Ana Oaknin, MD, PhD, on Cervical Cancer: Safety and Efficacy Results With Nivolumab and Ipilimumab
ESMO Congress 2022
Ana Oaknin, MD, PhD, of Barcelona’s Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, discusses findings from the CheckMate 358 trial, which showed that chemotherapy-free immunotherapy with nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab may provide durable tumor regression with manageable toxicity in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer, regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression (Abstract 520MO).
Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
CheckMate 358 is an ongoing Phase I/II study analyzing the role of nivolumab and nivolumab/ipilimumab combination in virus-associated cancer, including cervical cancer, regardless of PDL1 status. In the cervical cancer cohort, recovering metastatic cervical cancer patients were randomized into two arms, nivolumab plus ipilimumab in two different regimens: NIVO 1 IPI 3, or NIVI 3 IPI 1. These combinations were analyzed in the first-line setting and the second-line. The primary objective of the study was overall response rate and secondary objective progression-free survival, overall survival, and duration of response. The two-treatment combination show promising overall response rate, and remarkably, we observe greater responses when the patient received this combination of first-line therapy. Interestingly, the combination show responses regardless of PDL1 status. And when we saw the response rate in this combination were greater that we saw with nivolumab monotherapy.
In addition, PFS and overall survival were really, really promising. When we look at the median overall survival for those patients treated with NIVO 1 IPI 3, was around 20 months and interestingly 48% of the patients were alive up to NGS. However, this data should be interpreted with caution because the trial is not fully randomized and the population was a mixed population. The safety profile of the combination in this study was aligned with the previous reported data. We need to say that some adverse events, such as hepatitis and colitis seem to be higher for those patients treated with nivolumab 1 ipilimumab 3. But in conclusion, I can say that outcome from the NIVO 3 combination show very, very promising outcome, and it may be considered as a kind of chemotherapy free regimen for our patient with metastatic recurrent cervical cancer.
Julien Taïeb, MD, PhD, of Paris Descartes University, discusses phase II results from the SAMCO-PRODIGE 54 trial, which shows the efficacy and safety of avelumab in the second-line treatment of patients with deficient DNA mismatch–repair microsatellite-instability metastatic colorectal cancer. According to Dr. Taïeb, the study indirectly suggests this population should be treated as soon as possible with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (Abstract LBA23).
Charles Swanton, PhD, of The Francis Crick Institute, discusses a newly discovered mechanism of action for air pollution–induced non–small cell lung cancer in which particles linked to climate change appear to promote cancerous changes. The finding might pave the way for new potential approaches to lung cancer prevention and treatment (Abstract LBA1).
Neal D. Shore, MD, of Carolina Urologic Research Center/Genesis Care, discusses new data from the ENACT trial, which showed that patients with prostate cancer and the RNA biomarkers PAM50 and AR-A were likely to have better outcomes with enzalutamide treatment. The results suggest that such RNA biomarkers may help to identify patients who may benefit from enzalutamide treatment compared with active surveillance (Abstract 1385P).
Gérard Zalcman, MD, PhD, of France’s Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, discusses phase III results from the IFCT-1701 trial, which explored the questions of whether to administer nivolumab plus ipilimumab for 6 months or whether to prolong the treatment in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer (Abstract 972O).
Axel Bex, MD, PhD, of the Netherlands Cancer Institute, discusses phase III findings from the IMmotion010 study, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab vs placebo in patients with renal cell cancer who are at high risk of disease recurrence following nephrectomy (Abstract LBA66).