Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2022 Oct 15;151(8):1335-1344.
doi: 10.1002/ijc.34126. Epub 2022 Jun 6.

Cabozantinib-nivolumab sequence in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: The CABIR study

Yann-Alexandre Vano  1   2   3 , Letuan Phan  4 , Gwenaelle Gravis  5 , Iphigénie Korakis  6 , Friederike Schlürmann  7 , Denis Maillet  8 , Mostefa Bennamoun  9 , Nadine Houede  10 , Delphine Topart  11 , Delphine Borchiellini  12 , Philippe Barthelemy  13 , Raffaele Ratta  14 , Thomas Ryckewaert  15 , Ali Hasbini  16 , Sophie Hans  17 , Sheik Emambux  18 , Sandra Cournier  4 , Elena Braychenko  4 , Réza-Thierry Elaidi  4 , Stéphane Oudard  1   2
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Cabozantinib-nivolumab sequence in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: The CABIR study

Yann-Alexandre Vano et al. Int J Cancer. .

Abstract

Nivolumab and cabozantinib are approved agents in mRCC patients after sunitinib/pazopanib (TKI) failure. However, the optimal sequence, cabozantinib then nivolumab (CN) or nivolumab then cabozantinib (NC), is still unknown. The CABIR study aimed to identify the optimal sequence between CN and NC after frontline VEGFR-TKI. In this multicenter retrospective study, we collected data from mRCC pts receiving CN or NC, after frontline VEGFR-TKI. A propensity score (PrS) was calculated to manage bias selection, and sequence comparisons were carried out with a cox model on a matched sample 1:1. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) from the start of second line to progression in third line (PFS2-3 ). Key secondary endpoints included overall survival from second line (OS2 ). Out of 139 included mRCC patients, 38 (27%) and 101 (73%) received CN and NC, respectively. Overlap in PrS allowed 1:1 matching for each CN pts, with characteristics well balanced. For both PFS2-3 and OS2 , NC sequence was superior to CN (PFS2-3 : HR = 0.58 [0.34-0.98], P = .043; OS2 : 0.66 [0.42-1.05], P = .080). Superior PFS2-3 was in patients treated between 6 and 18 months with prior VEGFR-TKI (P = .019) and was driven by a higher PFSL3 with cabozantinib when given after nivolumab (P < .001). The CABIR study shows a prolonged PFS of the NC sequence compared to CN in mRCC after first line VEGFR-TKI failure. The data suggest that cabozantinib may be more effective than nivolumab in the third-line setting, possibly related to an ability of cabozantinib to overcome resistance to PD-1 blockade.

Keywords: cabozantinib; immunotherapy; matching-adjusted study; nivolumab; renal cell carcinoma; tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Yann‐Alexandre Vano received consultancy fees from BMS, MSD, Ipsen, Merck, Pfizer, Novartis. Gwenaelle Gravis: consultancy fees were received by her institution from BMS, Pfizer, MSD, Alliance Merck‐Pfizer; fees received by her institution for coordinating PI role from BMS. Denis Maillet received consultancy fees from BMS, Ipsen, Pfizer, MSD. Delphine Borchiellini: received consultancy fees from Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Pfizer; clinical research funding (institution) from: Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Exelixis, Infinity, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Taiho Oncology. Philippe Barthelemy received consultancy fees from BMS, Ipsen Pfizer, Merck MSD Novartis. Raffaele Ratta received consultancy fees from BMS, MSD, Ipsen, Merck, Pfizer. Sheik Emambux received consultancy fees from BMS and IPSEN. Stéphane Oudard received consultancy fees from Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, BMS, Ipsen. Mostefa Bennamoun, Letuan Phan, Iphigénie Korakis, Friederike Schlürmann, Nadine Houede, Delphine Topart, Thomas Ryckewaert, Ali Hasbini, Sophie Hans, Sandra Cournier, Elena Braychenko, Réza‐Thierry Elaidi: none.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Progression‐free survival from L2 to L3 (PFS2‐3) in matched (1:1) population. Kaplan‐Meier curve of progression‐free‐survival from second line to third line in matched (1:1) population (n = 38). The red curve represents the cabozantinib‐nivolumab (CN) sequence and the blue curve represents the nivolumab‐cabozantinib (NC) sequence [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Forest plot of sequence effect (PFS2‐3 and OS2) in different models. Forest plot representing the effect of cabozantinib‐nivolumab (CN) and nivolumab‐cabozantinib (NC) sequences on progression‐free‐survival from line 2 to line 3 (PFS2‐3) and on overall survival from line 2 (OS2), according to the following models: all patients (n = 139), all patient with adjustment on propensity score (PrS, n = 139), 1:1 matched population (n = 38), 1:2 matched population (n = 76). Hazard ratio below 1 favors the NC sequence [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Progression‐free survival (PFS) in second and third lines. Kaplan‐Meier curves of progression‐free‐survival (PFS) in second (A) and third line (B). The red curve represents the cabozantinib‐nivolumab (CN) sequence and the blue curve represents the nivolumab‐cabozantinib (NC) sequence [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Objective response rate (ORR) during second and third lines. Histogram representing the objective response rate (RECIST 1.1) with cabozantinib and nivolumab in second (left) and third line (right) in matched (1:1) population (n = 38). Green bars represent responders (complete and partial), dark blue bars represent nonresponders (progression and stable disease) and light blue bars represent nonevaluable patients. CN, cabozantinib‐nivolumab; NC, nivolumab‐cabozantinib [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
Forest plot of sequence effect (PFS2‐3) by subgroups. Forest plot representing the effect of cabozantinib‐nivolumab (CN) and nivolumab‐cabozantinib (NC) sequences on progression‐free‐survival (PFS) from line 2 to line 3, according to frontline VEGFR‐TKI duration (<6 months, 6‐18 months and >18 months) in the following models: all patients, 1:1 matched population, 1:2 matched population. Hazard ratio below 1 favors the NC sequence [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Gurram S, Al Harthy M, Ball MW. The changing landscape of systemic therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: an update. Discov Med. 2020;29:191‐199. - PubMed
    1. Bedke J, Albiges L, Capitanio U, et al. The 2021 updated European Association of Urology guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: immune checkpoint inhibitor‐based combination therapies for treatment‐naive metastatic clear‐cell renal cell carcinoma are standard of care. Eur Urol. 2021;80:393‐397. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2021.04.042 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Powles T, Albiges L, Bex A, et al. ESMO clinical practice guideline update on the use of immunotherapy in early stage and advanced renal cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol. 2021;32:1511‐1519. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2021.09.014 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gunturi A, McDermott DF. Nivolumab for the treatment of cancer. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2015;24:253‐260. doi:10.1517/13543784.2015.991819 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Motzer RJ, Escudier B, McDermott DF, et al. Nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal‐cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1803‐1813. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1510665 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms