Abstract
Background
In CheckMate 227 Part 1 (NCT02477826), first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab demonstrated long-term durable overall survival (OS) benefit versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. We report results in Japanese patients with ≥ 5-year follow-up.
Methods
Adults with stage IV/recurrent NSCLC without EGFR/ALK aberrations were randomized 1:1:1 to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab alone, or chemotherapy (patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1%), or nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy (patients with tumor PD-L1 < 1%). Five-year efficacy and safety were assessed in Japanese patients.
Results
At 62.1 months’ minimum follow-up, 143 Japanese patients with PD-L1 ≥ 1% or < 1% were randomized to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 66) or chemotherapy (n = 77). Five-year OS rates were 46% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 34% with chemotherapy (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 36% versus 19% (PD-L1 < 1%). Median duration of response was 59.1 versus 7.1 months (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 17.3 versus 3.0 months (PD-L1 < 1%). Among 5-year survivors treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1%; n = 27), 59% (95% CI, 39%–75%) were off treatment for ≥ 3 years without receiving subsequent therapy. No new safety signals were observed.
Conclusions
At 5-year follow-up, nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to show long-term durable clinical benefit versus chemotherapy, regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. Consistent with findings for the global population, these data support the use of nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line treatment in Japanese patients with metastatic NSCLC.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Programmed death 1 (PD-1) and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor-based immunotherapy in the first-line setting has significantly improved survival outcomes versus chemotherapy alone for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [1,2,3,4].
Immune checkpoint inhibitors, nivolumab, a fully human PD-1 antibody, and ipilimumab, a fully human cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 antibody, have distinct but complementary mechanisms of action [5]. This dual immunotherapy combination has shown durable survival benefit versus chemotherapy in global clinical trials, in metastatic NSCLC and several other advanced solid tumors [6,7,8]. CheckMate 227 is a multi-part, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial evaluating first-line nivolumab-based regimens versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC [1, 9, 10]. In Part 1 of the trial, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab showed overall survival (OS) benefit versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC with tumor PD-L1 expression ≥ 1% (independent co-primary endpoint) or < 1% (prespecified descriptive analysis) [1]. At the 5-year follow-up, nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to provide long-term, durable clinical benefit regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression versus chemotherapy, with no new safety concerns; the majority of 5-year survivors in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arm did not initiate any subsequent systemic anticancer treatment for ≥ 3 years [11]. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab is approved in the United States as first-line treatment for adults with metastatic NSCLC with no EGFR/ALK aberrations and tumor PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%, and in Japan as first-line treatment regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression [12,13,14].
Differences in treatment outcomes between Asian and non-Asian patients with NSCLC have been reported [15,16,17,18]. These may be due to epidemiological and demographical variability and differences in the prevalence of activating driver mutations between populations, such as a high prevalence of EGFR mutations in Asian patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma [16, 19, 20]. As Japan has a well-resourced healthcare system, higher rates of subsequent therapy and better patient management may also impact long-term treatment outcomes [16, 21].
It is therefore important to assess clinical outcomes in Japanese patients to better inform physicians of treatment options. Survival benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab across several tumor types has been reported in Asian populations, including Japanese patients [22,23,24]. At the 3-year follow-up of CheckMate 227, nivolumab plus ipilimumab provided durable long-term efficacy benefits versus chemotherapy, regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression, in the Asian subpopulation, including Japanese patients with metastatic NSCLC [21]. However, long-term clinical data on first-line immunotherapy combinations in Japanese patients remain a high unmet need. Here, we present efficacy and safety results of nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in Japanese patients from CheckMate 227 Part 1, with a minimum follow-up of 5 years, the longest reported phase 3 outcomes with dual immunotherapy for NSCLC in this subpopulation.
