Search

Introduction: The phase 2 RAMONA study demonstrated that second-line nivolumab ± ipilimumab immunotherapy was feasible and effective in older patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC). Here, we presented results from functional status (FS) and quality-of-life (QoL) analyses., Materials and Methods: Patients aged ≥65 years with advanced ESCC and disease progression following first-line therapy were enrolled for study treatment with nivolumab ± ipilimumab. Geriatric assessments (GA) consisting of G8 and GoGo/SlowGo evaluation, and quality of life (QoL) assessments with EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaires were conducted at baseline and during the treatment. A post hoc analysis was performed to compare therapy efficacy, toxicity, and QoL between age groups (≥70 years vs. <70 years) and functionality groups (G8 > 14 vs. ≤14 and GoGo vs. SlowGo)., Results: In 66 treated patients with a median age of 70.5 years, older patients had non-inferior overall survival and tumor response compared to younger patients, with no increased treatment-related adverse events. Fitter patients (G8 > 14, GoGo) had a clinically, yet not statistically significant, survival advantage than less fit patients (G8 ≤ 14, SlowGo) patients. Moreover, FS by G8 and GoGo/SlowGo significantly correlated with QoL. Overall, QoL was impaired at baseline but remained stable in all scales over the course of immunotherapy., Discussion: The administration of nivolumab ± ipilimumab second-line immunotherapy in older patients with ESCC did not show age-dependent effects and maintained QoL. GA could identify functional deficits and limitations of QoL and should be implemented in the context of immunotherapy., Clinicaltrials: gov: NCT03416244., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest NMB reports research funding and receipt of equipment from Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. RDH reports advisory for Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer, Daichi, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Roche, and Servier; honoraria for lectures and presentations from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer, Daichi, Lilly, medac, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Saladax, Sanofi, and Servier; and consulting fees from Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer, Daichi, Lilly, medac, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Saladax, Sanofi, and Servier. AV reports consultancy and advisory role for AstraZeneca, Amgen, BeiGene, Böhringer Mannheim, BMS, BTG, Daichi-Sankyo, EISAI, Incyte, Ipsen, MSD, PierreFabre, Roche, Servier, Sirtex, Tahio and Terumo. MdW reports research funding from Pfizer, Abbvie, Novartis, Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca and MorphoSys; speaker's honoraria from AstraZeneca and Janssen; travel or accommodation expenses from Astellas and Janssen. RJ reports consulting fees from Roche and Bayer; payments for lectures and presentations from Dr. Falk Pharma and Bristol Myers Squibb; for writing of manuscripts from Boston Scientific and Springer Nature; advisory for Heidelberg University Hospital; and leading the Endoscopy section of the German Society of Gastroenterology. GS reports consulting fees from Servier, Pharmacosmos, Bristol Myers Squibb, Amgen and travel support from Daichi-Sankyo. PTP reports consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and MSD. TL is Scientific Head at CROLLL GmbH. HB is an employee of a commercial provider of clinical statistics and programming services (Staburo GmbH, Munich). MPE reports funding for conducting the trial from AIO-Studien-gGmbH which is the regulatory sponsor of the trial, and advisory for Bristol Myers Squibb. NH reports advisory for Bristol Myers Squibb. All remaining authors declare no conflicts of interests., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The overall survival of patients with advanced and refractory oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, mostly aged 65 years and older, is poor. Treatment with PD-1 antibodies showed improved progression-free survival and overall survival. We assessed the safety and efficacy of combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy in this population., Methods: This multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial done in 32 sites in Germany included patients aged 65 years and older with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma and disease progression or recurrence following first-line therapy. Patients were treated with nivolumab (240 mg fixed dose once every 2 weeks, intravenously) in the safety run-in phase and continued with nivolumab and ipilimumab (nivolumab 240 mg fixed dose once every 2 weeks and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks, intravenously). The primary endpoint was overall survival, which was compared with a historical cohort receiving standard chemotherapy in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03416244., Findings: Between March 2, 2018, and Aug 20, 2020, we screened 75 patients with advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. We enrolled 66 patients (50 [76%] men and 16 [24%] women; median age 70·5 years [IQR 67·0-76·0]), 44 (67%) of whom received combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy and 22 (33%) received nivolumab alone. Median overall survival time at the prespecified data cutoff was 7·2 months (95% CI 5·7-12·4) and significantly higher than in a historical cohort receiving standard chemotherapy (p=0·0063). The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (12 [29%] of 42), nausea (11 [26%]), and diarrhoea (ten [24%]). Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 13 (20%) of 66 patients. Treatment-related death occurred in one patient with bronchiolitis obliterans while on nivolumab and ipilimumab treatment., Interpretation: Patients aged at least 65 years, with advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma might benefit from combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy in second-line treatment., Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MPE reports receiving funding to conduct the trial from AIO Studien, the regulatory sponsor of the trial, and serving as an advisor with Bristol Myers Squibb. NMB reports receiving research funding and receipt of equipment from Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. RH reports serving as an advisor with Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer, Daichi, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Roche, and Servier; honoraria for lectures and presentations from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer, Daichi, Lilly, medac, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Saladax, Sanofi, and Servier; and consulting fees from Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer, Daichi, Lilly, medac, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Saladax, Sanofi, and Servier. AV reports serving as an advisor with Roche, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Eisai, AstraZeneca, IPSEN, MSD, Sirtex, BTG, Servier, Terumo, and Imaging Equipment; and consulting fees and honoraria for lectures from Roche, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Eisai, Astra Zeneca, IPSEN, MSD, Sirtex, BTG, Servier, Terumo, and Imaging Equipment. RJ reports receiving consulting fees from Roche and Bayer; payments for lectures and presentations from Dr Falk Pharma and Bristol Myers Squibb; for writing of manuscripts from Boston Scientific and Springer Nature; serving as an advisor with Heidelberg University Hospital; and leading the Endoscopy section of the German Society of Gastroenterology. PTP reports receiving consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and MSD. TGa reports receiving honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, and Roche for presentations and advisory functions. JNK reports receiving consulting fees from Owkin and Panakeia as well as honoraria for lectures from MSD and Eisai. MM reports employment with AIO Studien, who was the regulatory sponsor of the trial. NH reports serving as an advisor with Bristol Myers Squibb. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The aim of the present study was to assess the feasibility of a 3D tumor cell culture model, that is, multicellular tumor spheroids (MCTSs) as an adequate model for micrometastases and therefore as a pharmacological model for efficacy testing of trifunctional therapeutic antibodies. Unlike conventional monolayer cultures, spheroids allow researchers to study parameters, such as 3D cell shape, 3D cell arrangement and microenvironment, and penetration efficiency of defense cells that may largely influence the efficacy of antibody treatment in vivo. The authors established a long-term coculture of human MCTSs with peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) to test the anticancer effect of the trifunctional, bispecific antibody catumaxomab (anti-EpCAM x anti-CD3) or similar therapeutic molecules. The test system is accessible to various analytical methods and thus allows for characterizing multiple parameters, which can help elucidate the mode of action of immunotherapeutic anticancer treatment. For example, the novel approach enables precise, reproducible volume growth analysis of MCTSs under immunotherapeutic treatments. For evaluation of changes within individual spheroids, cryosections can be stained (e.g., for proliferating or apoptotic cells as well as infiltrating PBMCs). Molecular PCR-based assays or flow cytometric analyses allow for discrimination between different cell types, particularly leukocyte subtypes. Furthermore, MCTSs can be disaggregated to form standard monolayers for cell viability or plating efficiency experiments. For these reasons, the MCTS model is a powerful tool to analyze drug efficacy with various endpoints under highly reproducible, standardized conditions.