SummaryBackgroundPembrolizumab improved progression-free survival and overall survival versus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma and is now a standard of care in the first-line setting. ...However, the optimal duration of anti-PD-1 administration is unknown. We present results from 5 years of follow-up of patients in KEYNOTE-006. MethodsKEYNOTE-006 was an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study done at 87 academic institutions, hospitals, and cancer centres in 16 countries. Patients aged at least 18 years with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, ipilimumab-naive histologically confirmed advanced melanoma with known BRAFV600 status and up to one previous systemic therapy were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to intravenous pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks or four doses of intravenous ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Treatments were assigned using a centralised, computer-generated allocation schedule with blocked randomisation within strata. Exploratory combination of data from the two pembrolizumab dosing regimen groups was not protocol-specified. Pembrolizumab treatment continued for up to 24 months. Eligible patients who discontinued pembrolizumab with stable disease or better after receiving at least 24 months of pembrolizumab or discontinued with complete response after at least 6 months of pembrolizumab and then progressed could receive an additional 17 cycles of pembrolizumab. Co-primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival. Efficacy was analysed in all randomly assigned patients, and safety was analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. Exploratory assessment of efficacy and safety at 5 years' follow-up was not specified in the protocol. Data cutoff for this analysis was Dec 3, 2018. Recruitment is closed; the study is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01866319. FindingsBetween Sept 18, 2013, and March 3, 2014, 834 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab (every 2 weeks, n=279; every 3 weeks, n=277), or ipilimumab (n=278). After a median follow-up of 57·7 months (IQR 56·7–59·2) in surviving patients, median overall survival was 32·7 months (95% CI 24·5–41·6) in the combined pembrolizumab groups and 15·9 months (13·3–22·0) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio HR 0·73, 95% CI 0·61–0·88, p=0·00049). Median progression-free survival was 8·4 months (95% CI 6·6–11·3) in the combined pembrolizumab groups versus 3·4 months (2·9–4·2) in the ipilimumab group (HR 0·57, 95% CI 0·48–0·67, p<0·0001). Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 96 (17%) of 555 patients in the combined pembrolizumab groups and in 50 (20%) of 256 patients in the ipilimumab group; the most common of these events were colitis (11 2% vs 16 6%), diarrhoea (ten 2% vs seven 3%), and fatigue (four <1% vs three 1%). Any-grade serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 75 (14%) patients in the combined pembrolizumab groups and in 45 (18%) patients in the ipilimumab group. One patient assigned to pembrolizumab died from treatment-related sepsis. InterpretationPembrolizumab continued to show superiority over ipilimumab after almost 5 years of follow-up. These results provide further support for use of pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma. FundingMerck Sharp & Dohme.
Abstract Cutaneous melanoma (CM) is potentially the most dangerous form of skin tumour and causes 90% of skin cancer mortality. A unique collaboration of multi-disciplinary experts from the European ...Dermatology Forum, the European Association of Dermato-Oncology and the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer was formed to make recommendations on CM diagnosis and treatment, based on systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. Diagnosis is made clinically using dermoscopy and staging is based upon the AJCC system. CMs are excised with 1–2 cm safety margins. Sentinel lymph node dissection is routinely offered as a staging procedure in patients with tumours >1 mm in thickness, although there is as yet no clear survival benefit for this approach. Interferon-α treatment may be offered to patients with stage II and III melanoma as an adjuvant therapy, as this treatment increases at least the disease-free survival and less clear the overall survival (OS) time. The treatment is however associated with significant toxicity. In distant metastasis, all options of surgical therapy have to be considered thoroughly. In the absence of surgical options, systemic treatment is indicated. For first-line treatment particularly in BRAF wild-type patients, immunotherapy with PD-1 antibodies alone or in combination with CTLA-4 antibodies should be considered. BRAF inhibitors like dabrafenib and vemurafenib in combination with the MEK inhibitors trametinib and cobimetinib for BRAF mutated patients should be offered as first or second line treatment. Therapeutic decisions in stage IV patients should be primarily made by an interdisciplinary oncology team (‘Tumour Board’).
SummaryBackgroundImmunotherapy combination treatments can improve patient outcomes. Epacadostat, an IDO1 selective inhibitor, and pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, showed promising antitumour activity ...in the phase 1–2 ECHO-202/KEYNOTE-037 study in advanced melanoma. In this trial, we aimed to compare progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma receiving epacadostat plus pembrolizumab versus placebo plus pembrolizumab. MethodsIn this international, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 trial, eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma previously untreated with PD-1 or PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors, an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1, and had a known BRAFV600 mutant status or consented to BRAFV600 mutation testing during screening. Patients were stratified by PD-L1 expression and BRAFV600 mutation status and randomly assigned (1:1) through a central interactive voice and integrated web response system to receive epacadostat 100 mg orally twice daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks or placebo plus pembrolizumab for up to 2 years. We used block randomisation with a block size of four in each stratum. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The safety analysis population included randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The study was stopped after the second interim analysis; follow-up for safety is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02752074. FindingsBetween June 21, 2016, and Aug 7, 2017, 928 patients were screened and 706 patients were randomly assigned to receive epacadostat plus pembrolizumab (n=354) or placebo plus pembrolizumab (n=352). Median follow-up was 12·4 months (IQR 10·3–14·5). No significant differences were found between the treatment groups for progression-free survival (median 4·7 months, 95% CI 2·9–6·8, for epacadostat plus pembrolizumab vs 4·9 months, 2·9–6·8, for placebo plus pembrolizumab; hazard ratio HR 1·00, 95% CI 0·83–1·21; one-sided p=0·52) or overall survival (median not reached in either group; epacadostat plus pembrolizumab vs placebo plus pembrolizumab: HR 1·13, 0·86–1·49; one-sided p=0·81). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse event was lipase increase, which occurred in 14 (4%) of 353 patients receiving epacadostat plus pembrolizumab and 11 (3%) of 352 patients receiving placebo plus pembrolizumab. Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 37 (10%) of 353 patients receiving epacadostat plus pembrolizumab and 32 (9%) of 352 patients receiving placebo plus pembrolizumab. There were no treatment-related deaths in either treatment group. InterpretationEpacadostat 100 mg twice daily plus pembrolizumab did not improve progression-free survival or overall survival compared with placebo plus pembrolizumab in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma. The usefulness of IDO1 inhibition as a strategy to enhance anti-PD-1 therapy activity in cancer remains uncertain. FundingIncyte Corporation, in collaboration with Merck Sharp & Dohme.
Treatment options are limited for patients with recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC); mortality rates exceed 70% in patients with distant metastases. Here, we ...present the first interim analysis of the R/M cSCC cohort from the 2-cohort-locally advanced and R/M-phase II KEYNOTE-629 study.
Patients with R/M cSCC not amenable to surgery or radiation received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. The primary end point was objective response rate per RECIST v1.1. Secondary end points were duration of response, disease control rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety.
At data cutoff (April 8, 2019), median follow-up of 105 enrolled patients in the R/M cohort was 11.4 months (range, 0.4 to 16.3 months). Objective response rate was 34.3% (95% CI, 25.3% to 44.2%; 4 complete responses, 32 partial responses), and disease control rate was 52.4% (95% CI, 42.4% to 62.2%). Median duration of response was not reached (range, 2.7 to 13.1+ months; '+' refers to ongoing response at data cutoff). Median progression-free survival was 6.9 months (95% CI, 3.1 months to 8.5 months). Median overall survival was not reached (95% CI, 10.7 months to not reached). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 66.7% of patients (n = 70), the most common of which were pruritus (n = 15; 14.3%), asthenia (n = 14; 13.3%), and fatigue (n = 13; 12.4%). Grade 3 to 5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 5.7% (n = 6) of patients. One patient died of treatment-related cranial nerve neuropathy.
Pembrolizumab demonstrated effective antitumor activity; clinically meaningful, durable responses; and acceptable safety in primarily elderly patients with R/M cSCC, supporting its use in clinical practice. Pembrolizumab adverse events in this study were consistent with its established safety profile.
Ipilimumab monotherapy (at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight), as compared with glycoprotein 100, improved overall survival in a phase 3 study involving patients with previously treated ...metastatic melanoma. We conducted a phase 3 study of ipilimumab (10 mg per kilogram) plus dacarbazine in patients with previously untreated metastatic melanoma.
We randomly assigned 502 patients with previously untreated metastatic melanoma, in a 1:1 ratio, to ipilimumab (10 mg per kilogram) plus dacarbazine (850 mg per square meter of body-surface area) or dacarbazine (850 mg per square meter) plus placebo, given at weeks 1, 4, 7, and 10, followed by dacarbazine alone every 3 weeks through week 22. Patients with stable disease or an objective response and no dose-limiting toxic effects received ipilimumab or placebo every 12 weeks thereafter as maintenance therapy. The primary end point was overall survival.
Overall survival was significantly longer in the group receiving ipilimumab plus dacarbazine than in the group receiving dacarbazine plus placebo (11.2 months vs. 9.1 months, with higher survival rates in the ipilimumab-dacarbazine group at 1 year (47.3% vs. 36.3%), 2 years (28.5% vs. 17.9%), and 3 years (20.8% vs. 12.2%) (hazard ratio for death, 0.72; P<0.001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 56.3% of patients treated with ipilimumab plus dacarbazine, as compared with 27.5% treated with dacarbazine and placebo (P<0.001). No drug-related deaths or gastrointestinal perforations occurred in the ipilimumab-dacarbazine group.
