Assessment of hyperprogression versus the natural course of disease development with nivolumab with or without ipilimumab versus placebo in phase III, randomized, controlled trials

Abstract

BackgroundRetrospective studies have suggested a potential risk of hyperprogressive disease (HPD) in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We compared the incidence of HPD during treatment with nivolumab±ipilimumab versus natural tumor progression with placebo in post hoc analyses of two randomized, double-blind clinical trials.MethodsATTRACTION-2 randomized patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC) and progression on ≥2 prior regimens to nivolumab 3 mg/kg Q2W or placebo. CheckMate 451 randomized patients with extensive-disease small cell lung cancer (ED SCLC) and ongoing complete/partial response or stable disease after first-line chemotherapy to nivolumab 240 mg Q2W, nivolumab 1 mg/kg+ipilimumab 3 mg/kg Q3W for four doses then nivolumab 240 mg Q2W, or placebo. Patients receiving ≥1 dose of study drug and with tumor scans at baseline and the first on-treatment evaluation were included in the HPD analyses. HPD definitions were ≥20%, ≥50%, and ≥100% increase in target lesion sum of the longest diameters (SLD) at the first on-treatment assessment.ResultsIn the ATTRACTION-2 HPD-evaluable population, 243 patients received nivolumab and 115 placebo. Fewer patients receiving nivolumab versus placebo had increases in SLD ≥20% (33.7% vs 46.1%) and ≥50% (6.2% vs 11.3%); similar proportions had increases in SLD ≥100% (1.6% vs 1.7%). In the CheckMate 451 HPD-evaluable population, 177 patients received nivolumab, 179 nivolumab+ipilimumab, and 175 placebo. Fewer patients receiving nivolumab or nivolumab+ipilimumab versus placebo had increases in SLD ≥20% (27.1%, 27.4% vs 45.7%), ≥50% (10.2%, 11.2% vs 22.3%), and ≥100% (2.8%, 2.8% vs 6.3%).ConclusionsNivolumab±ipilimumab was not associated with an increased rate of progression versus placebo in patients with GC, GEJC, or ED SCLC, suggesting that previous reports of HPD may reflect the natural disease course in some patients rather than ICI-mediated progression.Trial registration numberNCT02538666; NCT02267343.

Hypothesis of a CD137/Eomes activating axis for effector T cells in HPV oropharyngeal cancers

“…Immune checkpoint inhibitors are indicated in clinical practice in head and neck cancer with a significant response rate (Burtness et al 2019 ). However, a significant proportion of patients do not respond or show progression with checkpoint inhibitors (Kang et al 2022 ). CD137 agonists exist and could be combined as synchronous or delayed systemic combination therapy.…”

Chromosome 11q13 amplification correlates with poor response and prognosis to PD-1 blockade in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

“…Defined by its signal growth kinetics, HPD has raised many concerns regarding its incidence, mechanism, and potential biomarkers. Some debates that HPD represents the natural accelerating growth pace of the disease course ( 25 ). HPD after ICIs treatment in patients with Amp11q13 has been reported in non-small cell lung cancer, esophageal adenocarcinoma and lung cancer with neuroendocrine features.…”

“…Several biomarkers have been proposed to predict HPD following immunotherapy, but large-scale validation is needed. However, some debates that HPD may reflect merely the natural course of disease in a subset of patients ( 25 ).…”

Novel Necroptosis-Related Gene Signature for Predicting Early Diagnosis and Prognosis and Immunotherapy of Gastric Cancer

“…In recent years, immunotherapy has achieved great results in GC patients [ 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 ], so we analyzed the correlation between risk score and immunity. Our study shows that the NRG prognostic risk score has important associations with TME, immune cells, immune cell infiltration, immune checkpoints, and immunotherapy.…”