Patients and methods
Patients and treatment
Eligibility criteria for CheckMate 227 (NCT02477826) were described previously [1, 9]. Briefly, adults with histologically confirmed squamous or non-squamous stage IV/recurrent NSCLC, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–1, without prior systemic anticancer therapy for advanced/metastatic disease were enrolled. Patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations or known ALK alterations, untreated or symptomatic central nervous system metastases, or autoimmune disease were excluded. Patients (n = 143) for this subanalysis were enrolled from 32 centers in Japan [21].
Patients with tumor PD-L1 expression ≥ 1% were randomized 1:1:1 to receive nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks [Q2W]) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg every 6 weeks), nivolumab monotherapy (240 mg Q2W), or platinum-doublet chemotherapy (every 3 weeks [Q3W] for ≤ 4 cycles). Patients with tumor PD-L1 expression < 1% were randomized 1:1:1 to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab (360 mg Q3W) plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy (Q3W for ≤ 4 cycles), or platinum-doublet chemotherapy (Q3W for ≤ 4 cycles). Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or for ≤ 2 years for immunotherapy.
Endpoints and assessments
The independent co-primary endpoint of OS in patients with tumor PD-L1 expression ≥ 1% and secondary endpoints were previously reported [1]. The efficacy assessments in this 5-year exploratory subanalysis in Japanese patients included OS, progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and duration of response (DOR) assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST version 1.1) in the tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1%, tumor PD-L1 < 1%, and the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% populations. OS by histology and PFS after the next line of therapy (PFS2) were also assessed by tumor PD-L1 expression. Tumor PD-L1 expression was determined as described previously [1, 25].
Safety and tolerability, including treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs) were assessed in all treated Japanese patients. AEs were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Additional details on AEs are included in the supplementary methods (online only).
Post hoc analyses in Japanese patients included efficacy outcomes (PFS, ORR, and DOR) evaluated in the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population of patients alive at 5 years, efficacy outcomes (OS, PFS, ORR, and DOR) in the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population of patients who discontinued study treatment due to TRAEs, and treatment-free interval (TFI; the time from last study dose to start of subsequent systemic therapy or death, whichever occurred first) measured in patients who discontinued study therapy (for any reason), in 5-year survivors, and in patients who discontinued study treatment due to TRAEs.
Statistical analyses
Efficacy and safety analyses of nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in the randomized and treated populations, respectively, of Japanese patients were exploratory and summarized using descriptive statistics. Time-to-event analyses for OS, PFS, DOR, and TFI were performed using the Kaplan–Meier method. Hazard ratios (HRs) with associated two-sided confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model, with tumor histology as the strata and treatment group as a single covariate. An unstratified model was used to estimate HRs between treatment arms in patient subgroups. The Clopper-Pearson method was used to calculate 95% exact two-sided CIs for ORRs.
Results
Patients
At current database lock (February 15, 2022), the minimum follow-up for OS was 62.1 months and median follow-up was 67.5 months for Japanese patients. In total, 143 Japanese patients with tumor PD-L1 expression ≥ 1% or < 1% from CheckMate 227 Part 1 were randomized to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 66) or chemotherapy (n = 77) (Supplementary Fig. 1). Baseline characteristics were generally balanced across treatment arms (Table 1).
At database lock, all patients in both treatment arms had completed or discontinued treatment. In the tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1%, tumor PD-L1 < 1%, and the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% populations, the median (range) treatment durations were 6.0 (0–24.0), 4.2 (0–24.0), and 5.1 (0–24.0) months for nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 4.2 (0–49.4), 2.3 (0–24.3), and 3.8 (0–49.4) months for chemotherapy, respectively (Table 2). Among 66 patients receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 9 completed 2 years of study treatment (PD-L1 ≥ 1%, n = 8; PD-L1 < 1%, n = 1). Among patients in the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population who had a PFS event, 67% (nivolumab plus ipilimumab) versus 85% (chemotherapy) received subsequent systemic anticancer therapies; 18% versus 81% received subsequent immunotherapy (Table 3).
