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

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting


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).


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

Head and Neck Cancer
Supportive Care

Carryn M. Anderson, MD, on Head and Neck Cancer: New Data on Avasopasem Manganese for Oral Mucositis

Carryn M. Anderson, MD, of the University of Iowa Hospital, discusses phase III results of the ROMAN trial of avasopasem manganese for patients with severe oral mucositis who are receiving chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced, nonmetastatic head and neck cancer. Compared with placebo, avasopasem manganese improved severe oral mucositis (Abstract 6005).

Prostate Cancer

Alicia K. Morgans, MD, MPH, and Michael S. Hofman, MBBS, on Prostate Cancer: New Data on Lutetium-177–PSMA-617 (LuPSMA) vs Cabazitaxel

Alicia K. Morgans, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Michael S. Hofman, MBBS, of Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, University of Melbourne, discuss follow-up results on LuPSMA vs cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel treatment. The findings suggest that LuPSMA is a suitable option for this population, with fewer adverse events, higher response rates, improved patient-reported outcomes, and similar overall survival compared with cabazitaxel (Abstract 5000).

Myelodysplastic Syndromes

Ruben A. Mesa, MD, on Myelofibrosis: Phase III Results on Momelotinib vs Danazol

Ruben A. Mesa, MD, of Mays Cancer Center at UT Health San Antonio MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses new findings from the MOMENTUM study. This trial showed that in symptomatic and anemic patients with myelofibrosis, momelotinib was superior to danazol for symptom and spleen responses, as well as transfusion requirements (Abstract 7002).

Multiple Myeloma

Paul G. Richardson, MD, on Multiple Myeloma: New Data on Lenalidomide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone, With or Without ASCT

Paul G. Richardson, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discusses phase III findings from the DETERMINATION trial, which showed that, for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd) with or without autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) and lenalidomide maintenance to disease progression resulted in the longest median progression-free survival reported for each approach, and a highly significant difference in progression-free survival in favor of early transplant. While overall response rates were similar, rates of MRD favored early transplant also, but toxicity was greater and quality of life was transiently but significantly diminished. No overall survival advantage has been observed to date (Abstract LBA4).

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).