Phase II study of ipilimumab in adolescents with unresectable stage III or IV malignant melanoma

BackgroundIpilimumab is approved for the treatment of advanced melanoma in adults; however, little information on the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in younger patients is available.MethodsPatients aged 12 to <18 years with previously treated or untreated, unresectable stage III or IV malignant melanoma received ipilimumab 3 or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Primary end-points were 1-year overall survival and safety.ResultsOver a period of 3.5 years, 12 patients received ipilimumab at either 3 mg/kg (n = 4) or 10 mg/kg (n = 8). The median number of ipilimumab doses was four for 3 mg/kg and three for 10 mg/kg. At 1 year, three of four patients on 3 mg/kg and five of eight patients on 10 mg/kg were alive. Two patients on 10 mg/kg had partial response, and one on 3 mg/kg had stable disease. One patient had durable partial response at 3 years without further treatment, at time of this report. There was one grade 3/4 immune-mediated adverse reaction with 3 mg/kg and five with 10 mg/kg. There were no treatment-related deaths. The study was stopped due to slow accrual.ConclusionsAt >1 year follow-up, ipilimumab demonstrated activity in melanoma patients aged 12 to <18 years, with a similar safety profile as that seen in adults. Our trial highlights the difficulties of enrolling younger patients with rare diseases in clinical trials for treatments that are approved in adults, suggesting adolescents with cancer types occurring predominantly in adults should be considered for inclusion in adult trials of promising new drugs.Clinical trial registration: NCT01696045.     

Anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with advanced melanoma and preexisting autoimmune disorders or major toxicity with ipilimumab

BackgroundAnti-PD-1 antibodies (anti-PD-1) have clinical activity in a number of malignancies. All clinical trials have excluded patients with significant preexisting autoimmune disorders (ADs) and only one has included patients with immune-related adverse events (irAEs) with ipilimumab. We sought to explore the safety and efficacy of anti-PD-1 in such patients.Patients and methodsPatients with advanced melanoma and preexisting ADs and/or major immune-related adverse events (irAEs) with ipilimumab (requiring systemic immunosuppression) that were treated with anti-PD-1 between 1 July 2012 and 30 September 2015 were retrospectively identified.ResultsOne hundred and nineteen patients from 13 academic tertiary referral centers were treated with anti-PD-1. In patients with preexisting AD (N=52), the response rate was 33%. 20 (38%) patients had a flare of AD requiring immunosuppression, including 7/13 with rheumatoid arthritis, 3/3 with polymyalgia rheumatica, 2/2 with Sjogren’s syndrome, 2/2 with immune thrombocytopaenic purpura and 3/8 with psoriasis. No patients with gastrointestinal (N=6) or neurological disorders (N=5) flared. Only 2 (4%) patients discontinued treatment due to flare, but 15 (29%) developed other irAEs and 4 (8%) discontinued treatment. In patients with prior ipilimumab irAEs requiring immunosuppression (N=67) the response rate was 40%. Two (3%) patients had a recurrence of the same ipilimumab irAEs, but 23 (34%) developed new irAEs (14, 21% grade 3–4) and 8 (12%) discontinued treatment. There were no treatment-related deaths.ConclusionsIn melanoma patients with preexisting ADs or major irAEs with ipilimumab, anti-PD-1 induced relatively frequent immune toxicities, but these were often mild, easily managed and did not necessitate discontinuation of therapy, and a significant proportion of patients achieved clinical responses. The results support that anti-PD-1 can be administered safely and can achieve clinical benefit in patients with preexisting ADs or prior major irAEs with ipilimumab.     

Ipilimumab alone or in combination with nivolumab after progression on anti-PD-1 therapy in advanced melanoma

