open access

Vol 16, No 5 (2020)
Research paper
Published online: 2020-10-29
Get Citation

Indirect comparison of treating patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma with nivolumab or pembrolizumab — multicenter analysis

Bożena Cybulska-Stopa, Marcin Ziętek, Grażyna Kamińska-Winciorek, Anna M. Czarnecka, Karolina Piejko, Łukasz Galus, Barbara Ziółkowska, Stanisław Kieszko, Natasza Kempa-Kamińska, Jacek Calik, Tomasz Kubiatowski, Rafał Suwiński, Jacek Mackiewicz, Piotr Rutkowski
DOI: 10.5603/OCP.2020.0037
·
Oncol Clin Pract 2020;16(5):295-300.

open access

Vol 16, No 5 (2020)
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Published online: 2020-10-29

Abstract

Introduction. The development of a new class of drug — checkpoint inhibitors has changed the prognosis of cancer patients. A particular class of drugs are antibodies against the programmed cell death type 1 receptor/ligand of the programmed cell death type 1 receptor (nivolumab and pembrolizumab). There are, however, no trials with a random selection of the patients which directly compare nivolumab and pembrolizumab. Because of the development of immunotherapy and many new drugs registered as anti-PD-1, it is important to determine whether there are differences in respect to effectiveness and safety in using nivolumab and pembrolizumab.

Material and method. 499 patients with non-resectable or metastatic melanoma treated in the years 2016–2019 in five oncological reference centers in Poland (Cracow, Gliwice, Lublin, Poznań, Wrocław) were included in the analysis. The criterion for inclusion in the analysis was first-line treatment with anti-PD-1 (nivolumab or pembrolizumab).

Results. Median OS and PFS in the whole analyzed group were 19.9 and 7.9 months, respectively. Estimated median OS and PFS were 20.1 and 18.1 months and 8.5 and 6.0 months for nivolumab and pembrolizumab, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed in median OS and PFS in the group of patients receiving nivolumab and pembrolizumab (respectively P = 0.6291 [HR = 1.06; Cl 95% 0.8–1.4] and P = 0.0956 [HR = 1.20; Cl 95% 0.97–1.48]). The percentage of grade G3 or/and G4 irAEs was similar in both groups treated with nivolumab or pembrolizumab, 5.8 and 5.2%, respectively. Conclusions. No differences in the range of OS, PFS and ORR was observed between therapy with nivolumab and pembrolizumab in previously untreated patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma. No differences were found in the frequency of irAEs of grade G3 or G4. The treatment with a specific preparation should be based on the preferences of the patient and the clinician.

Abstract

Introduction. The development of a new class of drug — checkpoint inhibitors has changed the prognosis of cancer patients. A particular class of drugs are antibodies against the programmed cell death type 1 receptor/ligand of the programmed cell death type 1 receptor (nivolumab and pembrolizumab). There are, however, no trials with a random selection of the patients which directly compare nivolumab and pembrolizumab. Because of the development of immunotherapy and many new drugs registered as anti-PD-1, it is important to determine whether there are differences in respect to effectiveness and safety in using nivolumab and pembrolizumab.

Material and method. 499 patients with non-resectable or metastatic melanoma treated in the years 2016–2019 in five oncological reference centers in Poland (Cracow, Gliwice, Lublin, Poznań, Wrocław) were included in the analysis. The criterion for inclusion in the analysis was first-line treatment with anti-PD-1 (nivolumab or pembrolizumab).

Results. Median OS and PFS in the whole analyzed group were 19.9 and 7.9 months, respectively. Estimated median OS and PFS were 20.1 and 18.1 months and 8.5 and 6.0 months for nivolumab and pembrolizumab, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed in median OS and PFS in the group of patients receiving nivolumab and pembrolizumab (respectively P = 0.6291 [HR = 1.06; Cl 95% 0.8–1.4] and P = 0.0956 [HR = 1.20; Cl 95% 0.97–1.48]). The percentage of grade G3 or/and G4 irAEs was similar in both groups treated with nivolumab or pembrolizumab, 5.8 and 5.2%, respectively. Conclusions. No differences in the range of OS, PFS and ORR was observed between therapy with nivolumab and pembrolizumab in previously untreated patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma. No differences were found in the frequency of irAEs of grade G3 or G4. The treatment with a specific preparation should be based on the preferences of the patient and the clinician.

