Overall survival with neoadjuvant nivolumab (NIVO) + chemotherapy (chemo) in patients with resectable NSCLC in CheckMate 816.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LBA8000 Background: NIVO + chemo is an established standard of care neoadjuvant treatment (tx) for eligible patients (pts) with resectable NSCLC and has shown statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in EFS and pCR in the phase 3 CheckMate 816 study. Here, we report the planned final analysis of OS from CheckMate 816 at 5-y follow-up (f/u). Methods: Adults with stage IB (≥ 4 cm)–IIIA (per AJCC v7) resectable NSCLC, ECOG PS ≤ 1, and no known EGFR / ALK alterations were randomized 1:1 to receive neoadjuvant NIVO + chemo Q3W or chemo alone Q3W for 3 cycles, followed by surgery. Primary endpoints were EFS and pCR (both by blinded independent review). OS was a key prespecified, statistically powered secondary endpoint that was tested hierarchically. Exploratory analyses included OS by ctDNA clearance and pCR status. Results: At a median f/u of 68 mo (range, 60–85; database lock, 23 Jan 2025), neoadjuvant NIVO + chemo demonstrated a statistically significant OS benefit vs chemo alone (median [95% CI], not reached [NR] vs 73.7 mo [47.3–NR]; HR [95% CI], 0.72 [0.523–0.998]; P = 0.0479); 5-y OS rates were 65% vs 55%. OS favored NIVO + chemo in the subgroups defined by tumor PD-L1 expression, baseline disease stage, and histology (Table). In an exploratory analysis in pts with ctDNA+ at baseline (NIVO + chemo, n = 43; chemo, n = 43), pts with presurgical ctDNA clearance (56% vs 35%) had continued OS improvement vs those without across both tx arms (HR [95% CI]: NIVO + chemo, 0.38 [0.15–1.00]; chemo, 0.39 [0.14–1.11]). Furthermore, pts who had pCR with NIVO + chemo had sustained OS improvement vs those without (HR [95% CI], 0.11 [0.04–0.36]; 5-y OS rates, 95% vs 56%). Neoadjuvant NIVO + chemo continued to improve EFS vs chemo (median [95% CI], 59.6 [31.6–NR] vs 21.1 mo [16.5–36.8]; HR [95% CI], 0.68 [0.51–0.91]); 5-y EFS rates were 49% vs 34%. No new safety signals were observed at this long-term f/u. Conclusions: CheckMate 816 is the only neoadjuvant-only immunotherapy phase 3 trial to demonstrate a statistically and clinically significant OS benefit at 5 y for a resectable solid tumor. Pts with pCR with neoadjuvant NIVO + chemo had a ~90% reduction in their risk of death by 5 y compared with those without pCR. The findings show long-term survival benefit from a short course of neoadjuvant NIVO + chemo and affirm a paradigm shift in the tx of resectable NSCLC without actionable genomic alterations. Clinical trial information: NCT02998528 . All pts PD-L1 < 1% PD-L1 ≥ 1% Stage IB/II Stage IIIA Squamous Non-squamous NIVO + chemo (N = 179) vs chemo (N = 179) NIVO + chemo (n = 78) vs chemo (n = 77) NIVO + chemo (n = 89) vs chemo (n = 89) NIVO + chemo (n = 65) vs chemo (n = 61) NIVO + chemo (n = 113) vs chemo (n = 116) NIVO + chemo (n = 87) vs chemo (n = 95) NIVO + chemo (n = 92) vs chemo (n = 84) Median OS, mo NR vs 73.7 NR vs 61.8 NR vs 73.7 NR vs 76.8 NR vs 73.7 NR vs 73.7 NR vs NR HR (95% CI) 0.72 (0.523–0.998) 0.89 (0.57–1.41) 0.51 (0.31–0.84) 0.77 (0.44–1.35) 0.70 (0.47–1.05) 0.71 (0.46–1.11) 0.72 (0.45–1.16)
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".