Summary Background Ipilimumab is an approved treatment for patients with advanced melanoma. We aimed to assess ipilimumab as adjuvant therapy for patients with completely resected stage III melanoma ...at high risk of recurrence. Methods We did a double-blind, phase 3 trial in patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma (excluding lymph node metastasis ≤1 mm or in-transit metastasis) with adequate resection of lymph nodes (ie, the primary cutaneous melanoma must have been completely excised with adequate surgical margins) who had not received previous systemic therapy for melanoma from 91 hospitals located in 19 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), centrally by an interactive voice response system, to receive intravenous infusions of 10 mg/kg ipilimumab or placebo every 3 weeks for four doses, then every 3 months for up to 3 years. Using a minimisation technique, randomisation was stratified by disease stage and geographical region. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival, assessed by an independent review committee, and analysed by intention to treat. Enrollment is complete but the study is ongoing for follow-up for analysis of secondary endpoints. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2007-001974-10, and ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00636168. Findings Between July 10, 2008, and Aug 1, 2011, 951 patients were randomly assigned to ipilimumab (n=475) or placebo (n=476), all of whom were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. At a median follow-up of 2·74 years (IQR 2·28–3·22), there were 528 recurrence-free survival events (234 in the ipilimumab group vs 294 in the placebo group). Median recurrence-free survival was 26·1 months (95% CI 19·3–39·3) in the ipilimumab group versus 17·1 months (95% CI 13·4–21·6) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·75; 95% CI 0·64–0·90; p=0·0013); 3-year recurrence-free survival was 46·5% (95% CI 41·5–51·3) in the ipilimumab group versus 34·8% (30·1–39·5) in the placebo group. The most common grade 3–4 immune-related adverse events in the ipilimumab group were gastrointestinal (75 16% vs four <1% in the placebo group), hepatic (50 11% vs one <1%), and endocrine (40 8% vs none). Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 245 (52%) of 471 patients who started ipilimumab (182 39% during the initial treatment period of four doses). Five patients (1%) died due to drug-related adverse events. Five (1%) participants died because of drug-related adverse events in the ipilimumab group; three patients died because of colitis (two with gastrointestinal perforation), one patient because of myocarditis, and one patient because of multiorgan failure with Guillain-Barré syndrome. Interpretation Adjuvant ipilimumab significantly improved recurrence-free survival for patients with completely resected high-risk stage III melanoma. The adverse event profile was consistent with that observed in advanced melanoma, but at higher incidences in particular for endocrinopathies. The risk–benefit ratio of adjuvant ipilimumab at this dose and schedule requires additional assessment based on distant metastasis-free survival and overall survival endpoints to define its definitive value. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb.
To detect a pretreatment gene expression signature (GS) predictive of response to MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic in patients with metastatic melanoma and to investigate its applicability in a different ...cancer setting (adjuvant therapy of resected early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer NSCLC).
Patients were participants in two phase II studies of the recombinant MAGE-A3 antigen combined with an immunostimulant (AS15 or AS02B). mRNA from melanoma biopsies was analyzed by microarray analysis and quantitative polymerase chain reaction. These results were used to identify and cross-validate the GS, which was then applied to the NSCLC data.
In the patients with melanoma, 84 genes were identified whose expression was potentially associated with clinical benefit. This effect was strongest when the immunostimulant AS15 was included in the immunotherapy (hazard ratio HR for overall survival, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.13 to 1.05; P = .06) and was less strong with the other immunostimulant AS02B (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.97; P = .70). The same GS was then used to predict the outcome for patients with resected NSCLC treated with MAGE-A3 plus AS02B; actively treated GS-positive patients showed a favorable disease-free interval compared with placebo-treated GS-positive patients (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.17 to 1.03; P = .06), whereas among GS-negative patients, no such difference was found (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.59 to 2.31; P = .65). The genes identified were mainly immune related, involving interferon gamma pathways and specific chemokines, suggesting that their pretreatment expression influences the tumor's immune microenvironment and the patient's clinical response.
An 84-gene GS associated with clinical response for MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic was identified in metastatic melanoma and confirmed in resected NSCLC.
To compare low-dose decitabine to best supportive care (BSC) in higher-risk patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) age 60 years or older and ineligible for intensive chemotherapy.
Two-hundred ...thirty-three patients (median age, 70 years; range, 60 to 90 years) were enrolled; 53% had poor-risk cytogenetics, and the median MDS duration at random assignment was 3 months. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Decitabine (15 mg/m(2)) was given intravenously over 4 hours three times a day for 3 days in 6-week cycles.