Efficacy outcomes
All randomized patients
Among 89 Japanese patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1%, median (95% CI) OS was 58.3 (15.2–not reached [NR]) months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 28.9 (23.7–54.6) months with chemotherapy (HR 0.72; 95% CI, 0.42–1.26); 5-year OS (95% CI) rate was 46% (30%–60%) versus 34% (21%–47%) (Fig. 1A). Similar trends were observed with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in the tumor PD-L1 < 1% population (n = 54); median (95% CI) OS was 41.5 (19.4–62.6) versus 18.2 (7.4–30.3) months (HR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.29–1.04) and the 5-year OS (95% CI) rate was 36% (18%–54%) versus 19% (7%–35%) (Fig. 1B). Median (95% CI) OS in the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population was 46.8 (19.4–67.1) versus 24.9 (18.9–33.2) months (HR 0.64, [95% CI 0.42–0.98]); 5-year OS (95% CI) rate was 42% (30%–54%) versus 28% (18%–39%) (Fig. 1C).
Durable OS benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy was also observed in patients with non-squamous (median [95% CI] OS: 58.3 [20.4–NR] vs 26.4 [20.4–33.4] months) or squamous (median [95% CI] OS: 29.1 [14.6–48.8] vs 9.2 [5.3–41.1] months) histology, regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression; however, sample sizes were small in the squamous subgroup (Supplementary Table 1).
Similar patterns of clinical benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy were observed for PFS, ORR, and DOR in both the tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% populations. In patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1%, median (95% CI) PFS was 24.0 (5.6–55.5) months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 6.7 (4.3–8.3) months with chemotherapy (HR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32–0.95); 5-year PFS rate was 33% versus 11% (Fig. 2A). In patients with tumor PD-L1 < 1%, median PFS (95% CI) was 7.2 (2.9–19.3) months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 4.5 (4.0–7.0) months with chemotherapy (HR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.32–1.28); 5-year PFS rate was 10% versus 0% (Fig. 2B). In the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population, median (95% CI) PFS was 11.1 (5.6–24.0) months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 5.6 (4.3–7.0) months with chemotherapy (HR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38–0.89); 5-year PFS rate was 25% versus 7% (Fig. 2C). ORR was higher with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (63% vs 40%) in patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% but was comparable between treatment arms for patients with tumor PD-L1 < 1% (36% vs 31%) (Table 4). Median (95% CI) DOR was 59.1 (24.5–NR) months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 7.1 (3.9–31.6) months with chemotherapy in the tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% population, 17.3 (7.2–NR) versus 3.0 (2.6–5.6) months in the tumor PD-L1 < 1% population, and 29.0 (18.0–NR) versus 5.6 (3.1–7.1) months in the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population (Table 4). Of the confirmed responders, 40% (nivolumab plus ipilimumab) versus 6% (chemotherapy) had ongoing responses for ≥ 5 years.
PFS2 benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy was observed in the tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% (HR 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33–0.94) and tumor PD-L1 < 1% (HR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.29–0.93) populations (Supplementary Fig. 2). TFI, a potential indicator of patient experience [26,27,28,29], was assessed by tumor PD-L1 expression (Table 2). Among patients who discontinued study treatment (for any reason), 32% (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 12% (PD-L1 < 1%) of patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arm versus 5% (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 0% (PD-L1 < 1%) in the chemotherapy arm were estimated to remain alive and treatment-free for ≥ 3 years after treatment discontinuation.
