Abstract 653: Proved clinical benefit of low-dose anti-CTLA4 + anti-PD-1 immunotherapy versus mono anti-PD-1 therapy in patients unresectable or metastatic melanoma: Phase III OCTAVA trial

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Background: BCD-217-2/OCTAVA (NCT05732805) is an international, multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study conducted to access the efficacy and safety of prolgolimab+nurulimab (BCD-217) combination therapy with continued prolgolimab therapy compared to prolgolimab monotherapy as 1st line treatment for patients (pts) with unresectable or metastatic melanoma (un/mM). BCD-217 is a fixed-dose combination of nurulimab (aCTLA-4, 5 mg/ml) and prolgolimab (aPD-1, 15 mg/ml) was recently approved as the 1st line treatment for un/mM in Russia. Here we present the primary analysis of the study. Methods: Pts with unresectable or metastatic cutaneous melanoma (IIIC-IVM1a-c) with treatment- naïve for unresectable/metastatic disease were randomized in 2 treatment arms: combination drug containing nurulimab (1 mg/kg) and prolgolimab (3 mg/kg) at a dose of 0.2 ml/kg Q3W during the first four blinded infusions (nuru+prolgo arm) and prolgo arm received prolgolimab monotherapy at a dose of 3 mg/kg Q3W during the first four blinded infusions. Then both arms received prolgolimab maintenance up to two years. The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: 271 pts were randomized to nuru+prolgo (n=135) or prolgo monotherapy (n=136) arms. After the median of 15.8 mo follow-up the median PFS (mPFS) was 15.4 (10.3; ND) mo in the nuru+prolgo group and 10.8 (4.7; ND) mo in the prolgo monotherapy group (95% CI, HR 0.68 (0.482; 0.957), iRECIST). The mPFS benefit of nuru+prolgo arm compared to prolgo arm are maintained in RECIST 1.1 assessment: 9.9 mo vs 2.8 mo, respectively. ORR and DCR were also higher in NURU+PROLGO arm. mOS was not reached in both groups (95% CI, HR 0,88, (0.50; 1.55)). 12-mos OS was 84% in each arm. Grade 3-4 treatment-related AE were reported in 16.3% of pts in nuru+prolgo arm compared to 14.0% - prolgo arm. Immune-related AEs (irAE) of all grades were reported in 52.6% of cases in nuru+prolgo arm and 32.4% of cases - in prolgo arm (p 0.0007). Majority of them were mild. The proportion of gr.≥3 irAEs was 13.3% vs 5.9% in nuru+prolgo arm and prolgo arm, respectively (p 0.04). Treatment discontinuation due to AE was reported in 9.6% of cases for nuru+prolgo vs 4.4% of cases for prolgo arm. Conclusions: OCTAVA trial resuts demonstrated that the fixed-dose combination of nurulimab + prolgolimab is significantly more effective than aPD-1 monotherapy without a serious deterioration of the safety profile in patients with metastatic or unresectable cutaneous melanoma as 1st line therapy. Citation Format: Lev Demidov, Igor Samoylenko, Galina Kharkevich, Kristina Orlova, Vladimir Moiseenko, Igor Utyashev, Daniil Stroyakovskiy, Vadim Kozlov, Anastasia Mochalova, Svetlana Demidova, Marina Lyadova, Andrey Kutkovich, Pavel Skopin, Nadezhda Kovalenko, Sufia Safina, Vitaliy Volkov, Yulia Semiletova, Vera Vaschenko, Nikolaiy Kislov, Artem Poltoratsky, Irina Shumskaya, Sergey Kolomiets, Alexander Sobolev, Igor Belogortsev, Svetlana Odintsova, Sameer Rastogi, Timur Andabekov, Anastasia Zimina, Konstantin Penkov, Anna Semenova, Alexey Obukhov, Vasiliy Belyakovsky, Oleg Gladkov, Rakesh Neve, Natalia Falaleeva, Elena Poddubskaya, Amale Vaibhav, Dmitriy Kirtbaya, Yana Chapko, Maria Smagina, Irina Sorokina, Yulia Linkova, Arina Zinkina-Orikhan, Fedor Kriukov, Anton Lutsky, Evgenia Mikhailova. Proved clinical benefit of low-dose anti-CTLA4 + anti-PD-1 immunotherapy versus mono anti-PD-1 therapy in patients unresectable or metastatic melanoma: Phase III OCTAVA trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 653.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.