BackgroundThe anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors pembrolizumab and nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab have shown improved objective response rates and progression-free survival compared to ipilimumab only in advanced melanoma patients. Anti-PD-1 therapy demonstrated nearly equal clinical efficacy in patients who had progressed after ipilimumab or were treatment-naïve. However, only limited evidence exists regarding the efficacy of ipilimumab alone or in combination with nivolumab after treatment failure to anti-PD-therapy.Patients and methodsA multicenter retrospective study in advanced melanoma patients who were treated with nivolumab (1 or 3 mg/kg) and ipilimumab (1 mg or 3 mg/kg) or ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) alone after treatment failure to anti-PD-1 therapy was performed. Patient, tumour, pre- and post-treatment characteristics were analysed.ResultsIn total, 47 patients were treated with ipilimumab (ipi-group) and 37 patients with ipilimumab and nivolumab (combination-group) after treatment failure to anti-PD-1 therapy. Overall response rates for the ipi- and the combination-group were 16% and 21%, respectively. Disease control rate was 42% for the ipi-group and 33% for the combination-group. One-year overall survival rates for the ipi- and the combination-group were 54% and 55%, respectively.ConclusionsIpilimumab should be considered as a viable treatment option for patients with failure to prior anti-PD-1 therapy, including those with progressive disease as best response to prior anti-PD-1. In contrast, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab appears significantly less effective in this setting compared to treatment-naïve patients.     

Efficacy and safety of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in patients with pretreated,metastatic, mucosal melanoma

BackgroundMucosal melanoma is an extremely rare and aggressive malignancy that often remains undetected until it reaches an advanced stage, when effective treatment options are limited. The activity and safety of ipilimumab were assessed in an Expanded Access Programme (EAP) that included patients with metastatic, mucosal melanoma.MethodsIpilimumab was available upon physician request for patients aged ⩾16 years with stage III (unresectable) or IV skin, ocular or mucosal melanoma, who had failed or did not tolerate previous treatments and had no other therapeutic option available. Patients received ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses. Patients with stable disease or an objective response to ipilimumab were eligible for retreatment upon disease progression. Tumour assessments were conducted at baseline and week 12 using immune-related response criteria. Patients were monitored for adverse events (AEs), including immune-related AEs, within 3 to 4 days of each scheduled visit.ResultsOf 855 patients participating in the EAP in Italy, 71 (8%) had metastatic, mucosal melanoma. With a median follow-up of 21.8 months, the response rate was 12% and the immune-related disease control rate was 36%. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.3 and 6.4 months, respectively. In total, 34% of patients reported treatment-related AEs of any grade, which were grade 3 or 4 in 9% of patients. AEs were generally manageable as per protocol-specific guidelines.Conclusion/interpretationIpilimumab may be a feasible treatment option in pretreated patients with metastatic mucosal melanoma, and warrants further investigation in prospective clinical trials.     

Risk of treatment-related mortality in cancer patients treated with ipilimumab: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundFatal adverse events (FAEs) have been reported in cancer patients receiving ipilimumab—a monoclonal antibody against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4, but the risk of treatment-related mortality is unknown. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ipilimumab to determine the overall risk of FAEs associated with ipilimumab.MethodsWe systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, ClinicalTrial.gov and conference proceedings from inception to December 2016, for prospective trials that randomly assigned patients to ipilimumab treatment (with or without concurrent therapy) or controls with available data regarding incidence of FAEs. Two reviewers extracted data independently. Incidence of FAEs was pooled using a random effects model, and the risk of FAEs associated with ipilimumab was estimated using Peto odds ratios (ORs).ResultsA total of 5775 patients with solid tumours included in 12 RCTs (10 from journal reports and 2 from ClinicalTrials.gov) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled incidence of FAEs for patients treated with ipilimumab was 1.13% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56–1.86), compared with 0.22% in the control arms. Ipilimumab was associated with statistically significantly increased risk of FAEs, with a pooled Peto OR of 2.3 (95% CI, 1.4–3.6; P < 0.001). Analyses according to cancer type (melanoma versus other cancers); treatment mode (combination therapy or monotherapy); control type (active control versus placebo/best supportive care only); ipilimumab dose (high versus low dose [10 versus 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks]) found no statistically significantly differential effect by subgroups. Among the specific causes of FAEs, ipilimumab was associated with an increased risk of fatal gastrointestinal toxicity, with an OR of 4.5 (95% CI, 1.5–13.6).ConclusionThe use of ipilimumab, compared with controls, was associated with increased risk of treatment-related mortality.     

Clinical experience with ipilimumab 10?mg/kg in patients with melanoma treated at Italian centres as part of a European expanded access programme

Background

Patients with advanced melanoma are faced with a poor prognosis and, until recently, limited treatment options. Ipilimumab, a novel immunotherapy that blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4, was the first agent to improve survival of patients with advanced melanoma in a randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. We used data from an expanded access programme (EAP) at Italian centres to evaluate the clinical activity and safety profile of ipilimumab 10 mg/kg in patients with advanced melanoma in a setting more similar to that of daily practice.

