. It was about 24% versus 20%. This study is, again, comes as a validation for the role of Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy in patient with Stage 3A. This is something that has continued to evolve, as I mentioned earlier, and it's definitely set a standard of care option as one of the option for patients who potentially have resectable Stage 3 non-small cell lung cancer to receive chemotherapy and immunotherapy, followed by surgery and followed by Adjuvant immunotherapy.

Related Videos

Breast Cancer

Richard Finn, MD, on Advanced Breast Cancer: New Data on Palbociclib Plus Letrozole From PALOMA-2

Richard Finn, MD, of the Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses analyses from the PALOMA-2 trial on overall survival with first-line palbociclib plus letrozole vs placebo plus letrozole in women with ER-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The study met its primary endpoint of improving progression-free survival but not the secondary endpoint of overall survival. Although patients receiving palbociclib plus letrozole had numerically longer overall survival than those receiving placebo plus letrozole, the results were not statistically significant (Abstract LBA1003).

Breast Cancer

Etienne Brain, MD, PhD, on Breast Cancer: Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy With or Without Chemotherapy in Older Patients

Etienne Brain, MD, PhD, of the Institut Curie, discusses phase III findings from the Unicancer ASTER 70s trial, in which patients aged 70 or older with estrogen receptor–positive, HER2-negative breast cancer and a high genomic grade index received adjuvant endocrine therapy with or without chemotherapy. The data did not find a statistically significant overall survival benefit with this treatment after surgery (Abstract 500).

Bladder Cancer

Sumanta K. Pal, MD, on Urothelial Carcinoma: New Results on Cabozantinib Plus Atezolizumab

Sumanta K. Pal, MD, of City of Hope National Medical Center, discusses findings from the COSMIC-021 study, which showed that cabozantinib plus atezolizumab demonstrated encouraging clinical activity with manageable toxicity in patients with inoperable locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. The combination was administered as first-line therapy in cisplatin-based chemotherapy–eligible and –ineligible patients and as second- or later-line treatment in those who received prior immune checkpoint inhibitors (Abstract 4504).

Breast Cancer

Lisa A. Carey, MD, and Hope S. Rugo, MD, on Advanced Breast Cancer: New Data on Sacituzumab Govitecan-hziy vs Treatment of Physician’s Choice

Lisa A. Carey, MD, of the University of North Carolina Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, and Hope S. Rugo, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, discuss phase III results from the TROPiCS-02 trial. This study showed that sacituzumab govitecan-hziy was more beneficial than single-agent chemotherapy in terms of progression-free survival in heavily pretreated patients with hormone receptor–positive/HER2-negative and unresectable advanced breast cancer (LBA1001).

Breast Cancer

Nancy Davidson, MD: In It for the Long Haul: Outcomes in Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer

Nancy Davidson, MD, of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, reviews results from four abstracts about the importance of long-term follow-up in studies of adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone receptor–positive breast cancer. Because the natural history of hormone receptor–positive breast cancer is long, an effort is underway to improve selection of patients by clinical parameters or biomarkers, refine the endocrine therapy background, and administer more effective combinations of endocrine therapy with other agents.

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement