Category: Immuno Oncology

CAN-2409 in Advanced NSCLC: Turning Tumors into Vaccines

RR

SUMMARY: The American Cancer Society estimates that for 2025, about 226,650 new cases of lung cancer will be diagnosed and 124,730 patients will die of the disease. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) accounts for approximately 85% of all lung cancers and Adenocarcinoma is now the most frequent histologic subtype of lung cancer.

A New Approach to Overcoming Resistance
For patients with advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC), Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the treatment landscape. Yet, many patients develop resistance or fail to respond altogether, leaving clinicians with limited options. A novel gene therapy, CAN-2409, is offering a different strategy, one that uses the tumor itself as a source of immune activation.

How It Works: An In Situ Vaccination
CAN-2409 is an engineered, replication-defective adenovirus designed to deliver the Herpes Simplex Virus thymidine kinase (HSV-tk) gene directly into tumor cells. Once inside, the cells express HSV-tk. When patients take the oral prodrug Valacyclovir, the enzyme HSV-tk converts it into a toxic metabolite, selectively killing the tumor cells.

But the therapeutic effect goes far beyond cell death.

  • Immunogenic cell death releases tumor-specific antigens and creates a pro-inflammatory environment.
  • The adenovirus itself adds inflammatory cues.
  • Dendritic cells capture and present these antigens, training cytotoxic T cells to recognize the tumor.

The result is a two-step, multimodal effect: localized destruction followed by a systemic immune response. This “in situ vaccination” primes the immune system not just against the injected lesion, but also against distant metastases, creating the potential for durable control.

Clinical Trial in ICI-Refractory NSCLC
A Phase IIa open-label trial evaluated CAN-2409 plus Valacyclovir in patients with unresectable Stage III/IV NSCLC who had failed to respond adequately to anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. Patients continued on their checkpoint inhibitor therapy and received two intratumoral injections of CAN-2409 (5 × 10^11 vp) five to seven weeks apart via bronchoscopic or percutaneous injection into lung tumor, disease-positive lymph node, or peripheral metastasis, followed by oral prodrug Valacyclovir administered for 15 days. The median age was 67 yrs, 44% were female, 68% were on checkpoint inhibitor therapy alone and 32% were on checkpoint inhibitor therapy plus Pemetrexed regimen. Majority of patients (90%) had Stage IV disease, 46% had PD-L1 TPS < 1%, 91% were former or current smokers.

Participants were enrolled into two cohorts:

  • Cohort 1: Stable disease while on ICI therapy
  • Cohort 2: Progressive disease despite ICI therapy

The goal was to assess Overall Survival (OS), abscopal responses, and immune correlates.

Extended Follow-Up Results
Seventy-six patients were enrolled, of whom 46 patients were considered evaluable

At a median follow-up of 32.4 months, the findings were striking:

  • Median OS (all evaluable patients): 24.5 months
  • Median OS in Cohort 2 (progressive disease): 21.5 months
  • Long-term survival: 37% alive beyond 2 years
  • Histology-specific benefit: Patients with nonsquamous disease had longer OS than those with squamous histology (25.4 vs. 13.3 months).

Notably, patients with nonsquamous tumors showed greater expansion of cytotoxic T cells, B cells, and dendritic cells, suggesting that histology-linked biology may shape immune responsiveness to CAN-2409.

Evidence of Systemic Immune Activation
One of the most compelling signals came from the observation of abscopal responses. Among patients with multiple lesions, 69% experienced shrinkage at uninjected sites, confirming that local therapy could indeed drive a systemic anti-tumor effect.

Safety and Tolerability
Throughout extended follow-up, CAN-2409 maintained a favorable safety profile. The most common Treatment Related Adverse Events (TRAEs) were Grade 1/2, with fatigue, fever, and chills in 18-39% of patients. No dose-limiting toxicities or Grade 4 or more treatment-related AEs were noted. No new safety signals emerged, underscoring its feasibility as a repeat intratumoral intervention alongside checkpoint blockade.

Looking Ahead
These results highlight the promise of CAN-2409 as a next-generation immunotherapy platform for patients with advanced NSCLC resistant to ICIs. With durable survival in a subset of patients, particularly those with nonsquamous histology, the findings support the initiation of a larger, randomized trial to validate efficacy and refine patient selection strategies.

Key Takeaway for Oncology Practice
CAN-2409 represents a novel paradigm in NSCLC, transforming tumors into personalized vaccines that harness both direct cytotoxicity and immune training. For patients progressing on ICIs, this dual mechanism could offer a meaningful new avenue of durable disease control.

MA10.02 CAN-2409 With Continued Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) in Patients With Stage III/IV NSCLC With Inadequate Response to ICI. Aggarwal C, Sterman D, Nicholas G, et al. Presented at the 2025 World Conference on Lung Cancer. September 6-9, 2025. Barcelona, Spain.

Tarlatamab Sets New Standard in Recurrent Small Cell Lung Cancer: Results from DeLLphi-304

RR

SUMMARY: The American Cancer Society estimates that for 2025, about 226,650 new cases of lung cancer will be diagnosed and 124,730 patients will die of the disease. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) originates from neuroendocrine cells and accounts for approximately 10-15% of all lung cancers diagnosed annually in the US. It is lethal and aggressive. The 5 year survival rate for Extensive Stage SCLC (ES-SCLC) is less than 5%, with a median survival of 9-10 months from the time of diagnosis.

Treatment decisions was SCLC are typically based on the VA Lung Group 2-Staging system, which classifies disease as either Limited Stage (LS) or Extensive Stage (ES). In Limited Stage patients, the disease burden is limited to one hemithorax and regional nodes, without presence of extra-thoracic disease, and amenable to definitive-intent thoracic Radiation Therapy (RT). Extensive Stage encompasses all other SCLC patients.

Patients with ES-SCLC are often treated with chemoimmunotherapy with or without radiation in the first line setting. Nearly all patients with SCLC experience disease recurrence during or after standard platinum-based chemotherapy, underscoring the need for novel treatment strategies Second-line treatment options are limited, and the response duration is short varying from 3-5 months, with Overall Survival rarely exceeding 8 months. There are presently no approved therapies for third line and beyond and these patients face a dire prognosis.

Delta-Like Protein 3 also known as DLL3, is encoded by the DLL3 gene and is expressed on the surface of tumor cells but not in normal adult tissues. Patients with high-grade pulmonary NeuroEndocrine Tumors, Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) and Large Cell NeuroEndocrine Carcinoma (LCNEC) have increased expression of DLL3 protein (increased expression seen in approximately 85-96% of the SCLC tumors), making this a a potential target in the treatment of Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Tarlatamab (IMDELLTRA®) is a first-in-class bispecific T-cell engager immunotherapy that directs the patients T cells to cancer cells expressing Delta-Like Ligand 3 (DLL3), independent of Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC) class I. Tarlatamab binds to both DLL3 on cancer cells and CD3 on T cells, leading to T-cell–mediated lysis of cancer cells.

In May 2024, the U.S. FDA granted accelerated approval to Tarlatamab for adult patients with extensive-stage SCLC whose disease progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. This decision was based largely on early clinical benefit observed in the Phase 2 DeLLphi-301 trial, where Tarlatamab demonstrated a 40% Overall Response Rate (ORR) in previously treated patients. Now, confirmatory results from the Phase 3 DeLLphi-304 trial further support the role of Tarlatamab in the treatment landscape, and mark a potential new standard of care for recurrent SCLC.

Phase 3 DeLLphi-304: Study Design and Population
DeLLphi-304 was a global, randomized, open-label trial comparing Tarlatamab, with standard-of-care chemotherapy which included Topotecan, Lurbinectedin, or Amrubicin, in patients with extensive-stage SCLC, whose disease progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. A total of 509 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either Tarlatamab (N=254) or chemotherapy (N=255). The median patient age was 65 yrs, Approximately 45% of randomized patients had current or previous brain metastases, 35% had liver metastases, 71% had received previous therapy with checkpoint inhibitors and 44% had platinum-resistant disease. Stratification factors included prior PD-L1 inhibitor treatment, chemotherapy-free interval, presence of brain metastases, and intended chemotherapy regimen. The Primary endpoint was Overall Survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included Progression-Free Survival (PFS), Objective Response Rate (ORR), Duration of Response (DOR), Disease Control Rate (DCR), Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs), and Safety.

Tarlatamab Demonstrates Significant Survival Benefit
At a median follow-up of approximately 11 months, Tarlatamab demonstrated a statistically and clinically significant improvement in OS:

  • Median OS: 13.6 vs 8.3 months (HR 0.60; 95% CI: 0.47–0.77; P<0.001)
  • Median PFS: 4.2 vs 3.2 months (HR 0.72; 95% CI: 0.59–0.88; P<0.001)

This translated to a 40% reduction in the risk of death for patients receiving Tarlatamab. The survival benefit extended across all prespecified subgroups, including age, gender, race, and prior anti–PD-L1 therapy. The ORR was 35% in the Tarlatamab group and 20% in the chemotherapy group.

Improved Symptom Control and Quality of Life
Beyond survival, Tarlatamab provided clinically meaningful improvements in Patient-Reported Outcomes, including relief from hallmark symptoms of SCLC:

  • Dyspnea score improved at 18 weeks: –1.94 with Tarlatamab vs +7.20 with CTx (mean difference –9.14; P< 0.001)
  • Cough improvement: 16% vs 9% (Odds Ratio 2.04; P = 0.012)
  • Chest pain improvement: 9% vs 4% (Odds Ratio 1.84; P = 0.100) – not significant

These findings reflect an overall better patient experience and potential Quality-of-Life benefit with Tarlatamab therapy.

Safety Profile and Tolerability
Tarlatamab was associated with a more favorable safety profile compared to chemotherapy:

  • Grade 3 or more Treatment-Related Adverse Events (TRAEs): 27% (Tarlatamab) vs 62% (Chemotherapy)
  • Discontinuations due to TRAEs: 3% vs 6%
  • Most common Grade 3 or more TRAEs with Tarlatamab were neutropenia (4%) and lymphopenia (4%)
  • Cytokine Release Syndrome (CRS) occurred in 56% of patients (mostly grade 1-2) and was manageable in clinical settings

These safety results support Tarlatamab as a more tolerable alternative to conventional chemotherapy.

Looking Ahead: Optimizing Treatment Sequencing
While the DeLLphi-304 trial has established Tarlatamab as an effective option post-platinum therapy, questions remain regarding its integration into the broader SCLC treatment paradigm. PD-L1 inhibitors already form part of standard first-line and maintenance therapy. Early-phase studies have shown that Tarlatamab can be safely combined with anti–PD-L1 agents, and this is being further evaluated in the ongoing DeLLphi-305 trial, a Phase 3 study assessing Tarlatamab plus PD-L1 inhibition as first-line maintenance following chemotherapy. Additionally, biomarker-driven analyses from DeLLphi-304 are underway to help identify patients most likely to benefit from Tarlatamab and those who may achieve durable responses.

Conclusion
The DeLLphi-304 trial positions Tarlatamab as a practice-changing therapy for patients with SCLC that has progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. With significant improvements in Overall and Progression-Free Survival, better symptom control, and a favorable safety profile, Tarlatamab redefines second-line treatment for a historically underserved patient population. These results not only represent a meaningful advance in SCLC therapy but also signal a broader shift toward targeted immunotherapy strategies in aggressive thoracic malignancies.