Methods

Data were collected from patients enrolled in an ipilimumab EAP across eight participating Italian centres. As per the EAP protocol, patients had life-threatening, unresectable stage III/IV melanoma, had failed or did not tolerate previous treatments and had no other therapeutic option available. Treatment comprised ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for a total of four doses. If physicians believed patients would continue to derive benefit from ipilimumab treatment, maintenance therapy with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg was provided every 12 weeks. Tumour responses were assessed every 12 weeks using modified World Health Organization criteria and safety continuously monitored.

Results

Seventy-four pretreated patients with advanced melanoma were treated with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg. Of these, 9 (13.0%) had an objective response, comprising 3 patients with a complete response and 6 with a partial response. Median overall survival was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval, 5.3–8.7) and 16.6% of patients were alive after 3 years. Forty-five patients (60.8%) reported treatment-related adverse events of any grade, which were most commonly low-grade pruritus, pain, fever and diarrhoea. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AEs were reported in 8 patients (10.8%).

Conclusions

The clinical activity and safety profile of ipilimumab 10 mg/kg in the EAP was similar to that seen in previous clinical trials of ipilimumab in pretreated patient populations.     

Short-term CTLA-4 blockade directly followed by PD-1 blockade in advanced melanoma patients: a single-center experience

BackgroundCombination of T cell checkpoint blockade by CTLA-4- and PD-1-blockade is one of the most promising therapies in patients with advanced melanoma. It induces superior response rates when compared with single-agent therapy, but at the cost of a high percentage of grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AEs). This combination therapy was until July 2016 not available in the Netherlands, which prompted several physicians to treat patients with less than standard numbers of courses of ipilimumab followed directly by nivolumab or pembrolizumab.Patients and methodsIn this retrospective analysis, patients were included who were treated with two courses (day 0 and 21) anti-CTLA-4 (ipilimumab 3 mg/kg q3wk), directly followed by anti-PD-1 (starting at day 22 with nivolumab 3mg/kg q2wk or pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg q3wk). Data on treatment-related AEs were collected from electronic patient records and scored according to CTCAE 4.03 criteria. Overall response was evaluated using RECIST 1.1 for CT-scans and EORTC criteria for PET-scans.ResultsForty advanced melanoma patients could be included (29/40 pembrolizumab, 11/40 nivolumab). Median follow-up (FU) was 51 weeks (range: 4–63 weeks) with a minimum FU of 26 weeks. Treatment-related AEs of grade 3 and 4 occurred in 38% of the patients. The best overall response rate (BORR) was 55% (95% CI 39–70) and disease control rate was 75% (95% CI 59–87). Ongoing responses were observed in 82% of responding patients.ConclusionTreatment with short-term CTLA-4 blockade directly followed by PD-1 blockade may have similar efficacy but potentially lower toxicity when compared with concurrent therapy with anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1. These results warrant further investigation in a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.     

Patient-reported outcomes in KEYNOTE-006, a randomised study of pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma

ObjectiveReport results of patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptoms from phase III KEYNOTE-006 study of pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in patients with ipilimumab-naive advanced melanoma.Patients and methodsPatients received pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 (Q2W) or every 3 weeks (Q3W) for up to 2 years, or four cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg Q3W. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) was administered at baseline and throughout the study. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) analyses were pre-specified exploratory endpoints; the primary PRO assessment was the score change from baseline to week 12 in EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/HRQoL score between the arms using constrained longitudinal data analysis.ResultsThe PRO analysis population included 776 patients: pembrolizumab Q2W (n = 270); pembrolizumab Q3W (n = 266); ipilimumab (n = 240). Baseline GHS was similar across arms. QLQ-C30 compliance rates at week 12 were 87% (n = 214), 97% (n = 226), and 96% (n = 178), for the pembrolizumab Q2W, pembrolizumab Q3W, and ipilimumab arms, respectively. From baseline to week 12, GHS/HRQoL scores were better maintained with pembrolizumab than with ipilimumab (decrease of −1.9 and −2.5 for pembrolizumab versus −10.0 for ipilimumab; p < 0.001 for each pembrolizumab arm versus ipilimumab). Fewer patients treated with pembrolizumab experienced deterioration in GHS at week 12 (31% for pembrolizumab Q2W; 29% for Q3W and 44% for ipilimumab), with similar trends observed for individual functioning and symptoms scales.ConclusionsHRQoL was better maintained with pembrolizumab than with ipilimumab in patients with ipilimumab-naive advanced melanoma.ClinicalTrials.gov identifierNCT01866319.     

Efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma and brain metastases

Patients with melanoma brain metastases have a poor prognosis and historically have been excluded from clinical trials. The Expanded Access Program (EAP) provided an opportunity to evaluate the feasibility of ipilimumab (3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses) in patients with stage 3 (unresectable) or 4 melanoma and asymptomatic brain metastases, who had failed or did not tolerate previous treatments and had no other therapeutic option available. Tumor assessments were conducted at baseline and week 12 using immune-related response criteria and patients were monitored for adverse events (AEs). Of 855 patients participating in the EAP in Italy, 146 had asymptomatic brain metastases. With a median follow-up of 4 months, the global disease control rate was 27 %, including 4 patients with a complete response and 13 with a partial response. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 2.8 and 4.3 months, respectively and approximately one-fifth of patients were alive 1 year after starting ipilimumab. In total, 29 % of patients reported a treatment-related AE of any grade, which were grade 3/4 in 6 % of patients. AEs were generally reversible with treatment as per protocol-specific guidelines. Ipilimumab shows durable benefits in some patients with advanced melanoma metastatic to the brain, with safety results consistent with those previously reported in clinical trials.     

Efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in elderly patients with pretreated advanced melanoma treated at Italian centres through the expanded access programme

Background

Elderly patients with metastatic melanoma have different disease characteristics and a poorer prognosis than younger patients. Data from clinical trials and expanded access programmes (EAPs) suggest ipilimumab confers a consistent survival benefit and has a similar safety profile across different age groups of patients with metastatic melanoma. Here we report the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in elderly patients enrolled in an EAP in Italy.

Methods

Patients aged > 70 years with pretreated melanoma received ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses through an EAP. Tumour response was evaluated at baseline and after completion of induction therapy using immune-related response criteria and patients were monitored throughout the treatment period for adverse events (AEs), including immune-related AEs.

Results

The immune-related disease control rate among 188 evaluable patients was 38%, including four patients with an immune-related complete response, 24 with an immune-related partial response and 44 with immune-related stable disease. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.0 months and the 1- and 2-year PFS rates were 21% and 12%, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) was 8.9 months; 1- and 2-year OS rates were 38% and 22%, respectively. The safety profile of ipilimumab was consistent with that observed in the general population of the Italian EAP and treatment-related AEs generally resolved within a median of 2 weeks with treatment as per protocol-specific guidelines.

Conclusions

These results suggest ipilimumab is a feasible treatment option in elderly patients with metastatic melanoma. Ipilimumab treatment was generally well tolerated and resulted in clinical benefit and extended survival in elderly patients treated at centres in Italy.     

Efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in patients with pre-treated,uveal melanoma

BackgroundPatients with advanced uveal melanoma have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Ipilimumab is approved for pre-treated adult patients with advanced melanoma. However, because previous clinical trials with ipilimumab have excluded patients with uveal melanoma, data in this patient population are limited.Patients and methodsPre-treated patients with advanced uveal melanoma received ipilimumab 3 mg/kg through an expanded access programme, every 3 weeks for four doses. Tumour assessments were conducted at baseline and after completion of treatment and patients were monitored throughout for adverse events.ResultsAmong 82 assessable patients, 4 (5%) had an immune-related objective response and 24 (29%) had immune-related stable disease lasting ≥3 months for an immune-related disease control rate of 34%. With a median follow-up of 5.6 months, median overall survival (OS) was 6.0 months and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.6 months. The 1-year rates of OS and PFS were 31% and 11%, respectively. The safety profile of ipilimumab was similar to that in patients with cutaneous melanoma.ConclusionsThese data suggest ipilimumab 3 mg/kg is a feasible option in pre-treated patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. Evidence of disease control and a 1-year survival rate of 31% indicate the need for further investigation in randomised, controlled trials to determine the optimal timing and use of ipilimumab in this patient population.     

Adjuvant ipilimumab in stage III melanoma: New landscape,new questions

The recently reported significant prolongation of overall survival with ipilimumab as adjuvant in high-risk stage III melanoma patients represents an important event in the adjuvant treatment landscape. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 18071 trial demonstrated a 28% reduction in risk of death in patients treated with ipilimumab at 10 mg/kg (hazard ratio for death, 0.72; 95.1% CI, 0.58−0.88; P = 0.001) compared with placebo. All end-points—recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant-metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS)—showed similar benefits. Survival rates at 5 years in ipilimumab-treated patients were OS 11%, DMFS 9% and RFS 11% higher than in placebo-treated patients. Global Health quality-of-life scores were not significantly different between treatment arms, in spite of significant adverse event rates that resulted in only 42% of patients receiving more than four doses of ipilimumab and only 28.9% of patients going beyond 1 year of treatment. Grades 3–4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 41.6% of ipilimumab-treated patients and in 2.7% of placebo-treated patients. One can speculate on dose and duration of treatment, as well as on the requirement for complete lymph-node dissection in sentinel-node-positive patients. The remaining role of interferons will be discussed regarding differences in sensitivity profiles—such as in ulcerated melanoma versus non-ulcerated melanoma—and access to new drugs. Ongoing trials with targeted agents and with anti programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) agents may bring significant additional results in the next few years that will redefine how we treat stage III patients. Overall, pricing of new treatments will determine access and whether patients will actually benefit from new treatment options.     

Survival follow-up and ipilimumab retreatment of patients with advanced melanoma who received ipilimumab in prior phase II studies

BackgroundThis report provides a survival update at a follow-up of >5 years (5.5–6 years) for patients with advanced melanoma who previously received ipilimumab in phase II clinical trials. Safety and efficacy data following ipilimumab retreatment are also reported.Patients and methodsPatients who previously received ipilimumab 0.3, 3, or 10 mg/kg in one of six phase II trials (CA184-004, CA184-007, CA184-008, CA184-022, MDX010-08, and MDX010-15) were eligible to enroll in the companion study, CA184-025. Upon enrollment, patients initially received ipilimumab retreatment, extended maintenance therapy, or were followed for survival only. Overall survival (OS) rates were evaluated in patients from studies CA184-004, CA184-007, CA184-008, and CA184-022. Safety and best overall response during ipilimumab retreatment at 10 mg/kg were assessed in study CA184-025.ResultsFive-year OS rates for previously treated patients who received ipilimumab induction at 0.3, 3, or 10 mg/kg were 12.3%, 12.3%–16.5%, and 15.5%–28.4%, respectively. Five-year OS rates for treatment-naive patients who received ipilimumab induction at 3 or 10 mg/kg were 26.8% and 21.4%–49.5%, respectively. Little to no change in OS was observed from year 5 up to year 6. The objective response rate among retreated patients was 23%. Grade 3/4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 25%, 5.9%, and 13.2% of retreated patients who initially received ipilimumab 0.3, 3, and 10 mg/kg, with the most common being observed in the skin (4.2%, 2.9%, 3.8%) and gastrointestinal tract (12.5%, 2.9%, 3.8%), respectively.ConclusionsAt a follow-up of 5–6 years, ipilimumab continues to demonstrate durable, long-term survival in a proportion of patients with advanced melanoma. In some patients, ipilimumab retreatment can re-establish disease control with a safety profile that is comparable with that observed during ipilimumab induction. Further studies are needed to determine the contribution of ipilimumab retreatment to OS.ClinicalTrials.govNCT00162123.     

Patterns of onset and resolution of immune‐related adverse events of special interest with ipilimumab

BACKGROUND:

Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg was the first agent to demonstrate improved survival in previously treated patients with metastatic melanoma in a phase 3 trial (MDX010‐20). Ipilimumab produced a characteristic spectrum of immune‐related adverse events (irAEs) of special interest, consistent with its immune‐based mechanism of action.

METHODS:

In MDX010‐20, 676 previously treated patients were randomized 3:1:1 to receive ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus the glycoprotein 100 melanoma antigen vaccine (gp100), ipilimumab 3 mg/kg + placebo, or gp100 vaccine + placebo. For the current report, the authors conducted a detailed analysis of the time to onset and resolution of irAEs associated with ipilimumab therapy.

