Advertisement


Christian U. Blank, MD, PhD, on Melanoma: Potentially Practice-Changing Results From the NADINA Trial

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Christian U. Blank, MD, PhD, of the Netherlands Cancer Institute, discusses findings of an investigator-initiated phase III trial showing that neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab followed by response-driven adjuvant treatment improved event-free survival in patients with macroscopic, resectable stage III melanoma compared with adjuvant nivolumab (LBA2)



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
NADINA is the first phase III, investigator-initiated trial, testing a combination of neoadjuvant checkpoint inhibition against standard of care adjuvant therapy. NADINA showed that neoadjuvant ipilumumab plus nivolumab is superior to adjuvant nivolumab in the event free survival, showing that 83% at one year are rent-free in case of treated neoadjuvant versus only 57 treated with the standard of care adjuvant therapy. Special about NADINA is also that it has a personalized adjuvant part. Patients achieving a deep response, what we call major pathologic response after the neoadjuvant part, didn't receive any subsequent other therapy, no adjuvant therapy, and started the follow-up at once, and this was the case in nearly 60% of the patients. And despite of only this six weeks of treatment, these patients have an excellent outcome with an event-free survival of 95% at 12 months. Therefore, NADINA established for the first time a neoadjuvant combination scheme for macroscopic melanoma, but it also shows that we should personalize these neoadjuvant therapies, saving toxicity and resources for patients, achieving an excellent response after the neoadjuvant therapy. In that way, it establishes a really novel concept in macroscopic melanoma.

Related Videos

Leukemia

Mazyar Shadman, MD, MPH, on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Recruiting for the CELESTIAL-TNCLL Study

Mazyar Shadman, MD, MPH, of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, discusses an ongoing phase III study of the BCL2 inhibitor sonrotoclax plus zanubrutinib vs venetoclax and obinutuzumab for patients with treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The investigators are recruiting internationally (see NCT06073821; Abstract TPS7087).

Palliative Care

Joseph A. Greer, PhD, on Lung Cancer: Telehealth vs In-Person Palliative Care

Joseph A. Greer, PhD, of Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, discusses study findings showing the merits of delivering early palliative care via telehealth vs in person to patients with advanced lung cancer. Using telemedicine in this way may potentially improve access to and more broadly disseminate this evidence-based care model (LBA3).

Multiple Myeloma

Suzanne Trudel, MD, on Multiple Myeloma: Results From the DREAMM-8 Study of Treatments After Relapse

Suzanne Trudel, MD, of Canada’s Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, discusses phase III findings showing that, in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who had one or more prior lines of treatment, belantamab mafodotin-blmf plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone improved progression-free survival and showed a favorable overall survival trend compared with pomalidomide plus bortezomib and dexamethasone.

Leukemia

Yucai Wang, MD, PhD, on Richter Transformation of CLL: Findings on Combination Therapy With an Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor

Yucai Wang, MD, PhD, of the Mayo Clinic, discusses the increased efficacy of combination therapy with pembrolizumab plus a BCR kinase inhibitor compared with pembrolizumab alone in patients with Richter transformation of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL; Abstract 7050).

Lymphoma

Peter Riedell, MD, on DLBCL: Expert Commentary on Data From the ECHELON-3 Study

Peter Riedell, MD, of The University of Chicago, discusses phase III findings on the regimen of brentuximab vedotin in combination with lenalidomide and rituximab for patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). This therapy demonstrated a survival advantage in the third-line setting, but as this is an interim analysis, questions remain regarding long-term safety and duration of response, according to Dr. Riedell (Abstract LBA7005).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement