P-86 First-line Nivolumab (NIVO) Plus Chemotherapy (chemo) Vs Chemo in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer/gastroesophageal Junction Cancer/esophageal Adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC/EAC): CheckMate 649 Chinese Subgroup Analysis 2-Year Follow-Up

L. Shen,Y. Bai,X. Lin,W. Li,J. Wang,X. Zhang,H. Pan,C. Bai,L. Bai,Y. Cheng,J. Zhang,H. Zhong,Y. Ba,W. Hu,R. Xu,W. Guo,S. Qin,N. Yang,J. Lu,C. Amaya Chanaga,S. Soleymani,T. Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2022.04.176

IF: 51.769

2022-01-01

Annals of Oncology

Abstract:NIVO + chemo demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) vs chemotherapy alone, along with acceptable safety, in a preplanned analysis of previously untreated Chinese patients from CheckMate 649 after 12 months of follow-up. Results were consistent with those for the overall study population with advanced GC/GEJC/EAC. Based on data from CheckMate 649, NIVO + chemo was approved as first-line treatment for advanced GC/GEJC/EAC in China and other countries. 2-year follow-up data for Chinese patients in CheckMate 649 is reported. Adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC/EAC were enrolled regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Patients with known HER2-positive status were excluded. Patients were randomized to receive NIVO (360 mg Q3W or 240 mg Q2W) + chemo (XELOX Q3W or FOLFOX Q2W), NIVO + ipilimumab, or chemo. Dual primary endpoints for NIVO + chemo vs chemo were OS and PFS by blinded independent central review in patients with PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 5. 208 Chinese patients were concurrently randomized to NIVO + chemo (n = 99) or chemo (n = 106), including 156 (75%) with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5; 88% had GC, 12% had GEJC, and no patients had EAC. At 25 months of minimum follow up, NIVO + chemo continued to show clinically meaningful improvement in OS with median OS (95% CI) in patients with PD-L1 CPS > 5 of 15.5 months (11.9-21.1) for NIVO + chemo vs 9.6 months (8.0-12.1) for chemo (HR 0.56 [95% CI 0.38-0.81]); in all randomized patients the median OS (95% CI) was 14.3 months (11.5-16.5) for NIVO + chemo vs 10.3 months (8.1-12.1) for chemo (HR 0.63 [95% CI 0.46-0.86]). The median PFS (95% CI) in patients with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 was 8.5 months (6.0-14.0) for NIVO + chemo vs 4.3 months (4.1-6.5) for chemo (HR 0.51 [95% CI 0.34-0.76]); in all randomized patients, the median PFS was 8.3 months (6.2-12.4) for NIVO + chemo vs 5.6 months (4.2-6.8) for chemo (HR 0.57 [95% CI 0.41-0.80]). Objective response rate (ORR) in patients with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 was 68% vs 48% and median duration of response (DOR) was 12.5 months vs 6.9 months for NIVO + chemo vs chemo, respectively; ORR in all randomized patients was 66% vs 45% and median DOR was 12.5 months vs 5.6 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 66% and 50% of patients with NIVO + chemo vs chemo, and any-grade TRAEs leading to discontinuation were observed in 49% and 26% of patients, respectively. NIVO + chemo continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful improvement in OS, PFS, and ORR and have a longer DOR vs chemo alone in previously untreated Chinese patients, along with acceptable safety. These results are consistent with those observed in the overall study population with advanced GC/GEJC/EAC from CheckMate 649.