RESULTS:

Grade 2 through 5 irAEs generally developed during the induction phase of treatment (0‐12 weeks). Most, including grade 3/4 irAEs, were reversible when managed with treatment guidelines using vigilant monitoring and corticosteroids. The median time to resolution (to grade 1 or 0 or to the grade at baseline) of irAEs that had an onset during the induction phase was approximately 6 weeks for grade 2 through 4 irAEs and 8 weeks for grade 3 and 4 irAEs. Across the entire study duration, most grade 2 through 4 irAEs resolved within 12 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS:

Most ipilimumab‐associated irAEs, including grade 3/4 symptoms, developed within 12 weeks of initial dosing and resolved within 12 weeks of onset. IrAEs were well characterized in their evolution and could be managed using published algorithms. Cancer 2013. © 2013 American Cancer Society.     

Experience in daily practice with ipilimumab for the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma: an early increase in lymphocyte and eosinophil counts is associated with improved survival

BackgroundIpilimumab is a recently approved immunotherapy that has demonstrated an improvement in the overall survival (OS) of patients with metastatic melanoma. We report a single-institution experience in patients treated in a compassionate-use program.Patients and methodsIn this prospective study, patients were treated between June 2010 and September 2011. Inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, at least one previous line of chemotherapy, and survival 12 weeks after the first perfusion. Four courses of ipilimumab were administered at a dose of 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks.ResultsSeventy-three patients were included. Median OS was 9.1 months (95% CI 6.4–11.3) from the start of ipilimumab. Immune-related adverse events were observed in 45 patients (62%), including 19 grade 3–4 events (26%). No drug-related death occurred. A lymphocyte count >1000/mm³ at the start of the second course and an increase in the eosinophil count >100/mm³ between the first and second infusions were correlated with an improved OS.ConclusionIpilimumab toxic effect is manageable in real life. Biological data such as lymphocyte and eosinophil counts at the time of the second ipilimumab infusion appear to be early markers associated with better OS.     

Prognostic score for patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab

BackgroundImmunotherapies like the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 inhibitor ipilimumab show durable clinical benefit in patients with advanced melanoma. Reliable prognostic markers and risk scores in the era of immunotherapy are still lacking.Patients and methodsWe collected characteristics and outcomes on 134 patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ipilimumab between 2011 and 2014 at a single centre. Cox regression including multivariable fractional polynomials was used to identify independent markers for overall survival (OS). Internal model validation was done using bootstrap procedures.ResultsAfter a median follow-up of 16.1 months the median OS was 7.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.5–9.8). Nineteen of 134 patients (14.2%) had tumour remissions, 16 partial and 3 complete; 75% had progressive disease. We identified three independent adverse factors for OS: elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.03, 95% CI 1.02–1.04), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >0 (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.10–3.30), and number of organs involved (NOI) (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.22–1.86). To build an easy-to-apply risk score, we dichotomized LDH (>upper limit of normal) and NOI (>2) to built 3 prognostic groups: favourable (no adverse factors, N = 17), intermediate (1 adverse factor, N = 38), and poor prognosis (≥2 adverse factors, N = 73). Respective 12 and 18-month OS for the risk groups were: 85% and 73% (favourable), 41% and 29% (intermediate), and 12% and 6% (poor) (p < 0.001).ConclusionWe propose a simple prognostic score for survival in patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab using readily available clinical parameters.     

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

IntroductionNivolumab 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.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsOverall, 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.ConclusionsWhereas 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.     

