Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab in individuals with treatment-naive programmed death-ligand 1 positive metastatic soft tissue sarcomas: a multicentre retrospective study

Currently, the choice of treatment for individuals with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (MSTS) presents a significant challenge to clinicians. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NPI) versus nivolumab alone (NIV) in individuals with...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBMC cancer Vol. 21; no. 1; p. 108
Main Authors Chen, Yaolin, Liu, Xiangzhen, Liu, Jijun, Liang, Donghua, Zhao, Mingdong, Yu, Weiguang, Chen, Pengfei
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England BioMed Central Ltd 02.02.2021
BioMed Central
BMC
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Currently, the choice of treatment for individuals with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (MSTS) presents a significant challenge to clinicians. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NPI) versus nivolumab alone (NIV) in individuals with treatment-naive programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) positive MSTS. Prospectively maintained databases were reviewed from 2013 to 2018 to assess individuals with treatment-naive PD-L1 MSTS who received NPI (nivolumab 3 mg/kg and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for 4 doses followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or NIV (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) until disease progression, withdrawal, unendurable [AEs], or death. The co-primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The median follow-up was 16.0 months (IQR 14.4-18.5) after targeted intervention. The median OS was 12.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.1-13.7) and 9.2 months (95% CI, 4.2-11.5) for the NPI and NIV groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.49, 95% CI, 0.33-0.73; p=0.0002); the median PFS was 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.2-4.5) and 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.1-3.4) for the NPI and NIV groups, respectively (HR 0.51, 95% CI, 0.36-0.71; p< 0.0001). Key grade 3-5 AEs occurred more frequently in the NPI group than in the NIV group (94 [72.9%] for NPI vs. 35 [27.1%], p< 0.001). For treatment-naive PD-L1 positive MSTS, NPI seems to be less tolerated but has a greater survival advantage than NIV as the primary therapy.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1471-2407
1471-2407
DOI:10.1186/s12885-021-07843-3