Please select the option that best describes you:
Topics:
Genitourinary Cancers • Bladder Cancer • Medical Oncology • Urologic Oncology • Journal Club ft. NEJM publications
What could explain the contradictory results between CheckMate 274 and IMVIGOR 010?
Does this raise concerns about the efficacy of adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition? Are any preliminary results from AMBASSADOR (adjuvant pembrolizumab) yet available?
Answer from: Medical Oncologist at Community Practice
The reasons for the discord between the results of IMvigor010 and CheckMate 274 are unclear and may be multifactorial. In the IMvigor010 trial, the primary endpoint of DFS was not met with adjuvant atezolizumab vs. observation in the ITT population (HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·74-1·08]; p...
Sign in or Register to read more
Answer from: Medical Oncologist at Academic Institution
There are a number of potential explanations including different drugs and differences in trial design. Ultimately, however, if one believes the retrospective analysis placing the trial results in the context of pre-treatment ctDNA status, then one could conclude that this is largely an issue of pat...
Answer from: Medical Oncologist at Academic Institution
There is not a clear explanation for the different outcomes between the CM274 and IMvigor010 adjuvant trials and we should certainly consider the possibility that the role for adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy may change based on the updated analysis for CM274 with regard to OS as well as...