ASCO 2021: Efficacy of Nivolumab/Ipilimumab in Patients with Initial or Late Progression with Nivolumab: Updated Analysis of a Tailored Approach in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (TITAN-RCC)

(UroToday.com) There have been transformational changes in first-line therapy for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the past three years. Foremost among these is the move from monotherapy to combination approaches. While CheckMate 214 first brought combination therapy with dual checkpoint inhibition (nivolumab and ipilimumab) to the forefront, subsequent studies have examined combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors and tyrosine-kinase inhibitors in the first-line setting. However, the use of combination therapy in the first-line setting has further emphasized the need to identify novel therapeutic targets and further lines of therapy. The TITAN-RCC trial (NCT02917772) uses a tailored immunotherapy approach in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), starting with nivolumab induction followed by nivolumab + ipilimumab as immunotherapeutic “boost” in non-responders. In the Kidney and Bladder Poster session at the 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting, Dr. Marc-Oliver Grimm presented updated results from TITAN-RCC, focusing on the efficacy of nivolumab + ipilimumab in patients with initial progressive disease vs. initial responders with later progressive disease.

The authors enrolled patients with IMDC intermediate and poor-risk advanced clear cell RCC between October 2016 and December 2018. Patients began treatment with nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks induction. Patients with early significant progressive disease (week 8) or non-responders at week 16 received 2-4 nivolumab + ipilimumab “boost” cycles as salvage therapy. Patients who initially responded (partial or complete response) to nivolumab monotherapy continued with maintenance but could receive nivolumab + ipilimumab for later progressive disease.

ASCO21_Grimm_Figure1.png

The authors assessed the primary endpoint of confirmed investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST in both the first line (1L) and second-line (2L). Additional secondary endpoints included activity of nivolumab monotherapy, remission rate with nivolumab + ipilimumab “boost”, safety, and overall survival (OS).

They examined 109 patients without prior systemic therapy for kidney cancer and 98 patients in the second-line setting following prior treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The median age of included patients was 65 years (range 20-87) and 71 % had intermediate-risk disease and 25 % had poor-risk disease.

ASCO21_Grimm_Figure2.png

Confirmed ORR with nivolumab monotherapy was 28 % for patients receiving first-line therapy and 17 % for those being treated in the second-line. After a median follow-up of 12.8 months, the best overall response after nivolumab induction with or without nivolumab + ipilimumab was 36 % in previously untreated patients receiving first-line therapy and 30 % in the second-line therapy following first-line TKI. Among 38 patients who received nivolumab + ipilimumab for stable disease (SD) up to week 16, 1 (3 %) had a complete response, 4 (11 %) had a partial response, and 26 (68 %) had stable disease. In addition to those receiving nivolumab + ipilimumab for salvage disease, a further 28 patients in the first-line setting and 43 in the second-line setting received salvage nivolumab + ipilimumab for initial progressive disease. Of these patients with progressive disease, 3 (11 %) had a subsequent partial response and 8 (29 %) had stable disease in among those receiving first-line therapy, whereas 3 (7.0 %) achieved a complete response, 6 (14 %) had a partial response, and 13 (30 %) has stable disease in the second-line setting. A further 26 patients (16 in the first-line setting and 10 in the second-line setting) received salvage nivolumab + ipilimumab later than week 16 for progressive disease during nivolumab maintenance. Among the 16 patients with late progression in the first-line setting, 3 (19 %) achieved partial response and 5 (31 %) achieved stable disease, whereas, among the 10 with late progression in the second-line setting, 2 (20 %) achieved a partial response and 3 (30 %) achieved stable disease.

ASCO21_Grimm_Figure3.png
In the first-line setting, progression-free survival was 6.3 months (95 % CI 3.7 – 10.1) whereas t was 3.7 months (95 % CI 2.0 - 4.5) in the second-line setting. Overall survival was similarly longer in the first-line setting (27.2 months, 95 % CI 19.9 – not estimable (NE)) than the second-line setting (20.2 months, 95 % CI 15.6 – NE).

ASCO21_Grimm_Figure4.png
All-cause adverse events were seen in 99% of patients. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 84% and 37% had grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events. Three treatment-related adverse events occurred: cerebrovascular accident (first-line), respiratory failure (first-line), and pneumonia (second-line).

The authors conclude that this “tailored approach” with nivolumab + ipilimumab salvage for patients who fail nivolumab monotherapy improves response rates compared to nivolumab monotherapy alone.

Presented By: Marc-Oliver Grimm, MD, Professor, Otto-Schott-Institut der Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Jena, Germany

Written By: Christopher J.D. Wallis, MD, Ph.D., Urologic Oncology Fellow, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Twitter: @WallisCJD at the 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting, Virtual Annual Meeting #ASCO21, June, 4-8, 2021