Advertisement


Sapna P. Patel, MD, on Melanoma: New Data on Pembrolizumab, Adjuvant vs Neoadjuvant Plus Adjuvant

ESMO Congress 2022

Advertisement

Sapna P. Patel, MD, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses the latest findings from the SWOG S1801 trial, which showed that using single-agent pembrolizumab as neoadjuvant therapy improved event-free survival compared to adjuvant therapy in high-risk resectable stage III–IV melanoma (Abstract LBA6).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
The rationale behind neoadjuvant immunotherapy for melanoma is that cancer comes in contact with T cells that are inside the tumor. If you remove the tumor, you remove those T cells with it. On the other hand, if you give neoadjuvant therapy while the tumor is still in place and those T cells, you end up generating a larger immune response than if you give the same treatment after the tumor is removed. With that in mind, we designed the SWOG S1801 phase II trial. The study was a randomized one-to-one study for participants with stage IIIB to IV resectable melanoma. Participants on the adjuvant arm were randomized to surgery first followed by 18 doses of adjuvant pembrolizumab, flat-dosed every three weeks. Participants on the neoadjuvant arm received 3 doses of pembrolizumab followed by surgery, and then 15 doses of adjuvant pembrolizumab. Neoadjuvant therapy with pembrolizumab followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab improves event-free survival in resectable melanoma. Toxicities were well-managed and no new safety signals emerged. In fact, the use of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab did not lead to an increase in surgery events. Compared to the same therapy given entirely after surgery, the use of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab improves event-free survival in patients with resectable melanoma. The next steps for S1801 include central pathologic review on the neoadjuvant specimens to determine a correlation between pathologic response and clinical outcomes. Future neoadjuvant studies can consider S1801 as a benchmark and expand on deescalation of surgery protocols, deescalation of adjuvant therapy, or escalation of neoadjuvant or adjuvant regimens for those whose tumors do not respond.

Related Videos

Skin Cancer

Neil D. Gross, MD, on Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Recent Findings on Cemiplimab

Neil D. Gross, MD, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses data from a phase II study, which showed that neoadjuvant cemiplimab-rwlc in patients with stage II–IV (M0) resectable cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma is active and may enable function-preserving surgery in some cases (Abstract 789O).

Colorectal Cancer

Myriam Chalabi, MD, PhD, on Colon Cancer: New Findings on Neoadjuvant Immune Checkpoint Inhibition

Myriam Chalabi, MD, PhD, of The Netherlands Cancer Institute, discusses data from the NICHE-2 study, which confirms previously reported pathologic responses to short-term neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with locally advanced mismatch repair–deficient colon cancer. Survival data suggest neoadjuvant immunotherapy may become standard of care and allow further exploration of organ-sparing approaches. (Abstract LBA7).

Kidney Cancer
Immunotherapy

Toni K. Choueiri, MD, and Laurence Albiges, MD, PhD, on RCC: Recent Phase III Data on Cabozantinib, Nivolumab, and Ipilimumab From the COSMIC-313 Trial

Toni K. Choueiri, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Laurence Albiges, MD, PhD, of France’s Gustave Roussy Cancer Centre, discuss phase III findings showing that cabozantinib in combination with nivolumab and ipilimumab reduced the risk of disease progression or death compared with the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma of IMDC (the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium) intermediate or poor risk. However, the combination of cabozantinib, nivolumab, and ipilimumab vs nivolumab plus ipilimumab did not demonstrate an overall survival benefit to patients (Abstract LBA8).

Prostate Cancer

Neal D. Shore, MD, on Prostate Cancer: Biomarker Analysis, Enzalutamide, and Active Surveillance

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).

Kidney Cancer

Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, and Christopher Sweeney, MBBS, on RCC: Expert Review of Two Key Studies on Atezolizumab, Nivolumab, and Ipilimumab

Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, of Barts Health NHS Trust, Queen Mary University of London, and Christopher Sweeney, MBBS, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discuss two important phase III studies on renal cell cancer (RCC) presented at ESMO 2022: IMmotion010, which examined the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab vs placebo as adjuvant therapy in patients with RCC at increased risk of recurrence after nephrectomy; and CheckMate 914, which compared nivolumab monotherapy or nivolumab combined with ipilimumab vs placebo in patients with localized disease who underwent radical or partial nephrectomy and who are at high risk of relapse. (Abstract LBA4 & LBA66).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement