Comparative efficacy of cemiplimab versus other systemic treatments for advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma

Sam Keeping; Yingxin Xu; Chieh-I Chen; Shannon Cope; Ali Mojebi; Andreas Kuznik; Gerasimos Konidaris; Dieter Ayers; Medha Sasane; Rachel Allen; Thi-Minh-Thao Huynh; Evan Popoff; Morganna Freeman; Michael L Andria; Matthew G Fury; Kanwarjit Singh; Eggert Stockfleth; Amarnath Challapalli; Chrysalyne D Schmults

doi:10.2217/fon-2020-0823

Comparative efficacy of cemiplimab versus other systemic treatments for advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma

Future Oncol. 2021 Feb;17(5):611-627. doi: 10.2217/fon-2020-0823. Epub 2020 Oct 14.

Authors

Sam Keeping¹, Yingxin Xu², Chieh-I Chen², Shannon Cope¹, Ali Mojebi¹, Andreas Kuznik², Gerasimos Konidaris³, Dieter Ayers¹, Medha Sasane⁴, Rachel Allen³, Thi-Minh-Thao Huynh⁵, Evan Popoff¹, Morganna Freeman⁶, Michael L Andria², Matthew G Fury², Kanwarjit Singh⁴, Eggert Stockfleth⁷, Amarnath Challapalli⁸, Chrysalyne D Schmults⁹

Affiliations

¹ Precision HEOR, Vancouver, BC V6H 3Y4, Canada.
² Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Tarrytown, NY 10591, USA.
³ Sanofi, Reading, RG6 1PT, UK.
⁴ Sanofi, Bridgewater, NJ 08807, USA.
⁵ Sanofi, Chilly-Mazarin, 91380, France.
⁶ City of Hope, Duarte, CA 91010, USA.
⁷ Department of Dermatology, University of Bochum, 44801 Bochum, Germany.
⁸ Bristol Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, BS2 8ED, UK.
⁹ Brigham & Women's/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

PMID: 33052055
DOI: 10.2217/fon-2020-0823

Abstract

Aim: To estimate the comparative efficacy of cemiplimab, a programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor, versus EGFR inhibitors, pembrolizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy in terms of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival. Patients & methods: We performed an indirect treatment comparison of cemiplimab and other available systemic therapies for patients with advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Results: Cemiplimab was associated with benefits in OS (hazard ratios range: 0.07-0.52) and progression-free survival (hazard ratios range: 0.30-0.67) versus EGFR inhibitors and pembrolizumab (data from KEYNOTE-629). Cemiplimab was more efficacious versus platinum-based chemotherapy in terms of OS. Conclusion: Cemiplimab may offer improvements in survival for advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma patients compared with existing systemic therapies.

Keywords: cemiplimab; cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma; immuno-oncology; indirect treatment comparison; nonmelanoma skin cancer.

Publication types

Comparative Study
Systematic Review

MeSH terms

Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized / pharmacology
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized / therapeutic use*
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / pharmacology
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / therapeutic use*
Carboplatin / pharmacology
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell / drug therapy*
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell / immunology
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell / mortality
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell / pathology
Cetuximab / pharmacology
Cetuximab / therapeutic use
Cisplatin / pharmacology
Cisplatin / therapeutic use
Clinical Trials as Topic
ErbB Receptors / antagonists & inhibitors
Humans
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors / pharmacology
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors / therapeutic use*
Observational Studies as Topic
Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor / antagonists & inhibitors
Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor / metabolism
Progression-Free Survival
Skin Neoplasms / drug therapy*
Skin Neoplasms / immunology
Skin Neoplasms / mortality
Skin Neoplasms / pathology

Substances

Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors
PDCD1 protein, human
Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor
cemiplimab
Carboplatin
pembrolizumab
EGFR protein, human
ErbB Receptors
Cetuximab
Cisplatin

Grants and funding

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Sanofi Genzyme