Charles L. Cowey M.D.

Ascierto, P.A., Del Vecchio, M., Mandalá, M., Gogas, H., Arance, A.M., Dalle, S., Cowey, C.L., Schenker, M., Grob, J.J., Chiarion-Sileni, V., Márquez-Rodas, I., Butler, M.O., Maio, M., Middleton, M.R., de la Cruz-Merino, L., Arenberger, P., Atkinson, V., Hill, A., Fecher, L.A., Millward, M., Khushalani, N.I., Queirolo, P., Lobo, M., de Pril, V., Loffredo, J., Larkin, J. and Weber, J. (2020). “Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C and stage IV melanoma (CheckMate 238): 4-year results from a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.” Lancet Oncol 21(11): 1465-1477.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Previously, findings from CheckMate 238, a double-blind, phase 3 adjuvant trial in patients with resected stage IIIB-C or stage IV melanoma, showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival with nivolumab versus ipilimumab. This report provides updated 4-year efficacy, initial overall survival, and late-emergent safety results. METHODS: This multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was done in 130 academic centres, community hospitals, and cancer centres across 25 countries. Patients aged 15 years or older with resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive nivolumab or ipilimumab via an interactive voice response system and stratified according to disease stage and baseline PD-L1 status of tumour cells. Patients received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or intravenous ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, and then every 12 weeks until 1 year of treatment, disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by investigator assessment, and overall survival was a key secondary endpoint. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients). All patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety analysis. The results presented in this report reflect the 4-year update of the ongoing study with a database lock date of Jan 30, 2020. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02388906. FINDINGS: Between March 30 and Nov 30, 2015, 906 patients were assigned to nivolumab (n=453) or ipilimumab (n=453). Median follow-up was 51·1 months (IQR 41·6-52·7) with nivolumab and 50·9 months (36·2-52·3) with ipilimumab; 4-year recurrence-free survival was 51·7% (95% CI 46·8-56·3) in the nivolumab group and 41·2% (36·4-45·9) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [95% CI 0·60-0·86]; p=0·0003). With 211 (100 [22%] of 453 patients in the nivolumab group and 111 [25%] of 453 patients in the ipilimumab group) of 302 anticipated deaths observed (about 73% of the originally planned 88% power needed for significance), 4-year overall survival was 77·9% (95% CI 73·7-81·5) with nivolumab and 76·6% (72·2-80·3) with ipilimumab (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·66-1·14]; p=0·31). Late-emergent grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in three (1%) of 452 and seven (2%) of 453 patients. The most common late-emergent treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported were diarrhoea, diabetic ketoacidosis, and pneumonitis (one patient each) in the nivolumab group, and colitis (two patients) in the ipilimumab group. Two previously reported treatment-related deaths in the ipilimumab group were attributed to study drug toxicity (marrow aplasia in one patient and colitis in one patient); no further treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: At a minimum of 4 years’ follow-up, nivolumab demonstrated sustained recurrence-free survival benefit versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma indicating a long-term treatment benefit with nivolumab. With fewer deaths than anticipated, overall survival was similar in both groups. Nivolumab remains an efficacious adjuvant treatment for patients with resected high-risk melanoma, with a safety profile that is more tolerable than that of ipilimumab.

Ascierto, P.A., Del Vecchio, M., Mandalá, M., Gogas, H., Arance, A.M., Dalle, S., Cowey, C.L., Schenker, M., Grob, J.J., Chiarion-Sileni, V., Márquez-Rodas, I., Butler, M.O., Maio, M., Middleton, M.R., de la Cruz-Merino, L., Arenberger, P., Atkinson, V., Hill, A., Fecher, L.A., Millward, M., Khushalani, N.I., Queirolo, P., Lobo, M., de Pril, V., Loffredo, J., Larkin, J. and Weber, J. (2020). “Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C and stage IV melanoma (CheckMate 238): 4-year results from a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.” Lancet Oncol 2020 Sep 18;S1470-2045(20)30494-0. [Epub ahead of print.].