Patients alive at 5 years
In the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population, 47 Japanese patients were alive at 5 years (nivolumab plus ipilimumab: n = 27; chemotherapy: n = 20); baseline characteristics of patients are shown in Supplementary Table 2. Median (range) treatment duration was 10.7 (0–24.0) months for nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 7.0 (2.0–49.4) months for chemotherapy (Table 2), with a median (range) of 24 (1–52) nivolumab doses and 6 (1–18) ipilimumab doses received in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arm. PFS benefit was observed with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy; median (95% CI) PFS was 60.6 (19.4–NR) versus 8.3 (6.7–27.7) months (Fig. 3). ORR was 85% (nivolumab plus ipilimumab) versus 45% (chemotherapy), with 56% versus 17% of responders having ongoing responses for ≥ 5 years; median (95% CI) DOR was NR versus 6.9 (2.7–31.6) months (Table 4).
At the 5-year cut-off, 59% (95% CI, 39%–75%) of patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arm versus 15% (95% CI, 4%–34%) in the chemotherapy arm were off treatment without receiving any subsequent therapy (Table 2); 15% versus 85% of patients had received subsequent immunotherapy (Table 3). Median (95% CI) TFI was NR with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 2.0 (1.2–5.3) months with chemotherapy; the 3-year TFI rate was 59% versus 15% (Table 2).
Patients who discontinued study treatment due to TRAEs
In the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population, TRAEs led to the discontinuation of all study drugs in 17 (26%) Japanese patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 13 (17%) treated with chemotherapy (Fig. 4). Median (range) treatment duration was 2.8 (0–12.6) months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 2.2 (0–38.9) months with chemotherapy (Supplementary Table 3). Median OS was NR with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus 33.2 (95% CI, 7.7–NR) months with chemotherapy; 5-year OS rate was 58% versus 38% (Table 5). Median PFS after treatment discontinuation was 54.3 months versus 2.0 months. ORR was 65% (nivolumab plus ipilimumab) versus 38% (chemotherapy) and median DOR after treatment discontinuation was NR versus 1.5 (95% CI, 0.1–NR) months; 66% of responding patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arm had responses lasting ≥ 5 years, whereas no patients in the chemotherapy arm were estimated to remain in response. The 3-year TFI rate was 47% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab; no patients were estimated to be treatment-free in the chemotherapy arm (Supplementary Table 3).
Safety
No new TRAEs were reported with nivolumab plus ipilimumab since the prior report [21], as all Japanese patients have been off treatment for ≥ 3 years (Supplementary Table 4). In the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population, the most common (≥ 10%) any-grade IMAEs with nivolumab plus ipilimumab were rash (47%), diarrhea/colitis (18%), adrenal insufficiency, hypothyroidism/thyroiditis, and hypophysitis (12% each), and hyperthyroidism and pneumonitis (11% each); the most common (≥ 5%) grade 3–4 IMAEs were hypophysitis (8%), adrenal insufficiency, diabetes mellitus, and rash (6% each), and diarrhea/colitis, pneumonitis, and hepatitis (5% each) (Table 6).
Most IMAEs occurred within the first 6 months of nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment, with 20 (30%) and 35 (53%) patients newly experiencing an onset of an endocrine or non-endocrine IMAE during this time, respectively (Table 6; Fig. 5; Supplementary Fig. 3). The frequency of new onset of IMAEs was considerably reduced over time, with 3 and 2 patients experiencing new onset of endocrine and non-endocrine IMAEs, respectively, at 6–12 months and 1 and 4 patients at 12–18 months. No patient had new onset of IMAEs beyond 18 months of treatment (Fig. 5). Most non-endocrine IMAEs were resolved, with the median time to resolution ranging from < 1 month (hypersensitivity) to 7.9 months (pneumonitis) (Table 6). Systemic corticosteroids were primarily used for the management of most IMAEs in patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, with median treatment duration ranging from 0.1 (hypersensitivity) to 3.9 weeks (adrenal insufficiency) (Supplementary Table 5).
Discussion
The results of this subanalysis in Japanese patients from the CheckMate 227 Part 1 study represent the longest survival follow-up reported to date for phase 3 studies evaluating first-line combination immunotherapy for metastatic NSCLC with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% or < 1%. With a 5-year minimum follow-up, clinically meaningful OS benefit was maintained with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in Japanese patients regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression, despite a high rate of subsequent immunotherapy received in the chemotherapy arm (81%) in the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population of patients with a PFS event. The results were consistent with the 3-year follow-up analysis in Japanese patients [21].
PFS and DOR benefit was maintained with nivolumab plus ipilimumab at 5 years. Additionally, patients in the combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% population who were alive at 5 years had a higher 3-year TFI rate with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy, with 59% versus 15% of patients receiving no subsequent systemic therapy at the 5-year time point, suggesting the long-term durable benefit of this first-line immunotherapy combination in Japanese patients. Among patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment within 2 years due to TRAEs, 58% remained alive for ≥ 5 years, with 47% of patients receiving no subsequent therapy within 3 years of discontinuation.
Recent studies in melanoma and other cancers have demonstrated that TFI, during which patients typically experience clinically stable disease while remaining treatment-free, is associated with improved quality of life [26,27,28,29]. In the randomized global population of CheckMate 227, two-thirds of the 5-year survivors treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab remained treatment-free through the 5-year landmark, and their quality of life was similar to that of the US general population [11, 30]. In this subanalysis, the high 3-year TFI rate in 5-year survivors who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab is consistent with that of the randomized global population [11], and also suggests long-term durable benefit of this dual immunotherapy regimen in Japanese patients.
No new safety signals were reported in this subanalysis after long-term follow-up (≥ 5 years). TRAEs reported in Japanese patients at 5 years were consistent with the 3-year data [21]. Most IMAEs occurred within the first 6 months of nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment; only 1 and 4 Japanese patients experienced new onset of endocrine and non-endocrine IMAEs, respectively, after 12 months. Numerically higher incidences of some IMAEs were observed in Japanese patients versus the randomized global population [11], including rash (47% vs 20%), diarrhea/colitis (18% vs 8%), adrenal insufficiency (12% vs 4%), hypophysitis (12% vs 4%), and diabetes mellitus (6% vs 1%); however, most events were managed with systemic corticosteroids.
This exploratory subanalysis was not statistically powered to conduct statistical testing for comparisons between treatment arms. The subanalysis was also limited by small sample sizes for the patient subgroups. The findings in Japanese patients, however, were consistent with results in the randomized global population and aligned with findings from other immunotherapy-based treatments in this subpopulation [11, 21, 31,32,33]. Ongoing observational studies in Japanese patients with metastatic NSCLC could provide insight into the use of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in clinical practice in Japan [34].
In conclusion, at ≥ 5-year follow-up, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab provided long-term efficacy benefits versus chemotherapy in Japanese patients with metastatic NSCLC, regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. Consistent with the long-term findings in the randomized global population, these data continue to support the use of nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic NSCLC in Japan.
Data availability
Data are available upon reasonable request. BMS policy on data sharing may be found at https://www.bms.com/researchers-and-partners/independent-research/data-sharing-request-process.html.