Melanoma recurrence patterns and management after adjuvant targeted therapy: a multicentre analysis

Background Adjuvant targeted therapy (TT) improves relapse free survival in patients with resected BRAF mutant stage III melanoma. The outcomes and optimal management of patients who relapse after adjuvant TT is unknown.Methods Patients from twenty-one centres with recurrent melanoma after adjuvant TT were included. Disease characteristics, adjuvant therapy, recurrence, treatment at relapse and outcomes were examined.Results Eighty-five patients developed recurrent melanoma; nineteen (22%) during adjuvant TT. Median time to first recurrence was 18 months and median follow-up from first recurrence was 31 months. Fifty-eight (68%) patients received immunotherapy (IT) or TT as 1st line systemic therapy at either first or subsequent recurrence and had disease that was assessable for response. Response to anti-PD-1 (±trial agent), combination ipilimumab-nivolumab, TT rechallenge and ipilimumab monotherapy was 63%, 62% 25% and 10% respectively. Twenty-eight (33%) patients had died at census, all from melanoma. Two-year OS was 84% for anti-PD-1 therapy (±trial agent), 92% for combination ipilimumab and nivolumab, 49% for TT and 45% for ipilimumab monotherapy (p = 0.028).Conclusions Patients who relapse after adjuvant TT respond well to subsequent anti-PD-1 based therapy and have outcomes similar to those seen when first line anti-PD-1 therapy is used in stage IV melanoma.Subject terms: Targeted therapies, Melanoma, Melanoma     

Neurotoxicity from immune-checkpoint inhibition in the treatment of melanoma: a single centre experience and review of the literature

BackgroundTreatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPi) has greatly improved survival for patients with advanced melanoma in recent years. Anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD1 antibodies have been approved following large Phase III trials. Immune-related neurological toxicity of varying severity has been reported in the literature. The cumulative incidence of neurotoxicity among ipilimumab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab is reported as <1% in published clinical trials. We aimed to identify the incidence of neurotoxicity in our institution across anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD-1 antibodies, including the combination of ipilimumab with nivolumab. We also review the existing literature and propose an investigation and management algorithm.MethodsAll patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab or the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab (ipi + nivo), managed at the Royal Marsden Hospital between September 2010 and December 2015, including patients on (published) clinical trials were included. Medical records for each patient were reviewed and information on neurotoxicity recorded. A systematic search strategy was performed to collate existing reports of neurological toxicity.ResultsIn total, 413 immunotherapy treatment episodes in 352 patients were included, with median follow-up of 26.7 months. Ten cases of neurotoxicity were recorded, affecting 2.8% of patients overall, ranging from grade 1 to 4, affecting both central and peripheral nervous systems. A rate of 14% was noted with ipi + nivo. Three of five patients commenced on corticosteroids responded to these. Six patients had made a full recovery at the time of reporting. A favorable radiological response was found in 7 of the 10 cases. Unusual presentations are described in detail.ConclusionsNeurological toxicity is not uncommon, and may be more frequent in patients treated with combination ipi + nivo. Patterns of presentation and response to treatment are varied. A prompt and considered approach is required to optimize outcomes in this group of patients.     

Final analysis of a randomised trial comparing pembrolizumab versus investigator-choice chemotherapy for ipilimumab-refractory advanced melanoma

AimTo evaluate the protocol-specified final analysis of overall survival (OS) in the KEYNOTE-002 study (NCT01704287) of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with ipilimumab-refractory, advanced melanoma.MethodsIn this randomised, phase II study, eligible patients had advanced melanoma with documented progression after two or more ipilimumab doses, previous BRAF or MEK inhibitor or both, if BRAF^V600 mutant-positive. Patients were randomised to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks or investigator-choice chemotherapy. Crossover to pembrolizumab was allowed following progression on chemotherapy. The protocol-specified final OS was performed in the intent-to-treat population. Survival was positive if p < 0.01 in one pembrolizumab arm.ResultsA total of 180 patients were randomised to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 181 to pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg and 179 to chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 28 months (range 24.1–35.5), 368 patients died and 98 (55%) crossed over to pembrolizumab. Pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67–1.10, p = 0.117) and 10 mg/kg (0.74, 0.57–0.96, p = 0.011) resulted in a non-statistically significant improvement in OS versus chemotherapy; median OS was 13.4 (95% CI 11.0–16.4) and 14.7 (95% CI 11.3–19.5), respectively, versus 11.0 months (95% CI 8.9–13.8), with limited improvement after censoring for crossover. Two-year survival rates were 36% and 38%, versus 30%. Progression-free survival, objective response rate and duration of response improved with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy, regardless of dose. Grade III–V treatment-related adverse events occurred in 24 (13.5%), 30 (16.8%) and 45 (26.3%) patients, respectively.ConclusionImprovement in OS with pembrolizumab was not statistically significant at either dose versus chemotherapy.