Efficacy and safety of first-line (1L) nivolumab plus relatlimab (NIVO + RELA) versus NIVO plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) in advanced melanoma: An updated indirect treatment comparison (ITC) with 4-year follow-up data.

9554 Background: An ITC comparing NIVO + RELA and NIVO + IPI, approved dual immunotherapy treatment options for patients (pts) with advanced melanoma, was previously conducted using pt-level data from the pivotal RELATIVITY-047 (RELA-047; NIVO + RELA vs NIVO) and CheckMate 067 (CM-067; NIVO + IPI or NIVO vs IPI) trials (Long JCO 2024). Here we present updated results using 4-year follow-up data from RELA-047. Methods: Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for cross-trial imbalances in baseline characteristics. CM-067 follow-up was truncated (median 41.0 mo) to best align with the follow-up length in RELA-047 (median 34.9 mo). Progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator, confirmed objective response rates (ORRs) per investigator, overall survival (OS), and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were analyzed. Outcomes were also evaluated across key subgroups. The weighted NIVO arms from each trial were compared for internal validation. Results: After weighting, key baseline characteristics were balanced for NIVO + RELA (n=339) and NIVO + IPI (n=297). Outcomes after weighting were similar between NIVO + RELA and NIVO + IPI (hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI]: PFS 1.08 [0.89–1.33]; OS 0.95 [0.76–1.19]; table). Outcomes were similar between the NIVO arms, validating the ITC methodology. Across subgroups, efficacy appeared similar between treatments, although trends favoring NIVO + IPI were observed for ORR among pts with BRAF-mutant disease or serum lactate dehydrogenase >2x the upper limit of normal. Results when NIVO + IPI follow-up was untruncated were consistent with the truncated analyses. Conclusions: Consistent with previous results, this updated ITC with longer follow-up from RELA-047 suggests that 1L treatment with NIVO + RELA may have comparable efficacy to NIVO + IPI in pts with advanced melanoma, including most—but not all—subgroups. Results should be interpreted with caution given differences in study design and changes in the treatment landscape over time. Efficacy outcomes after weighting. NIVO + RELA (n = 339) NIVO + IPI (n = 297) HR/odds ratio [OR] (95% CI) NIVO RELA-047 (n = 338) NIVO CM-067 (n = 288) HR/OR (95% CI) Median PFS per INV, mo (95% CI) 12.0 (8.2–17.1) 11.2 (8.5–18.1) 1.08 (0.89–1.33) 6.6 (4.6–10.1) 5.7 (3.9–9.1) 0.96 (0.79–1.16) Confirmed ORR per INV, % 48 50 0.91 (0.73–1.14) 40 40 1.00 (0.79–1.28) Median OS, mo (95% CI) 64.5 (38.6–NR) NR (37.1–NR) 0.95 (0.76–1.19) 35.1 (27.3–48.8) 35.7 (26.4–NR) 1.02 (0.83–1.26) Median MSS, mo (95% CI) NR (NR–NR) NR (NR–NR) 0.87 (0.68–1.12) 51.2 (34.7–NR) 44.8 (32.3–NR) 0.96 (0.76–1.21) NR: not reached; HR/OR are NIVO+RELA vs NIVO+IPI.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-05-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.16_suppl.9554
Primary Topic
Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Efficacy and safety of first-line (1L) nivolumab plus relatlimab (NIVO + RELA) versus NIVO plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) in advanced melanoma: An updated indirect treatment comparison (ITC) with 4-year follow-up data.

Hussein A. Tawbi, Evan J. Lipson, Hannah Kim, Paolo A. Ascierto et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
article

Efficacy and safety of first-line (1L) nivolumab plus relatlimab (NIVO + RELA) versus NIVO plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) in advanced melanoma: An updated indirect treatment comparison (ITC) with 4-year follow-up data.

Hussein A. Tawbi, Evan J. Lipson, Hannah Kim, Paolo A. Ascierto, Dirk Schadendorf, Andriy Moshyk, Jennell Palaia, Caroline Gaudy‐Marqueste, Viviana Garcia Horton, Georgina Venetia Long, James Larkin, F. Stephen Hodi, Leon A. Sakkal, David R. D’Adamo, Divya Patel, Zheng‐Yi Zhou, Dana Christensen, Christopher D. Lao, A. Selvan
article en

Abstract

9554 Background: An ITC comparing NIVO + RELA and NIVO + IPI, approved dual immunotherapy treatment options for patients (pts) with advanced melanoma, was previously conducted using pt-level data from the pivotal RELATIVITY-047 (RELA-047; NIVO + RELA vs NIVO) and CheckMate 067 (CM-067; NIVO + IPI or NIVO vs IPI) trials (Long JCO 2024). Here we present updated results using 4-year follow-up data from RELA-047. Methods: Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for cross-trial imbalances in baseline characteristics. CM-067 follow-up was truncated (median 41.0 mo) to best align with the follow-up length in RELA-047 (median 34.9 mo). Progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator, confirmed objective response rates (ORRs) per investigator, overall survival (OS), and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were analyzed. Outcomes were also evaluated across key subgroups. The weighted NIVO arms from each trial were compared for internal validation. Results: After weighting, key baseline characteristics were balanced for NIVO + RELA (n=339) and NIVO + IPI (n=297). Outcomes after weighting were similar between NIVO + RELA and NIVO + IPI (hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI]: PFS 1.08 [0.89–1.33]; OS 0.95 [0.76–1.19]; table). Outcomes were similar between the NIVO arms, validating the ITC methodology. Across subgroups, efficacy appeared similar between treatments, although trends favoring NIVO + IPI were observed for ORR among pts with BRAF-mutant disease or serum lactate dehydrogenase >2x the upper limit of normal. Results when NIVO + IPI follow-up was untruncated were consistent with the truncated analyses. Conclusions: Consistent with previous results, this updated ITC with longer follow-up from RELA-047 suggests that 1L treatment with NIVO + RELA may have comparable efficacy to NIVO + IPI in pts with advanced melanoma, including most—but not all—subgroups. Results should be interpreted with caution given differences in study design and changes in the treatment landscape over time. Efficacy outcomes after weighting. NIVO + RELA (n = 339) NIVO + IPI (n = 297) HR/odds ratio [OR] (95% CI) NIVO RELA-047 (n = 338) NIVO CM-067 (n = 288) HR/OR (95% CI) Median PFS per INV, mo (95% CI) 12.0 (8.2–17.1) 11.2 (8.5–18.1) 1.08 (0.89–1.33) 6.6 (4.6–10.1) 5.7 (3.9–9.1) 0.96 (0.79–1.16) Confirmed ORR per INV, % 48 50 0.91 (0.73–1.14) 40 40 1.00 (0.79–1.28) Median OS, mo (95% CI) 64.5 (38.6–NR) NR (37.1–NR) 0.95 (0.76–1.19) 35.1 (27.3–48.8) 35.7 (26.4–NR) 1.02 (0.83–1.26) Median MSS, mo (95% CI) NR (NR–NR) NR (NR–NR) 0.87 (0.68–1.12) 51.2 (34.7–NR) 44.8 (32.3–NR) 0.96 (0.76–1.21) NR: not reached; HR/OR are NIVO+RELA vs NIVO+IPI.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(16_suppl)
The University of Sydney (AU), Bloomberg (United States) (US), Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust (GB), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US), Aix-Marseille Université (FR), University of Michigan (US), Massachusetts General Hospital (US), Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States) (US), Melanoma Institute Australia (AU), Royal Marsden Hospital (GB), Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" (IT), Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center (US), Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DE), Analysis Group (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
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.