At baseline, the median ages in the combination and chemotherapy arms were 55.0 years (IQR, 50.5-59.5) and 54.0 years (IQR, 49.0-61.0), respectively.1 Most patients in these respective arms had a PD-L1 CPS of at least 1 (93.2% vs 92.8%), had metastatic disease (97.7% vs 97.3%), had received prior platinum-containing therapy (70.9% vs 70.0%), and had received prior therapy (95.5% vs 96.0%). At diagnosis, patients had stage I (15.9% vs 13.9%), II (32.7% vs 35.4%), III (38.2% vs 37.2%), IVA (0.5% vs 1.8%), IVB (8.2% vs 8.1%), or unknown (4.5% vs 3.6%) disease. Prior therapies included surgery (48.2% vs 44.8%), radiotherapy (85.5% vs 88.3%), and systemic anticancer treatment (86.8% vs 85.7%); 30.9% of patients in the chemotherapy arm received bevacizumab during the study.
What were the additional efficacy data and safety profile of the combination?
The median OS in the combination arm was 34.4 months (95% CI, 29.6-not reached) compared with 23.4 months (95% CI, 19.5-28.2) in the chemotherapy arm (stratified HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.86; P = .0012). Findings from a subgroup analysis revealed that the PFS benefit in favor of the combination arm was reported in all prespecified subgroups except for the subgroup of patients with a PD-L1 CPS of less than 1 (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.72-3.68). The OS benefit with the combination was reported in all prespecified subgroups.
The BICR-assessed confirmed ORR in the combination arm was 52.3% (95% CI, 45.5%-59.0%) vs 46.6% (range, 39.9%-53.4%) in the chemotherapy arm, including respective complete response rates of 10.9% and 8.5%. The confirmed DCRs were 81.8% (95% CI, 76.1%-86.7%) and 77.6% (range, 71.5%-82.9%), respectively. The median DORs were 17.9 months (95% CI, 12.5-22.9) and 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.3-9.0), respectively, and the respective median TTRs were 2.2 months (IQR, 2.1-4.2) and 2.1 months (IQR, 2.1-2.2).
In terms of safety, any-grade treatment-emergent adverse effects (AEs) occurred in 99.5% of patients in the combination arm and 99.1% of patients in the chemotherapy arm. Patients in both arms experienced grade 3 to 5 treatment-related AEs (TRAEs; 87.3% vs 67.1%), serious TRAEs (34.5% vs 19.2%), as well as TRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation (13.6% vs 6.6%), dose interruption (83.6% vs 37.6%), and dose reduction (65.0% vs 12.2%). Patients in the combination arm experienced any-grade immune-related (38.2%) and grade 3 to 5 immune-related (7.3%) TRAEs; no such events were reported in the chemotherapy arm.
The most common any-grade TRAEs in the combination arm included decreased white blood cell count (79.5%), decreased neutrophil count (75.0%), and anemia (70.0%). These were also the most common any-grade TRAEs in the chemotherapy arm, occurring at respective rates of 73.7%, 70.0%, and 75.6%.
“The safety profile was manageable. These study findings [show that] camrelizumab plus famitinib could serve as a novel first-line treatment option for this patient population,” Wu said in his conclusion.
Disclosures: Wu reported no relevant disclosures.
References
- Wu X, Xia L, Wang J, et al. Phase 3 study of camrelizumab plus famitinib versus platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer. Presented at: 2025 ESMO Congress; October 17-25, 2025; Berlin, Germany. Abstract LBA38.
- Camrelizumab combined with famitinib malate for treatment of recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer. ClinicalTrials.gov. Updated September 9, 2025. Accessed October 20, 2025. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04906993