Cemiplimab monotherapy in Japanese patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer

Other authors

Institut Català de la Salut

[Hasegawa K] Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, Japan. [Takahashi S] Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan. [Ushijima K] Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Japan. [Okadome M] Gynecology Service, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center, Fukuoka, Japan. [Yonemori K] Department of Breast and Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. [Yokota H] Saitama Cancer Center, Saitama, Japan. [Oaknin A] Gynaecologic Cancer Programme, Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain. Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain

Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus

Publication date

2024-11-05T13:42:40Z

2024-11-05T13:42:40Z

2024-09-26



Abstract

Cervical cancer; Immunotherapy; Programmed cell death‐1


Càncer de coll uterí; Immunoteràpia; Mort cel·lular programada-1


Cáncer de cuello uterino; Inmunoterapia; Muerte celular programada‐1


Background In the phase 3 EMPOWER-Cervical 1/GOG-3016/ENGOT-cx9 study, cemiplimab significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy for patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer who progressed after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. We present a post hoc subgroup analysis of patients enrolled in Japan. Methods Patients were enrolled regardless of programmed cell death-ligand 1 status and randomized 1:1 to cemiplimab 350 mg intravenously every 3 weeks or investigator's choice single-agent chemotherapy for up to 96 weeks. Primary endpoint was OS. Key secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). Results Overall, 608 patients were randomized, of whom 56 (9.2%) were in Japan (cemiplimab, n = 29; chemotherapy, n = 27). The median (range) duration of follow-up was 13.6 (6.0–25.3) versus 18.2 (6.0–38.2) months for patients in Japan and for the overall population, respectively. Median OS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 8.4 (7.0-not evaluable) and 9.4 (5.4–14.9) months for cemiplimab versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.43–1.68). Median PFS (95% CI) was 4.0 (1.4–8.2) versus 3.7 (1.8–4.2) months with cemiplimab and chemotherapy (HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.50–1.61), respectively. ORR was 17.2% for cemiplimab and 7.4% for chemotherapy (odds ratio, 2.47; 95% CI, 0.44–13.99). Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events at any grade was 79.3% for cemiplimab and 100% for chemotherapy. Grade ≥3 adverse events were 37.9% versus 66.7% with cemiplimab and chemotherapy, respectively. Discussion While acknowledging limitations inherent to a small subgroup analysis, the HR of 0.86 observed in Japanese patients suggests an emerging survival benefit despite a 4.6-month shorter median duration of follow-up versus the overall study population.


This study was funded by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi.

Document Type

Article


Published version

Language

English

Publisher

Wiley

Related items

Cancer Medicine;13(18)

https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.70236

Recommended citation

This citation was generated automatically.

Rights

Attribution 4.0 International

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This item appears in the following Collection(s)