Change history
09 September 2023
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-023-02408-9
References
Hellmann MD, Paz-Ares L, Bernabe Caro R et al (2019) Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 381(21):2020–2031. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1910231
Herbst RS, Giaccone G, de Marinis F et al (2020) Atezolizumab for first-line treatment of PD-L1-selected patients with NSCLC. N Engl J Med 383(14):1328–1339. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1917346
Mok TSK, Wu YL, Kudaba I et al (2019) Pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for previously untreated, PD-L1-expressing, locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-042): a randomised, open-label, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 393(10183):1819–1830. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32409-7
Reck M, Rodríguez-Abreu D, Robinson AG et al (2016) Pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for PD-L1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 375(19):1823–1833. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1606774
Wei SC, Duffy CR, Allison JP (2018) Fundamental mechanisms of immune checkpoint blockade therapy. Cancer Discov 8(9):1069–1086. https://doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.Cd-18-0367
Paz-Ares LG, Ramalingam SS, Ciuleanu TE et al (2022) First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced NSCLC: 4-year outcomes from the randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 227 Part 1 trial. J Thorac Oncol 17(2):289–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2021.09.010
Doki Y, Ajani JA, Kato K et al (2022) Nivolumab combination therapy in advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 386(5):449–462. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2111380
Peters S, Scherpereel A, Cornelissen R et al (2022) First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma: 3-year outcomes from CheckMate 743. Ann Oncol 33(5):488–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2022.01.074
Hellmann MD, Ciuleanu TE, Pluzanski A et al (2018) Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in lung cancer with a high tumor mutational burden. N Engl J Med 378(22):2093–2104. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1801946
Paz-Ares L, Ciuleanu TE, Yu X et al (2019) LBA3 Nivolumab (NIVO) + platinum-doublet chemotherapy (chemo) vs chemo as first-line (1L) treatment (tx) for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC): CheckMate 227 - part 2 final analysis. Ann Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdz453.004
Brahmer JR, Lee JS, Ciuleanu TE et al (2022) Five-year survival outcomes with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in CheckMate 227. J Clin Oncol 41(6):1200–1212. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.22.01503
Bristol Myers Squibb Company (2022) OPDIVO (nivolumab) highlights of prescribing information. Available at https://packageinserts.bms.com/pi/pi_opdivo.pdf. Accessed October 2022. Princeton, NJ.
Bristol Myers Squibb Company (2022) YERVOY (ipilimumab) highlights of prescribing information. Available at https://packageinserts.bms.com/pi/pi_yervoy.pdf. Accessed October 2022. Princeton, NJ.
Ono Pharmaceutical Co. Combination therapy concerning Opdivo and Yervoy approved in Japan for first–line treatment of unresectable advanced or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer. Available at https://www.ono-pharma.com/sites/default/files/en/news/press/sm_cn201127_1.pdf. Published 2020. Accessed October 2022.
Hotta K, Hida T, Nokihara H et al (2022) Final overall survival analysis from the phase III J-ALEX study of alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK inhibitor-naïve Japanese patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. ESMO Open 7(4):100527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100527
Kim ES, Melosky B, Park K et al (2021) EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors for EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: outcomes in Asian populations. Future Oncol 17(18):2395–2408. https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2021-0195
Niho S, Kunitoh H, Nokihara H et al (2012) Randomized phase II study of first-line carboplatin-paclitaxel with or without bevacizumab in Japanese patients with advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 76(3):362–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2011.12.005
Soo RA, Loh M, Mok TS et al (2011) Ethnic differences in survival outcome in patients with advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer: results of a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Thorac Oncol 6(6):1030–1038. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e3182199c03
Kawaguchi T, Matsumura A, Fukai S et al (2010) Japanese ethnicity compared with Caucasian ethnicity and never-smoking status are independent favorable prognostic factors for overall survival in non-small cell lung cancer: a collaborative epidemiologic study of the National Hospital Organization Study Group for Lung Cancer (NHSGLC) in Japan and a Southern California Regional Cancer Registry databases. J Thorac Oncol 5(7):1001–1010. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181e2f607
Shi Y, Au JS, Thongprasert S et al (2014) A prospective, molecular epidemiology study of EGFR mutations in Asian patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer of adenocarcinoma histology (PIONEER). J Thorac Oncol 9(2):154–162. https://doi.org/10.1097/jto.0000000000000033
O’Byrne KJ, Lee KH, Kim SW et al (2022) First-line nivolumab + ipilimumab in advanced NSCLC: CheckMate 227 subpopulation analyses in Asian patients. ESMO Open 7(1):100394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100394
Namikawa K, Kiyohara Y, Takenouchi T et al (2020) Final analysis of a phase II study of nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab for unresectable chemotherapy-naive advanced melanoma. J Dermatol 47(11):1257–1266. https://doi.org/10.1111/1346-8138.15514
Kato K, Doki Y, Ogata T et al (2022) First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab or chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a Japanese subgroup analysis of open-label, phase 3 trial (CheckMate 648/ONO-4538–50). Esophagus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10388-022-00970-1
Tomita Y, Kondo T, Kimura G et al (2020) Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma: analysis of Japanese patients in CheckMate 214 with extended follow-up. Jpn J Clin Oncol 50(1):12–19. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyz132
Dako (2019) PD-L1 IHC 28–8 pharmDX. Available at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf15/P150027c.pdf. Accessed Oct 2022.