OS prolongation with decitabine versus BSC was not statistically significant (median OS, 10.1 v 8.5 months, respectively; hazard ratio HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.17; two-sided, log-rank P = .38). Progression-free survival (PFS), but not acute myeloid leukemia (AML) -free survival (AMLFS), was significantly prolonged with decitabine versus BSC (median PFS, 6.6 v 3.0 months, respectively; HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.88; P = .004; median AMLFS, 8.8 v 6.1 months, respectively; HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.12; P = .24). AML transformation was significantly (P = .036) reduced at 1 year (from 33% with BSC to 22% with decitabine). Multivariate analyses indicated that patients with short MDS duration had worse outcomes. Best responses with decitabine versus BSC, respectively, were as follows: complete response (13% v 0%), partial response (6% v 0%), hematologic improvement (15% v 2%), stable disease (14% v 22%), progressive disease (29% v 68%), hypoplasia (14% v 0%), and inevaluable (8% v 8%). Grade 3 to 4 febrile neutropenia occurred in 25% of patients on decitabine versus 7% of patients on BSC; grade 3 to 4 infections occurred in 57% and 52% of patients on decitabine and BSC, respectively. Decitabine treatment was associated with improvements in patient-reported quality-of-life (QOL) parameters.
Decitabine administered in 6-week cycles is active in older patients with higher-risk MDS, resulting in improvements of OS and AMLFS (nonsignificant), of PFS and AML transformation (significant), and of QOL. Short MDS duration was an independent adverse prognosticator.
Adjuvant pegylated interferon alfa-2b (PEG-IFN-α-2b) was approved for treatment of resected stage III melanoma in 2011. Here, we present long-term follow-up results of this pivotal trial.
In all, ...1,256 patients with resected stage III melanoma were randomly assigned to observation (n = 629) or PEG-IFN-α-2b (n = 627) for an intended duration of 5 years. Stratification factors were microscopic (N1) versus macroscopic (N2) nodal involvement, number of positive nodes, ulceration and tumor thickness, sex, and center. Recurrence-free survival (RFS; primary end point), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed for the intent-to-treat population.
At 7.6 years median follow-up, 384 recurrences or deaths had occurred with PEG-IFN-α-2b versus 406 in the observation group (hazard ratio HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.00; P = .055); 7-year RFS rate was 39.1% versus 34.6%. There was no difference in OS (P = .57). In stage III-N1 ulcerated melanoma, RFS (HR, 0.72; 99% CI, 0.46 to 1.13; P = .06), DMFS (HR, 0.65; 99% CI, 0.41 to 1.04; P = .02), and OS (HR, 0.59; 99% CI, 0.35 to 0.97; P = .006) were prolonged with PEG-IFN-α-2b. PEG-IFN-α-2b was discontinued for toxicity in 37% of patients.
Adjuvant PEG-IFN-α-2b for stage III melanoma had a positive impact on RFS, which was marginally significant and slightly diminished versus the benefit seen at prior follow-up (median, 3.8 years). No significant increase in DMFS or OS was noted in the overall population. Patients with ulcerated melanoma and lower disease burden had the greatest benefit.
To study sex differences in survival and progression in patients with stage III or IV metastatic melanoma and to compare our results with published literature.
Data were retrieved from three large, ...randomized, controlled trials of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer in patients with stage III and two trials in patients with stage IV melanoma. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for females compared with males, adjusted for different sets of confounders for stage III and stage IV, respectively.
In 2,734 stage III patients, females had a superior 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) rate compared with males (51.5% v 43.3%), an adjusted HR for DSS of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.76 to 0.95), and an adjusted HR for relapse-free survival of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.95). In 1,306 stage IV patients, females also exhibited an advantage in DSS (2-year survival rate, 14.1% v 19.0%; adjusted HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.92) as well as for progression-free survival (adjusted HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.88). This female advantage was consistent across pre- and postmenopausal age categories and across different prognostic subgroups. However, the female advantage seems to become smaller in patients with higher metastatic tumor load.
The persistent independent female advantage, even after metastasis to lymph nodes and distant sites, contradicts theories about sex behavioral differences as an explanation for this phenomenon. A biologic sex trait seems to profoundly influence melanoma progression and survival, even in advanced disease.
Several studies observed a female advantage in the prognosis of cutaneous melanoma, for which behavioral factors or an underlying biologic mechanism might be responsible. Using complete and reliable ...follow-up data from four phase III trials of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Melanoma Group, we explored the female advantage across multiple end points and in relation to other important prognostic indicators.