Ipilimumab (at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram) in combination with dacarbazine, as compared with dacarbazine plus placebo, improved overall survival in patients with previously untreated metastatic melanoma. The types of adverse events were consistent with those seen in prior studies of ipilimumab; however, the rates of elevated liver-function values were higher and the rates of gastrointestinal events were lower than expected on the basis of prior studies. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00324155.).
The prognosis of patients with metastatic melanoma has dramatically improved in recent years with the introduction of two new therapeutic strategies. BRAF and MEK inhibitors are small molecules that ...are able to block the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway, which is constitutively activated by recurrent BRAF V600 mutations in 45% of melanoma patients. These agents were shown to provide a rapid and strong response but are often limited by a high rate of secondary resistance. Monoclonal antibodies against the immune checkpoints cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed death 1 (PD-1) can restore an efficient and durable anti-tumor immunity, even following treatment discontinuation. Anti-PD-1 antibodies were shown to prolong survival of metastatic melanoma patients and a real cure seems to be obtainable in some patients. Many more therapies are currently under investigation, given that 50% of patients still do not have long-term benefits from approved treatments. The main goal is to avoid or circumvent primary or secondary immune resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy not only by targeting other players in the tumor microenvironment but also by optimizing treatment sequencing and combining anti-PD-1 with other treatments, especially with BRAF and MEK inhibitors. The unexpected major successes of immunotherapies in melanoma have opened the way for the development of these treatments in other cancers. In this review, we describe the different available treatments, their toxicities, and the key components of our decisional algorithms, and give an overview of what we expect to be the near future of melanoma treatment.
Few data are published on the long-term follow-up of ipilimumab-induced hypophysitis, a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 antibody. We characterized hypophysitis in terms of clinical signs, ...endocrinological profile, and imaging at diagnosis and during a long-term follow-up.
Fifteen patients, treated for malignant melanoma and who presented ipilimumab-induced hypophysitis, were observed between June 2006 and August 2012 in Timone Hospital, Marseille.
Symptoms, pituitary function, and pituitary imaging at diagnosis of hypophysitis and during the follow-up were recorded.
Of 131 patients treated with ipilimumab or a placebo, 15 patients (10 mg/kg in 11/15) presented with hypophysitis (≥11.5%) at 9.5±5.9 weeks (mean±s.d.) after treatment start, occurring in 66% after the third infusion. The main initial symptoms were headache (n=13) and asthenia (n=11). All patients but one had at least one hormonal defect: thyrotroph (n=13), gonadotroph (n=12), or corticotroph (n=11) deficiencies. None had diabetes insipidus. Pituitary imaging showed a moderately enlarged gland in 12 patients. Clinical symptoms improved rapidly on high-dose glucocorticoids (n=11) or physiological replacement doses (n=4). At the end of follow-up (median 33.6 months, range 7-53.5), corticotroph deficiency remained in 13 patients, 11 recovered thyrotroph and ten gonadotroph functions. Pituitary imaging remained abnormal in 11 patients.
Ipilimumab-induced hypophysitis is a common side-effect with frequent hormonal deficiencies at diagnosis. Usually, hormonal deficiencies improved, except for corticotroph function. Patients receiving these immunomodulatory therapies should be closely monitored especially by systematic baseline hormone measurements after the third infusion and remain at a risk of adrenal insufficiency in the long-term.
Previously reported results from the phase 3 CheckMate 067 trial showed a significant improvement in objective responses, progression-free survival, and overall survival with nivolumab plus ...ipilimumab or nivolumab alone compared with ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma. The aim of this report is to provide 4-year updated efficacy and safety data from this study.
In this phase 3 trial, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, unresectable, stage III or stage IV melanoma, known BRAFV600 mutation status, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive intravenous nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus placebo, or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses plus placebo. Randomisation was done via an interactive voice response system with a permuted block schedule (block size of six) and stratification by PD-L1 status, BRAF mutation status, and metastasis stage. The patients, investigators, study site staff, and study funder were masked to the study drug administered. The co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population, whereas safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The results presented in this report reflect the 4-year update of the ongoing study with a database lock date of May 10, 2018. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01844505.
