Dataset Information

Outcomes of long-term nivolumab and subsequent chemotherapy in Japanese patients with head and neck cancer: 2-year follow-up from a multicenter real-world study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We have previously reported the effectiveness and safety of nivolumab in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) in real-world clinical practice in Japan. Here, we report long-term outcomes from this study in the overall population and subgroups stratified by subsequent chemotherapy.

Methods

In this multicenter, retrospective observational study, Japanese patients with recurrent or metastatic (R/M) HNC receiving nivolumab were followed up for 2 years. Effectiveness endpoints included overall survival (OS), OS rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and PFS rate. Safety endpoints included the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs).

Results

Overall, 256 patients received a median of 6.0 doses (range: 1-52) of nivolumab over a median duration of 72.5 days (range: 1-736). Median OS was 9.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.2-12.0] and median PFS was 2.1 months (95% CI 1.8-2.7). A significant difference between 2-year survivors (n = 62) and non-2-year survivors was observed by median age (P = 0.0227) and ECOG PS (P = 0.0001). Of 95 patients who received subsequent chemotherapy, 54.7% received paclitaxel ± cetuximab. The median OS and PFS from the start of paclitaxel ± cetuximab were 6.9 months (95% CI 5.9-11.9) and 3.5 months (95% CI 2.3-5.5), respectively. IrAEs were reported in 17.2% of patients. Endocrine (7.0%) and lung (4.3%) disorders were the most common irAEs; kidney disorder (n = 1) was newly identified in this follow-up analysis.

Conclusions

Results demonstrated the long-term effectiveness of nivolumab and potential effectiveness of subsequent chemotherapy in patients with R/M HNC in the real-world setting. Safety was consistent with that over the 1-year follow-up.

SUBMITTER: Yasumatsu R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8732924 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The traditional concept of post-treatment surveillance in head and neck cancer patients relies on examinations directed at early detection of disease recurrence and/or second primary tumors. They are usually provided by ear, nose and throat specialists with complementary input from radiation oncologists and medical oncologists. Emerging evidence underscores the importance of monitoring and effective management of late adverse events. One of the major drawbacks is a lack of prospective controlled data. As a result, local institutional policies differ, and practice recommendations are subject to continuing debate. Due to the economic burden and impact on emotional comfort of patients, intensity and content of follow-up visits are a particularly conflicting topic. According to the current evidence-based medicine, follow-up of head and neck cancer patients does not prolong survival but can improve quality of life. Therefore, an approach giving priority to a multidisciplinary care involving a speech and swallowing expert, dietician, dentist, and psychologist may indeed be more relevant. Moreover, on a case-by-case basis, some patients need more frequent consultations supplemented by imaging modalities. Human papillomavirus positive oropharyngeal cancer tends to develop late failures at distant sites, and asymptomatic oligometastatic disease, especially in the lungs, can be successfully salvaged by local ablation, either surgically or by radiation. The deep structures of the skull base related to the nasopharynx are inaccessible to routine clinical examination, advocating periodic imaging supplemented by nasofibroscopy as indicated. Anamnesis of heavy smoking justifies annual low-dose computed tomography screening of the thorax and intensive smoking cessation counseling. Finally, some cancer survivors feel more comfortable with regular imaging, and their voice should be taken into consideration. Future development of surveillance strategies will depend on several variables including identification of reliable predictive factors to select those who could derive the most benefit from follow-up visits, the availability of long-term follow-up data, the results of the first randomized trials, resource allocation patterns, infrastructure density, and the therapeutic landscape of locally advanced and recurrent and/or metastatic disease, which is rapidly changing with the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors and better utilization of local approaches.

Project description:BackgroundDespite impressive progression-free survival (PFS) results from PARP inhibitors (PARPi) in ovarian cancer, concerns about their effect on post-progression treatment outcomes have recently arisen, particularly when administered in the relapsed setting. Overlapping mechanisms of resistance between PARPi and platinum have been described, and optimal therapies upon progression to PARPi are unknown. We communicate real-world data (RWD) on outcomes of subsequent chemotherapy upon progression to PARPi used as maintenance in ovarian cancer relapses, particularly focusing on platinum rechallenge, according to BRCA status.MethodsData from high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer patients who received subsequent chemotherapy after progression to maintenance PARPi in the relapsed setting, in 16 Catalan hospitals between August 2016 and April 2021, and who were followed-up until July 2021, were included. Endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), and PFS and overall survival (OS) measured from the subsequent chemotherapy starting date.Results111 patients were included [46 (41.4%) presented pathological BRCA1/2 mutations, 8 (7.5%) in other homologous recombination-related genes]. Sixty-four patients (57.7%) had received two prior chemotherapy lines, including the one immediately prior to PARPi. PARPi were niraparib (n = 60, 54.1%), olaparib (n = 49, 44.1%), and rucaparib (n = 2, 1.8%). A total of 81 patients remained platinum-sensitive (PS population) after progression to PARPi (when progression-free interval [PFI] was >6 months after the last cycle of prior platinum) [median PFI 12.0 months (interquartile range, IQR, 8.8-17.1)]. Of those, 74 were treated with subsequent platinum regimens, with the following results: ORR of 41.9%, median PFS (mPFS) of 6.6 months (95% CI 6-9.2), and median OS (mOS) of 20.6 months (95% CI 13.6-28.9). Analysis of these 74 patients according to BRCA status showed that PFIs for BRCA mutant and non BRCA-mutant patients were 13.6 [IQR11.2-22.2] and 10.3 [IQR 7.4-14.9] months, respectively (p = 0.010); ORR were 40.0% versus 43.6%, respectively; Rates of progression (as best response) to subsequent platinum were 45.7% versus 17.9%, respectively (p = 0.004); mPFS and mOS were 3.5 (95% CI 2.5-8.6) versus 7.5 months (95% CI 6.5-10.1, p = 0.03), and 16.4 (95% CI 9.3-27.5) versus 24.2 months (95% CI 17.2-NR, p = 0.036), respectively.ConclusionThis is the largest series of real-world data on ovarian cancer patients retreated with platinum in the post-PARPi scenario, separately analyzing BRCA mutant and non-mutant patients, to our knowledge. In our platinum-sensitive population, rechallenge with platinum after progression upon PARPi in the 3rd or later lines for ovarian cancer relapses shows relevant ORR and similar PFS outcomes to historical series of the prePARPi era. However, BRCA mutant patients presented significantly higher rates of progression under subsequent platinum and worse survival outcomes associated with subsequent platinum than non-BRCA-mutant patients.