Treatment-free survival over extended follow-up of patients with advanced melanoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in CheckMate 067

Background Treatment-free survival (TFS) characterizes disease control after discontinuation of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) until subsequent therapy or death. We previously evaluated TFS in a pooled analysis of the CheckMate 067 and CheckMate 069 trials of the ICIs nivolumab and ipilimumab, alone or in combination, in patients with advanced melanoma after minimum follow-up of 36 months. This analysis investigated TFS differences between treatments in CheckMate 067 after a minimum follow-up of 60 months, and their relation to overall survival (OS) differences. Methods Data were from 937 patients who initiated treatment (nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, or ipilimumab) in CheckMate 067 (NCT01844505). TFS was defined as the area between the Kaplan-Meier curves for time to protocol therapy cessation and time to subsequent systemic therapy initiation or death, each measured from randomization. TFS was partitioned as time with and without toxicity. Toxicity included persistent and late-onset grade ≥2 select treatment-related adverse events (ie, those of potential immunologic etiology). The area between Kaplan-Meier curves was estimated by the difference in 60-month restricted-mean times of the endpoints. Between-group differences were estimated with bootstrapped 95% CIs. Results At 60 months from randomization, 39%, 24%, and 11% of patients assigned to treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, and ipilimumab, respectively, had survived and were treatment-free. The 60-month mean TFS was approximately twice as long with the combination (19.7 months) than with nivolumab (9.9 months; absolute difference, 9.8 (95% CI 6.7 to 12.8)) or ipilimumab (11.9 months; absolute difference, 7.8 (95% CI 4.6 to 11.0)). In the respective groups, mean TFS represented 33% (8% with and 25% without toxicity), 17% (2% and 14%), and 20% (3% and 17%) of the 60-month period. Compared with 36-month estimates, mean TFS over the 60-month period represented slightly greater percentages of time in the nivolumab-containing regimen groups and a lesser percentage in the ipilimumab group. TFS differences between the combination and either monotherapy increased with longer follow-up. Conclusions Along with improved long-term OS with the nivolumab-containing regimens versus ipilimumab, TFS without toxicity was sustained with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus either monotherapy, demonstrating larger between-group differences with extended follow-up.

[1]  M. Atkins,et al.  713P Treatment-free survival, with and without toxicity, after immuno-oncology vs targeted therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): 42-month results of CheckMate 214 , 2020 .

[2]  L. Tian,et al.  Analysis of Response Data for Assessing Treatment Effects in Comparative Clinical Studies , 2020, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[3]  V. Sondak,et al.  Systemic Therapy for Melanoma: ASCO Guideline. , 2020, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[4]  J. Wolchok,et al.  Treatment-Free Survival: A Novel Outcome Measure of the Effects of Immune Checkpoint Inhibition—A Pooled Analysis of Patients With Advanced Melanoma , 2019, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[5]  D. Schadendorf,et al.  Overall Survival with Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  D. Schadendorf,et al.  Health-related quality of life results from the phase III CheckMate 067 study , 2017, European journal of cancer.

[7]  G. Linette,et al.  Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma: 2-year overall survival outcomes in a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. , 2016, The Lancet. Oncology.

[8]  Lihui Zhao,et al.  On the restricted mean survival time curve in survival analysis , 2016, Biometrics.

[9]  K. Kreamer Immune Checkpoint Blockade: A New Paradigm in Treating Advanced Cancer , 2014, Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology.

[10]  M. Neary,et al.  Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer , 2010, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes.

[11]  M. Neary,et al.  Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer , 2010, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes.

[12]  P. Dolan,et al.  Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. , 1997, Medical care.

[13]  D. Schadendorf,et al.  Five-Year Survival with Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma. , 2019, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  S. Haque Ethics approval This study was conducted with the approval of the East London and City Health Authority Ethic Committee. Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed. , 2011 .

[15]  R. Gelber,et al.  Evaluation of effectiveness: Q-TWiST , 1993 .

[16]  R. Gelber,et al.  Evaluation of effectiveness: Q-TWiST. The International Breast Cancer Study Group. , 1993, Cancer treatment reviews.

[17]  P Glasziou,et al.  Costs and benefits of adjuvant therapy in breast cancer: a quality-adjusted survival analysis. , 1989, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.