Get Citation

Keywords

melanoma; immunotherapy; antiPD-1 therapy; pembrolizumab; nivolumab

About this article
Title

Indirect comparison of treating patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma with nivolumab or pembrolizumab — multicenter analysis

Journal

Oncology in Clinical Practice

Issue

Vol 16, No 5 (2020)

Article type

Research paper

Pages

295-300

Published online

2020-10-29

DOI

10.5603/OCP.2020.0037

Bibliographic record

Oncol Clin Pract 2020;16(5):295-300.

Keywords

melanoma
immunotherapy
antiPD-1 therapy
pembrolizumab
nivolumab

Authors

Bożena Cybulska-Stopa
Marcin Ziętek
Grażyna Kamińska-Winciorek
Anna M. Czarnecka
Karolina Piejko
Łukasz Galus
Barbara Ziółkowska
Stanisław Kieszko
Natasza Kempa-Kamińska
Jacek Calik
Tomasz Kubiatowski
Rafał Suwiński
Jacek Mackiewicz
Piotr Rutkowski

References (14)
  1. Wang C, Thudium KB, Han M, et al. In vitro characterization of the anti-PD-1 antibody nivolumab, BMS-936558, and in vivo toxicology in non-human primates. Cancer Immunol Res. 2014; 2(9): 846–856.
  2. Guo L, Zhang H, Chen B. Nivolumab as programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitor for targeted immunotherapy in tumor. J Cancer. 2017; 8(3): 410–416.
  3. Longoria TC, Tewari KS. Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics and metabolism of pembrolizumab in the treatment of melanoma. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2016; 12(10): 1247–1253.
  4. Rutkowski P, Wysocki PJ, Nasierowska-Guttmejer A, et al. Cutaneous melanomas. Oncol Clin Pract. 2020; 16(4): 163–182.
  5. Mok TSK, Wu YL, Kudaba I, et al. KEYNOTE-042 Investigators. 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. 2019; 393(10183): 1819–1830.
  6. Carbone DP, Reck M, Paz-Ares L, et al. CheckMate 026 Investigators. First-Line Nivolumab in Stage IV or Recurrent Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376(25): 2415–2426.
  7. https://www.gov.pl/web/zdrowie/choroby-onkologiczne (last access: 26th Jun 2020).
  8. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009; 45(2): 228–247.
  9. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0) published: May 28, 2009 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute.
  10. Moser JC, Wei G, Colonna SV, et al. Comparative-effectiveness of pembrolizumab vs. nivolumab for patients with metastatic melanoma. Acta Oncol. 2020; 59(4): 434–437.
  11. Robert C, Schachter J, Long GV, et al. KEYNOTE-006 investigators. Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015; 372(26): 2521–2532.
  12. Robert C, Long GV, Brady B, et al. Nivolumab in previously untreated melanoma without BRAF mutation. N Engl J Med. 2015; 372(4): 320–330.
  13. Ascierto PA, Long GV, Robert C, et al. Survival outcomes in patients with previously untreated BRAF wild-type advanced melanoma treated with nivolumab therapy: three-year follow-up of a randomized phase 3 trial. JAMA Oncol. 2019; 5(2): 187–194.
  14. Robert C, Schachter J, Long G, et al. Abstract CT188: 5-year survival and other long-term outcomes from KEYNOTE-006 study of pembrolizumab (pembro) for ipilimumab (ipi)-naive advanced melanoma. Clinical Trials (13 Supplement). 2019.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

Wydawcą serwisu jest  "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail:  viamedica@viamedica.pl