Randomized Phase II Trial of Nivolumab With Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Versus Nivolumab Alone in Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
The objective response rate (ORR) for single-agent anti-programmed death receptor 1 (anti-PD-1) therapy is modest in patients with metastatic or recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We aimed to test whether radiotherapy may act synergistically with anti-PD-1 therapy to improve response through the abscopal effect.Patients and methods
We conducted a single-center, randomized, phase II trial of nivolumab (anti-PD-1 therapy) versus nivolumab plus stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with metastatic HNSCC. Patients had at least two metastatic lesions: one that could be safely irradiated and one measurable by RECIST version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by human papillomavirus status, to nivolumab (3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) or nivolumab (same dose) plus SBRT (9 Gy × 3) to 1 lesion. The primary end point was ORR in nonirradiated lesions, which was assessed by RECIST in patients with at least one available set of on-treatment images; safety was assessed in a per-protocol population.Results
Between March 11, 2016, and June 22, 2018, 62 patients were randomly assigned to nivolumab (n = 30) or nivolumab plus SBRT (n = 32). There was no statistically significant ORR difference between arms (34.5% [95% CI, 19.9% to 52.7%] v 29.0% [95% CI, 16.1% to 46.6%]; P = .86). There was no significant difference in overall survival (P = .75), progression-free survival (P = .79), or response duration (P = .26). Grade 3-5 toxicities were similar (13.3% v 9.7%; P = .70).Conclusion
We found no improvement in response and no evidence of an abscopal effect with the addition of SBRT to nivolumab in unselected patients with metastatic HNSCC.
SUBMITTER: McBride S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8462641 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:The efficacy of immunotherapy targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway has previously been demonstrated in metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) aims at ablating metastatic lesions and may play a synergistic role with immunotherapy. The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of triple treatment combination (TTC) consisting of the administration of durvalumab and tremelimumab in combination with SBRT in metastatic HNSCC. METHOD:This is a phase I/II single arm study that will include 35 patients with 2-10 extracranial metastatic lesions. Patients will receive durvalumab (1500?mg IV every 4?weeks (Q4W)) and tremelimumab (75?mg IV Q4W for a total of 4 doses) until progression, unacceptable toxicity or patient withdrawal. SBRT to 2-5 metastases will be administered between cycles 2 and 3 of immunotherapy. The safety of the treatment combination will be evaluated through assessment of TTC-related toxicities, defined as grade 3-5 toxicities based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (v 4.03), occurring within 6?weeks from SBRT start, and that are definitely, probably or possibly related to the combination of all treatments. We hypothesize that dual targeting of PD-L1 and CTLA-4 pathways combined with SBRT will lead to <?35% grade 3-5 acute toxicities related to TTC. Progression free survival (PFS) will be the primary endpoint of the phase II portion of this study and will be assessed with radiological exams every 8?weeks using the RECIST version 1.1 criteria. DISCUSSION:The combination of synergistic dual checkpoints inhibition along with ablative radiation may significantly potentiate the local and systemic disease control. This study constitutes the first clinical trial combining effects of SBRT with dual checkpoint blockade with durvalumab and tremelimumab in the treatment of metastatic HNSCC. If positive, this study would lead to a phase III trial testing this treatment combination against standard of care in metastatic HNSCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT03283605 . Registration date: September 14, 2017; version 1.
