Nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs sunitinib for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: Final analysis from the phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial.
4505 Background: First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) provided substantial long-term survival benefits over sunitinib (SUN) in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) in the CheckMate 214 trial. We now report final efficacy and safety data in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk. Methods: Pts with clear cell aRCC were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 3 mg/kg + IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W×4 then NIVO (3 mg/kg or 240 mg Q2W or 480 mg Q4W); or SUN 50 mg once daily for 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off. Efficacy endpoints included overall survival (OS), and independent radiology review committee (IRRC)-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) in intermediate/poor-risk (I/P; primary), ITT (secondary), and favorable-risk (FAV; exploratory) pts. Response was assessed using RECIST v1.1. Results: With 9 years median follow-up, OS was improved with NIVO+IPI vs SUN in ITT (HR 0.71) and I/P (HR 0.69) pts. The probability of OS at 108 months was 31% vs 20% in ITT pts and 30% vs 19% in I/P pts, respectively. In pts with FAV risk, the HR for OS improved from 1.45 at first report (Motzer NEJM 2018) to 0.80 at 9 years, showing a delayed benefit with NIVO+IPI vs SUN. OS probabilities at 108 months were 35% vs 22% in FAV pts, respectively (Table). The probability of PFS at 96 months with NIVO+IPI vs SUN was 23% vs 9% in ITT pts, 25% vs 9% in I/P pts, and 13% vs 11% in FAV pts. The probability of remaining in response through 96 months with NIVO+IPI vs SUN was 48% vs 19% in ITT pts, 50% vs 23% in I/P pts, and 36% vs not available (NA) in FAV pts. No new treatment-related deaths occurred in either arm. Additional subgroup analyses will be presented. Conclusions: In the longest and final phase 3 follow-up (9 years) of a first-line checkpoint inhibitor combination in aRCC, milestone rates of OS and PFS and durable response remained higher with NIVO+IPI vs SUN. No new safety signals emerged. NIVO+IPI remains a standard first-line option in aRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT02231749 . ITT I/P FAV Arm; n NIVO+IPI; 550 SUN; 546 NIVO+IPI; 425 SUN; 422 NIVO+IPI; 125 SUN; 124 mOS (95% CI), mo 53 (46–64) 38 (32–44) 47 (35–56) 26 (22–33) 78 (65–92) 67 (56–80) 108-mo OS probabilities (95% CI), % 31 (27–35) 20 (16–23) 30 (26–35) 19 (15–23) 35 (27–44) 22 (15–30) mPFS (95% CI), mo 12 (10–16) 12 (10–15) 12 (9–17) 9 (7–11) 13 (10–18) 29 (23–43) 96-mo a PFS probabilities (95% CI), % 23 (18–27) 9 (5–15) 25 (20–31) 9 (4–15) 13 (6–22) 11 (3–27) ORR per IRRC (95% CI); CR, % 39 (35–44); 12 33 (29–37); 3 42 (38–47); 12 27 (23–32); 3 30 (22–38); 13 52 (43–61); 6 mDOR (95% CI), mo 76 (59–NE) 25 (20–33) 83 (54–NE) 20 (16–26) 61 (23–NE) 33 (25–51) 96-mo a DOR probabilities (95% CI), % 48 (39–55) 19 (10–31) 50 (41–58) 23 (13–36) 36 (17–56) NA b a 96-mo probabilities reported due to small numbers of pts at risk at 108 mo. b No pts remain at risk. CR, complete response; DOR, duration of response; m, median; NE, not estimable.
Authors
- Marc‐Oliver Grimm (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3084-8654)
- David F. McDermott (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2675-5095)
- Yoshihiko Tomita (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7465-9591)
- Camillo Porta (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2412-1563)
- Brian I. Rini (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2212-080X)
- Maximiliano van Kooten Losio
- Elizabeth R. Plimack (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7618-0744)
- Chung‐Wei Lee (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3573-2506)
- Bernard Escudier (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4626-0479)
- Toni K. Choueiri (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9201-3217)
- Michael B. Atkins (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3901-9924)
- Nizar M. Tannir (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5559-8060)
- Robert John Motzer (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6925-2327)
- Frede Donskov (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8449-863X)
- Mauricio Burotto (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7150-4033)
- Saby George (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0444-5870)
- Christian Kollmannsberger (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6329-761X)
- Ruiyun Jiang
- Hans J. Hammers (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6224-4559)
- Thomas Powles
Institutions
- National Health Service (GB)
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Fox Chase Cancer Center (US)
- BC Cancer Agency (CA)
- Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (US)
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- Queen Mary University of London (GB)
- University of Pavia (IT)
- The Royal Free Hospital (GB)
- Cancer Research UK (GB)
- Institut Gustave Roussy (FR)
- Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States) (US)
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US)
- Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center (US)
- Jena University Hospital (DE)
- Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center (US)
- Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center
- University College London (GB)
- Niigata University (JP)
- The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2025-05-28
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.16_suppl.4505
- Citations
- 16
- Primary Topic
- Renal cell carcinoma treatment
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 24.29