Christian U. Blank, MD, PhD, on Melanoma: Potentially Practice-Changing Results From the NADINA Trial
2024 ASCO Annual Meeting
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.
The ASCO Post Staff
Allison M. Winter, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, discusses real-world outcomes with lisocabtagene maraleucel in patients with Richter transformation, a difficult-to-treat population with a poor prognosis. Data from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research showed this therapy provided clinical benefit with a high complete response rate (Abstract 7010).
The ASCO Post Staff
Lisa A. Carey, MD, of University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, and Kevin Kalinsky, MD, of the Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, discuss the first phase III findings showing a benefit of continued CDK4/6 inhibition with abemaciclib plus fulvestrant, following disease progression in patients with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (LBA1001).
The ASCO Post Staff
Brian I. Rini, MD, of Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center, discusses phase III findings of the KEYNOTE-426 study of pembrolizumab plus axitinib vs sunitinib for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. He details the exploratory biomarker results, including RNA sequencing, whole-exome sequencing, and PD-L1 (Abstract 4505).
The ASCO Post Staff
Minesh P. Mehta, MD, of Miami Cancer Institute, part of Baptist Health South Florida, discusses results from the METIS (EF-25) trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of tumor treating fields therapy following stereotactic radiosurgery in patients with mutation-negative non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and brain metastases. Tumor treating fields therapy prolongs time to intracranial disease progression and may postpone whole-brain radiation therapy without declines in quality of life and cognition (Abstract 2008).
The ASCO Post Staff
Emily L. Podany, MD, of Washington University, St. Louis, discusses disparities in the use of PI3K inhibitors for Black patients with estrogen receptor–positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer while other drugs that do not require genomic profiling were similarly used (Abstract 1017).