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Previously, findings from CheckMate 238, a double-blind, phase 3 adjuvant trial in patients with resected stage IIIB-C or stage IV melanoma, showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival with nivolumab versus ipilimumab. This report provides updated 4-year efficacy, initial overall survival, and late-emergent safety results. METHODS: This multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was done in 130 academic centres, community hospitals, and cancer centres across 25 countries. Patients aged 15 years or older with resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive nivolumab or ipilimumab via an interactive voice response system and stratified according to disease stage and baseline PD-L1 status of tumour cells. Patients received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or intravenous ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, and then every 12 weeks until 1 year of treatment, disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by investigator assessment, and overall survival was a key secondary endpoint. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients). All patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety analysis. The results presented in this report reflect the 4-year update of the ongoing study with a database lock date of Jan 30, 2020. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02388906. FINDINGS: Between March 30 and Nov 30, 2015, 906 patients were assigned to nivolumab (n=453) or ipilimumab (n=453). Median follow-up was 51·1 months (IQR 41·6-52·7) with nivolumab and 50·9 months (36·2-52·3) with ipilimumab; 4-year recurrence-free survival was 51·7% (95% CI 46·8-56·3) in the nivolumab group and 41·2% (36·4-45·9) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [95% CI 0·60-0·86]; p=0·0003). With 211 (100 [22%] of 453 patients in the nivolumab group and 111 [25%] of 453 patients in the ipilimumab group) of 302 anticipated deaths observed (about 73% of the originally planned 88% power needed for significance), 4-year overall survival was 77·9% (95% CI 73·7-81·5) with nivolumab and 76·6% (72·2-80·3) with ipilimumab (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·66-1·14]; p=0·31). Late-emergent grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in three (1%) of 452 and seven (2%) of 453 patients. The most common late-emergent treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported were diarrhoea, diabetic ketoacidosis, and pneumonitis (one patient each) in the nivolumab group, and colitis (two patients) in the ipilimumab group. Two previously reported treatment-related deaths in the ipilimumab group were attributed to study drug toxicity (marrow aplasia in one patient and colitis in one patient); no further treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: At a minimum of 4 years’ follow-up, nivolumab demonstrated sustained recurrence-free survival benefit versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma indicating a long-term treatment benefit with nivolumab. With fewer deaths than anticipated, overall survival was similar in both groups. Nivolumab remains an efficacious adjuvant treatment for patients with resected high-risk melanoma, with a safety profile that is more tolerable than that of ipilimumab. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical.

Cowey, C.L., Boyd, M., Aguilar, K.M., Beeks, A., Krepler, C. and Scherrer, E. (2020). “An observational study of drug utilization and associated outcomes among adult patients diagnosed with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma treated with first-line anti-PD-1 monotherapies or BRAF/MEK inhibitors in a community-based oncology setting.” Cancer Med Sep 1. [Epub ahead of print.].

Full text of this article.

INTRODUCTION: Anti-PD-1 monotherapies (aPD-1) and BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi) changed the BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma treatment landscape. This study aimed to improve the understanding of real-world treatment patterns and optimal treatment sequence. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma patients who initiated 1L aPD-1 or BRAF/MEKi in the US Oncology Network between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2017, followed through 31 December 2018. Patient and treatment characteristics were assessed descriptively, with Kaplan-Meier methods used for time-to-event endpoints. As the primary analysis, overall survival (OS) and physician-assessed progression-free survival (rwPFS) were evaluated with Cox proportional hazard regression models and propensity score matching (n = 49). RESULTS: A total of 224 patients were included (median age 61 years, 62.9% male, 89.7% white): 36.2% received aPD-1 and 63.8% BRAF/MEKi. Median OS and rwPFS were longer among aPD-1 vs BRAF/MEKi patients (OS: not reached vs 13.9 months, log-rank P = .0169; rwPFS: 7.6 vs 6.5 months, log-rank P = .0144). Receipt of aPD-1 was associated with improved OS (HR = 0.602 vs BRAF/MEKi [95%CI 0.382-0.949]; P = .0287). Among patients without an event within 6 months of 1L initiation, receipt of aPD-1 was associated with a decreased risk of progression or death from 6 months onwards (HR = 0.228 [95%CI 0.106-0.493]; P = .0002). This association was not observed among patients within 6 months of 1L initiation (HR = 1.146; 95% CI 0.755-1.738). Results from the propensity score-matched pairs were consistent with these trends. CONCLUSION: These results suggest a clinical benefit of 1L aPD-1 compared to BRAF/MEKi after 6 months of treatment for BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma. Future research should explore factors associated with early progression and their relationship with clinical outcomes.

Cowey, C. L., N. J. Robert, J. L. Espirito, K. Davies, J. Frytak, I. Lowy and M. G. Fury (2020). “Clinical outcomes among unresectable, locally advanced, and metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with systemic therapy.” Cancer Med Jun 24. [Epub ahead of print.].

Full text of this article.

Prior studies of conventional chemotherapy or epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors for advanced (ie, locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma [laCSCC] or metastatic [mCSCC]) cutaneous squamous cell cancer enrolled ≤ 40 patients. This retrospective, observational study assessed real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with unresectable laCSCC or mCSCC using electronic health records of patients who initiated first-line (1L) systemic treatment from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2015, with follow-up to 30 September 2017. The median duration of follow-up from 1L treatment was 10.1 months (range 0.03-67.6 months). Duration of therapy (DOT) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Response rate was calculated as the proportion of patients who achieved physician-assessed-response. Eighty-two patients were identified (17 laCSCC and 65 mCSCC). Median age at 1L treatment initiation was 75 years; 85% were male, 88% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1, and 84% had received radiotherapy. The most common 1L regimens were carboplatin + paclitaxel (27%) and cetuximab monotherapy (24%). The median 1L DOT was 4.1 months for laCSCC and 2.3 months for mCSCC. The physician-assessed response rate for 1L therapy was 17.6% for laCSCC, and 18.5% for mCSCC. The median OS from 1L treatment initiation was 16.2 months for laCSCC, and 15.3 months for mCSCC. Only 24 patients (29%) received second-line therapy. This is the largest retrospective data set regarding patients with advanced CSCC treated with anticancer systemic therapy prior to approval of the anti-programmed cell death-1 antibody, cemiplimab. Efficacy was low in both laCSCC and mCSCC. These data provide historic benchmarks for outcomes in patients with advanced CSCC prior to Food and Drug Administration approval of cemiplimab-rwlc.

Larkin, J., V. Chiarion-Sileni, R. Gonzalez, J. J. Grob, P. Rutkowski, C. D. Lao, C. L. Cowey, D. Schadendorf, J. Wagstaff, R. Dummer, P. F. Ferrucci, M. Smylie, D. Hogg, A. Hill, I. Marquez-Rodas, J. Haanen, M. Guidoboni, M. Maio, P. Schoffski, M. S. Carlino, C. Lebbe, G. McArthur, P. A. Ascierto, G. A. Daniels, G. V. Long, L. Bastholt, J. I. Rizzo, A. Balogh, A. Moshyk, F. S. Hodi and J. D. Wolchok (2019). “Five-Year Survival with Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma.” New England Journal of Medicine 381(16): 1535-1546.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone resulted in longer progression-free and overall survival than ipilimumab alone in a trial involving patients with advanced melanoma. We now report 5-year outcomes in the trial. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma to receive one of the following regimens: nivolumab (at a dose of 1 mg per kilogram of body weight) plus ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks); nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks) plus ipilimumab-matched placebo; or ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses) plus nivolumab-matched placebo. The two primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and in the nivolumab group, as compared with the ipilimumab group. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 60 months, the median overall survival was more than 60.0 months (median not reached) in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and 36.9 months in the nivolumab group, as compared with 19.9 months in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for death with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.52; hazard ratio for death with nivolumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.63). Overall survival at 5 years was 52% in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and 44% in the nivolumab group, as compared with 26% in the ipilimumab group. No sustained deterioration of health-related quality of life was observed during or after treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or with nivolumab alone. No new late toxic effects were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced melanoma, sustained long-term overall survival at 5 years was observed in a greater percentage of patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone than in those who received ipilimumab alone, with no apparent loss of quality of life in the patients who received regimens containing nivolumab. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 067 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844505.).