News

Article

Updated CheckMate 649 Data Reinforce Nivolumab Plus Chemo as Frontline SOC in Advanced Gastric Cancers

Kohei Shitara, MD, discusses 4-year survival data of chemotherapy plus nivolumab in advanced gastric/GEJ cancer or esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Kohei Shitara, MD

Kohei Shitara, MD

Four-year survival data from the phase 3 CheckMate 649 study (NCT02872116) validates the use of chemotherapy plus nivolumab (Opdivo) as a standard of care (SOC) option in the first line for patients with advanced gastric cancer, gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer, or esophageal adenocarcinoma, according to Kohei Shitara, MD.1

The randomized, open-label, global study previously met its primary end point of improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with a PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) of 5 or more. Based on these findings, the FDA approved the use of nivolumab plus fluoropyrimidine- and platinum-containing chemotherapy in April 2021 for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic gastric cancer, GEJ cancer, and esophageal adenocarcinoma. Notably, the PD-1 inhibitor was the first immunotherapy agent to receive approval in the United States in this population.2

Data presented at the 2024 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium showed that at a minimum follow-up of 48.1 months, the median OS in the overall population was 13.7 months (95% CI, 12.4-14.5) with the combination (n = 789) vs 11.6 months (95% CI, 10.9-12.5) with chemotherapy (n = 792; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.88). Patients with a PD-L1 CPS of 5 or greater experienced a median OS of 14.4 months (95% CI, 13.1-16.2) vs 11.1 months (95% CI, 10.1-12.1) with the combination (n = 473) and chemotherapy (n = 482), respectively (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.81). In those with a PD-L1 CPS of 1 or higher, the median OS was 13.8 months (95% CI, 12.4-14.8) and 11.4 months (95% CI, 10.7-12.3), respectively (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67-0.85).

The median progression-free survival (PFS) in the overall population was 7.7 months (95% CI, 7.1-8.6) with nivolumab plus chemotherapy vs 6.9 months (95% CI, 6.7-7.2) with chemotherapy alone (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.89). In the group of patients with a PD-1 CPS of 5 or higher, the median PFS was 8.3 months (95% CI, 7.0-9.3) and 6.1 months (95% CI, 5.6-6.9 in the nivolumab/chemotherapy and chemotherapy arms, respectively (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.82); in the subgroup with a PD-L1 CPS of 1 or higher, the median PFS was 7.5 months (95% CI, 7.0-8.4) and 6.9 months (95% CI, 6.2-7.1), respectively (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.68-0.88).

“Chemotherapy plus nivolumab is implemented [in practice] as the current SOC, and these results clearly support the continued use of this treatment for patients in the first-line indication,” said Shitara, who was the lead study author, as well as a medical oncologist and chief of the Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology of the National Cancer Center Hospital East in Kashiwa, Japan.

In an interview with OncLive®, Shitara highlighted long-term survival and safety data with the nivolumab combination from CheckMate 649, discussed the optimal use of this combination in patients according to PD-L1 CPS status, and detailed the importance of investigating immunotherapy plus targeted therapy combinations to continue moving the field forward.

OncLive: Could you briefly provide some background on the CheckMate 649 study, including findings from previously reported interim analyses?

Shitara: CheckMate 649 is a global, pivotal trial [that set out] to establish chemotherapy plus nivolumab as a standard for patients with [untreated] HER2-negative gastric or GEJ adenocarcinomas. This study met its primary end points of PFS and OS benefit with this combination at a minimum of 1 year of follow-up at the first interim analysis. [These data were] published in The Lancet almost 3 years before and led to regulatory approval [of the regimen] in many countries. We also published [findings from] a 2-year follow-up analysis in Nature Medicine. We [shared] 3-year follow-up data last year [and this was published] in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. This time, we are showing 4-year survival data [from the trial].

What patient population was evaluated in the study?

This is a first-line population with no previous chemotherapy [exposure] and known HER2-negative disease, [so those with] HER2-positive [disease] had to be excluded. Otherwise, the usual first-line population was a target for this trial. We do have a subgroup analysis [of patients according to] PD-L1 CPS, but [this was not required to be known in the] all-comer population.

What long-term survival data were presented at the meeting?

The 4-year survival rate reported with chemotherapy plus nivolumab [in patients with a PD-L1 CPS of 5 or greater] was 17% compared with 8% with chemotherapy alone; that is a 9% actual difference in 4-year survival rate. This is a benchmark in gastric cancer because usually survival is not high enough. To achieve [prolonged and] and durable survival is very difficult, even with any kind of chemotherapy. After the introduction of the checkpoint inhibitor, we have durable survival [rates and] responses that are confirmed by this long-term follow-up. [In the] all-comer population, there was a 5% difference in 4-year survival rate [between the arms] and the same difference in PFS.

