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

Clifford A. Hudis, MD: A Message From ASCO’s CEO

Clifford A. Hudis, MD, of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), talks about the 2024 Annual Meeting, and a focus on the compassionate side of cancer care.

Gynecologic Cancers

Katherine C. Fuh, MD, PhD, on Ovarian Cancer: New Data on Batiraxcept and Paclitaxel

Katherine C. Fuh, MD, PhD, of the University of California, San Francisco, discusses phase III findings of the AXLerate-OC trial, showing that batiraxcept with paclitaxel compared to paclitaxel alone improved progression-free and overall survival in patients with platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer whose tumors were AXL-high in an exploratory analysis (LBA5515).

Bladder Cancer

Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, and Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD, on Urothelial Carcinoma: The DESTINY-Pan Tumor02 Study and New Findings on Sacituzumab Govitecan

Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, of Barts Cancer Institute and the University of London, and Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, discuss clinical outcomes of sacituzumab govitecan-hziy after prior exposure to enfortumab vedotin-ejfv in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma, as well as the safety and efficacy of fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki in patients with HER2-expressing bladder tumors (Abstracts 4502 and 4509).

Skin Cancer

Axel Hauschild, MD, on Melanoma: Findings From the PIVOTAL Trial of Daromun vs Surgery

Axel Hauschild, MD, of Germany’s University of Kiel and University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, discusses phase III study results on neoadjuvant intralesional daromun vs immediate surgery for patients with fully resectable, locally advanced melanoma (Abstract LBA9501).

Multiple Myeloma

Thierry Facon, MD, on Multiple Myeloma: Results From the IMROZ Study on Isatuximab, Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone

Thierry Facon, MD, of the University of Lille and Lille University Hospital, discusses phase III findings showing for the first time that isatuximab, an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, when given with the standard of care (bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone, or VRd) to patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are transplant-ineligible, may reduce the risk of disease progression or death by 40.4% vs VRd alone (Abstract 7500).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement