Explore the vast range of titles available.

Brain metastases are a common cause of disabling neurologic complications and death in patients with metastatic melanoma. Previous studies of nivolumab combined with ipilimumab in metastatic melanoma have excluded patients with untreated brain metastases. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with melanoma who had untreated brain metastases. In this open-label, multicenter, phase 2 study, patients with metastatic melanoma and at least one measurable, nonirradiated brain metastasis (tumor diameter, 0.5 to 3 cm) and no neurologic symptoms received nivolumab (1 mg per kilogram of body weight) plus ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks for up to four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary end point was the rate of intracranial clinical benefit, defined as the percentage of patients who had stable disease for at least 6 months, complete response, or partial response. Among 94 patients with a median follow-up of 14.0 months, the rate of intracranial clinical benefit was 57% (95% confidence interval [CI], 47 to 68); the rate of complete response was 26%, the rate of partial response was 30%, and the rate of stable disease for at least 6 months was 2%. The rate of extracranial clinical benefit was 56% (95% CI, 46 to 67). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 55% of patients, including events involving the central nervous system in 7%. One patient died from immune-related myocarditis. The safety profile of the regimen was similar to that reported in patients with melanoma who do not have brain metastases. Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab had clinically meaningful intracranial efficacy, concordant with extracranial activity, in patients with melanoma who had untreated brain metastases. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and the National Cancer Institute; CheckMate 204 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02320058 .).

Immunotherapy 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. In 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. Between 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. Epacadostat 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. Incyte Corporation, in collaboration with Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Application of immunotherapy has revolutionized treatment of number of malignancies. We present a review of immunotherapy approaches, early-phase data of number of new immunotherapeutic targets in melanoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, Merkel cell cancer, and non-small cell lung cancer.

Pembrolizumab 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. KEYNOTE-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. Between 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. Pembrolizumab 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. Merck Sharp & Dohme.

In a multinational, randomized study, pembrolizumab produced significantly improved progression-free and overall survival and less high-grade toxicity than did ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. Two therapeutic strategies have improved survival for patients with advanced melanoma in recent years: immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies blocking BRAF and MEK. 1 BRAF and MEK inhibitors are indicated for the approximately 40 to 50% of patients with BRAF V600 mutations, 1 whereas immunotherapies are effective independently of BRAF mutational status. 2 Ipilimumab, which blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), a coinhibitory molecule of the immune system, 3 , 4 is approved for treating advanced melanoma on the basis of its survival benefit. 5 , 6 However, grade 3 or 4 adverse events, mostly immune-related, 7 are observed in 23% of patients. 5 , 6 When activated . . .

Combination nivolumab plus ipilimumab was efficacious in patients with asymptomatic melanoma brain metastases (MBM) in CheckMate 204, but showed low efficacy in patients with symptomatic MBM. Here, we provide final 3-year follow-up data from the trial. This open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study (CheckMate 204) included adults (aged ≥18 years) with measurable MBM (0·5–3·0 cm in diameter). Asymptomatic patients (cohort A) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1 and no neurological symptoms or baseline corticosteroid use; symptomatic patients (cohort B) had an ECOG performance status of 0–2 with stable neurological symptoms and could be receiving low-dose dexamethasone. Nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg was given intravenously every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks for up to 2 years, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was intracranial clinical benefit rate (complete responses, partial responses, or stable disease lasting ≥6 months) assessed in all treated patients. Intracranial progression-free survival and overall survival were key secondary endpoints. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02320058. Between Feb 19, 2015, and Nov 1, 2017, 119 (72%) of 165 screened patients were enrolled and treated: 101 patients were asymptomatic (cohort A; median follow-up 34·3 months [IQR 14·7–36·4]) and 18 were symptomatic (cohort B; median follow-up 7·5 months [1·2–35·2]). Investigator-assessed intracranial clinical benefit was observed in 58 (57·4% [95% CI 47·2–67·2]) of 101 patients in cohort A and three (16·7% [3·6–41·4]) of 18 patients in cohort B; investigator-assessed objective response was observed in 54 (53·5% [43·3–63·5]) patients in cohort A and three (16·7% [3·6–41·4]) patients in cohort B. 33 (33%) patients in cohort A and three (17%) patients in cohort B had an investigator-assessed intracranial complete response. For patients in cohort A, 36-month intracranial progression-free survival was 54·1% (95% CI 42·7–64·1) and overall survival was 71·9% (61·8–79·8). For patients in cohort B, 36-month intracranial progression-free survival was 18·9% (95% CI 4·6–40·5) and overall survival was 36·6% (14·0–59·8). The most common grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase (15 [15%] of 101 patients each) in cohort A; no grade 3 TRAEs occurred in more than one patient each in cohort B, and no grade 4 events occurred. The most common serious TRAEs were colitis, diarrhoea, hypophysitis, and increased alanine aminotransferase (five [5%] of each among the 101 patients in cohort A); no serious TRAE occurred in more than one patient each in cohort B. There was one treatment-related death (myocarditis in cohort A). The durable 3-year response, overall survival, and progression-free survival rates for asymptomatic patients support first-line use of nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Symptomatic disease in patients with MBM remains difficult to treat, but some patients achieve a long-term response with the combination. Bristol Myers Squibb.

Oncogene-targeted therapy with B-Raf proto-oncogene (BRAF) and mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibitors induces a high initial response rate in patients with BRAF V600 -mutated melanoma, with a median duration of response of approximately 1 year 1 – 3 . Immunotherapy with antibodies to programmed death 1 (PD-1) produces lower response rates but with long response duration. Preclinical models suggest that combining BRAF and MEK inhibitors with PD-1 blockade therapy improves antitumor activity 4 – 6 , which may provide additional treatment options for patients unlikely to have long-lasting responses to either mode of therapy alone. We enrolled 15 patients with BRAF V600 -mutated metastatic melanoma in a first-in-human clinical trial of dabrafenib, trametinib and pembrolizumab ( NCT02130466 ). Eleven patients (73%) experienced grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events, the most common being elevation of liver function tests and pyrexia, most of which resolved with drug interruption or discontinuation of either the anti-PD-1 antibody or the targeted therapy combination. Eleven patients (73%; 95% confidence interval = 45–92%) had an objective response, and six (40%; 95% confidence interval = 16–68%) continued with a response at a median follow-up of 27 months (range = 10.3–38.4+ months) for all patients. This study suggests that this triple-combined therapy may benefit a subset of patients with BRAF V600 -mutated metastatic melanoma by increasing the frequency of long-lasting antitumor responses. Triple therapy combining BRAF and MEK inhibitors with immune checkpoint blockade may benefit a subset of patients with BRAF V600 -mutated metastatic melanoma.