Djebbari F, Sharpley FA, McLain-Smith S et al (2020) Treatment-free interval as an additional measure of efficacy in a large UK dataset of transplant ineligible myeloma patients. PLoS One 15(2):e0229469. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229469
McDermott DF, Rini BI, Motzer RJ et al (2018) 874P - Treatment-free interval (TFI) following discontinuation of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (N+I) or sunitinib (S) in patients (Pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): CheckMate 214 analysis. Ann Oncol 29:viii303. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdy283
Regan MM, Werner L, Rao S et al (2019) Treatment-free survival: a novel outcome measure of the effects of immune checkpoint inhibition-a pooled analysis of patients with advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol 37(35):3350–3358. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.19.00345
Richardson P, Roy A, Acharyya S et al (2017) Treatment-free interval as a metric of patient experience and a health outcome of value for advanced multiple myeloma: the case for the histone deacetylase inhibitor panobinostat, a next-generation novel agent. Expert Rev Hematol 10(10):933–939. https://doi.org/10.1080/17474086.2017.1369399
Janssen MF, Szende A, Cabases J et al (2019) Population norms for the EQ-5D-3L: a cross-country analysis of population surveys for 20 countries. Eur J Health Econ 20(2):205–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-018-0955-5
Horinouchi H, Nogami N, Saka H et al (2021) Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum for metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: KEYNOTE-189 Japan Study. Cancer Sci 112(8):3255–3265. https://doi.org/10.1111/cas.14980
Satouchi M, Nosaki K, Takahashi T et al (2021) First-line pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: KEYNOTE-024 Japan subset. Cancer Sci 112(12):5000–5010. https://doi.org/10.1111/cas.15144
John T, Sakai H, Ikeda S et al (2022) First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab combined with two cycles of chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a subanalysis of Asian patients in CheckMate 9LA. Int J Clin Oncol 27(4):695–706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-022-02120-0
Kijima T, Azuma K, Hayashi H et al (2022) P29–1 LIGHT-NING: An observational study of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with or without chemotherapy for 1st line NSCLC in Japan. Ann Oncol 33:S524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2022.05.276
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the patients and their families, as well as the clinical study teams, for making this study possible; Faith E. Nathan, MD, who served as the clinical trial physician; and Suresh Alaparthy, who served as the global trial manager. This study was funded by Bristol Myers Squibb. The PD-L1 IHC 28-8 pharmDx assay was developed in collaboration with Dako, an Agilent Technologies company (Santa Clara, CA, USA). Medical writing support was provided by Vidya Rajagopalan, PhD, of Evidence Scientific Solutions, Inc., and was funded by Bristol Myers Squibb.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Patient treatment and data collection were performed by MN, YO, SI, TY, HH, TF, YS, HT, KH, SS, HD, IO, KK, TN and HM. Data analysis was performed by LL, RGG and JB. All authors contributed to the interpretation of results and preparation of the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
H.D. received honoraria from AstraZeneca and Chugai Pharmaceutical. H.H. received honoraria from Amgen K.K., AstraZeneca K.K., Boehringer Ingelheim Japan Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb Co. Ltd., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd., Eli Lilly Japan K.K., Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K., Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Merck Biopharma Co. Ltd., MSD K.K., Novartis Pharmaceutical K.K., Ono Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.; received consulting fees from AstraZeneca K.K., Boehringer Ingelheim Japan Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb Co. Ltd., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Eli Lilly Japan K.K., Guardant Health, Merck Biopharma Co. Ltd., Pfizer Japan Inc., Shanghai Haihe Biopharma, and Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.; and received research funding from A2 Healthcare Corp., AbbVie Inc., Astellas Pharma Inc., AstraZeneca K.K., Bayer Yakuhin Ltd., Bristol Myers Squibb Co. Ltd., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., CMIC Shift Zero K.K., Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd., Eli Lilly Japan K.K., Eisai Co. Ltd., EP-CRSU