There was no update on response rate because responses were usually achieved at a relatively early stage of treatment. We did show an improvement in PFS2, which was the [time from randomization] to progression [after subsequent] chemotherapy, and some data stratified by the response rate at the 18-week [landmark timepoint.] Patients achieved a [numerically higher] response rate at 18 weeks [with the combination vs chemotherapy alone]. This predicts a very nice survival outcome.

Were there any updates with regard to the toxicity profile of the regimen?

Safety profile is another important aspect of this kind of treatment, because sometimes [patients] experience delayed onset of immune-mediated adverse effects after using a checkpoint inhibitor. However, there was no difference in terms of grade 3 or higher toxicity or treatment-related deaths [between the] 3- and 4-year survival data. No new safety concerns [were identified] in this update.

Should this regimen be primarily administered to patients with a higher PD-L1 CPS score, or for all patients regardless of PD-L1 CPS score?

This is a very difficult question. There is no doubt [that the combination should be given to patients with] a CPS score of 5 or higher if they have enough performance data, such as [adequate] organ function. [We saw a] durable benefit in terms of our efficacy end point [for these patients]. For [those with a] CPS less than 5, the PFS and OS benefit [derived with the regimen] was relatively limited even after this long-term follow-up, with a hazard ratio of 0.75 [for OS and 0.77 for PFS]. There is still data to suggest that a continuous benefit in response rate [can be achieved with the combination in this population].

I’m always considering not only [a patient’s] CPS score but also other clinical factors, including a patient’s symptoms, their wish to receive intensive treatment, other comorbidities, family support, toxicity from immunotherapy, etc. [At my] institution, most of these patients with good performance data are enrolled in clinical trials. I tend to use chemotherapy alone in patients with a low CPS, but if I have a patient with good performance who could be a candidate for a clinical trial, I may use the chemotherapy/nivolumab combination.

Does this research inspire any future avenues of investigation?

We have some new candidates [that are under exploration]. For example, Claudin 18.2– targeted therapy has already improved outcomes [for patients with CLDN18.2-positive gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma.] Combining a checkpoint inhibitor with this kind of targeted therapy should be the next step, and some ongoing trials are examining this. FGFR is another important target in gastric cancer, and agents [targeting FGFR are] already [being] investigated. [These targeted therapies] in combination with a checkpoint inhibitor could hopefully further improve patient outcomes.

References

  1. Shitara K, Moehler M, Ajani, J, et al. Nivolumab (NIVO) + chemotherapy (chemo) vs chemo as first-line (1L) treatment for advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer/esophageal adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC/EAC): 4 year (yr) follow-up of CheckMate 649. J Clin Oncol. 2023;42(suppl 3):306. doi:10.1200/JCO.2024.42.3_suppl.306
  2. FDA approves first immunotherapy for initial treatment of gastric cancer. News release. FDA. April 16, 2021. Accessed January 29, 2024.
Related Videos
Haley M. Hill, PA-C, discusses preliminary data for zenocutuzumab in NRG1 fusion–positive non–small cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer.
Haley M. Hill, PA-C, discusses how physician assistants aid in treatment planning for NRG1-positive non–small cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer.
Haley M. Hill, PA-C, discusses DNA vs RNA sequencing for genetic testing in non–small cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer.
Haley M. Hill, PA-C, discusses current approaches and treatment challenges in NRG1-positive non–small cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer.
Tanios Bekaii-Saab, MD, FACP
Cindy Medina Pabon, MD, assistant professor, Sylvester Cancer Center, University of Miami; assistant lead, GI Cancer Clinical Research, Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, University of Miami Health Systems
Mohammed Najeeb Al Hallak, MD, MS, and Sakti Chakrabarti, MD, discuss ongoing research in gastrointestinal cancers.
Mohammed Najeeb Al Hallak, MD, MS, and Sakti Chakrabarti, MD, discuss research building upon approved combinations in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.
Mohammed Najeeb Al Hallak, MD, MS, and Sakti Chakrabarti, MD, on trastuzumab deruxtecan–based regimens in advanced HER2-positive GI cancers.
Mohammed Najeeb Al Hallak, MD, MS, and Sakti Chakrabarti, MD, on tremelimumab/durvalumab vs atezolizumab/bevacizumab in unresectable HCC.