Neal Ready

Positions:

Professor of Medicine

Medicine, Medical Oncology
School of Medicine

Member of the Duke Cancer Institute

Duke Cancer Institute
School of Medicine

Education:

Ph.D. 1983

University of California at Irvine

M.D. 1986

Vanderbilt University

Medical Resident, Medicine

Brown University

Fellow in Hematology-Oncology, Medicine

Brown University

Fellow in Hematology-Oncology, Medicine

Tufts University

Grants:

Evaluation of Tumor Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Resected Non Small Cell Lung Cancer

Administered By
Medicine, Medical Oncology
Role
Mentor
Start Date
End Date

Refining and Validating Genomic Signatures in Lung Cancer

Administered By
Institutes and Centers
Awarded By
National Institutes of Health
Role
Investigator
Start Date
End Date

Programs in Clinical Effectiveness of Cancer Pharmacogenomics

Administered By
Duke Center for Applied Genomics and Precision Medicine
Awarded By
National Institutes of Health
Role
Co Investigator
Start Date
End Date

ADRIATIC

Administered By
Duke Cancer Institute
Role
Principal Investigator
Start Date
End Date

B9991023

Administered By
Duke Cancer Institute
Role
Principal Investigator
Start Date
End Date

Publications:

Long-term outcomes with nivolumab (Nivo) vs docetaxel (Doc) in patients (Pts) with advanced (Adv) NSCLC: CheckMate 017 and CheckMate 057 2-y update

Authors
Barlesi, F; Steins, M; Horn, L; Ready, N; Felip, E; Borghaei, H; Spigel, DR; Arrieta, O; Antonia, SJ; Fayette, J; Rizvi, N; Crinò, L; Reck, M; Eberhardt, WE; Hellmann, M; Geese, WJ; Li, A; Healey, D; Brahmer, JR; Paz-Ares, L
MLA Citation
Barlesi, F., et al. “Long-term outcomes with nivolumab (Nivo) vs docetaxel (Doc) in patients (Pts) with advanced (Adv) NSCLC: CheckMate 017 and CheckMate 057 2-y update.” Annals of Oncology, vol. 27, 2016, p. vi420. Scopus, doi:10.1093/annonc/mdw383.15.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1367922
Source
scopus
Published In
Annals of Oncology
Volume
27
Published Date
Start Page
vi420
DOI
10.1093/annonc/mdw383.15

The immunotherapeutic landscape in non-small cell lung cancer and its surgical horizons.

Lung cancer continues to be a leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Despite tremendous advances in surgical technique, chemotherapy regimens, radiation, and targeted therapies, survival is <50% at 5 years. Immunotherapy, specifically immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), demonstrates promise as a solution to this clinical problem. Several agents have been Food and Drug Administration-approved for locally advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Further studies are now exploring the use of these agents in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings. Although ICIs have demonstrated meaningful efficacy in NSCLC and other advanced malignancies, they are not without adverse toxicities. Furthermore, there are minimal data on their use in the perioperative period. Here we discuss the current domain of ICIs and their surgical implications in NSCLC.
Authors
Rhodin, KE; Rucker, AJ; Ready, NE; D'Amico, TA; Antonia, SJ
MLA Citation
Rhodin, Kristen E., et al. “The immunotherapeutic landscape in non-small cell lung cancer and its surgical horizons.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, vol. 159, no. 4, Apr. 2020, pp. 1616–23. Pubmed, doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.08.138.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1423626
PMID
31836182
Source
pubmed
Published In
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Volume
159
Published Date
Start Page
1616
End Page
1623
DOI
10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.08.138

