Indirect treatment comparison of nivolumab versus placebo as adjuvant treatment for resected melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab (an anti-programmed death-1 antibody) is an adjuvant standard of care for patients with high-risk resected melanoma, although a watch-and-wait strategy remains an option. In the absence of head-to-head evidence, an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of adjuvant nivolumab versus placebo, the proxy for a watch-and-wait strategy, was conducted in patients with high-risk resected melanoma. METHODS: An ITC using the Bucher method compared nivolumab with placebo using intention-to-treat population data from the phase III CheckMate 238 (nivolumab vs ipilimumab; minimum follow-up, 4 years; NCT02388906) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 18071 (ipilimumab vs placebo; minimum follow-up, ≈4.5 years; NCT00636168) trials. The end-points were recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS). To account for cross-trial differences in staging and subsequent therapy, additional analyses examined patients with stage IIIB/IIIC disease and adjusted post-recurrence survival in EORTC 18071, respectively. RESULTS: Nivolumab versus placebo was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.68) and OS (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.45-0.89). Nivolumab versus placebo was also associated with clinically meaningful improvements in RFS (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.40-0.69), DMFS (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46-0.83) and OS (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47-0.97) in patients with stage IIIB/IIIC disease and in OS (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.92) in the overall population after adjusting post-recurrence survival in EORTC 18071. CONCLUSION: This ITC shows that adjuvant nivolumab provides clinically meaningful improvements in RFS, DMFS and OS versus a watch-and-wait strategy in high-risk resected melanoma.

Third-Line Nivolumab Monotherapy in Recurrent SCLC: CheckMate 032.

INTRODUCTION: For patients with recurrent SCLC, topotecan remains the only approved second-line treatment, and the outcomes are poor. CheckMate 032 is a phase 1/2, multicenter, open-label study of nivolumab or nivolumab plus ipilimumab in SCLC or other advanced/metastatic solid tumors previously treated with one or more platinum-based chemotherapies. We report results of third- or later-line nivolumab monotherapy treatment in SCLC. METHODS: In this analysis, patients with limited-stage or extensive-stage SCLC and disease progression after two or more chemotherapy regimens received nivolumab monotherapy, 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate. Secondary end points included duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Between December 4, 2013, and November 30, 2016, 109 patients began receiving third- or later-line nivolumab monotherapy. At a median follow-up of 28.3 months (from first dose to database lock), the objective response rate was 11.9% (95% confidence interval: 6.5-19.5) with a median duration of response of 17.9 months (range 3.0-42.1). At 6 months, 17.2% of patients were progression-free. The 12-month and 18-month overall survival rates were 28.3% and 20.0%, respectively. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 11.9% of patients. Three patients (2.8%) discontinued because of treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab monotherapy provided durable responses and was well tolerated as a third- or later-line treatment for recurrent SCLC. These results suggest that nivolumab monotherapy is an effective third- or later-line treatment for this patient population.

Phase III Randomized Trial of Ipilimumab Plus Etoposide and Platinum Versus Placebo Plus Etoposide and Platinum in Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Purpose Patients with extensive-stage disease small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) have poor survival outcomes despite first-line chemotherapy with etoposide and platinum. This randomized, double-blind phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab or placebo plus etoposide and platinum in patients with newly diagnosed extensive-stage disease SCLC. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to receive chemotherapy with etoposide and platinum (cisplatin or carboplatin) plus ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo every 3 weeks for a total of four doses each in a phased induction schedule (chemotherapy in cycles one to four; ipilimumab or placebo beginning in cycle three up to cycle six), followed by ipilimumab or placebo maintenance every 12 weeks. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) among patients receiving at least one dose of blinded study therapy. Results Of 1,132 patients randomly assigned, 954 received at least one dose of study therapy (chemotherapy plus ipilimumab, n = 478; chemotherapy plus placebo, n = 476). Median OS was 11.0 months for chemotherapy plus ipilimumab versus 10.9 months for chemotherapy plus placebo (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.09; P = .3775). Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months for chemotherapy plus ipilimumab versus 4.4 months for chemotherapy plus placebo (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.97). Rates and severity of treatment-related adverse events were similar between arms, except for diarrhea, rash, and colitis, which were more frequent with chemotherapy plus ipilimumab. Rate of treatment-related discontinuation was higher with chemotherapy plus ipilimumab (18% v 2% with chemotherapy plus placebo). Five treatment-related deaths occurred with chemotherapy plus ipilimumab and two with chemotherapy plus placebo. Conclusion Addition of ipilimumab to chemotherapy did not prolong OS versus chemotherapy alone in patients with newly diagnosed extensive-stage disease SCLC. No new or unexpected adverse events were observed with chemotherapy plus ipilimumab. Several ongoing studies are evaluating ipilimumab in combination with programmed death-1 inhibitors in SCLC.

Effect of dapagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes who have inadequate glycaemic control with metformin: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Correction of hyperglycaemia and prevention of glucotoxicity are important objectives in the management of type 2 diabetes. Dapagliflozin, a selective sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor, reduces renal glucose reabsorption in an insulin-independent manner. We assessed the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in patients who have inadequate glycaemic control with metformin. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial, 546 adults with type 2 diabetes who were receiving daily metformin (>/=1500 mg per day) and had inadequate glycaemic control were randomly assigned to receive one of three doses of dapagliflozin (2.5 mg, n=137; 5 mg, n=137; or 10 mg, n=135) or placebo (n=137) orally once daily. Randomisation was computer generated and stratified by site, implemented with a central, telephone-based interactive voice response system. Patients continued to receive their pre-study metformin dosing. The primary outcome was change from baseline in haemoglobin A(1c)(HbA(1c)) at 24 weeks. All randomised patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study medication and who had both a baseline and at least one post-baseline measurement (last observation carried forward) were included in the analysis. Data were analysed by use of ANCOVA models. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00528879. FINDINGS: 534 patients were included in analysis of the primary endpoint (dapagliflozin 2.5 mg, n=135; dapagliflozin 5 mg, n=133; dapagliflozin 10 mg, n=132; placebo, n=134). At week 24, mean HbA(1c) had decreased by -0.30% (95% CI -0.44 to -0.16) in the placebo group, compared with -0.67% (-0.81 to -0.53, p=0.0002) in the dapagliflozin 2.5 mg group, -0.70% (-0.85 to -0.56, p<0.0001) in the dapagliflozin 5 mg group, and -0.84% (-0.98 to -0.70, p<0.0001) in the dapagliflozin 10 mg group. Symptoms of hypoglycaemia occurred in similar proportions of patients in the dapagliflozin (2-4%) and placebo groups (3%). Signs, symptoms, and other reports suggestive of genital infections were more frequent in the dapagliflozin groups (2.5 mg, 11 patients [8%]; 5 mg, 18 [13%]; 10 mg, 12 [9%]) than in the placebo group (seven [5%]). 17 patients had serious adverse events (four in each of the dapagliflozin groups and five in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: Addition of dapagliflozin to metformin provides a new therapeutic option for treatment of type 2 diabetes in patients who have inadequate glycaemic control with metformin alone. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca.