First-line (1L) nivolumab (NIVO) plus chemotherapy (chemo) vs chemo in patients (pts) with advanced gastric cancer, gastroesophageal junction cancer, and esophageal adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC/EAC): 5-year (y) follow-up of Chinese pts from CheckMate 649.

392 Background: NIVO + chemo demonstrated clinically meaningful survival benefit and an acceptable safety profile vs chemo in previously untreated Chinese pts with advanced GC/GEJC/EAC from CheckMate 649, consistent with the overall study population. 1L NIVO + chemo is currently approved for pts with advanced non-HER2+ GC/GEJC/EAC in China and other countries. We report 5-y results of NIVO + chemo vs chemo in Chinese pts from CheckMate 649. Methods: Adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced or metastatic, non-HER2+ GC/GEJC/EAC were enrolled regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Randomized pts received NIVO + chemo, NIVO + ipilimumab, or chemo. Dual primary endpoints for NIVO + chemo vs chemo were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR) in pts with PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 5. Results: 208 Chinese pts were randomized to NIVO + chemo or chemo. At 61-month (mo) minimum follow-up, NIVO + chemo continued to demonstrate OS and PFS benefit vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 and all randomized pts (Table). 5-y OS rate was 24% with NIVO + chemo vs 8% with chemo in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 and 20% vs 7% in all randomized pts. Objective response rate (ORR) was higher and responses were more durable with NIVO + chemo vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 and all randomized pts (Table). No new safety signals were identified with longer follow-up. Conclusions: NIVO + chemo continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful long-term survival benefit, more durable responses, and acceptable safety vs chemo in Chinese pts after 5 y of follow-up, consistent with earlier reports and with the overall study population of pts with advanced non-HER2+ GC/GEJC/EAC. These results further support NIVO + chemo as a standard 1L treatment option for Chinese pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02872116 . Efficacy PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 All randomized NIVO + chemo(n = 75) Chemo (n = 81) NIVO + chemo (n = 99) Chemo (n = 109) mOS (95% CI), mo 15.5(11.9–21.1) 9.6(8.0–12.1) 14.3(11.5–16.5) 10.3(8.1–12.1) HR (95% CI) 0.57 (0.40–0.82) 0.63 (0.46–0.85) mPFS a (95% CI), mo 8.5(6.0–14.0) 4.3(4.1–6.5) 8.3(6.2–12.4) 5.6(4.2–6.8) HR (95% CI) 0.51 (0.34–0.76) 0.57 (0.41–0.80) ORR a,b (95% CI), % 68 (56–79) 48 (36–60) 66 (55–76) 45 (35–56) mDOR a,c (95% CI), mo 12.5 (7.2–23.4) 6.9 (3.9–8.5) 12.5 (7.2–17.7) 5.6 (4.4–8.3) a Per BICR. b In pts with measurable target lesions at baseline. c In responders. DOR, duration of response; m, median.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-01-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.4_suppl.392
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
10.63
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

First-line (1L) nivolumab (NIVO) plus chemotherapy (chemo) vs chemo in patients (pts) with advanced gastric cancer, gastroesophageal junction cancer, and esophageal adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC/EAC): 5-year (y) follow-up of Chinese pts from CheckMate 649.

Stephen McCraith, Wenwei Hu, Chunmei Bai, Yi Ba et al.
7 citations
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
10.63
article

First-line (1L) nivolumab (NIVO) plus chemotherapy (chemo) vs chemo in patients (pts) with advanced gastric cancer, gastroesophageal junction cancer, and esophageal adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC/EAC): 5-year (y) follow-up of Chinese pts from CheckMate 649.

Stephen McCraith, Wenwei Hu, Chunmei Bai, Yi Ba, Hongming Pan, Shukui Qin, Yuxian Bai, Wei Li, Xiaochun Zhang, Li Bai, Tianshu Liu, Jingdong Zhang, Weijian Guo, Rui‐Hua Xu, Nan Hu, Jufeng Wang, Haijun Zhong, Xiaoyan Lin, Ying Cheng, Lin Shen
article en
7 citations

Abstract

392 Background: NIVO + chemo demonstrated clinically meaningful survival benefit and an acceptable safety profile vs chemo in previously untreated Chinese pts with advanced GC/GEJC/EAC from CheckMate 649, consistent with the overall study population. 1L NIVO + chemo is currently approved for pts with advanced non-HER2+ GC/GEJC/EAC in China and other countries. We report 5-y results of NIVO + chemo vs chemo in Chinese pts from CheckMate 649. Methods: Adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced or metastatic, non-HER2+ GC/GEJC/EAC were enrolled regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Randomized pts received NIVO + chemo, NIVO + ipilimumab, or chemo. Dual primary endpoints for NIVO + chemo vs chemo were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR) in pts with PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 5. Results: 208 Chinese pts were randomized to NIVO + chemo or chemo. At 61-month (mo) minimum follow-up, NIVO + chemo continued to demonstrate OS and PFS benefit vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 and all randomized pts (Table). 5-y OS rate was 24% with NIVO + chemo vs 8% with chemo in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 and 20% vs 7% in all randomized pts. Objective response rate (ORR) was higher and responses were more durable with NIVO + chemo vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 and all randomized pts (Table). No new safety signals were identified with longer follow-up. Conclusions: NIVO + chemo continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful long-term survival benefit, more durable responses, and acceptable safety vs chemo in Chinese pts after 5 y of follow-up, consistent with earlier reports and with the overall study population of pts with advanced non-HER2+ GC/GEJC/EAC. These results further support NIVO + chemo as a standard 1L treatment option for Chinese pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02872116 . Efficacy PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 All randomized NIVO + chemo(n = 75) Chemo (n = 81) NIVO + chemo (n = 99) Chemo (n = 109) mOS (95% CI), mo 15.5(11.9–21.1) 9.6(8.0–12.1) 14.3(11.5–16.5) 10.3(8.1–12.1) HR (95% CI) 0.57 (0.40–0.82) 0.63 (0.46–0.85) mPFS a (95% CI), mo 8.5(6.0–14.0) 4.3(4.1–6.5) 8.3(6.2–12.4) 5.6(4.2–6.8) HR (95% CI) 0.51 (0.34–0.76) 0.57 (0.41–0.80) ORR a,b (95% CI), % 68 (56–79) 48 (36–60) 66 (55–76) 45 (35–56) mDOR a,c (95% CI), mo 12.5 (7.2–23.4) 6.9 (3.9–8.5) 12.5 (7.2–17.7) 5.6 (4.4–8.3) a Per BICR. b In pts with measurable target lesions at baseline. c In responders. DOR, duration of response; m, median.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(4_suppl)
Qingdao University (CN), Fujian Medical University (CN), Harbin Medical University (CN), Sun Yat-sen University (CN), China Pharmaceutical University (CN), Jilin University (CN), Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN), Peking University (CN), Fudan University (CN), Peking Union Medical College Hospital (CN), Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital (CN), Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital (CN), Chinese PLA General Hospital (CN), Zhengzhou University (CN), Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States) (US), Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (CN), Peking University Cancer Hospital (CN), Jilin Province Tumor Hospital (CN), Zhejiang Cancer Hospital (CN), Third Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University (CN), The First People's Hospital of Changzhou (CN), Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University (CN), First Hospital of Jilin University (CN), Zhongshan Hospital (CN), The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University (CN), Henan Cancer Hospital (CN), Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center (CN), Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute (CN), Union Hospital (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
10.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.