Merkel cell carcinoma is a rare, aggressive skin cancer with poor prognosis in patients with advanced disease. Current standard care uses various cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens, but responses are seldom durable. Tumour oncogenesis is linked to Merkel cell polyomavirus integration and ultraviolet-radiation-induced mutations, providing rationale for treatment with immunotherapy antibodies that target the PD-L1/PD-1 pathway. We assessed treatment with avelumab, an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody, in patients with stage IV Merkel cell carcinoma that had progressed after cytotoxic chemotherapy. In this multicentre, international, prospective, single-group, open-label, phase 2 trial, patients with stage IV chemotherapy-refractory, histologically confirmed Merkel cell carcinoma (aged ≥18 years) were enrolled from 35 cancer treatment centres and academic hospitals in North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia. Key eligibility criteria were an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1, measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, adequate haematological, hepatic, and renal function, and immune-competent status (patients with HIV, immunosuppression, haematological malignancies, and previous organ transplantation were excluded). Patient selection was not based on PD-L1 expression or Merkel cell polyomavirus status. Collection of biopsy material or use of archival tissue for these assessments was mandatory. Avelumab was given intravenously at a dose of 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response (complete response or partial response) assessed according to RECIST version 1.1 by an independent review committee. Safety and clinical activity were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug (the modified intention-to-treat population). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02155647. Between July 25, 2014, and Sept 3, 2015, 88 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of avelumab. Patients were followed up for a median of 10·4 months (IQR 8·6–13·1). The proportion of patients who achieved an objective response was 28 (31·8% [95·9% CI 21·9–43·1]) of 88 patients, including eight complete responses and 20 partial responses. Responses were ongoing in 23 (82%) of 28 patients at the time of analysis. Five grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in four (5%) patients: lymphopenia in two patients, blood creatine phosphokinase increase in one patient, aminotransferase increase in one patient, and blood cholesterol increase in one patient; there were no treatment-related grade 4 adverse events or treatment-related deaths. Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in five patients (6%): enterocolitis, infusion-related reaction, aminotransferases increased, chondrocalcinosis, synovitis, and interstitial nephritis (n=1 each). Avelumab was associated with durable responses, most of which are still ongoing, and was well tolerated; hence, avelumab represents a new therapeutic option for advanced Merkel cell carcinoma. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Pembrolizumab, an inhibitor of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1), produced responses in 24% of patients with non–small-cell lung cancer, with a median overall survival of 16.2 months. The response rate increased to 45% if more than 50% of tumor cells expressed the PD-1 ligand. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. 1 , 2 Platinum-based chemotherapy, with or without maintenance therapy and subsequently followed by second-line cytotoxic chemotherapy, is standard treatment for most patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer, with a median survival of approximately 1 year. 3 , 4 One hallmark of cancer is immune evasion, in which the immune system does not mount an effective antitumor response. 5 Programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) is a negative costimulatory receptor expressed primarily on the surface of activated T cells. 6 , 7 The binding of PD-1 to one of its ligands, PD-L1 or PD-L2, can inhibit a cytotoxic . . .

Clinical and correlative biomarker results from a phase 1 clinical trial in patients with different solid tumours are presented; the findings indicate that PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune cells is associated with clinical response to MPDL3280A (anti-PD-L1). Predicting patient response to anti-PD-L1 anti-cancer therapy The transmembrane protein PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1) is upregulated in many different types of cancer and protocols targeting its interactions have shown promise in pre-clinical studies. Here Roy Herbst et al . present clinical and correlative biomarker results from a phase I clinical trial in patients with solid tumours of various types treated with the engineered anti-PD-L1 antibody MPDL3280A. The findings indicate that PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune cells is associated with clinical response to MPDL3280A. The development of human cancer is a multistep process characterized by the accumulation of genetic and epigenetic alterations that drive or reflect tumour progression. These changes distinguish cancer cells from their normal counterparts, allowing tumours to be recognized as foreign by the immune system 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 . However, tumours are rarely rejected spontaneously, reflecting their ability to maintain an immunosuppressive microenvironment 5 . Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1; also called B7-H1 or CD274), which is expressed on many cancer and immune cells, plays an important part in blocking the ‘cancer immunity cycle’ by binding programmed death-1 (PD-1) and B7.1 (CD80), both of which are negative regulators of T-lymphocyte activation. Binding of PD-L1 to its receptors suppresses T-cell migration, proliferation and secretion of cytotoxic mediators, and restricts tumour cell killing 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 . The PD-L1–PD-1 axis protects the host from overactive T-effector cells not only in cancer but also during microbial infections 11 . Blocking PD-L1 should therefore enhance anticancer immunity, but little is known about predictive factors of efficacy. This study was designed to evaluate the safety, activity and biomarkers of PD-L1 inhibition using the engineered humanized antibody MPDL3280A. Here we show that across multiple cancer types, responses (as evaluated by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, version 1.1) were observed in patients with tumours expressing high levels of PD-L1, especially when PD-L1 was expressed by tumour-infiltrating immune cells. Furthermore, responses were associated with T-helper type 1 (T H 1) gene expression, CTLA4 expression and the absence of fractalkine (CX3CL1) in baseline tumour specimens. Together, these data suggest that MPDL3280A is most effective in patients in which pre-existing immunity is suppressed by PD-L1, and is re-invigorated on antibody treatment.