| S-EPMC6332607 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTreatment options for patients with platinum-refractory, recurrent, metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (r/m HNSCC) are limited and prognosis is poor. The recent CheckMate 141 clinical trial demonstrated that nivolumab, an anti-programmed cell death protein 1 monoclonal antibody, was efficacious in extending the median overall survival (OS) in this patient population compared with standard therapies. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine whether nivolumab is a cost-effective treatment in this patient population and examined various subgroups to determine for which, if any, the treatment is more cost-effective.Materials and methodsWe implemented a state transition model for HNSCC with a patient cohort who had tumor progression 6 months after the last dose of platinum-containing chemotherapy and compared the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab with docetaxel. Treatment effect estimates and adverse event rates were obtained from CheckMate 141. Costs, utilities, and other model inputs were gathered from published sources. We used a Canadian perspective, a 5-year time horizon, and a 1.5% discount rate for the analysis.ResultsNivolumab extended mean OS by 4 months compared with docetaxel and resulted in fewer treatment-related adverse events, producing an incremental effectiveness of 0.13 quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The incremental cost of treatment with nivolumab was $18,823. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY, nivolumab was not a cost-effective treatment option for r/m HNSCC, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $144,744/QALY. Nivolumab would be cost-effective if its price was reduced by 20%. Our subgroup analysis seemed to indicate that nivolumab might be cost-effective for tumors with expression of programmed death-ligand 1 >5%.ConclusionWe conclude that although nivolumab offers clinical benefit for the treatment of r/m HNSCC over current regimens, it is not cost-effective based on its list price. We have also established a value-based price estimate for nivolumab to be cost-effective in this patient population. Further study is required to draw a definitive conclusion on biomarkers for cost-effectiveness.Implications for practiceIn health care settings in which cost considerations are a constraint on choice of therapy, patient selection should be carefully considered to maintain efficiency in the system. Until a biomarker for response to therapy is identified for nivolumab, this medication is unlikely to be cost-effective for most patients with recurrent, metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
| S-EPMC5813741 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe EXTREME clinical trial revealed that cetuximab plus chemotherapy improved the overall survival time of patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) versus chemotherapy alone. The current study examined the cost-effectiveness of cetuximab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in HNSCC patients from the perspective of China.Materials and methodsA partitioned survival model was implemented for R/M HNSCC patients. Survival information was derived from the CHANGE-2 trial. The model was designed as a ten-year time horizon, a 3-week cycle, and a 3% discount rate for costs and utilities. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) value is less than $30,201/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was considered cost-effective in China. We analyzed the uncertainty by performing one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ResultsIn the base-case analysis, we found that the ICER of cetuximab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone is $172,702/QALY. The results of one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic analysis showed that the fluctuations of each variable in its ranges do not cause ICERs to reach acceptable thresholds.ConclusionThe current observations suggested that treatment with cetuximab plus chemotherapy is not a cost-effective strategy for R/M HNSCC patients in China at a $30,201 willingness to pay threshold.
| S-EPMC7661788 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the CheckMate 651 study, nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus EXTREME (cisplatin/carboplatin + cetuximab + fluorouracil) regimen was compared for effectiveness. It is not known whether these immunotherapy agents are cost-effective for recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN). The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with EXTREME in the first-line setting from the standpoint of third-party payers in the United States. The projecting of costs and outcomes over 15 years was done using a three-state partitioned survival model discounted by 3% per year. Long-term extrapolation of CheckMate 651 was used to model progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). The incremental net health benefit (INHB), incremental net monetary benefit (INMB), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. The uncertainty and stability of the model were accounted for via one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. As compared with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, EXTREME was associated with an increase of 0.154 life-years and 0.076 QALYs, as well as a cost increase of $572 per patient. The corresponding ICERs were $7545/QALY along with the values of INMB and INHB were $113,267 and 0.076 QALYs, respectively, at a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY. The probability of nivolumab plus ipilimumab being cost-effective was > 99% in patients with combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 1, CPS 1-19, or CPS ≥ 20. Moreover, hazard ratio for OS and body weight were the most sensitive parameters for the model. According to sensitivity analyses, these results were generally robust. In overall populations with R/M SCCHN, the EXTREME regimen is cost-effective compared with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Given a WTP threshold of $150,000 per QALY, the probability of the EXTREME regiment being cost-effective compared with nivolumab and ipilimumab, was 64%. Importantly, there was heterogeneity in the cost-effectiveness probabilities, based on primary sites and expression levels of PD-L1. Therefore, tailored treatment based on individual patient and clinical characteristics, remains important, and may impact the cost-effectiveness of the regimens under study.