Definitive Radiotherapy for Inoperable Stage IIB Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: Patterns of Care and Comparative Effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to analyze practice patterns and perform comparative effectiveness of definitive radiotherapy techniques for inoperable stage IIB (American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults in the National Cancer Database diagnosed with T3N0M0 or T1-2N1M0 NCSLC between 2004 and 2015 who received definitive radiotherapy were identified. Cases were divided as stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT), or conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) and stratified by systemic therapy (ST). Cox proportional hazards models evaluated the effect of covariates on overall survival (OS). Subgroup analysis by tumor size, chest wall invasion, multifocality, and ST use was performed with Kaplan-Meier estimates of OS. RESULTS: A total of 10,081 subjects met inclusion criteria: 4401 T3N0M0 (66.5% CFRT, 11.0% HFRT, and 22.5% SBRT) and 5680 T1-2N1M0 (92.5% CFRT and 7.5% HFRT). For T3N0M0 NSCLC, SBRT utilization increased from 3.7% in 2006% to 35.4% in 2015. Subjects treated with SBRT were more likely to have smaller tumors, multifocal tumors, or adenocarcinoma histology. SBRT resulted in similar or superior OS compared with CFRT for tumors > 5 cm, tumors invading the chest wall, or multifocal tumors. SBRT was significantly associated with improved OS on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.715; P < .001). For T1-2N1M0 NSCLC, patients treated with HFRT were significantly older and less likely to receive ST; nevertheless, there was no difference in OS between HFRT and CFRT on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: CFRT + ST is utilized most frequently to treat stage IIB NSCLC in the United States when surgery is not performed, though it is decreasing. SBRT utilization for T3N0M0 NSCLC is increasing and was associated with improved OS.
Authors
Jacobs, CD; Gao, J; Wang, X; Clarke, JM; Tong, B; Ready, NE; Suneja, G; Kelsey, CR; Torok, JA
MLA Citation
Jacobs, Corbin D., et al. “Definitive Radiotherapy for Inoperable Stage IIB Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: Patterns of Care and Comparative Effectiveness.Clin Lung Cancer, vol. 21, no. 3, May 2020, pp. 238–46. Pubmed, doi:10.1016/j.cllc.2019.10.005.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1422411
PMID
31757764
Source
pubmed
Published In
Clin Lung Cancer
Volume
21
Published Date
Start Page
238
End Page
246
DOI
10.1016/j.cllc.2019.10.005

Nivolumab Monotherapy and Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Recurrent Small Cell Lung Cancer: Results From the CheckMate 032 Randomized Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Nivolumab monotherapy is approved in the United States for third-line or later metastatic small cell lung cancer based on pooled data from nonrandomized and randomized cohorts of the multicenter, open-label, phase 1/2 trial of nivolumab ± ipilimumab (CheckMate 032; NCT01928394). We report updated results, including long-term overall survival (OS), from the randomized cohort. METHODS: Patients with small cell lung cancer and disease progression after one to two prior chemotherapy regimens were randomized 3:2 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Patients were stratified by number of prior chemotherapy regimens and treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: Overall, 147 patients received nivolumab and 96 nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Minimum follow-up for ORR/progression-free survival/safety was 11.9 months (nivolumab) and 11.2 months (nivolumab plus ipilimumab). ORR increased with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (21.9% versus 11.6% with nivolumab; odds ratio: 2.12; 95% confidence interval: 1.06-4.26; p = 0.03). For long-term OS, minimum follow-up was 29.0 months (nivolumab) versus 28.4 months (nivolumab plus ipilimumab); median (95% confidence interval) OS was 5.7 (3.8-7.6) versus 4.7 months (3.1-8.3). Twenty-four-month OS rates were 17.9% (nivolumab) and 16.9% (nivolumab plus ipilimumab). Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse event rates were 12.9% (nivolumab) versus 37.5% (nivolumab plus ipilimumab), and treatment-related deaths were n =1 versus n = 3, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas ORR (primary endpoint) was higher with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab, OS was similar between groups. In each group, OS remained encouraging with long-term follow-up. Toxicities were more common with combination therapy versus nivolumab monotherapy.
Authors
Ready, NE; Ott, PA; Hellmann, MD; Zugazagoitia, J; Hann, CL; de Braud, F; Antonia, SJ; Ascierto, PA; Moreno, V; Atmaca, A; Salvagni, S; Taylor, M; Amin, A; Camidge, DR; Horn, L; Calvo, E; Li, A; Lin, WH; Callahan, MK; Spigel, DR
MLA Citation
Ready, Neal E., et al. “Nivolumab Monotherapy and Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Recurrent Small Cell Lung Cancer: Results From the CheckMate 032 Randomized Cohort.J Thorac Oncol, vol. 15, no. 3, Mar. 2020, pp. 426–35. Pubmed, doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2019.10.004.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1416731
PMID
31629915
Source
pubmed
Published In
J Thorac Oncol
Volume
15
Published Date
Start Page
426
End Page
435
DOI
10.1016/j.jtho.2019.10.004

