Treatment management for BRAF-mutant melanoma patients with tumor recurrence on adjuvant therapy: a multicenter study from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.
Adjuvant therapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) or BRAF/MEK-directed targeted therapy (TT) improves recurrence-free survival (RFS) for patients with advanced, BRAFV600-mutant (BRAFmut) resected melanoma. However, 40% of these patients will develop distant metastases (DM) within 5 years, which require systemic therapy. Little data exist to guide the choice of upfront adjuvant therapy or treatment management upon DM. This study evaluated the efficacy of subsequent treatments following tumor recurrence upon upfront adjuvant therapy.
For this multicenter cohort study, we identified 515 BRAFmut patients with resected stage III melanoma who were treated with PD-1 inhibitors (anti-PD1) or TT in the adjuvant setting. Disease characteristics, treatment regimens, details on tumor recurrence, subsequent treatment management, and survival outcomes were collected within the prospective, real-world skin cancer registry ADOReg. Primary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) following DM and best tumor response to first-line (1L) treatments.
Among 515 eligible patients, 273 patients received adjuvant anti-PD1 and 242 adjuvant TT. At a median follow-up of 21 months, 54.6% of anti-PD1 patients and 36.4% of TT patients recurred, while 39.6% (anti-PD1) and 29.3% (TT) developed DM. Risk of recurrence was significantly reduced in patients treated with TT compared with anti-PD1 (adjusted HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.68, p<0.001). Likewise, median RFS was significantly longer in TT-treated patients (31 vs 17 months, p<0.001). Patients who received TT as second adjuvant treatment upon locoregional recurrence had a longer RFS2 as compared with adjuvant CPI (41 vs 6 months, p=0.009). Patients who recurred at distant sites following adjuvant TT showed favorable response rates (42.9%) after switching to 1L ipilimumab+nivolumab (ipi+nivo). Patients with DM during adjuvant anti-PD1 achieved response rates of 58.7% after switching to 1L TT and 35.3% for 1L ipi+nivo. Overall, median PFS was significantly longer in patients who switched treatments for stage IV disease (median PFS 9 vs 5 months, p=0.004).
BRAFmut melanoma patients who developed DM upon upfront adjuvant therapy achieve favorable tumor control and prolonged PFS after switching treatment modalities in the first-line setting of stage IV disease. Patients with locoregional recurrence benefit from complete resection of recurrence followed by a second adjuvant treatment with TT.
Haist M
，Stege H
，Rogall F
，Tan Y
，von Wasielewski I
，Klespe KC
，Meier F
，Mohr P
，Kähler KC
，Weichenthal M
，Hauschild A
，Schadendorf D
，Ugurel S
，Lodde G
，Zimmer L
，Gutzmer R
，Debus D
，Schilling B
，Kreuter A
，Ulrich J
，Meiss F
，Herbst R
，Forschner A
，Leiter U
，Pfoehler C
，Kaatz M
，Ziller F
，Hassel JC
，Tronnier M
，Sachse M
，Dippel E
，Terheyden P
，Berking C
，Heppt MV
，Kiecker F
，Haferkamp S
，Gebhardt C
，Simon JC
，Grabbe S
，Loquai C
... -
《Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer》
Efficacy of PD-1-based immunotherapy after radiologic progression on targeted therapy in stage IV melanoma.
Targeted therapy (TT) is an effective treatment for advanced BRAFV600-mutated melanoma, but most patients eventually acquire resistance and progress. Here, we evaluated the outcome of second-line immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) after progression on dual BRAF and MEK inhibition.
Patients with metastatic melanoma progressing on combined BRAF + MEK inhibition and receiving second-line ICB between 2015 and 2019 in 9 tertiary referral centres were enrolled. Demographic and clinical data and blood counts of all patients were collected retrospectively.
We identified 99 patients with stage IV melanoma receiving ICB (nivolumab, pembrolizumab [n = 39] or ipilimumab plus nivolumab [n = 60]) after progression on combined TT. The median progression-free survival was similar in the PD-1 and ipilimumab plus nivolumab group (2.6 months [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.0-3.1] vs. 2.0 [95% CI, 1.4-2.6], p = 0.15). The objective response rate was 18.0% in the PD-1 and 15.0% in the ipilimumab plus nivolumab group (p = 0.70). The disease control rate was 25.7% for monotherapy and 18.3% for combined ICB (p = 0.39). The median overall survival was 8.4 months (95% CI, 5.1-11.7) for patients receiving PD-1 monotherapy and 7.2 months (95% CI, 5.2-9.1) for patients receiving ipilimumab plus nivolumab (p = 0.86). The latter was associated with a higher rate of treatment-related adverse events (AEs). No significant association of laboratory values or clinicopathological characteristics with response to second-line ICB was observed.
PD-1 monotherapy and combined ipilimumab plus nivolumab show similar activity and outcome in patients with melanoma resistant to BRAF + MEK inhibition. However, combined ipilimumab plus nivolumab was associated with a higher rate of treatment-related AEs compared with monotherapy.
Kreft S
，Gesierich A
，Eigentler T
，Franklin C
，Valpione S
，Ugurel S
，Utikal J
，Haferkamp S
，Blank C
，Larkin J
，Garbe C
，Schadendorf D
，Lorigan P
，Schilling B
... -
《-》
Nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone versus ipilimumab alone in advanced melanoma (CheckMate 067): 4-year outcomes of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial.
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.
Hodi FS
，Chiarion-Sileni V
，Gonzalez R
，Grob JJ
，Rutkowski P
，Cowey CL
，Lao CD
，Schadendorf D
，Wagstaff J
，Dummer R
，Ferrucci PF
，Smylie M
，Hill A
，Hogg D
，Marquez-Rodas I
，Jiang J
，Rizzo J
，Larkin J
，Wolchok JD
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