| S-EPMC10957979 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC10080406 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionWhile combination of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and immunotherapy are promising, their efficacy and safety have not been compared with SBRT-alone in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).MethodsThis retrospective study included 100 patients with nonmetastatic, unresectable HCC in two hospitals. Eligible patients had tumor nodules ≤3 and Child-Pugh liver function score of A5 to B7. Seventy patients received SBRT-alone, and 30 patients underwent combined SBRT and immunotherapy (SBRT-IO). Overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), overall response rate (ORR), and toxicity were analyzed. We adjusted for the potential confounding factors using propensity score matching.ResultsThe median tumor size was 7.3 cm (range, 2.6-18 cm). Twenty-five (25%) of patients had vascular invasion. Before propensity score matching, the 1-year and 3-year OS rate was 89.9% and 59.8% in the SBRT-IO group and 75.7% and 42.3% in SBRT-alone group (p = 0.039). After propensity score matching (1:2), 25 and 50 patients were selected from the SBRT-IO and SBRT-alone group. The 1-year and 3-year OS was 92.0% and 63.9% in the SBRT-IO group versus 74.0% and 43.3% in the SBRT-alone group (p = 0.034). The 1-year and 3-year TTP was better in SBRT-IO group (1-year: 68.9% vs. 58.9% and 3-year: 61.3% vs. 32.5%, p = 0.057). The ORR of 88% (complete response [CR]: 56%, partial response [PR]: 22%) in SBRT-IO arm was significantly better than 50% (CR: 20%, PR: 30%) in the SBRT-alone arm (p = 0.006). Three patients (12%) developed ≥grade 3 immune-related treatment adverse events (n = 2 hepatitis, n = 1 dermatitis) leading to permanent treatment discontinuation.ConclusionAdding immunotherapy to SBRT resulted in better survival with manageable toxicities. Prospective randomized trial is warranted.
| S-EPMC11095610 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesStereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) is gaining popularity although its use in head and neck cancer (HNC) is not well defined. The primary objective was to review the published evidence regarding the use of stereotactic radiotherapy in HNC.MethodsA literature search was performed by using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for eligible studies from 2000 to 2019 and 26 relevant studies were identified.ResultsLiterature demonstrates a heterogeneous use of this technique with regards to patient population, primary or salvage treatment, dose fractionation regimens, outcomes and follow-up protocols. Carotid blow out syndrome is a risk as with other forms of reirradiation but alternative treatment regimens may reduce this risk.ConclusionAt present there is a lack of evidence regarding SBRT as a primary treatment option for HNC and definitive answers regarding efficacy and tolerability cannot be provided but there is growing evidence that SBRT reirradiation regimens are safe and effective. In lieu of evidence from large Phase III trials, we define appropriate organ at risk constraints and prescription doses, with accurate plan summation approaches. Prospective randomised trials are warranted to validate improved treatment outcomes and acceptable treatment morbidity.Advances in knowledgeThis article provides a comprehensive review of evidence of use of stereotactic radiotherapy in HNC site (either as a primary treatment or as reirradiation). We also provide an evidence-based approach to the implementation and practical consideration of stereotactic radiotherapy in HNC.
| S-EPMC7774675 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck after platinum chemotherapy have a very poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Nivolumab, an anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibody, was assessed as treatment for this condition.MethodsIn this randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial, we assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, 361 patients with recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck whose disease had progressed within 6 months after platinum-based chemotherapy to receive nivolumab (at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight) every 2 weeks or standard, single-agent systemic therapy (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab). The primary end point was overall survival. Additional end points included progression-free survival, rate of objective response, safety, and patient-reported quality of life.ResultsThe median overall survival was 7.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.5 to 9.1) in the nivolumab group versus 5.1 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 6.0) in the group that received standard therapy. Overall survival was significantly longer with nivolumab than with standard therapy (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 97.73% CI, 0.51 to 0.96; P=0.01), and the estimates of the 1-year survival rate were approximately 19 percentage points higher with nivolumab than with standard therapy (36.0% vs. 16.6%). The median progression-free survival was 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 2.1) with nivolumab versus 2.3 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.1) with standard therapy (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.13; P=0.32). The rate of progression-free survival at 6 months was 19.7% with nivolumab versus 9.9% with standard therapy. The response rate was 13.3% in the nivolumab group versus 5.8% in the standard-therapy group. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 13.1% of the patients in the nivolumab group versus 35.1% of those in the standard-therapy group. Physical, role, and social functioning was stable in the nivolumab group, whereas it was meaningfully worse in the standard-therapy group.ConclusionsAmong patients with platinum-refractory, recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck, treatment with nivolumab resulted in longer overall survival than treatment with standard, single-agent therapy. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 141 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02105636 .).
| S-EPMC5564292 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent studies have suggested the benefit of salvage chemotherapy (SCT) after immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment for recurrent and metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC). We retrospectively examined the outcome of SCT and the usefulness of the serum C-reactive protein level (CRP) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as prognostic biomarkers. Thirty-nine patients with R/M HNSCC were enrolled in this study. Twenty-five patients (64.1%) received combination chemotherapy of weekly paclitaxel and cetuximab (PC) as SCT, and 14 patients (35.9%) received tegafur-gimestat-otastat potassium (S1), an oral fluoropyrimidine. In all patients, the response rate, disease control rate, median progression-free survival (PFS), and median overall survival (OS) were 45.2%, 85.7%, 6.5 months, and 13.5 months, respectively. No chemotherapy-related deaths were observed. These PC groups had low CRP (<1.2 mg/dL) or low NLR (<7.0) values at the time of SCT induction, which was significantly associated with an improved OS (p = 0.0440, p = 0.0354). A multivariate analysis also showed that a lower CRP value was significantly associated with a better OS (p = 0.0078). We clarified the usefulness of the PC and S1 regimens as SCT. In addition, SCT with the PC regimen showed a better prognosis with a lower CRP or NLR at induction than a higher CRP or NLR. This is the first report on biomarkers of SCT in R/M HNSCC.
| S-EPMC7463840 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is increasingly used to treat disease in the oligometastatic (OM) setting due to mounting evidence demonstrating its efficacy and safety. Given the low population representation in prospective studies, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes of HNC patients with extracranial OM disease treated with SBRT.MethodsA systematic review was conducted with Cochrane, Medline, and Embase databases queried from inception to August 2022 for studies with extracranial OM HNC treated with stereotactic radiotherapy. Polymetastatic patients (>five lesions), mixed-primary cohorts failing to report HNC separately, lack of treatment to all lesions, nonquantitative endpoints, and other definitive treatments (surgery, conventional radiotherapy, and radioablation) were excluded. The meta-analysis examined the pooled effects of 12- and 24-month local control (LC) per lesion, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Weighted random-effects were assessed using the DerSimonian and Laird method, with heterogeneity evaluated using the I2 statistic and Cochran Qtest. Forest plots were generated for each endpoint.ResultsFifteen studies met the inclusion criteria (639 patients, 831 lesions), with twelve eligible for quantitative synthesis with common endpoints and sufficient reporting. Fourteen studies were retrospective, with a single prospective trial. Studies were small, with a median of 32 patients (range: 6-81) and 63 lesions (range: 6-126). The OM definition varied, with a maximum of two to five metastases, mixed synchronous and metachronous lesions, and a few studies including oligoprogressive lesions. The most common site of metastasis was the lung. Radiation was delivered in 1-10 fractions (20-70 Gy). The one-year LC (LC1), reported in 12 studies, was 86.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 79.3-91.9%). LC2 was 77.9% (95% CI: 66.4-86.3%), with heterogeneity across studies. PFS was reported in five studies, with a PFS1 of 43.0% (95% CI: 35.0-51.4%) and PFS2 of 23.9% (95% CI: 17.8-31.2%), with homogeneity across studies. OS was analyzed in nine studies, demonstrating an OS1 of 80.1% (95% CI: 74.2-85.0%) and OS2 of 60.7% (95% CI: 51.3-69.4%). Treatment was well tolerated with no reported grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Grade 3 toxicity rates were uniformly below 5% when reported.ConclusionsSBRT offers excellent LC and promising OS, with acceptable toxicities in OM HNC. Durable PFS remains rare, highlighting the need for effective local or systemic therapies in this population. Further investigations on concurrent and adjuvant therapies are warranted.
| S-EPMC10930866 | biostudies-literature