Safety and Efficacy of Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab in Patients With PD-L1-Low/Negative Recurrent or Metastatic HNSCC: The Phase 2 CONDOR Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Dual blockade of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) may overcome immune checkpoint inhibition. It is unknown whether dual blockade can potentiate antitumor activity without compromising safety in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) and low or no PD-L1 tumor cell expression. Objective: To assess safety and objective response rate of durvalumab combined with tremelimumab. Design, Setting, and Participants: The CONDOR study was a phase 2, randomized, open-label study of Durvalumab, Tremelimumab, and Durvalumab in Combination With Tremelimumab in Patients With R/M HNSCC. Eligibility criteria included PD-L1-low/negative disease that had progressed after 1 platinum-containing regimen in the R/M setting. Patients were randomized (N = 267) from April 15, 2015, to March 16, 2016, at 127 sites in North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. Interventions: Durvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks) + tremelimumab (1 mg/kg every 4 weeks) for 4 cycles, followed by durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks), or durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks) monotherapy, or tremelimumab (10 mg/kg every 4 weeks for 7 doses then every 12 weeks for 2 doses) monotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Safety and tolerability and efficacy measured by objective response rate. Results: Among the 267 patients (220 men [82.4%]), median age (range) of patients was 61.0 (23-82) years. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 21 patients (15.8%) treated with durvalumab + tremelimumab, 8 (12.3%) treated with durvalumab, and 11 (16.9%) treated with tremelimumab. Grade 3/4 immune-mediated adverse events occurred in 8 patients (6.0%) in the combination arm only. Objective response rate (95% CI) was 7.8% (3.78%-13.79%) in the combination arm (n = 129), 9.2% (3.46%-19.02%) for durvalumab monotherapy (n = 65), and 1.6% (0.04%-8.53%) for tremelimumab monotherapy (n = 63); median overall survival (95% CI) for all patients treated was 7.6 (4.9-10.6), 6.0 (4.0-11.3), and 5.5 (3.9-7.0) months, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with R/M HNSCC and low or no PD-L1 tumor cell expression, all 3 regimens exhibited a manageable toxicity profile. Durvalumab and durvalumab + tremelimumab resulted in clinical benefit, with minimal observed difference between the two. A phase 3 study is under way. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02319044.
Authors
Siu, LL; Even, C; Mesía, R; Remenar, E; Daste, A; Delord, J-P; Krauss, J; Saba, NF; Nabell, L; Ready, NE; Braña, I; Kotecki, N; Zandberg, DP; Gilbert, J; Mehanna, H; Bonomi, M; Jarkowski, A; Melillo, G; Armstrong, JM; Wildsmith, S; Fayette, J
MLA Citation
Siu, Lillian L., et al. “Safety and Efficacy of Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab in Patients With PD-L1-Low/Negative Recurrent or Metastatic HNSCC: The Phase 2 CONDOR Randomized Clinical Trial.Jama Oncol, vol. 5, no. 2, Feb. 2019, pp. 195–203. Pubmed, doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.4628.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1357458
PMID
30383184
Source
pubmed
Published In
Jama Oncol
Volume
5
Published Date
Start Page
195
End Page
203
DOI
10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.4628