Between July 3, 2013, and March 31, 2014, 945 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=314), nivolumab (n=316), or ipilimumab (n=315). Median follow-up was 46·9 months (IQR 10·9–51·8) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 36·0 months (10·5–51·4) in the nivolumab group, and 18·6 months (7·6–49·5) in the ipilimumab group. At a minimum follow-up of 48 months from the date that the final patient was enrolled and randomised, median overall survival was not reached (95% CI 38·2–not reached) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 36·9 months (28·3–not reached) in the nivolumab group, and 19·9 months (16·9–24·6) in the ipilimumab group. The hazard ratio for death for the combination versus ipilimumab was 0·54 (95% CI 0·44–0·67; p<0·0001) and for nivolumab versus ipilimumab was 0·65 (0·53–0·79; p<0·0001). Median progression-free survival was 11·5 months (95% CI 8·7–19·3) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 6·9 months (5·1–10·2) in the nivolumab group, and 2·9 months (2·8–3·2) in the ipilimumab group. The hazard ratio for progression-free survival for the combination versus ipilimumab was 0·42 (95% CI 0·35–0·51; p<0·0001) and for nivolumab versus ipilimumab was 0·53 (0·44–0·64; p<0·0001). Treatment-related grade 3–4 adverse events were reported in 185 (59%) of 313 patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 70 (22%) of 313 who received nivolumab, and 86 (28%) of 311 who received ipilimumab. The most common treatment-related grade 3 adverse events were diarrhoea in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group (29 9% of 313) and in the nivolumab group (nine 3% of 313) and colitis in the ipilimumab group (23 7% of 311); the most common grade 4 adverse event in all three groups was increased lipase (15 5% of 313 in the combination group, ten 3% of 313 in the nivolumab group, and four 1% of 311 in the ipilimumab group). Serious adverse events were not analysed for the 4-year follow-up. In total for the study, there were four treatment-related deaths: two in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group (one cardiomyopathy and one liver necrosis), one in the nivolumab group (neutropenia), and one in the ipilimumab group (colon perforation). No additional treatment-related deaths have occurred since the previous (3-year) analysis.
The results of this analysis at 4 years of follow-up show that a durable, sustained survival benefit can be achieved with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma.
Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Summary Background Dabrafenib plus trametinib treatment provides significant benefits over BRAF-inhibitor monotherapy in patients with BRAFV600E -mutant or BRAFV600K -mutant advanced melanoma; ...however, in many patients the disease progresses, leading to death. With many treatment options available, understanding clinical factors that predict long-term response and survival for treatments is important for optimisation of patient management. We aimed to identify clinical factors associated with long-term response and survival using pooled data from randomised trials of dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with metastatic BRAF -mutant melanoma. Methods We did a retrospective individual data analysis based on all published randomised trials that included treatment-naive patients with BRAFV600E -mutant or BRAFV600K -mutant metastatic melanoma who received the approved dose of dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily plus trametinib 2 mg once daily. Data were pooled from patients in the BRF113220 (part C; March 26, 2010, to Jan 15, 2015), COMBI-d (May 4, 2012, to Jan 12, 2015), and COMBI-v (June 4, 2012, to March 13, 2015) randomised trials. Patients with untreated brain metastases were not permitted to enrol in these trials. Baseline factors, identified a priori based on known melanoma clinical or prognostic characteristics, were analysed for association with progression-free survival and overall survival using univariate and multivariate analyses and assessed for hierarchical effect on outcomes using regression tree analyses. We also analysed factors identified after baseline, on treatment, and at progression, for associations with survival after progression. The trials included in this analysis are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov : BRF113220, number NCT01072175 ; COMBI-d, number NCT01584648 ; COMBI-v, number NCT01597908. Findings 617 patients were included in this analysis with a median follow-up of 20·0 months (range 0−48·0, IQR 10·1−24·8); 396 patients had progression events (ie, disease progression or death) and 290 patients had died. Median progression-free survival (11·1 months 95% CI 9·7−12·9), median overall survival (25·6 months 23·1−34·3), 1-year progression-free survival (48% 44–52) and overall survival (74% 71–78), and 2-year progression-free survival (30% 26–34) and overall survival (53% 49–57) were consistent with those in the individual trials. Patients with normal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) concentration and fewer than three organ sites containing metastases (n=237) had the longest 1-year progression-free survival (68% 95% CI 62–74) and overall survival (90% 87–94) and 2-year progression-free survival (46% 40–54) and overall survival (75% 70–81), whereas patients with LDH concentration at least two times the upper limit of normal (n=70) had the shortest 1-year progression-free survival (8% 3–19) and overall survival (40% 29–55) and 2-year progression-free survival (2% 0–13) and overall survival (7% 3–19). Of patients with disease progression (n=379), survival after progression was longest in those with progression in baseline or new non-CNS lesions (n=205; median 10·0 months 95% CI 7·9−12·0) and shortest in those with new CNS lesions or concurrent progression in baseline and new lesions (n=171; median 4·0 months 3·5−4·9). Interpretation Several patient and clinical characteristics at and after baseline are associated with outcomes with dabrafenib plus trametinib, and durable benefit is possible with targeted treatment in defined patient subsets. Funding Novartis.
PDF
