DOI: 10.1200/jco.2025.43.4_suppl.lba143 ISSN: 0732-183X

First results of nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) vs NIVO monotherapy for microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) from CheckMate 8HW.

Thierry Andre, Elena Elez, Heinz-Josef Lenz, Lars Henrik Jensen, Yann Touchefeu, Eric Van Cutsem, Rocio Garcia-Carbonero, David Tougeron, Guillermo Mendez, Michael Schenker, Christelle De La Fouchardiere, Maria Luisa Limon, Takayuki Yoshino, Jin Li, Francine Aubin, Elvis Cela, Tian Chen, Ming Lei, Lixian Jin, Sara Lonardi

LBA143

Background: The CheckMate 8HW study met its dual primary endpoint with NIVO + IPI demonstrating superior progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR) vs chemotherapy (chemo) in patients (pts) with centrally confirmed MSI-H/dMMR mCRC in the first-line (1L) setting (HR 0.21; 95% CI 0.14–0.32; P < 0.0001). We report first results from the other dual primary endpoint of PFS for NIVO + IPI vs NIVO across all lines of therapy in pts with centrally confirmed MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Methods: Immunotherapy-naive pts with unresectable or mCRC and MSI-H/dMMR status by local testing who had received 0 or 1 prior line of therapy were randomized 2:2:1 to (i) NIVO (240 mg) Q2W (6 doses, then NIVO 480 mg Q4W), (ii) NIVO (240 mg) + IPI (1 mg/kg) Q3W (4 doses, then NIVO 480 mg Q4W), or (iii) chemo ± targeted therapies. Pts who had received ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy were randomized 1:1 to the NIVO + IPI or NIVO arms. Treatments continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (all arms), or a maximum of 2 years (NIVO ± IPI arms). Results: Across all lines of therapy,707 pts were randomized to NIVO + IPI (n = 354) or NIVO (n = 353); 55% and 52% received study treatment in the 1L setting, respectively. Of all randomized pts, 296 in the NIVO + IPI arm and 286 in the NIVO arm had centrally confirmed MSI-H/dMMR status. With 47.0 months (mo) of median follow-up (range, 16.7–60.5), NIVO + IPI demonstrated clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in PFS by BICR vs NIVO (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.48–0.81; P = 0.0003) and higher 12-, 24-, and 36-mo PFS rates vs NIVO (Table). Objective response rate (ORR) by BICR was significantly higher with NIVO + IPI vs NIVO (71% vs 58%; P = 0.0011; Table); best overall response of progressive disease was reported in 10% and 19% of pts, respectively. No new safety concerns were identified (Table). Conclusions: In the first randomized study to compare dual- vs single-agent immunotherapy in MSI-H/dMMR mCRC, NIVO + IPI demonstrated superior PFS vs NIVO across all lines of therapy, with a manageable safety profile. These results establish NIVO + IPI as the potential new standard-of-care treatment for MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT04008030 .

Efficacy by BICR (all lines; centrally confirmed MSI-H/dMMR by IHC and/or PCR test)
NIVO + IPI(n = 296)
NIVO(n = 286)
Median PFS (95% CI), mo
NR (53.8–NE)
39.3 (22.1–NE)
HR (95% CI); P value
0.62 (0.48–0.81); 0.0003
PFS rate (12/24/36-mo), %
76/71/68 63/56/51
ORR, n (%); 95% CI, %
209 (71); 65–76 165 (58); 52–64
P value
0.0011
Safety (all lines; all treated), n (%)
NIVO + IPI (n = 352) NIVO (n = 351)
Any-grade/grade 3–4 TRAEs
285 (81)/78 (22) 249 (71)/50 (14)
Any-grade/grade 3–4 TRAEs leading to discontinuation
48 (14)/33 (9) 21 (6)/14 (4)
Treatment-related deaths
2 (< 1) 1 (< 1)
IHC, immunohistochemistry; NE, not estimable; NR, not reached; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; TRAE, treatment-related adverse event.

More from our Archive