Dataset Information

Effect of Nivolumab vs Bevacizumab in Patients With Recurrent Glioblastoma: The CheckMate 143 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Clinical outcomes for glioblastoma remain poor. Treatment with immune checkpoint blockade has shown benefits in many cancer types. To our knowledge, data from a randomized phase 3 clinical trial evaluating a programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitor therapy for glioblastoma have not been reported.

Objective

To determine whether single-agent PD-1 blockade with nivolumab improves survival in patients with recurrent glioblastoma compared with bevacizumab.

Design, setting, and participants

In this open-label, randomized, phase 3 clinical trial, 439 patients with glioblastoma at first recurrence following standard radiation and temozolomide therapy were enrolled, and 369 were randomized. Patients were enrolled between September 2014 and May 2015. The median follow-up was 9.5 months at data cutoff of January 20, 2017. The study included 57 multicenter, multinational clinical sites.

Interventions

Patients were randomized 1:1 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg or bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks until confirmed disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or death.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary end point was overall survival (OS).

Results

A total of 369 patients were randomized to nivolumab (n = 184) or bevacizumab (n = 185). The MGMT promoter was methylated in 23.4% (43/184; nivolumab) and 22.7% (42/185; bevacizumab), unmethylated in 32.1% (59/184; nivolumab) and 36.2% (67/185; bevacizumab), and not reported in remaining patients. At median follow-up of 9.5 months, median OS (mOS) was comparable between groups: nivolumab, 9.8 months (95% CI, 8.2-11.8); bevacizumab, 10.0 months (95% CI, 9.0-11.8); HR, 1.04 (95% CI, 0.83-1.30); P = .76. The 12-month OS was 42% in both groups. The objective response rate was higher with bevacizumab (23.1%; 95% CI, 16.7%-30.5%) vs nivolumab (7.8%; 95% CI, 4.1%-13.3%). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were similar between groups (nivolumab, 33/182 [18.1%]; bevacizumab, 25/165 [15.2%]), with no unexpected neurological TRAEs or deaths due to TRAEs.

Conclusions and relevance

Although the primary end point was not met in this randomized clinical trial, mOS was comparable between nivolumab and bevacizumab in the overall patient population with recurrent glioblastoma. The safety profile of nivolumab in patients with glioblastoma was consistent with that in other tumor types.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02017717.

SUBMITTER: Reardon DA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7243167 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThere remains an unmet need to improve clinical outcomes in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN).ObjectiveTo evaluate clinical benefit of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs nivolumab alone in patients with R/M SCCHN.Design, setting, and participantsThe CheckMate 714, double-blind, phase 2 randomized clinical trial was conducted at 83 sites in 21 countries between October 20, 2016, and January 23, 2019. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and had platinum-refractory or platinum-eligible R/M SCCHN and no prior systemic therapy for R/M disease. Data were analyzed from October 20, 2016 (first patient, first visit), to March 8, 2019 (primary database lock), and April 6, 2020 (overall survival database lock).InterventionsPatients were randomized 2:1 to receive nivolumab (3 mg/kg intravenously [IV] every 2 weeks) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg IV every 6 weeks) or nivolumab (3 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks) plus placebo for up to 2 years or until disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or consent withdrawal.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end points were objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response between treatment arms by blinded independent central review in the population with platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN. Exploratory end points included safety.ResultsOf 425 included patients, 241 (56.7%; median age, 59 [range, 24-82] years; 194 males [80.5%]) had platinum-refractory disease (nivolumab plus ipilimumab, n = 159; nivolumab, n = 82) and 184 (43.3%; median age, 62 [range, 33-88] years; 152 males [82.6%]) had platinum-eligible disease (nivolumab plus ipilimumab, n = 123; nivolumab, n = 61). At primary database lock, the ORR in the population with platinum-refractory disease was 13.2% (95% CI, 8.4%-19.5%) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs 18.3% (95% CI, 10.6%-28.4%) with nivolumab (odds ratio [OR], 0.68; 95.5% CI, 0.33-1.43; P = .29). Median duration of response for nivolumab plus ipilimumab was not reached (NR) (95% CI, 11.0 months to NR) vs 11.1 months (95% CI, 4.1 months to NR) for nivolumab. In the population with platinum-eligible disease, the ORR was 20.3% (95% CI, 13.6%-28.5%) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs 29.5% (95% CI, 18.5%-42.6%) with nivolumab. The rates of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs nivolumab were 15.8% (25 of 158) vs 14.6% (12 of 82) in the population with platinum-refractory disease and 24.6% (30 of 122) vs 13.1% (8 of 61) in the population with platinum-eligible disease.Conclusions and relevanceThe CheckMate 714 randomized clinical trial did not meet its primary end point of ORR benefit with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs nivolumab alone in platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab was associated with an acceptable safety profile. Research to identify patient subpopulations in R/M SCCHN that would benefit from nivolumab plus ipilimumab over nivolumab monotherapy is warranted.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02823574.

Project description:BackgroundRecent studies showed inconsistent results of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy vs single-agent therapy in terms of their safety and efficacy for the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to explore the value of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy and single-agent therapy in recurrent glioblastoma treatment.MethodsDatabases such as MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to the topic of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy and single-agent therapy as treatments for recurrent glioblastoma from January 1980 to April 2018. Subsequent articles were then sorted, evaluated, and analyzed.ResultsWe pooled 1,169 patient cases from seven RCTs. Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy showed a significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=0.65; 95% CI 0.57-0.74; P<0.001) compared to single-agent therapy. In addition, the overall survival (OS) rate showed insignificant differences between the two groups (HR=0.96; 95% CI 0.83-1.12; P=0.622). Simultaneously, we found that bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy had a higher objective response rate (ORR) (OR=2.10; 95% CI 1.32-3.33; P=0.002), but also higher incidence of adverse events (AEs) (OR=1.85; 95% CI 1.26-2.71; P=0.002). However, in subgroup analysis, we found that AEs showed insignificant differences between the two treatment methods when bevacizumab was used as the single-agent therapy subgroup (P=0.058). In addition, in the subgroup with low corticosteroid use rate at baseline (N<50%), ORR (P=0.108) and AEs (P=0.134) showed insignificant differences between the two groups.ConclusionBevacizumab combined with chemotherapy can significantly improve PFS and ORR, but did not prolong OS in these studies, and can even lead to higher odds of AEs. In addition, bevacizumab may play a dominant role and corticosteroid may be an unfavorable factor in the combination therapy of recurrent glioblastoma.