Co. Ltd., EPS Corp., EPS International Co. Ltd., Gritstone Oncology Inc., ICON Japan K.K., inVentiv Health Japan, Kissei Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co. Ltd., Linical Co. Ltd., Merck Serono Co. Ltd., Merck Biopharma Co. Ltd., MSD K.K., Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim Co. Ltd., Novartis Pharma K.K., Ono Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Parexel International Corp., Pfizer Japan Inc., Pfizer R&D Japan G.K., Quintiles Inc./IQVIA Services Japan K.K., SymBio Pharmaceutical Ltd., Syneos Health, Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., and Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. K.H. received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Lilly, MSD, Nippon Kayaku, Pfizer, and Takeda; and received research funding from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Lilly, and MSD. S.I. received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Lilly, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Takeda; and received research funding from AstraZeneca and Chugai Pharmaceutical. K.K. received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Lilly, MSD, and Ono Pharmaceutical; and received research funding from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Lilly, MSD, and Ono Pharmaceutical. T.N. received honoraria from Ono Pharmaceutical and research grants from Ostuka Pharmaceutical. M.N. received honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical. Y.O. received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, MSD, Nippon Kayaku, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, and Taiho Pharmaceutical; and received research funding from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Dainippon Sumitomo, Janssen, Kissei, Kyorin, Lilly, Novartis, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Takeda. I.O. received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Lilly, MSD Oncology, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Taiho Pharmaceutical; and received research funding from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Lilly, MSD Oncology, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Taiho Pharmaceutical. Y.S. received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, MSD, Nippon Kayaku, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, and Taiho Pharmaceutical. S.S. received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, MSD K.K., and Ono Pharmaceutical. H.T. received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo Pharma, Eli Lilly, MSD, Ono Pharmaceutical, Takeda, and Taiho Pharmaceutical; and received research funding from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo Pharma, Eli Lilly, MSD, Ono Pharmaceutical, Takeda, and Taiho Pharmaceutical. T.Y. received honoraria from AstraZeneca K.K., Bristol Myers Squibb Co. Ltd., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Eli Lilly Japan K.K., Nippon Kayaku Co. Ltd., Ono Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Pfizer Japan Inc., and Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.; and received research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb Co. Ltd., Boehringer Ingelheim Japan Inc., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Delta-Fly Pharma, Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K., MSD, and Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. J.B., R.G.G., and L.L. are employees of Bristol Myers Squibb and received stock ownership from Bristol Myers Squibb. T.F. and H.M. declare no competing interests.
Ethical approval
The institutional review board or independent ethics committee at each center approved this trial and it was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization Good Clinical Practice guidelines. All patients provided written informed consent. The trial protocol has been published previously (Hellmann MD, et al. N Engl J Med 2018;378:2093–2104).
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
This article is published under an open access license. Please check the 'Copyright Information' section either on this page or in the PDF for details of this license and what re-use is permitted. If your intended use exceeds what is permitted by the license or if you are unable to locate the licence and re-use information, please contact the Rights and Permissions team.
About this article
Cite this article
Nishio, M., Ohe, Y., Ikeda, S. et al. First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: 5-year outcomes in Japanese patients from CheckMate 227 Part 1. Int J Clin Oncol 28, 1354–1368 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-023-02390-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-023-02390-2