Tarlatamab in Small-Cell Lung Cancer after Platinum-Based Chemotherapy. Mountzios G, Sun L, Cho BC, et al. for the DeLLphi-304 Investigators. N Engl J Med 2025;393:349-361

 

Adjuvant Atezolizumab in Resected NSCLC: Five-Year Outcomes from IMpower010

RR

SUMMARY: Lung cancer is the second most common cancer in both men and women and the American Cancer Society estimates that for 2025, about 226,650 new cases of lung cancer will be diagnosed and 124,730 patients will die of the disease. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) accounts for approximately 85% of all lung cancers and Adenocarcinoma is now the most frequent histologic subtype of lung cancer. Of the three main subtypes of NSCLC, 30% are Squamous Cell Carcinomas (SCC), 40% are Adenocarcinomas and 10% are Large Cell Carcinomas. With changes in the cigarette composition and decline in tobacco consumption over the past several decades, Adenocarcinoma now is the most frequent histologic subtype of lung cancer.

Surgical resection is the primary treatment for approximately 30% of patients with NSCLC who present with early stage (I–IIIA) disease. These patients are often treated with platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy to decrease the risk of recurrence. Nonetheless, 45-75% of these patients develop recurrent disease. There is therefore an unmet need for this patient population.

Atezolizumab (TECENTRIQ®) is an anti PD-L1 monoclonal antibody, designed to directly bind to PD-L1 expressed on tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells, thereby blocking its interactions with PD-1 and B7.1 receptors expressed on activated T cells. PD-L1 inhibition may prevent T-cell deactivation and further enable the activation of T cells.

IMpower 010 is a global, multicentre, open-label, randomized Phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of Atezolizumab compared with Best Supportive Care (BSC), in patients with stage IB-IIIA NSCLC, following surgical resection and up to 4 cycles of adjuvant Cisplatin-based chemotherapy. In this study, 1005 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive Atezolizumab 1200 mg IV every 3 weeks for 16 cycles, or BSC. Both study groups were well balanced and eligible patients had an ECOG PS of 0-1. The Primary endpoint was Disease Free Survival (DFS) in the PD-L1-positive (1% or more) stage II-IIIA patients, all randomized stage II-IIIA patients and Intent to Treat (ITT) stage IB-IIIA populations. Key Secondary endpoints included Overall Survival (OS) in the overall study population and ITT stage IB-IIIA NSCLC patients.

Initial DFS Results at a Median Follow-Up of 32.2 Months
Adjuvant Atezolizumab demonstrated a clinically meaningful DFS advantage:

  • Stage II–IIIA, PD-L1 1% or more: 34% reduction in risk of recurrence or death vs. BSC (HR 0.66; P=0.0039); median DFS not reached vs. 35.3 months for BSC
  • Stage II–IIIA, PD-L1 50% or more: 57% risk reduction (HR 0.43)
  • All stage II–IIIA: HR 0.79 (P=0.02), median DFS gain of 7 months
  • No statistically significant DFS improvement in the ITT population
  • OS data immature at this stage

These findings led to regulatory approval of adjuvant Atezolizumab in resected stage II–IIIA PD-L1–positive NSCLC following chemotherapy.

Updated 5-Year Outcomes
Final DFS analysis and second OS interim analysis were reported with an additional 36 and 21 months of follow-up, respectively (clinical cutoff: January 26, 2024).

Disease-Free Survival:

  • Stage II–IIIA, PD-L1 ≥1% (N=476): HR 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55–0.91) – More than 30-month median DFS difference between arms
  • Stage II–IIIA, PD-L1 ≥50% (N=229): HR 0.48 (95% CI, 0.32–0.72)
  • All stage II–IIIA (N=882): HR 0.83 (95% CI, 0.69–1.00)
  • ITT (N=1005): HR 0.85 (95% CI, 0.71–1.01; P=0.07) – numerical improvement, not statistically significant
  • All randomized Stage II–IIIA (N=882): HR 0.83 (95% CI, 0.69–1.00)
  • PD-L1 ≥50% without EGFR/ALK alterations (N=209): HR 0.49 (95% CI, 0.32–0.75)

Overall Survival:

  • ITT: HR 0.97 (95% CI, 0.78–1.22)
  • Stage II–IIIA: HR 0.94 (95% CI, 0.75–1.19)
  • PD-L1 ≥1%: HR 0.77 (95% CI, 0.56–1.06)
  • PD-L1 ≥50%: HR 0.47 (95% CI, 0.28–0.77)

Since DFS in the ITT population did not cross the statistical significance boundary, formal OS testing was not conducted. OS data remain immature given a low event-to-patient ratio (~31%).

Clinical Perspective
IMpower010 remains the only Phase III trial with more than 5-year follow-up evaluating a checkpoint inhibitor as adjuvant therapy in resectable stage II–IIIA NSCLC. The most pronounced and durable benefits continue to be seen in PD-L1–selected populations, particularly those with PD-L1 50% or more and without EGFR/ALK alterations. These findings reinforce PD-L1 testing as a critical step in the adjuvant treatment algorithm for NSCLC, and they differentiate Atezolizumab from other checkpoint inhibitors evaluated in similar settings, where results have varied (e.g., KEYNOTE-091, BR.31)

Key Takeaways for Oncology Practice

  • Patient selection matters – Benefit is greatest in PD-L1–positive, especially PD-L1 50% or more
  • Durable effect – DFS benefit persists beyond 5 years in high PD-L1 subgroups
  • Ongoing OS follow-up – OS data are still maturing; future analyses may clarify survival impact
  • Safety reassurance – No new safety concerns after extended follow-up

Five-Year Survival Outcomes With Atezolizumab After Chemotherapy in Resected Stage IB-IIIA Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer (IMpower010): An Open-Label, Randomized, Phase III Trial. Felip E, Altorki N, Zhou C, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43:2343-2349. 

Neoadjuvant PD-1 Blockade Promotes Organ Preservation in Early Stage Mismatch Repair–Deficient Solid Tumors

RR

SUMMARY: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer diagnosed in both men and women in the United States. The American Cancer Society estimates that approximately 154,270 new cases of CRC will be diagnosed in the United States in 2025 and about 52,900 patients will die of the disease. The lifetime risk of developing CRC is about 1 in 23. The majority of CRC cases (about 75 %) are sporadic whereas the remaining 25 % of the patients have a family history of the disease. Only 5-6 % of patients with CRC with a family history background are due to inherited mutations in major CRC genes, while the rest are the result of accumulation of both genetic mutations and epigenetic modifications of several genes. Colorectal Cancer is a heterogeneous disease classified by its genetics, and even though the diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer in the US is dropping among people 65 years and older, the incidence has been rising in the younger age groups, with 12% of Colorectal Cancer cases diagnosed in people under age 50.

The DNA MisMatchRepair (MMR) system is responsible for molecular surveillance and works as an editing tool that identifies errors within the microsatellite regions of DNA and removes them. Defective MMR system leads to MSI (Micro Satellite Instability) and hypermutation, with the expression of tumor-specific neoantigens at the surface of cancer cells, triggering an enhanced antitumor immune response. MSI is therefore a hallmark of defective/deficient DNA MisMatchRepair (dMMR) system and occurs in 15% of all colorectal cancers. Defective MMR can be a sporadic or heritable event. Approximately 65% of the MSI high colon tumors are sporadic and when sporadic, the DNA MMR gene is MLH1. Defective MMR can manifest as a germline mutation occurring in MMR genes including MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2. This produces Lynch Syndrome often called Hereditary Nonpolyposis Colorectal Carcinoma–HNPCC, an Autosomal Dominant disorder that is often associated with a high risk for Colorectal and Endometrial carcinoma, as well as several other malignancies including Ovary, Stomach, Small bowel, Hepatobiliary tract, Brain and Skin. MSI is a hallmark of Lynch Syndrome-associated cancers. MSI high tumors tend to have better outcomes and this has been attributed to the abundance of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes in these tumors from increase immunogenicity. These tumors therefore are susceptible to blockade with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

MSI testing is performed using a PCR or NGS based assay and MSI-High refers to instability at 2 or more of the 5 mononucleotide repeat markers and MSI-Low refers to instability at 1 of the 5 markers. Patients are considered Micro Satellite Stable (MSS) if no instability occurs. MSI-L and MSS are grouped together because MSI-L tumors are uncommon and behave similar to MSS tumors. Tumors considered MSI-H have deficiency of one or more of the DNA MMR genes. MMR gene deficiency can be detected by ImmunoHistoChemistry (IHC). NCCN Guidelines recommend MMR or MSI testing for all patients with a history of Colon or Rectal cancer. Unlike Colorectal and Endometrial cancer, where MSI-H/dMMR testing is routinely undertaken, the characterization of Lynch Syndrome across heterogeneous MSI-H/dMMR tumors is unknown.

Background
Checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment landscape for MisMatch Repair–deficient (dMMR) metastatic solid tumors, offering durable responses across tumor types. This paradigm is now being explored in early-stage settings. Dostarlimab (JEMPERLI®) is a monoclonal antibody that binds to the PD-1 receptor and blocks its interaction with PD-L1 and PD-L2. Blocking the Immune checkpoint proteins unleashes the T cells, resulting in T cell proliferation, activation and a therapeutic response. Building on prior success in dMMR rectal cancer, this Phase 2, multicenter study investigated the feasibility of using neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade with Dostarlimab to achieve organ preservation in early-stage, surgically resectable dMMR solid tumors, potentially shifting the standard of care away from surgery and cytotoxic therapies.

Study Design and Patient Population
Conducted at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Hartford HealthCare, and Baptist Health Miami Cancer Institute, the study enrolled patients with newly diagnosed Stage I–III dMMR solid tumors, defined by loss of MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, or MSH6 expression on immunohistochemistry, that were amenable to curative-intent surgery. Two cohorts were formed:

  • Cohort 1: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.
  • Cohort 2: Patients with nonrectal dMMR solid tumors (including esophagogastric, colon, hepatobiliary, genitourinary, and gynecologic cancers).

All patients received Dostarlimab 500 mg IV every 3 weeks for 6 months (nine cycles). Clinical response was assessed within 8 weeks of completing therapy via tumor-specific imaging, endoscopy, and biopsy where applicable. Patients with residual disease were offered standard neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, while those achieving a clinical Complete Response (cCR) could opt for nonoperative management.

Primary and Exploratory Endpoints

  • Cohort 1: Co-primary endpoints were Overall Response Rate and sustained cCR at 12 months post-treatment.
  • Cohort 2: Exploratory analyses evaluated cCR rates, Recurrence-Free Survival (RFS), safety, and molecular correlates of response, including circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA).

Results
A total of 117 patients were analyzed:

  • Cohort 1 (Rectal Cancer): All 49 patients who completed therapy achieved a cCR and declined surgery. At 12 months, 37 maintained a sustained cCR, meeting the efficacy threshold.
  • Cohort 2 (Nonrectal Tumors): Of 54 patients, 35 achieved a cCR, with 33 choosing nonoperative management.

Across both cohorts:

  • 103 patients completed Dostarlimab therapy.
  • 84 (82%) achieved cCR.
  • 82 patients (80%) avoided surgery.
  • Two-year RFS: 92% (95% CI, 86–99).
  • Median follow-up for recurrence: 20 months (range, 0–60.8).
  • Safety: Most adverse events were grade 1–2 (60%), with 35% reporting no treatment-related events. No patient lost the opportunity for curative surgery due to disease progression.

Genomic and ctDNA Findings

  • Germline dMMR variants were present in 44% of patients.
  • Tumor-informed ctDNA testing tracked up to 50 tumor-specific mutations using a highly sensitive and specific assay.
  • ctDNA clearance correlated strongly with cCR: all patients with a cCR showed complete ctDNA clearance by end of treatment.
  • Persistently detectable ctDNA was associated with residual disease or eventual recurrence, reinforcing its value as a real-time, noninvasive biomarker for treatment response and residual disease monitoring.

Discussion
The findings underscore the transformative potential of neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade for early-stage dMMR cancers. Key takeaways include:

  • Tumor-Agnostic Efficacy: Dostarlimab elicited robust responses across a variety of histologies, suggesting that dMMR status, rather than tumor origin, may drive sensitivity to immunotherapy.
  • Organ Preservation: Surgery, and its associated morbidities, was avoided in the majority of patients, including those with rectal cancers where standard treatment often compromises fertility, continence, or other organ functions. Three women with rectal cancer treated in this trial successfully conceived and delivered children.
  • Variable Responses by Histology: While responses were highest in rectal, colon, hepatobiliary, and urothelial cancers, lower cCR rates were observed in prostate and upper gastrointestinal tumors. This suggests underlying biological variability despite shared dMMR status.
  • Monitoring Strategy: Integration of imaging, endoscopy, and ctDNA is critical. Liquid biopsy offered a reliable surrogate for tumor biopsy, particularly in inaccessible tumors, but caution is warranted as ctDNA alone may miss certain cases.
  • Safety and Feasibility: The 6-month regimen was generally well tolerated, and no patient lost surgical eligibility due to disease progression. This supports the feasibility of prolonged neoadjuvant immunotherapy in appropriately selected patients.

Clinical Implications and Future Directions
This study lays the groundwork for a paradigm shift in the management of early-stage dMMR tumors. However, key questions remain:

  • Long-Term Durability: While initial outcomes are promising, especially in rectal cancer, longer follow-up and additional data are necessary to confirm sustained benefit across nonrectal histologies.
  • Histology-Specific Trials: Basket trials and single-arm studies may suffice for anatomically sensitive tumors (e.g., rectum, bladder), but randomized trials may still be appropriate in less morbidly resectable cancers (e.g., colon).
  • Treatment Optimization: Determining the minimal effective duration of immunotherapy could reduce adverse events and cost. Median times to biopsy negativity (1.5 months) and imaging response (6.1 months) suggest a window for shortening therapy in responders.
  • Shared Decision-Making: Given the potential for curative nonoperative management, multidisciplinary care teams must align on strategies and engage patients in informed decision-making, particularly where standard surgery entails long-term quality-of-life tradeoffs.

Conclusion
Neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade with Dostarlimab achieved clinical Complete Responses in a substantial majority of patients with early-stage dMMR tumors, offering a path to organ preservation without compromising curative potential. These results highlight the tumor-agnostic power of checkpoint inhibitors and present a compelling case for redefining the treatment of dMMR solid tumors. As follow-up data matures and histology-specific nuances are better understood, immunotherapy may become the new cornerstone of early-stage dMMR cancer management.

Nonoperative Management of Mismatch Repair–Deficient Tumors. Cercek A, Foote MB, Rousseau B, et al. N Engl J Med 2025;392:2297-2308.

OPDIVO QvantigTM (nivolumab + hyaluronidase-nvhy) is delivered via subcutaneous injection, streamlining administration for eligible patients1*

RR

*3-5–minute vs 30-minute infusion of IV nivolumab. This does not account for all aspects of treatment. Actual clinic time may vary. 1,2

 Expert opinion: Saby George, MD, FACP†
†Dr Saby George, MD, is a paid consultant of Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) who was compensated by BMS for his contributions to this article.

Content sponsored by Bristol Myers Squibb

Subcutaneous administration overview

While immune checkpoint inhibitors have emerged as key treatment options for certain types of cancer, they are primarily delivered through intravenous (IV) administration,3 creating a need for alternative routes of administration.4-5 A subcutaneous (SC) injection may reduce the time preparing and administering treatment compared to IV delivery, offer practice flexibility that may free up infusion chairs, and deliver treatment faster.3,5 “Infusion centers are overwhelmed. Infusion chairs may open up if we transition to approved SC options,” remarked Dr George.

Evaluation of comparable PK, efficacy, and safety of SC OPDIVO Qvantig with IV nivolumab

OPDIVO Qvantig is formulated with hyaluronidase to increase the dispersion and absorption of SC nivolumab.1 CheckMate 67T, a randomized, open-label, phase 3 noninferiority trial, was designed to compare the PK, efficacy, and safety of OPDIVO Qvantig (delivered as a SC injection) with IV nivolumab.1,4

 OPDIVO QVANTIG, as monotherapy, is indicated for the first-line treatment of adult patients with intermediate- or poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), following treatment with intravenous nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy. OPDIVO QVANTIG is not indicated in combination with ipilimumab for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma. Please see additional 16 indications below.

OPDIVO QVANTIG is associated with the following Warnings and Precautions: severe and fatal immune-mediated adverse reactions including pneumonitis, colitis, hepatitis and hepatotoxicity, endocrinopathies, nephritis with renal dysfunction, dermatologic adverse reactions, other immune-mediated adverse reactions; complications of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT); embryo-fetal toxicity; and increased mortality in patients with multiple myeloma when OPDIVO QVANTIG is added to a thalidomide analogue and dexamethasone, which is not recommended outside of controlled clinical trials.

Please see Important Safety Information for OPDIVO QVANTIG below and US Full Prescribing Information for OPDIVO QVANTIG.

CheckMate 67T was a phase 3, randomized (1:1), open-label, noninferiority trial evaluating OPDIVO Qvantig (1,200 mg of nivolumab and 20,000 units of hyaluronidase) compared to intravenous nivolumab, in adult patients with advanced or metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) who received prior systemic therapy.1,4 Patients were stratified by weight (<80 kg versus ≥80 kg) and International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score (favorable vs intermediate vs poor risk).1 A total of 495 patients were randomized to receive either OPDIVO Qvantig every 4 weeks subcutaneously (n=248) or nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks intravenously (n=247).1,4 The co-primary endpoints were time-averaged serum concentration over 28 days (Cavgd28) and minimum serum concentration at steady state (Cminss).4 The key powered secondary endpoint was overall response rate, as assessed by blinded independent central review. The minimum follow-up time was 8 months.4

Pharmacokinetic, efficacy, and safety results

CheckMate 67T demonstrated that the PK of OPDIVO Qvantig was noninferior to that of intravenously administered nivolumab.1,4*

 

OPDIVO Qvantig resulted in a safety profile comparable with IV nivolumab.1 Dr George noted, “Safety was similar between administration methods. Rates of adverse reactions were similar for IV and SC nivolumab administration.”6 Please see safety table below for more information.

Summary and conclusions

OPDIVO Qvantig resulted in comparable PK, efficacy, and safety to IV nivolumab and may be the right option for your eligible patients.1 This 3-5 minute SC injection option may reduce the steps required for preparation and time needed for administration compared to IV nivolumab.1,2* There is no need for IV preparation, dilution, weight-based dose calculations, or port access with OPDIVO Qvantig.1 According to Dr George, “For my appropriate patients, it gives me flexibility. It may save administration time.* For eligible patients, it’s great to have this subcutaneous treatment option.”

*3-5–minute vs 30-minute infusion of IV nivolumab. This does not account for all aspects of treatment. Actual clinic time may vary.1,2

INDICATIONS

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the first-line treatment of adult patients with intermediate- or poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), following treatment with intravenous nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy.
Limitations of Use: OPDIVO QVANTIG is not indicated in combination with ipilimumab for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), in combination with cabozantinib, is indicated for the first-line treatment of adult patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who have received prior anti-angiogenic therapy.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma following treatment with intravenous nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy.
Limitations of Use: OPDIVO QVANTIG is not indicated in combination with ipilimumab for treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the adjuvant treatment of adult patients with completely resected Stage IIB, Stage IIC, Stage III, or Stage IV melanoma.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), in combination with platinum-doublet chemotherapy, is indicated as neoadjuvant treatment of adult patients with resectable (tumors ≥4 cm or node positive) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), in combination with platinum-doublet chemotherapy, is indicated for the neoadjuvant treatment of adult patients with resectable (tumors ≥4 cm or node positive) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and no known epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations or anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements, followed by OPDIVO QVANTIG as monotherapy in the adjuvant setting after surgical resection.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with progression on or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients with EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations should have disease progression on FDA-approved therapy for these aberrations prior to receiving OPDIVO QVANTIG.
Limitations of Use: OPDIVO QVANTIG is not indicated in combination with ipilimumab for the treatment of metastatic NSCLC.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) with disease progression on or after platinum-based therapy.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the adjuvant treatment of adult patients with urothelial carcinoma (UC) who are at high risk of recurrence after undergoing radical resection of UC.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine, is indicated for the first-line treatment of adult patients with unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC).

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) who have disease progression during or following platinum-containing chemotherapy or have disease progression within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment with platinum-containing chemotherapy.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the adjuvant treatment of completely resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer with residual pathologic disease in adult patients who have received neoadjuvant
chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), in combination with fluoropyrimidine- and platinum-containing chemotherapy, is indicated for the first-line treatment of adult patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) whose tumors express PD-L1 (≥1%).
Limitations of Use: OPDIVO QVANTIG is not indicated in combination with ipilimumab for the treatment of patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic ESCC.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), as monotherapy, is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable advanced, recurrent or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after prior fluoropyrimidine-and platinum-based chemotherapy.

OPDIVO QVANTIG™ (nivolumab and hyaluronidase-nvhy), in combination with fluoropyrimidine- and platinum-containing chemotherapy, is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with advanced or metastatic gastric cancer, gastroesophageal junction cancer, and esophageal adenocarcinoma whose tumors express PD-L1 (≥1%).

IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION 

Severe and Fatal Immune-Mediated Adverse Reactions

  • Immune-mediated adverse reactions, which may be severe or fatal, can occur in any organ system or tissue. While immune-mediated adverse reactions usually manifest during treatment, they can also occur after discontinuation of OPDIVO QVANTIG. Early identification and management are essential to ensure safe use of OPDIVO QVANTIG. Monitor for signs and symptoms that may be clinical manifestations of underlying immune-mediated adverse reactions. Evaluate clinical chemistries including liver enzymes, creatinine, and thyroid function at baseline and periodically during treatment. In cases of suspected immune-mediated adverse reactions, initiate appropriate workup to exclude alternative etiologies, including infection. Institute medical management promptly, including specialty consultation as appropriate.
  • Withhold or permanently discontinue OPDIVO QVANTIG depending on severity (please see Section 2 Dosage and Administration in the accompanying Full Prescribing Information). In general, if OPDIVO QVANTIG interruption or discontinuation is required, administer systemic corticosteroid therapy (1 to 2 mg/kg/day prednisone or equivalent) until improvement to Grade 1 or less. Upon improvement to Grade 1 or less, initiate corticosteroid taper and continue to taper over for at least 1 month. Consider administration of other systemic immunosuppressants in patients whose immune-mediated adverse reactions are not controlled with corticosteroid therapy.
  • Toxicity management guidelines for adverse reactions that do not necessarily require systemic steroids (e.g., endocrinopathies and dermatologic reactions) are discussed below.

Immune-Mediated Pneumonitis

  • OPDIVO QVANTIG can cause immune-mediated pneumonitis. The incidence of pneumonitis is higher in patients who have received prior thoracic radiation.
  • Immune-mediated pneumonitis occurred in 2.8% (7/247) of patients receiving OPDIVO QVANTIG, including Grade 3 (0.8%) and Grade 2 (2.0%) adverse reactions.

Immune-Mediated Colitis

  • OPDIVO QVANTIG can cause immune-mediated colitis. A common symptom included in the definition of colitis was diarrhea. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection/reactivation has been reported in patients with corticosteroid-refractory immune-mediated colitis. In cases of corticosteroid-refractory colitis, consider repeating infectious workup to exclude alternative etiologies.
  • Immune-mediated colitis occurred in 2.8% (7/247) of patients receiving OPDIVO QVANTIG, including Grade 3 (0.4%) and Grade 2 (2.4%) adverse reactions.

Immune-Mediated Hepatitis and Hepatotoxicity

  • OPDIVO QVANTIG can cause immune-mediated
  • Immune-mediated hepatitis occurred in 2.4% (6/247) of patients receiving OPDIVO QVANTIG, including Grade 3 (1.6%), and Grade 2 (0.8%) adverse reactions. Intravenous nivolumab in combination with cabozantinib can cause hepatic toxicity with higher frequencies of Grade 3 and 4 ALT and AST elevations compared to intravenous nivolumab alone. Consider more frequent monitoring of liver enzymes as compared to when the drugs are administered as single agents. With the combination of intravenous nivolumab and cabozantinib, Grades 3 and 4 increased ALT or AST were seen in 11% (35/320) of patients. 

Immune-Mediated Endocrinopathies

  • OPDIVO QVANTIG can cause primary or secondary adrenal insufficiency, immune-mediated hypophysitis, immune-mediated thyroid disorders, and Type 1 diabetes mellitus, which can present with diabetic ketoacidosis. Withhold OPDIVO QVANTIG depending on severity (please see section 2 Dosage and Administration in the accompanying Full Prescribing Information). For Grade 2 or higher adrenal insufficiency, initiate symptomatic treatment, including hormone replacement as clinically Hypophysitis can present with acute symptoms associated with mass effect such as headache, photophobia, or visual field defects. Hypophysitis can cause hypopituitarism; initiate hormone replacement as clinically indicated. Thyroiditis can present with or without endocrinopathy. Hypothyroidism can follow hyperthyroidism; initiate hormone replacement or medical management as clinically indicated. Monitor patients for hyperglycemia or other signs and symptoms of diabetes; initiate treatment with insulin as clinically indicated.
  • Adrenal insufficiency occurred in 2% (5/247) of patients receiving OPDIVO QVANTIG, including Grade 3 (0.8%) and Grade 2 (1.2%) adverse Adrenal insufficiency occurred in 4.7% (15/320) of patients with RCC who received intravenous nivolumab with cabozantinib, including Grade 3 (2.2%) and Grade 2 (1.9%) adverse reactions. Hypophysitis occurred in 0.6% (12/1994) of patients treated with single agent intravenous nivolumab, including Grade 3 (0.2%) and Grade 2 (0.3%). Thyroiditis occurred in 0.4% (1/247) of patients receiving OPDIVO QVANTIG, including a Grade 1 (0.4%) adverse reaction.
  • Hyperthyroidism occurred in 0.8% (2/247) of patients receiving OPDIVO QVANTIG, including Grade 2 (0.4%) adverse reactions. Hypothyroidism occurred in 9% (23/247) of patients receiving OPDIVO QVANTIG, including Grade 2 (5.7%) adverse reactions.
  • Grade 3 diabetes occurred in 4% (1/247) of patients receiving OPDIVO QVANTIG.

Immune-Mediated Nephritis with Renal Dysfunction

  • OPDIVO QVANTIG can cause immune-mediated
  • Grade 2 immune-mediated nephritis and renal dysfunction occurred in 1.2% (3/247) of patients receiving OPDIVO QVANTIG.

Immune-Mediated Dermatologic Adverse Reactions

  • OPDIVO QVANTIG can cause immune-mediated rash or dermatitis. Exfoliative dermatitis, including Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), and DRESS (drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms), has occurred with PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies. Topical emollients and/or topical corticosteroids may be adequate to treat mild to moderate non-exfoliative Withhold or permanently discontinue OPDIVO QVANTIG depending on severity (please see section 2 Dosage and Administration in the accompanying Full Prescribing Information).
  • Immune-mediated rash occurred in 7% (17/247) of patients, including Grade 3 (0.8%) and Grade 2 (2.8%) adverse reactions.

Other Immune-Mediated Adverse Reactions

  • The following clinically significant immune-mediated adverse reactions occurred at an incidence of <1% (unless otherwise noted) in patients who received OPDIVO QVANTIG or intravenous nivolumab as single agent or in combination with chemotherapy or immunotherapy, or were reported with the use of other PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies. Severe or fatal cases have been reported for some of these adverse reactions: cardiac/vascular: myocarditis, pericarditis, vasculitis; nervous system: meningitis, encephalitis, myelitis and demyelination, myasthenic syndrome/myasthenia gravis (including exacerbation), Guillain-Barré syndrome, nerve paresis, autoimmune neuropathy; ocular: uveitis, iritis, and other ocular inflammatory toxicities can occur; gastrointestinal: pancreatitis to include increases in serum amylase and lipase levels, gastritis, duodenitis; musculoskeletal and connective tissue: myositis/polymyositis, rhabdomyolysis, and associated sequelae including renal failure, arthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica; endocrine: hypoparathyroidism; other (hematologic/immune): hemolytic anemia, aplastic anemia, hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH), systemic inflammatory response syndrome, histiocytic necrotizing lymphadenitis (Kikuchi lymphadenitis), sarcoidosis, immune thrombocytopenic purpura, solid organ transplant rejection, other transplant (including corneal graft) rejection.
  • Some ocular IMAR cases can be associated with retinal detachment. Various grades of visual impairment, including blindness, can occur. If uveitis occurs in combination with other immune-mediated adverse reactions, consider a Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada–like syndrome, as this may require treatment with systemic corticosteroids to reduce the risk of permanent vision loss.

Complications of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

  • Fatal and other serious complications can occur in patients who receive allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) before or after being treated with OPDIVO QVANTIG. Transplant-related complications include hyperacute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), acute GVHD, chronic GVHD, hepatic veno-occlusive disease (VOD) after reduced intensity conditioning, and steroid-requiring febrile syndrome (without an identified infectious cause). These complications may occur despite intervening therapy between OPDIVO QVANTIG and allogeneic HSCT.
  • Follow patients closely for evidence of transplant-related complications and intervene promptly. Consider the benefit versus risks of treatment with OPDIVO QVANTIG prior to or after an allogeneic HSCT.

Embryo-Fetal Toxicity

  • Based on its mechanism of action and data from animal studies, OPDIVO QVANTIG can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman. In animal reproduction studies, administration of nivolumab to cynomolgus monkeys from the onset of organogenesis through delivery resulted in increased abortion and premature infant Advise pregnant women of the potential risk to a fetus. Advise females of reproductive potential to use effective contraception during treatment with OPDIVO QVANTIG and for 5 months after the last dose.

Increased Mortality in Patients with Multiple Myeloma when Nivolumab Is Added to a Thalidomide Analogue and Dexamethasone

  • In randomized clinical trials in patients with multiple myeloma, the addition of a PD-1 blocking antibody, including intravenous nivolumab, to a thalidomide analogue plus dexamethasone, a use for which no PD-1 or PD-L1 blocking antibody is indicated, resulted in increased Treatment of patients with multiple myeloma with a PD-1 or PD-L1 blocking antibody in combination with a thalidomide analogue plus dexamethasone is not recommended outside of controlled clinical trials.

Lactation

  • There are no data on the presence of nivolumab or hyaluronidase in human milk, the effects on the breastfed child, or the effects on milk production. Because of the potential for serious adverse reactions in the breastfed child, advise women not to breastfeed during treatment and for 5 months after the last dose of OPDIVO Qvantig.

Serious Adverse Reactions

  • In Checkmate 67T, serious adverse reactions occurred in 28% of patients who received OPDIVO QVANTIG (n=247). Serious adverse reactions in >1% of patients included pleural effusion (1.6%), pneumonitis (1.6%), hyperglycemia (1.2%), hyperkalemia (1.2%), hemorrhage (1.2%) and diarrhea (1.2%). Fatal adverse reactions occurred in 3 patients (1.2%) who received OPDIVO QVANTIG and included myocarditis, myositis, and colitis complications. In Checkmate 037, serious adverse reactions occurred in 41% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=268). Grade 3 and 4 adverse reactions occurred in 42% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab. The most frequent Grade 3 and 4 adverse drug reactions reported in 2% to <5% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab were abdominal pain, hyponatremia, increased aspartate aminotransferase, and increased lipase. In Checkmate 066, serious adverse reactions occurred in 36% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=206). Grade 3 and 4 adverse reactions occurred in 41% of patients receiving intravenous The most frequent Grade 3 and 4 adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab were gamma-glutamyltransferase increase (3.9%) and diarrhea (3.4%). In Checkmate 067, the most frequent (≥10%) serious adverse reactions in the intravenous nivolumab arm (n=313) were diarrhea (2.2%), colitis (1.9%), and pyrexia (1.0%). In Checkmate 067, serious adverse reactions (74% and 44%), adverse reactions leading to permanent discontinuation (47% and 18%) or to dosing delays (58% and 36%), and Grade 3 or 4 adverse reactions (72% and 51%) all occurred more frequently in the intravenous nivolumab plus intravenous ipilimumab arm (n=313) relative to the intravenous nivolumab arm (n=313). The most frequent (≥10%) serious adverse reactions in the intravenous nivolumab plus intravenous ipilimumab arm and the intravenous nivolumab arm, respectively, were diarrhea (13% and 2.2%), colitis (10% and 1.9%), and pyrexia (10% and 1.0%).
  • In Checkmate 816, serious adverse reactions occurred in 30% of patients (n=176) who were treated with intravenous nivolumab in combination with platinum-doublet Serious adverse reactions in >2% included pneumonia and vomiting. No fatal adverse reactions occurred in patients who received intravenous nivolumab in combination with platinum-doublet chemotherapy. In Checkmate 77T, serious adverse reactions occurred in 21% of patients who received intravenous nivolumab in combination with platinum-doublet chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment (n=228). The most frequent (≥2%) serious adverse reactions was pneumonia. Fatal adverse reactions occurred in 2.2% of patients, due to cerebrovascular accident, COVID-19 infection, hemoptysis, pneumonia, and pneumonitis (0.4% each). In the adjuvant phase of Checkmate 77T, 22% of patients experienced serious adverse reactions (n=142). The most frequent serious adverse reaction was pneumonitis/ILD (2.8%). One fatal adverse reaction due to COVID-19 occurred. In Checkmate 017 and 057, serious adverse reactions occurred in 46% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=418). The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab were pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, dyspnea, pyrexia, pleural effusion, pneumonitis, and respiratory failure. In Checkmate 057, fatal adverse reactions occurred; these included events of infection (7 patients, including one case of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia), pulmonary embolism (4 patients), and limbic encephalitis (1 patient). In Checkmate 214, serious adverse reactions occurred in 59% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab plus intravenous ipilimumab (n=547). The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients were diarrhea, pyrexia, pneumonia, pneumonitis, hypophysitis, acute kidney injury, dyspnea, adrenal insufficiency, and colitis. In Checkmate 9ER, serious adverse reactions occurred in 48% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab and cabozantinib (n=320). The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients were diarrhea, pneumonia, pneumonitis, pulmonary embolism, urinary tract infection, and hyponatremia. Fatal intestinal perforations occurred in 3 (0.9%) patients.
  • In Checkmate 025, serious adverse reactions occurred in 47% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=406). The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients were acute kidney injury, pleural effusion, pneumonia, diarrhea, and In Checkmate 141, serious adverse reactions occurred in 49% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=236). The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab were pneumonia, dyspnea, respiratory failure, respiratory tract infection, and sepsis. In Checkmate 275, serious adverse reactions occurred in 54% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=270). The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥ 2% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab were urinary tract infection, sepsis, diarrhea, small intestine obstruction, and general physical health deterioration. In Checkmate 274, serious adverse reactions occurred in 30% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=351). The most frequent serious adverse reaction reported in ≥ 2% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab was urinary tract infection. Fatal adverse reactions occurred in 1% of patients; these included events of pneumonitis (0.6%). In Checkmate 901, serious adverse reactions occurred in 48% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy. The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients who received intravenous nivolumab with chemotherapy were urinary tract infection (4.9%), acute kidney injury (4.3%), anemia (3%), pulmonary embolism (2.6%), sepsis (2.3%), and platelet count decreased (2.3%). Fatal adverse reactions occurred in 3.6% of patients who received intravenous nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy; these included sepsis (1%). In Checkmate 238, serious adverse reactions occurred in 18% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=452). Grade 3 or 4 adverse reactions occurred in 25% of intravenous nivolumab-treated patients (n=452). The most frequent Grade 3 and 4 adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of intravenous nivolumab-treated patients were diarrhea and increased lipase and amylase. In Attraction-3, serious adverse reactions occurred in 38% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=209). Serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients who received intravenous nivolumab were pneumonia, esophageal fistula, interstitial lung disease, and pyrexia. The following fatal adverse reactions occurred in patients who received intravenous nivolumab: interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis (1.4%), pneumonia (1.0%), septic shock (0.5%), esophageal fistula (0.5%), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (0.5%), pulmonary embolism (0.5%), and sudden death (0.5%). In Checkmate 577, serious adverse reactions occurred in 33% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=532). A serious adverse reaction reported in ≥2% of patients who received intravenous nivolumab was pneumonitis. A fatal reaction of myocardial infarction occurred in one patient who received intravenous nivolumab. In Checkmate 648, serious adverse reactions occurred in 62% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy (n=310). The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients who received intravenous nivolumab with chemotherapy were pneumonia (11%), dysphagia (7%), esophageal stenosis (2.9%), acute kidney injury (2.9%), and pyrexia (2.3%). Fatal adverse reactions occurred in 5 (1.6%) patients who received OPDIVO in combination with chemotherapy; these included pneumonitis, pneumatosis intestinalis, pneumonia, and acute kidney injury. In Checkmate 648, serious adverse reactions occurred in 69% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab in combination with intravenous ipilimumab (n=322). The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% who received intravenous nivolumab in combination with intravenous ipilimumab were pneumonia (10%), pyrexia (4.3%), pneumonitis (4.0%), aspiration pneumonia (3.7%), dysphagia (3.7%), hepatic function abnormal (2.8%), decreased appetite (2.8%), adrenal insufficiency (2.5%), and dehydration (2.5%). Fatal adverse reactions occurred in 5 (1.6%) patients who received intravenous nivolumab in combination with intravenous ipilimumab; these included pneumonitis, interstitial lung disease, pulmonary embolism, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. In Checkmate 649, serious adverse reactions occurred in 52% of patients treated with intravenous nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy (n=782). The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients treated with intravenous nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy were vomiting (3.7%), pneumonia (3.6%), anemia, (3.6%), pyrexia (2.8%), diarrhea (2.7%), febrile neutropenia (2.6%), and pneumonitis (2.4%). Fatal adverse reactions occurred in 16 (2.0%) patients who were treated with intravenous nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy; these included pneumonitis (4 patients), febrile neutropenia (2 patients), stroke (2 patients), gastrointestinal toxicity, intestinal mucositis, septic shock, pneumonia, infection, gastrointestinal bleeding, mesenteric vessel thrombosis, and disseminated intravascular coagulation. In Checkmate 76K, serious adverse reactions occurred in 18% of patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=524). Adverse reactions which resulted in permanent discontinuation of intravenous nivolumab in >1% of patients included arthralgia (1.7%), rash (1.7%), and diarrhea (1.1%). A fatal adverse reaction occurred in 1 (0.2%) patient (heart failure and acute kidney injury).
  • The most frequent Grade 3-4 lab abnormalities reported in ≥1% of intravenous nivolumab-treated patients were increased lipase (2.9%), increased AST (2.2%), increased ALT (2.1%), lymphopenia (1.1%), and decreased potassium (1.0%).

Common Adverse Reactions 

  • In Checkmate 67T, the most common adverse reactions (≥10%) in patients treated with OPDIVO QVANTIG (n=247) were musculoskeletal pain (31%), fatigue (20%), pruritus (16%), rash (15%), hypothyroidism (12%), diarrhea (11%), cough (11%), and abdominal pain (10%). In Checkmate 037, the most common adverse reaction (≥20%) reported with intravenous nivolumab (n=268) was rash (21%). In Checkmate 066, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) reported with intravenous nivolumab (n=206) vs dacarbazine (n=205) were fatigue (49% vs 39%), musculoskeletal pain (32% vs 25%), rash (28% vs 12%), and pruritus (23% vs 12%). In Checkmate 067, the most common (≥20%) adverse reactions in the intravenous nivolumab arm (n=313) were fatigue (59%), rash (40%), musculoskeletal pain (42%), diarrhea (36%), nausea (30%), cough (28%), pruritus (27%), upper respiratory tract infection (22%), decreased appetite (22%), headache (22%), constipation (21%), arthralgia (21%), and vomiting (20%). In Checkmate 067, the most common (≥20%) adverse reactions in the intravenous nivolumab plus intravenous ipilimumab arm (n=313) were fatigue (62%), diarrhea (54%), rash (53%), nausea (44%), pyrexia (40%), pruritus (39%), musculoskeletal pain (32%), vomiting (31%), decreased appetite (29%), cough (27%), headache (26%), dyspnea (24%), upper respiratory tract infection (23%), arthralgia (21%), and increased transaminases (25%).
  • In Checkmate 816, the most common (>20%) adverse reactions in the intravenous nivolumab plus chemotherapy arm (n=176) were nausea (38%), constipation (34%), fatigue (26%), decreased appetite (20%), and rash (20%). In Checkmate 77T, the most common adverse reactions (reported in ≥20%) in patients receiving intravenous nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy (n= 228) were anemia (39.5%), constipation (32.0%), nausea (28.9%), fatigue (28.1%), alopecia (25.9%), and cough (21.9%). In Checkmate 017 and 057, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) in patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=418) were fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, cough, dyspnea, and decreased appetite. In Checkmate 214, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) reported in patients treated with intravenous nivolumab plus intravenous ipilimumab (n=547) were fatigue (58%), rash (39%), diarrhea (38%), musculoskeletal pain (37%), pruritus (33%), nausea (30%), cough (28%), pyrexia (25%), arthralgia (23%), decreased appetite (21%), dyspnea (20%), and vomiting (20%). In Checkmate 9ER, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) in patients receiving intravenous nivolumab and cabozantinib (n=320) were diarrhea (64%), fatigue (51%), hepatotoxicity (44%), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (40%), stomatitis (37%), rash (36%), hypertension (36%), hypothyroidism (34%), musculoskeletal pain (33%), decreased appetite (28%), nausea (27%), dysgeusia (24%), abdominal pain (22%), cough (20%) and upper respiratory tract infection (20%). In Checkmate 025, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) reported in patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=406) vs everolimus (n=397) were fatigue (56% vs 57%), cough (34% vs 38%), nausea (28% vs 29%), rash (28% vs 36%), dyspnea (27% vs 31%), diarrhea (25% vs 32%), constipation (23% vs 18%), decreased appetite (23% vs 30%), back pain (21% vs 16%), and arthralgia (20% vs 14%). In Checkmate 141, the most common adverse reactions (≥10%) in patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=236) were cough (14%) and dyspnea (14%) at a higher incidence than investigator’s In Checkmate 275, the most common adverse reactions (≥ 20%) reported in patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=270) were fatigue (46%), musculoskeletal pain (30%), nausea (22%), and decreased appetite (22%). In Checkmate 274, the most common adverse reactions (20%) reported in patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=351) were rash (36%), fatigue (36%), diarrhea (30%), pruritus (30%), musculoskeletal pain (28%), and urinary tract infection (22%). In Checkmate 901, the most common adverse reactions (reported in ≥20% of patients) were nausea (52%), fatigue (48%), musculoskeletal pain (33%), constipation (30%), decreased appetite (30%), rash (25%), vomiting (23%), and peripheral neuropathy (20%). In Checkmate 238, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) reported in intravenous nivolumab-treated patients (n=452) vs ipilimumab-treated patients (n=453) were fatigue (57% vs 55%), diarrhea (37% vs 55%), rash (35% vs 47%), musculoskeletal pain (32% vs 27%), pruritus (28% vs 37%), headache (23% vs 31%), nausea (23% vs 28%), upper respiratory infection (22% vs 15%), and abdominal pain (21% vs 23%). The most common immune-mediated adverse reactions were rash (16%), diarrhea/colitis (6%), and hepatitis (3%). In Attraction-3, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) in intravenous nivolumab-treated patients (n=209) were rash (22%) and decreased appetite (21%). In Checkmate 577, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) in patients receiving intravenous nivolumab (n=532) were fatigue (34%), diarrhea (29%), nausea (23%), rash (21%), musculoskeletal pain (21%), and cough (20%). In Checkmate 648, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) in patients treated with intravenous nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy (n=310) were nausea (65%), decreased appetite (51%), fatigue (47%), constipation (44%), stomatitis (44%), diarrhea (29%), and vomiting (23%). In Checkmate 648, the most common adverse reactions reported in ≥20% of patients treated with intravenous nivolumab in combination with intravenous ipilimumab were rash (31%), fatigue (28 %), pyrexia (23%), nausea (22%), diarrhea (22%), and constipation (20%). In Checkmate 649, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) in patients treated with intravenous nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy (n=782) were peripheral neuropathy (53%), nausea (48%), fatigue (44%), diarrhea (39%), vomiting (31%), decreased appetite (29%), abdominal pain (27%), constipation (25%), and musculoskeletal pain (20%). In Checkmate 76K, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) reported with intravenous nivolumab (n=524) were fatigue (36%), musculoskeletal pain (30%), rash (28%), diarrhea (23%) and pruritus (20%).

Surgery Related Adverse Reactions

  • In Checkmate 77T, 5.3% (n=12) of the intravenous nivolumab-treated patients who received neoadjuvant treatment, did not receive surgery due to adverse reactions. The adverse reactions that led to cancellation of surgery in intravenous nivolumab-treated patients were cerebrovascular accident, pneumonia, and colitis/diarrhea (2 patients each) and acute coronary syndrome, myocarditis, hemoptysis, pneumonitis, COVID-19, and myositis (1 patient each).

Please see US Full Prescribing Information for OPDIVO QVANTIG.

References:

  1. OPDIVO Qvantig [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.
  2. OPDIVO [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.
  3. Bittner B et al. BioDrugs. 2018;32:425-440.
  4. Albiges L et al. Ann Oncol. 2025;36(1):99-107.
  5. Bittner B, Schmidt J. BioDrugs. 2024;38(1):23-46.
  6. George S et al. Oral presentation at ASCO GU 2024. Abstract LBA360.

© 2025 Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. OPDIVO QvantigTM and the related logo are trademarks of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.

1992-US-2500197   05/25

Three-Year Overall Survival with OPDUALAG® in Advanced Melanoma

RR

SUMMARY: The American Cancer Society estimates that for 2025, about 104,960 new cases of melanoma of the skin will be diagnosed in the United States and 8430 people are expected to die of the disease. The rates of melanoma have been rising rapidly over the past few decades, but this has varied by age.

A better understanding of Immune checkpoints has opened the doors for the discovery of novel immune targets. Immune checkpoints are cell surface inhibitory proteins/receptors that harness the immune system and prevent uncontrolled immune reactions. Survival of cancer cells in the human body may be related to their ability to escape immune surveillance, by inhibiting T lymphocyte activation. Under normal circumstances, inhibition of an intense immune response and switching off the T cells of the immune system is accomplished by immune checkpoints or gate keepers. With the recognition of immune checkpoint proteins and their role in suppressing antitumor immunity, antibodies have been developed that target the membrane bound inhibitory immune checkpoint proteins/receptors such as CTLA-4 (Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen 4, also known as CD152), PD-1(Programmed cell Death 1), etc. By blocking the immune checkpoint proteins, T cells are unleashed, resulting in T cell proliferation, activation and a therapeutic response.

YERVOY® (Ipilimumab), a fully human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that blocks immune checkpoint protein/receptor CTLA-4 was compared with PD-1 inhibitors, OPDIVO® (Nivolumab) and KEYTRUDA® (Pembrolizumab) in patients with advanced melanoma, and both OPDIVO® and KEYTRUDA® have demonstrated superior Overall Survival (OS), Progression Free Survival (PFS), and Objective Response Rate (ORR), and with a better safety profile. In the CheckMate 067, which is a double-blind Phase III study, results from the 6.5 year analysis showed that a combination of OPDIVO® plus YERVOY® demonstrated significant improvement in OS and PFS, when compared to single agent OPDIVO® or single agent YERVOY®.

In an attempt to improve outcomes and enhance the risk-benefit profiles of immunotherapy combinations, alternate immune checkpoints are being explored. LAG-3 (Lymphocyte-Activation Gene 3 (LAG-3), is a cell-surface receptor expressed on immune cells including activated CD4+ T cells, and negatively regulates T-cell proliferation, inhibits T-cell activation and effector T-cell function. LAG-3 is upregulated in several tumor types, including malignant melanoma.

Relatlimab is a first-in-class human IgG4 LAG-3–blocking antibody that binds to LAG-3 and restores the effector function of exhausted T cells, resulting in T cell proliferation, activation and a therapeutic response. In preclinical studies, dual inhibition of LAG-3 and PD-1 showed synergistic antitumor activity, and in a Phase I/II trial, the combination of Relatlimab and OPDIVO®, demonstrated durable Objective Responses in patients with Relapsed/Refractory melanoma following treatment with PD-1 inhibitors.

RELATIVITY-047 is a Phase II/III, global, multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial in which a fixed-dose combination of Relatlimab and OPDIVO® (OPDUALAG®) was compared with OPDIVO® alone, in patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable melanoma. In this study, 714 patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive OPDUALAG®  (Relatlimab 160 mg and OPDIVO® 480 mg in a fixed-dose combination) (N=355) or single agent OPDIVO® 480 mg (N=359). Both regimens were administered as an IV infusion over 60 minutes every 4 weeks, and treatment was continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicities, or withdrawal of consent. Both treatment groups were well balanced and patients were stratified according to LAG-3 expression (1% or more versus less than 1%), PD-L1 expression (1% or more versus less than 1%), BRAF V600 mutation status, and metastasis stage (M0 or M1 with normal LDH levels versus M1 with elevated LDH levels). More patients in the OPDUALAG® group had Stage M1c disease, and a larger proportion had three or more sites with at least one metastatic lesion. The Primary end point was Progression Free Survival (PFS) as assessed by blinded Independent Central Review. Secondary end points included Overall Survival and Objective Response Rate (ORR).

At a median follow up was 13.2 months there was a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), as well as a numerically higher objective response rate (ORR) with a fixed-dose combination of OPDUALAG®, compared with OPDIVO® alone. This led to the approval of this combination by the FDA in 2022.

The researchers herein reported updated descriptive efficacy and safety results from RELATIVITY-047 with a median follow-up of 33.8 months, which confirmed the sustained efficacy benefit of OPDUALAG®, compared with OPDIVO® alone.

The median PFS was 10.2 months with OPDUALAG® as compared with 4.6 months with OPDIVO® (HR=0.79; [95% CI, 0.66-0.95]).The 3-year PFS rates were 31.8% and 26.9% respectively. The median OS was 51.0 months and 34.1 months, respectively (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.66 to 0.99]). The ORR was 43.7% (95% CI, 38.4 to 49.0) with OPDUALAG® versus 33.7% (95% CI, 28.8 to 38.9) with OPDIVO®.

The PFS benefit was more so with OPDUALAG® across key prespecified subgroups, compared to single agent OPDIVO®. Patients with poor prognosis characteristics, such as visceral metastases, high tumor burden, elevated levels of serum LDH, or mucosal or acral melanoma, had better outcomes with OPDUALAG®, than with single agent OPDIVO®. Further, a benefit with OPDUALAG® was also noted across BRAF mutant and wild-type subgroups, compared to single agent OPDIVO®. Expression of LAG-3 or PD-L1 was not useful in predicting a benefit of OPDUALAG® over single agent OPDIVO® and appears to NOT have a clear role in treatment selection.

Subsequent systemic therapy was received by 38% in the OPDUALAG® group and 39.3% in the OPDIVO® alone group. The median PFS2 was 29.6 months with OPDUALAG® and 20.3 months with OPDIVO® alone, further supporting the long-term benefits of OPDUALAG®.

Grade 3 or 4 toxicities occurred in 18.9% of patients in the OPDUALAG® group and in 9.7% of patients in the single agent OPDIVO® group. The Safety profile of OPDUALAG® appeared favorable, when compared with dual checkpoint inhibition with a CTLA-4 inhibitor and PD-1 inhibitor combination (YERVOY® plus OPDIVO®) in the CheckMate 067 trial, in which adverse events were noted in 59% of patients.

The researchers concluded that RELATIVITY-047 is the first study to show a statistically significant improvement in Progression Free Survival for an immunotherapy combination versus PD-1 monotherapy, in patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable melanoma. This is believed to be the first analysis demonstrating that a combination immunotherapy significantly improves Overall Survival compared to anti-PD-1 monotherapy (evidenced by an Overall Survival HR 95% CI upper bound now <1). The authors added that these results validate blocking LAG-3 in combination with PD-1 as a therapeutic strategy for patients with melanoma, and establishes LAG-3 as the third immune checkpoint pathway, thus providing more treatment options for patients with advanced melanoma.

Three-Year Overall Survival With Nivolumab Plus Relatlimab in Advanced Melanoma From RELATIVITY-047. Tawbi HA, Hodi FS, Lipson EJ, et al. J Clin Oncol 2024;43:1546-1552

FDA Approves Perioperative KEYTRUDA® for Resectable Locally Advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

RR

SUMMARY: The FDA on June 12, 2025, approved Pembrolizumab (KEYTRUDA&reg;) for adults with resectable locally advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (HNSCC) whose tumors express PD-L1 Combined Positive Score (CPS) of 1 or more, as determined by an FDA-approved test, as a single agent as neoadjuvant treatment, continued as adjuvant treatment in combination with Radiotherapy (RT) with or without Cisplatin after surgery, and then as a single agent.This is the first approval for HNSCC in 6 years and the first overall perioperative approval for locally advanced HNSCC.

The American Cancer Society estimates that 59,660 new cases of cancer involving the oral cavity and pharynx will be diagnosed in the US in 2025 and 12,770 will die of the disease. The Head and Neck region includes the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx and larynx. Squamous Cell Carcinoma (SCC) of the Head and Neck accounts for about 3-5% of all cancers in the United States. Common risk factors include tobacco and alcohol use and Human PapillomaVirus (HPV) infection. Even though tobacco has long been associated with head and neck cancer development, cannabis has similar carcinogens.

The Standard of Care for patients with Stage III–IVA Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (HNSCC) has remained largely static for nearly 2 decades: surgery followed by risk-adapted adjuvant radiotherapy, with or without concurrent chemotherapy. Despite refinements in technique and supportive care, relapse rates remain high, particularly among patients with adverse pathological features such as extranodal extension and positive margins.

The treatment paradigm for Head and Neck cancer has been rapidly evolving with the recognition and better understanding of immune evasion and the role of immune checkpoints or gate keepers in suppressing antitumor immunity. Blocking the immune checkpoints unleashes the T cells, resulting in T cell proliferation, activation, and a therapeutic response. Checkpoint inhibitors administered in a neoadjuvant setting activates both the priming phase of immunity within tumor tissue, and the effector phase within the tumor microenvironment. It has been shown that neoadjuvant immunotherapy expands more T-cell clones than adjuvant treatment. Preclinical models have also demonstrated that both radiation therapy and Cisplatin chemotherapy increase the PD-L1 expression on the tumor, suggesting that combining radiotherapy with anti-PD-1 therapy could improve the outcomes.

Pembrolizumab (KEYTRUDA®) is a fully humanized, Immunoglobulin G4, monoclonal antibody and checkpoint inhibitor, that binds to the PD-1 receptor and blocks its interaction with ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2, thereby undoing PD-1 pathway-mediated inhibition of the immune response and unleashing the tumor-specific effector T cells. Pembrolizumab has been shown to improve Overall Survival in patients with Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

KEYNOTE-689, a landmark Phase 3 trial, has provided the most compelling evidence to date that perioperative immunotherapy, specifically Pembrolizumab, can significantly improve clinical outcomes for patients with resectable, locally advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (HNSCC). This international, randomized, placebo-controlled study enrolled 714 patients (N=714) with newly diagnosed, resectable, Stage III–IVA HNSCC of the oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx, or hypopharynx.

Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive:

  • Investigational arm (N=356):
    • 2 cycles of neoadjuvant Pembrolizumab (200 mg IV Q3W) starting about 3 weeks before surgery.
    • Standard-of-care surgery.
    • Up to 3 doses of Pembrolizumab administered concurrently with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, with Cisplatin (depending on pathologic risk- positive margins <1 mm or extranodal extension present at surgery was considered high risk).
    • 12 additional adjuvant doses of Pembrolizumab Q3W (total treatment duration: about 1 year).
  • Control arm (N=358):
    • Identical treatment structure, substituting placebo for Pembrolizumab.

PD-L1 expression was assessed via Combined Positive Score (CPS), and stratification included CPS ≥1 and CPS ≥10 subgroups, recognizing the prognostic and potentially predictive value of PD-L1 expression. The Primary endpoint was Event-Free Survival (EFS) by Blinded Independent Central Review, defined as time from randomization to disease progression, local/regional recurrence, distant metastasis, or death from any cause. Secondary endpoints included Overall Survival (OS) and Major Pathological Response.

The trial met its Primary endpoint of EFS. At median follow-up of 38.3 months, patients in the investigational arm had significantly improved EFS compared with the Standard of Care arm (median 51.8 months vs. 30.4 months; HR=0.73; P=0.0041). Patients who received Pembrolizumab who had a CPS score ≥10 derived the greatest benefit (median 59.7 months vs. 26.9 months; HR = 0.66; P=0.002) whereas the median EFS in the CPS ≥1 subgroup was 59.7 vs. 29.6 months (HR, 0.70; P = .0014).

Major pathological response defined as 90% or more tumor regression was also notably improved. Among all patients, the major pathological response rate was 9.4% with Pembrolizumab vs. 0% with Standard of Care (P < 0.00001). In the CPS ≥10 subgroup, the major pathological response rate reached 13.7%.

While the interim analysis did not demonstrate a statistically significant OS benefit, trends were favorable, particularly in the CPS ≥10 group (HR, 0.72; P =0.02). Further OS follow-up is ongoing.

Adverse events were consistent with known profiles of checkpoint inhibitors. Grade 3 or more Treatment-Related Adverse Events (TRAEs) occurred in 44.6% of the Pembrolizumab group and 42.9% in the Standard of Care group. Immune-mediated adverse events were observed in 43.2% of the Pembrolizumab arm, with hypothyroidism being the most common (24.7%). Mortality attributable to treatment was slightly higher with Pembrolizumab (1.1% vs. 0.3%).

The researchers concluded that perioperative Pembrolizumab is now emerging as a new standard of care in the treatment of resectable locally advanced HNSCC. The findings from this study underscore the importance of harnessing the immune system both before and after surgery. Neoadjuvant administration may prime the immune response when tumor antigen burden is highest, while adjuvant therapy may help eliminate residual microscopic disease.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant pembrolizumab plus standard of care in resectable locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: phase 3 KEYNOTE-689 study. Uppaluri R, et al. Abstract CT001. Presented at: American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting; April 25-30, 2025; Chicago.

Late Breaking Abstract – ASCO 2025: Tarlatamab Sets New Standard in Recurrent Small Cell Lung Cancer: Results from DeLLphi-304

RR

SUMMARY: The American Cancer Society estimates that for 2025, about 226,650 new cases of lung cancer will be diagnosed and 124,730 patients will die of the disease. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) originates from neuroendocrine cells and accounts for approximately 10-15% of all lung cancers diagnosed annually in the US. It is lethal and aggressive. The 5 year survival rate for Extensive Stage SCLC (ES-SCLC) is less than 5%, with a median survival of 9-10 months from the time of diagnosis.

Treatment decisions was SCLC are typically based on the VA Lung Group 2-Staging system, which classifies disease as either Limited Stage (LS) or Extensive Stage (ES). In Limited Stage patients, the disease burden is limited to one hemithorax and regional nodes, without presence of extra-thoracic disease, and amenable to definitive-intent thoracic Radiation Therapy (RT). Extensive Stage encompasses all other SCLC patients.

Patients with ES-SCLC are often treated with chemoimmunotherapy with or without radiation in the first line setting. Nearly all patients with SCLC experience disease recurrence during or after standard platinum-based chemotherapy, underscoring the need for novel treatment strategies Second-line treatment options are limited, and the response duration is short varying from 3-5 months, with Overall Survival rarely exceeding 8 months. There are presently no approved therapies for third line and beyond and these patients face a dire prognosis.

Delta-Like Protein 3 also known as DLL3, is encoded by the DLL3 gene and is expressed on the surface of tumor cells but not in normal adult tissues. Patients with high-grade pulmonary NeuroEndocrine Tumors, Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) and Large Cell NeuroEndocrine Carcinoma (LCNEC) have increased expression of DLL3 protein (increased expression seen in approximately 85-96% of the SCLC tumors), making this a a potential target in the treatment of Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Tarlatamab (IMDELLTRA®) is a first-in-class bispecific T-cell engager immunotherapy that directs the patients T cells to cancer cells expressing Delta-Like Ligand 3 (DLL3), independent of Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC) class I. Tarlatamab binds to both DLL3 on cancer cells and CD3 on T cells, leading to T-cell–mediated lysis of cancer cells.

In May 2024, the U.S. FDA granted accelerated approval to Tarlatamab for adult patients with extensive-stage SCLC whose disease progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. This decision was based largely on early clinical benefit observed in the Phase 2 DeLLphi-301 trial, where Tarlatamab demonstrated a 40% Overall Response Rate (ORR) in previously treated patients. Now, confirmatory results from the Phase 3 DeLLphi-304 trial further support the role of Tarlatamab in the treatment landscape, and mark a potential new standard of care for recurrent SCLC.

Phase 3 DeLLphi-304: Study Design and Population
DeLLphi-304 was a global, randomized, open-label trial comparing Tarlatamab, with standard-of-care chemotherapy which included Topotecan, Lurbinectedin, or Amrubicin, in patients with extensive-stage SCLC, whose disease progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. A total of 509 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either Tarlatamab (N=254) or chemotherapy (N=255). Stratification factors included prior PD-L1 inhibitor treatment, chemotherapy-free interval, presence of brain metastases, and intended chemotherapy regimen. The Primary endpoint was Overall Survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included Progression-Free Survival (PFS), Objective Response Rate (ORR), Duration of Response (DOR), Disease Control Rate (DCR), Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs), and Safety.

Tarlatamab Demonstrates Significant Survival Benefit
At a median follow-up of approximately 11 months, Tarlatamab demonstrated a statistically and clinically significant improvement in OS:

  • Median OS: 13.6 vs 8.3 months (HR 0.60; 95% CI: 0.47–0.77; P<0.001)
  • Median PFS: 4.2 vs 3.2 months (HR 0.72; 95% CI: 0.59–0.88; P<0.001)

This translated to a 40% reduction in the risk of death for patients receiving Tarlatamab. The survival benefit extended across all prespecified subgroups, including age, gender, race, and prior anti–PD-L1 therapy. The ORR was 35% in the Tarlatamab group and 20% in the chemotherapy group.

Improved Symptom Control and Quality of Life
Beyond survival, Tarlatamab provided clinically meaningful improvements in Patient-Reported Outcomes, including relief from hallmark symptoms of SCLC:

  • Dyspnea score improved at 18 weeks: –1.94 with Tarlatamab vs +7.20 with CTx (mean difference –9.14; P< 0.001)
  • Cough improvement: 16% vs 9% (Odds Ratio 2.04; P = 0.012)
  • Chest pain improvement: 9% vs 4% (Odds Ratio 1.84; P = 0.100)

These findings reflect an overall better patient experience and potential Quality-of-Life benefit with Tarlatamab therapy.

Safety Profile and Tolerability
Tarlatamab was associated with a more favorable safety profile compared to chemotherapy:

  • Grade 3 or more Treatment-Related Adverse Events (TRAEs): 27% (Tarlatamab) vs 62% (Chemotherapy)
  • Discontinuations due to TRAEs: 3% vs 6%
  • Most common Grade 3 or more TRAEs with Tarlatamab were neutropenia (4%) and lymphopenia (4%)
  • Cytokine Release Syndrome (CRS) occurred in 56% of patients (mostly grade 1-2) and was manageable in clinical settings

These safety results support Tarlatamab as a more tolerable alternative to conventional chemotherapy.

Looking Ahead: Optimizing Treatment Sequencing
While the DeLLphi-304 trial has established Tarlatamab as an effective option post-platinum therapy, questions remain regarding its integration into the broader SCLC treatment paradigm. PD-L1 inhibitors already form part of standard first-line and maintenance therapy. Early-phase studies have shown that Tarlatamab can be safely combined with anti–PD-L1 agents, and this is being further evaluated in the ongoing DeLLphi-305 trial, a Phase 3 study assessing Tarlatamab plus PD-L1 inhibition as first-line maintenance following chemotherapy. Additionally, biomarker-driven analyses from DeLLphi-304 are underway to help identify patients most likely to benefit from Tarlatamab and those who may achieve durable responses.

Conclusion
The DeLLphi-304 trial positions Tarlatamab as a practice-changing therapy for patients with SCLC that has progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. With significant improvements in Overall and Progression-Free Survival, better symptom control, and a favorable safety profile, Tarlatamab redefines second-line treatment for a historically underserved patient population. These results not only represent a meaningful advance in SCLC therapy but also signal a broader shift toward targeted immunotherapy strategies in aggressive thoracic malignancies.

Tarlatamab versus chemotherapy (CTx) as second-line (2L) treatment for small cell lung cancer (SCLC): Primary analysis of Ph3 DeLLphi-304. Rudin C, Mountzios G, Sun L, et al. J Clin Oncol 43, 2025 (suppl 17; abstr LBA8008)

Late Breaking Abstract – ASCO 2025: Durvalumab Plus FLOT Demonstrates Significant EFS Improvement in Resectable Gastric and GE Junction Cancers: Interim Results from the Phase 3 MATTERHORN Trial

RR

SUMMARY: The American Cancer Society estimates that in the US about 30,300 new gastric cancer cases will be diagnosed in 2025 and about 10,780 people will die of the disease. It is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths in the world. Several hereditary syndromes such as Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer (HDGC), Lynch syndrome (Hereditary Nonpolyposis Colorectal Cancer) and Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP) have been associated with a predisposition for gastric cancer. Additionally, one of the strongest risk factor for gastric adenocarcinoma is infection with Helicobacter pylori (H.pylori), which is a gram-negative, spiral-shaped microaerophilic bacterium.

Despite the intent of cure in resectable gastric and GastroEsophageal Junction (GEJ) cancers, long-term survival remains suboptimal, with fewer than half of patients alive at five years. Current perioperative chemotherapy strategies, such as the FLOT regimen (5-FU, Leucovorin, Oxaliplatin, and Docetaxel), are widely accepted as the standard of care, particularly in Western countries. However, recurrence remains a frequent challenge, underscoring the need for enhanced systemic control.

The global, randomized, double-blind Phase 3 MATTERHORN trial evaluated whether adding the immune checkpoint inhibitor Durvalumab to FLOT could improve clinical outcomes in patients with resectable, locally advanced gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma. This approach leverages prior success of immunotherapy in metastatic settings, where checkpoint inhibitors are already approved in combination with chemotherapy, but expands the strategy into the curative-intent, perioperative context.

Durvalumab (IMFINZI&reg;) is a human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that binds to the PD-L1 protein and blocks the interaction of PD-L1 with the PD-1 and CD80 proteins, countering the tumor’s immune-evading tactics, and unleashes the T cells.

Trial Design and Treatment Protocol
In this study, a total of 948 treatment-naïve patients with Stage II to IVa resectable gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma were randomized 1:1 to receive either Durvalumab plus FLOT (N=474) or placebo plus FLOT (N=474).  Treatment consisted of Durvalumab 1500 mg or Placebo every 4 weeks (Q4W) on Day 1 + FLOT (5-Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, Oxaliplatin and Docetaxel) on Days 1 and 15 for 4 cycles (2 cycles each neoadjuvant/adjuvant), followed by Durvalumab 1500 mg or Placebo on Day 1 Q4W for 10 cycles. Participants were enrolled across Asia, Europe, North America, and South America, reflecting the global burden of disease. Key stratification factors included geographic region (Asia vs non-Asia), nodal status, and PD-L1 expression. The median age was approximately 62 years, and around 70% of patients had gastric tumors, with the remainder involving the GEJ. Most patients (70%) had node-positive disease at baseline. Treatment groups were well balanced. Treatment was administered perioperatively, consisting of two neoadjuvant and two adjuvant cycles. Durvalumab or placebo was continued post-chemotherapy as monotherapy for 10 additional cycles. The Primary endpoint was Event-Free Survival (EFS), with Secondary endpoints including Overall Survival (OS), pathologic Complete Response (pCR), and Safety.

Efficacy Findings
At a median follow-up of 31.5 months, the addition of Durvalumab to FLOT significantly improved EFS compared to placebo. The median EFS had not yet been reached in the Durvalumab arm, whereas it was 32.8 months in the placebo group (Hazard Ratio [HR] 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58–0.86; P<0.001), translating to a roughly 30% reduction in the risk of progression, recurrence, or death. Importantly, Durvalumab did not delay surgery or adjuvant therapy initiation. Notably, 24-month EFS rates were higher with Durvalumab (67.4%) compared to placebo (58.5%), indicating a durable benefit. Subgroup analyses consistently favored the Durvalumab combination across clinical and demographic variables, including PD-L1 expression status, nodal involvement, and geographic region, although some subgroups lacked sufficient power for statistical significance.

An early OS analysis, though not yet mature, suggested a favorable trend for the Durvalumab arm (HR 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62–0.97), with median OS not reached in that group compared to 47.2 months in the placebo group. At 24 months, overall survival was 76% with Durvalumab versus 70% with placebo.

Pathologic and Disease-Free Outcomes
In addition to EFS, the Durvalumab-containing regimen improved pathologic Complete Response rates, achieved in 19% of patients versus 7% in the placebo arm. This significant increase in pCR suggests more effective eradication of micrometastatic disease with immunotherapy-enhanced perioperative treatment.

Disease-Free Survival (DFS) results mirrored those of EFS. The median DFS had not yet been reached in the Durvalumab arm and was 39.8 months in the placebo group (HR 0.70; P=0.012). At 24 months, DFS rates were 75% and 66%, respectively.

Safety and Tolerability
The addition of Durvalumab did not compromise surgical outcomes or delay the initiation of adjuvant therapy. The incidence of grade 3/4 adverse events was similar between arms (72% with Durvalumab vs 71% with placebo), as were rates of serious adverse events (48% vs 44%) and treatment-related deaths (5% vs 4%). These findings reinforce the safety of incorporating immunotherapy into the perioperative setting without increasing toxicity burden or interfering with multimodal management.

Biomarker Insights and Future Directions
Approximately 90% of patients were PD-L1–positive in both groups, and 5% had MicroSatellite instability–High (MSI-H) tumors (lower than the rates of 7% to 9% commonly seen). Although these biomarker-defined subpopulations are known to respond favorably to immunotherapy, their relatively small representation in the study suggests the observed benefits were driven by broader immunomodulatory effects rather than biomarker enrichment alone.

The optimal duration of adjuvant Durvalumab remains an open question. In MATTERHORN, Durvalumab was continued for 10 cycles post-chemotherapy, but further investigation may determine whether shorter courses or biomarker-guided de-escalation could yield similar benefits while minimizing toxicity and cost.

Clinical Implications
The interim findings from MATTERHORN, position Durvalumab plus FLOT as a potential new global standard of care for patients with resectable gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma. The significant improvements in EFS and pCR, coupled with a manageable safety profile, support integration of immunotherapy into the perioperative management paradigm.

These results also underscore the importance of addressing systemic disease early in the treatment course. As Overall Survival data continue to mature, this study highlights the promising role of immunotherapy in curative-intent settings and may shift practice patterns globally.

Event-free survival (EFS) in MATTERHORN: A randomized, phase 3 study of durvalumab plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin and docetaxel chemotherapy (FLOT) in resectable gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC). Janjigian Y, Al-Batran S-E, Wainberg Z, et al. J Clin Oncol 43, 2025 (suppl 17; abstr LBA5).

Late Breaking Abstract – ASCO 2025: Adjuvant Immunotherapy Improves Outcomes in Stage III dMMR Colon Cancer: Results from the ATOMIC Trial

RR

SUMMARY: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer diagnosed in both men and women in the United States. The American Cancer Society estimates that approximately 154,270 new cases of CRC will be diagnosed in the United States in 2025 and about 52,900 patients will die of the disease. The lifetime risk of developing CRC is about 1 in 23. The majority of CRC cases (about 75 %) are sporadic whereas the remaining 25 % of the patients have a family history of the disease. Only 5-6 % of patients with CRC with a family history background are due to inherited mutations in major CRC genes, while the rest are the result of accumulation of both genetic mutations and epigenetic modifications of several genes. Colorectal cancer is a heterogeneous disease classified by its genetics, and even though the diagnosis of CRC in the US is dropping among people 65 years and older, the incidence has been rising in the younger age groups, with 12% of CRC cases diagnosed in people under age 50.

The DNA MisMatchRepair (MMR) system is responsible for molecular surveillance and works as an editing tool that identifies errors within the microsatellite regions of DNA and removes them. Approximately 10% to 15% of nonmetastatic CRCs exhibit deficient mismatch repair (dMMR), accounting for an estimated 330,000 cases annually worldwide. Defective MMR system leads to MSI (Micro Satellite Instability) and hypermutation, with the expression of tumor-specific neoantigens at the surface of cancer cells, triggering an enhanced antitumor immune response. These tumors respond poorly to Fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy alone, especially in the adjuvant setting. While immune checkpoint inhibitors are approved for dMMR colorectal cancer in the metastatic setting, their benefit in earlier stages, particularly post-resection, had not been previously established in a prospective trial.

Atezolizumab (TECENTRIQ&reg;) is an anti PD-L1 monoclonal antibody, designed to directly bind to PD-L1 expressed on tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells, thereby blocking its interactions with PD-1 and B7.1 receptors expressed on activated T cells. PD-L1 inhibition may prevent T-cell deactivation and further enable the activation of T cells.

The Phase 3 ATOMIC trial (NCT02912559), sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and conducted across multiple centers including NCTN sites and the German AIO group investigated whether the addition of Atezolizumab, a PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitor, to standard adjuvant chemotherapy could improve Disease-Free Survival (DFS) in patients with resected Stage III dMMR colon adenocarcinoma.

Study Design and Population
The trial enrolled 712 patients with surgically resected Stage III colon cancer confirmed to have dMMR. Eligibility included patients aged 12 years and older (one pediatric patient was enrolled). MMR status was initially determined locally by immunohistochemistry and subsequently confirmed centrally. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive:

  • Control arm: mFOLFOX6 (5-Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin) for 6 months (N=357)
  • Experimental arm: mFOLFOX6 plus Atezolizumab (840 mg IV every 2 weeks) for 6 months, followed by maintenance Atezolizumab monotherapy for an additional 6 months (N=355)

Median patient age was 64 yr. 55.1% were female, 84% of tumors were proximal, 46% were clinical low risk (T1-3N1) and 54% were high risk (T4 and/or N2). Stratification was based on nodal status (N1/N1c vs N2), tumor depth (T1-T3 vs T4), and tumor location (proximal vs distal colon). The Primary endpoint was Disease-Free Survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints included Overall Survival (OS) and Adverse Event (AE) profile. At the second interim analysis, median patient follow-up was 37.2 months and 124 DFS events were observed.

Results and Efficacy
After a median follow-up of 37.2 months, the Primary endpoint of DFS was significantly improved in the Atezolizumab arm. The 3-year DFS was 86.4% in the combination arm vs 76.6% in the mFOLFOX6-only arm (Hazard Ratio (HR)=0.50; P< 0.0001, crossing the prespecified efficacy boundary. This represents a 50% relative reduction in the risk of recurrence or death with the addition of Atezolizumab. Importantly, the benefit was consistent across predefined subgroups, including patients over 70 years old and those with both low and high-risk disease (based on T and N-stage). Tumor location, patient sex, and race did not impact the observed treatment benefit.

Safety and Tolerability
Grade 3 or more treatment-related adverse events occurred in 71.7% of patients receiving Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy, compared to 62.1% in those receiving chemotherapy alone. Although the addition of Atezolizumab resulted in a modest increase in toxicity, the side effect profile was consistent with prior experience with checkpoint inhibitors and considered manageable.

Clinical Implications
The ATOMIC trial is the first large, prospective, randomized Phase 3 study to demonstrate a clear benefit from adding immunotherapy to adjuvant chemotherapy in Stage III dMMR colon cancer. As highlighted by the investigators, current adjuvant treatment recommendations for dMMR tumors have historically been extrapolated from studies in mismatch repair–proficient populations or based on retrospective analyses. The robust DFS improvement observed here provides definitive evidence supporting a new treatment paradigm for this molecularly defined subgroup.

Although Overall Survival (OS) data are not yet mature with a median OS follow-up of 42.5 months, early signs are promising. However, future OS analyses may be complicated by the use of subsequent checkpoint inhibitors in patients who recur. The researchers emphasized the clinical relevance of these findings, noting their applicability to both sporadic dMMR cancers and Lynch syndrome associated tumors.

Future Directions
The ATOMIC trial sets a new benchmark for adjuvant therapy in dMMR colon cancer. However, important questions remain. Chief among them is the optimal duration of immunotherapy in this setting. Atezolizumab was administered for nearly a year, including maintenance. Ongoing research should clarify whether such prolonged treatment is necessary or if shorter regimens could maintain efficacy while reducing toxicity.

Moreover, while this study confirms benefit in the postoperative setting, parallel efforts are warranted to evaluate checkpoint inhibition in the neoadjuvant context. Encouraging responses such as those seen in small studies of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in dMMR rectal cancer highlight the need to explore earlier immunotherapeutic intervention in colon cancer as well.

Conclusion
The ATOMIC trial provides compelling evidence that incorporating Atezolizumab into adjuvant therapy improves Disease-free survival in patients with Stage III dMMR colon cancer, marking a major advancement in the management of this biologically distinct subset. Given these results, the combination of Atezolizumab and mFOLFOX6 should be considered the new standard of care in this setting. This trial also exemplifies the power of cooperative group studies in driving progress for biomarker-defined subsets within common malignancies.

Randomized trial of standard chemotherapy alone or combined with atezolizumab as adjuvant therapy for patients with stage III deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) colon cancer (Alliance A021502; ATOMIC). Sinicrope F, Ou F-S, Arnold D, et al. J Clin Oncol 43, 2025 (suppl 17; abstr LBA1)