Patients diagnosed with localized melanoma were included in EORTC adjuvant treatment trials 18832, 18871, 18952, and 18961 and randomly assigned during the period of 1984 to 2005. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for women compared with men, adjusted for age, Breslow thickness, body site, ulceration, performed lymph node dissection, and treatment.
A total of 2,672 patients with stage I/II melanoma were included. Women had a highly consistent and independent advantage in overall survival (adjusted HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.83), disease-specific survival (adjusted HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.88), time to lymph node metastasis (adjusted HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.96), and time to distant metastasis (adjusted HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.81). Subgroup analysis showed that the female advantage was consistent across all prognostic subgroups (with the possible exception of head and neck melanomas) and in pre- and postmenopausal age groups.
Women have a consistent and independent relative advantage in all aspects of the progression of localized melanoma of approximately 30%, most likely caused by an underlying biologic sex difference.
Active immunization against the tumor-specific MAGE-A3 antigen is followed by a few but impressive and durable clinical responses. This randomized phase II trial evaluated two different ...immunostimulants combined with the MAGE-A3 protein to investigate whether a more robust and persistent immune response could be associated with increased clinical benefit.
Patients with MAGE-A3-positive stage III or IV M1a melanoma were randomly assigned to receive the MAGE-A3 protein combined either with AS02B or with AS15 immunostimulant. Clinical end points were toxicity and rates of objective clinical responses, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).
Seventy-five patients were treated, with 36 eligible patients per arm. Both treatments were well tolerated. In the AS15 arm, four objective responses were observed (three complete responses and one partial response) versus one partial response in the AS02B arm. In the AS15 and AS02B arms, the PFS rates after 6 months were 25% and 14%, respectively; and the median OS times were 33 months and 19.9 months, respectively, with a median observation period of 48 months. Antibodies against MAGE-A3, found in all patients, showed three-fold higher titers in the AS15 arm. The anti-MAGE-A3 cellular response was also more pronounced in the AS15 arm.
In the MAGE-A3+AS15 arm, clinical activity was higher and the immune response more robust. Therefore, the AS15 immunostimulant was selected for combination with the MAGE-A3 protein in phase III trials.
Summary Background The EORTC 18071 phase 3 trial compared adjuvant ipilimumab with placebo in patients with stage III melanoma. The primary endpoint, recurrence-free survival, was significantly ...longer in the ipilimumab group than in the placebo group. Investigator-reported toxic effects of ipilimumab consisted mainly of skin, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and hepatic immune-related adverse events. Adjuvant treatment with ipilimumab in this setting was approved in October, 2014, by the US Food and Drug Administration based on the results of the primary outcome of this trial. Here, we report the results of the secondary endpoint, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), of this trial. Methods EORTC 18071 was a multinational, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial in patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma (excluding lymph node metastasis ≤1 mm or in-transit metastasis) in 19 countries worldwide. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by an interactive voice response system, to receive either ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo every 3 weeks for four doses, then every 3 months for up to 3 years. Using a minimisation technique, randomisation was stratified by disease stage and geographical region. HRQoL was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30 quality-of-life instrument at baseline, weeks 4, 7, 10, and 24, and every 12 weeks thereafter up to 2 years, irrespective of disease progression. Results were summarised by timepoint and in a longitudinal manner in the intention-to-treat population. Two summary scores were calculated for each HRQoL scale: the average score reported during induction (ipilimumab or placebo at a dose of 10 mg/kg, administered as one single dose at the start of days 1, 22, 43, and 64—ie, four doses in 3 weeks), and the average score reported after induction. A predefined threshold of a 10 point difference between arms was considered clinically relevant. The primary HRQoL endpoint was the global health scale, with the predefined hypothesis of no clinically relevant differences after induction between groups. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2007-001974-10, and ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00636168. Findings Between July 10, 2008, and Aug 1, 2011, 951 patients were randomly assigned to treatment: 475 in the ipilimumab group and 476 in the placebo group. Compliance with completing the HRQoL questionnaire was 893 (94%) of 951 patients at baseline, 693 (75%) of 924 at week 24, and 354 (51%) of 697 at week 108. Patient mean global health scores during (77·32 SD 17·36 vs 72·96 17·82; p=0·00011) and after induction (76·48 17·52 vs 72·32 18·60; p=0·00067) were statistically significantly different between groups but were not clinically relevant. Mean global health scores differed most between the groups at week 7 (77 SD 19 in the placebo group vs 72 22 in the ipilimumab group) and week 10 (77 20 vs 70 23). Mean HRQoL scores differed by more than 10 points at week 10 between treatment groups for diarrhoea (7·67 SD 17·05 for placebo vs 18·17 28·35 for ipilimumab) and insomnia (15·17 22·53 vs 25·60 29·19). Interpretation Despite increased toxicity, which led to treatment discontinuation for most patients during the induction phase of ipilimumab administration, overall HRQoL, as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30, was similar between groups, as no clinically relevant differences (10 points or more) in global health status scores were observed during or after induction. Clinically relevant deterioration for some symptoms was observed at week 10, but after induction, no clinically relevant differences remained. Together with the primary analysis, results from this trial show that treatment with ipilimumab results in longer recurrence-free survival compared with that for treatment with placebo, with little impairment in HRQoL despite grade 3–4 investigator-reported adverse events. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Cytarabine plays a pivotal role in the treatment of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Most centers use 7 to 10 days of cytarabine at a daily dose of 100 to 200 mg/m(2) for remission ...induction. Consensus has not been reached on the benefit of higher dosages of cytarabine.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche dell' Adulto (GIMEMA) Leukemia Groups conducted a randomized trial (AML-12; Combination Chemotherapy, Stem Cell Transplant and Interleukin-2 in Treating Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia) in 1,942 newly diagnosed patients with AML, age 15 to 60 years, comparing remission induction treatment containing daunorubicin, etoposide, and either standard-dose (SD) cytarabine (100 mg/m(2) per day by continuous infusion for 10 days) or high-dose (HD) cytarabine (3,000 mg/m(2) every 12 hours by 3-hour infusion on days 1, 3, 5, and 7). Patients in complete remission (CR) received a single consolidation cycle containing daunorubicin and intermediate-dose cytarabine (500 mg/m(2) every 12 hours for 6 days). Subsequently, a stem-cell transplantation was planned. The primary end point was survival.
At a median follow-up of 6 years, overall survival was 38.7% for patients randomly assigned to SD cytarabine and 42.5% for those randomly assigned to HD cytarabine (log-rank test P = .06; multivariable analysis P = .009). For patients younger than age 46 years, survival was 43.3% and 51.9%, respectively (P = .009; multivariable analysis P = .003), and for patients age 46 to 60 years, survival was 33.9% and 32.9%, respectively (P = .91). CR rates were 72.0% and 78.7%, respectively (P < .001) and were 75.6% and 82.4% for patients younger than age 46 years (P = .01) and 68.3% and 74.8% for patients age 46 years and older (P = .03). Patients of all ages with very-bad-risk cytogenetic abnormalities and/or FLT3-ITD (internal tandem duplication) mutation, or with secondary AML benefitted from HD cytarabine.
HD cytarabine produces higher remission and survival rates than SD cytarabine, especially in patients younger than age 46 years.
In the CheckMate 238 study, any-grade paresthesia (2.7%), peripheral neuropathy (0.4%), and axonal neuropathy (0.2%) were included as well. ...one may expect differences between the study results ...regarding the incidence of irAE, and their dispersion of occurrence over time. In the EORTC 1325/KN054 study, we refrained to produce a landmark analysis: only 52% (20%/37.3%) of the irAE occurred within 3 months. ...kind of analysis would suffer from a dilution effect and be characterized by a low power: RFS events within 3 months could not be taken into consideration and a substantial number of patients (91=48% of 190) without irAE at 3 months developed later an irAE. For the nivolumab versus ipilimumab comparison, they did find a stronger treatment effect among those who had a TRAE which did not require an immunosuppressant treatment (HR=0.60), as compared with those who required an immunosuppressant treatment after a TRAE (0.87).1 This was consistent with our findings (HR 0.34 and 0.50, respectively) for the pembrolizumab vs placebo comparison.2 Lastly, in the Results section, the authors described the association which was evaluated in the ipilimumab group: ‘Moreover, as with nivolumab treatment, the presence or absence of select TRAEs reported between first study dose and 100 days after last study dose (time-varying covariate) was not associated with RFS in the ipilimumab group (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.96; p=0.0301 (to account for multiple comparisons, p≤0.01).’ ...the CheckMate 238 and EORTC 1325/KN054 studies both observed that the occurrence of irAEs was associated with a 30%–40% reduction in the of risk of recurrence or death among high-risk melanoma patients treated with adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).
PDF
