Comparison of the efficacy and toxicity of anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies (nivolumab versus pembrolizumab) in treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma.
Authors: Cybulska-Stopa Bozena , Zietek Marcin , Czarnecka Anna Malgorzata , Piejko Karolina , Dziura Robert , Galus Łukasz , Ziółkowska Barbara , Kieszko Stanisław , Kempa-Kamińska Natasza , Calik Jacek , Gajewska-Wicher Katarzyna , Gądek Kamila , Sałek-Zań Agata , Seredyńska Joanna , Drosik-Kwaśniewska Anna , Kaminska-Winciorek Grazyna , Kubiatowski Tomasz , Suwiński Rafał , Mackiewicz Jacek , Rutkowski Piotr 
Published: June 2021

e21514 Background: Anti-programmed cell death-1 antibodies (anti-PD-1) have become a standard treatment option for melanoma patients. Currently, two anti-PD-1 antibodies are registered in the treatment of melanoma patients: nivolumab and pembrolizumab. Nivolumab is a human monoclonal antibody, while pembrolizumab is a humanized antibody. Unfortunately, there are very few clinical data comparing the efficacy and toxicity of nivolumab and pembrolizumab in routine practice. Methods: Consecutive patients treated in the first line with anti-PD-1 (nivolumab or pembrolizumab) for unresectable or metastatic melanoma in comprehensive cancer centers between 03/2016 and 09/2020 were enrolled in the analysis. Baseline factors (age, gender, primary location of melanoma, BRAF mutation status, ECOG performance status, baseline LDH level, and location of metastases) were evaluated to identify predictors of overall survival (OS). Data on response to treatment and the occurrence of irAEs were collected prospectively during anti-PD-1 treatment. OS were assessed using Kaplan–Meier and Cox models. The Chi-Square statistic was used for testing relationships between categorical variables. Median follow up for nivolumab and pembrolizumab group was 12.6 (range 0.2-52.1) and 10.7 (range 0.03-53.5) months, respectively. Results: Overall, 736 patients were included in the present analysis (443 nivolumab, 293 pembrolizumab). There were no statistically significant differences in baseline factors (age, gender, primary location of melanoma, BRAF mutation status, ECOG performance status, baseline LDH level (normal vs elevated), brain metastasis and TNM stage) between the groups. Median OS for patients treated with nivolumab and pembrolizumab was 22 and was 17.3 months, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in OS between the nivolumab and pembrolizumab groups (p = 0.12, HR = 1.2, Cl 95% 0.9-1.4). At multivariate analysis normal LDH levels, no brain metastases, and ECOG 0 or 1 were positive prognostic factors for OS both in nivolumab and pembrolizumab groups. In the nivolumab and pembrolizumab groups, 6% and 5% CR (complete response), 33% and 31% PR (partial response), 25% and 24% SD (stable disease), respectively, were observed. There was no statistical difference between the groups in the response to treatment (p = 0.65). There was no statistical difference between the groups in occurrence of the irAEs (p = 0.97) as well as in the type of irAEs. Conclusions: Our analysis in melanoma patients treated in routine practice with nivolumab or pembrolizumab confirmed no statistical differences in OS and treatment responses between these two anti-PD-1 antibodies. There were also no differences in toxicity between the two drugs. The choice of treatment should be based on the preferences of the patient and the physician.