Health-related quality of life in patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab: prognostic implications and changes during treatment

Background: We have previously reported that the safety and efficacy of ipilimumab in real-world patients with metastatic melanoma were comparable to clinical trials. Few studies have explored health-related quality of life (HRQL) in real-world populations receiving checkpoint inhibitors. This study reports HRQL in real-world patients receiving ipilimumab and assesses the prognostic value of patient-reported outcome measures. Patients and methods: Ipi4 (NCT02068196) was a prospective, multicentre, interventional phase IV trial. Real-world patients (N = 151) with metastatic melanoma were treated with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously as labelled. HRQL was assessed by the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire at baseline and after 10-12 weeks. Results: The European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire was completed by 93% (141/151 patients) at baseline, and by 82% at 10-12 weeks. Poor performance status and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) were associated with worse baseline HRQL. Clinically relevant and statistically significant deteriorations in HRQL from baseline to weeks 10-12 were reported (P <0.05). Baseline physical functioning [hazard ratio (HR) 1.96, P = 0.016], role functioning (HR 2.15, P <0.001), fatigue (HR 1.60, P = 0.030), and appetite loss (HR 1.76, P = 0.012) were associated with poorer overall survival independent of performance status, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and CRP. We further developed a prognostic model, combining HRQL outcomes with performance status, LDH, and CRP. This model identified three groups with large and statistically significant differences in survival. Conclusions: Systemic inflammation is associated with impaired HRQL. During treatment with ipilimumab, HRQL deteriorated significantly. Combining HRQL outcomes with objective risk factors provided additional prognostic information that may aid clinical decision making.publishedVersio

Ipilimumab in a real-world population: A prospective Phase IV trial with long-term follow-up

Ipilimumab was the first treatment that improved survival in advanced melanoma. Efficacy and toxicity in a real-world setting may differ from clinical trials, due to more liberal eligibility criteria and less intensive monitoring. Moreover, high costs and lack of biomarkers have raised cost-benefit concerns about ipilimumab in national healthcare systems and limited its use. Here, we report the prospective, interventional study, Ipi4 (NCT02068196), which aimed to investigate the toxicity and efficacy of ipilimumab in a real-world population with advanced melanoma. This national, multicentre, phase IV trial included 151 patients. Patients received ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously and were followed for at least 5 years or until death. Treatment interruption or cessation occurred in 38%, most frequently due to disease progression (19%). Treatment-associated grade 3 to 4 toxicity was observed in 28% of patients, and immune-related toxicity in 56%. The overall response rate was 9%. Median overall survival was 12.1 months (95% CI: 8.3-15.9); and progression-free survival 2.7 months (95% CI: 2.6-2.8). After 5 years, 20% of patients were alive. In a landmark analysis from 6 months, improved survival was associated with objective response (HR 0.16, P = .001) and stable disease (HR 0.49, P = .005) compared to progressive disease. Poor performance status, elevated lactate dehydrogenase and C-reactive protein were identified as biomarkers. This prospective trial represents the longest reported follow-up of a real-world melanoma population treated with ipilimumab. Results indicate safety and efficacy comparable to phase III trials and suggest that the use of ipilimumab can be based on current cost-benefit estimates.publishedVersio

High sensitivity assays for docetaxel and paclitaxel in plasma using solid-phase extraction and high-performance liquid chromatography with UV detection

BACKGROUND: The taxanes paclitaxel and docetaxel have traditionally been used in high doses every third week in the treatment of cancer. Lately there has been a trend towards giving weekly low doses to improve the therapeutic index. This article describes the development of high performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC) methods suitable for monitoring taxane levels in patients, focusing on patients receiving low-dose therapy. METHODS: Paclitaxel and docetaxel were extracted from human plasma by solid phase extraction, and detected by absorbance at 227 nm after separation by reversed phase high performance liquid chromatography. The methods were validated and their performance were tested using samples from patients receiving paclitaxel or docetaxel. RESULTS: The limits of quantitation were 1 nM for docetaxel and 1.2 nM for paclitaxel. For both compounds linearity was confirmed from the limit of quantitation up to 1000 nM in plasma. The recoveries ranged between 92% and 118% for docetaxel and between 76% and 104% for paclitaxel. Accuracy and precision were within international acceptance criteria, that is within ± 15%, except at the limit of quantitation where values within ± 20% are acceptable. Low-dose patients included in an on going clinical trial had a median docetaxel concentration of 2.8 nM at 72 hours post infusion. Patients receiving 100 mg/m(2 )of paclitaxel had a mean paclitaxel concentration of 21 nM 48 hours after the end of infusion. CONCLUSION: We have developed an HPLC method using UV detection capable of quantifying 1 nM of docetaxel in plasma samples. The method should be useful for pharmacokinetic determinations at all relevant doses of docetaxel. Using a similar methodology paclitaxel can be quantified down to a concentration of 1.2 nM in plasma with acceptable accuracy and precision. We further demonstrate that the previously reported negative influence of Cremophor EL on assay performance may be overcome by degradation of the detergent by incubation with lipase

Pharmacokinetic analysis of two different docetaxel dose levels in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with docetaxel as monotherapy or with concurrent radiotherapy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Previous pharmacokinetic studies with docetaxel have mostly used 3-weekly (75 mg/m²and 100 mg/m²) or weekly regimens (35–40 mg/m²). The pharmacokinetics and radiosensitizing efficacy of weekly 20 mg/m²docetaxel, has however not been well characterized. We examined the pharmacokinetics of weekly docetaxel when administered with concurrent radiotherapy and compared the results with a 3-weekly 100 mg/m²regimen.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Thirty-four patients with non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were included in this study, 19 receiving 100 mg/m²docetaxel 3-weekly as single therapy, and 15 receiving 20 mg/m²docetaxel weekly with concurrent radiotherapy. A newly developed HPLC method was used for measuring docetaxel levels, capable of quantifying docetaxel in plasma down to the nanomolar level.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The HPLC method showed detectable concentrations of docetaxel in plasma even after 72 hours. In the present study we have demonstrated that median docetaxel plasma levels of 3 nM can be obtained 72 hours after a dose of 20 mg/m².</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The pharmacokinetics of docetaxel is characterized by great inter-individual variability and at some time points plasma concentrations for 20 mg/m²and 100 mg/m²docetaxel were overlapping. Extrapolation of these results indicates that radio sensitizing docetaxel concentrations may be present for as long as 1 week, thus supporting the use of 20 mg/m²weekly docetaxel.</p

A prospective phase II trial exploring the association between tumor microenvironment biomarkers and clinical activity of ipilimumab in advanced melanoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Ipilimumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4, has demonstrated an improvement in overall survival in two phase III trials of patients with advanced melanoma. The primary objective of the current trial was to prospectively explore candidate biomarkers from the tumor microenvironment for associations with clinical response to ipilimumab.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this randomized, double-blind, phase II biomarker study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00261365), 82 pretreated or treatment-naïve patients with unresectable stage III/IV melanoma were induced with 3 or 10 mg/kg ipilimumab every 3 weeks for 4 doses; at Week 24, patients could receive maintenance doses every 12 weeks. Efficacy was evaluated per modified World Health Organization response criteria and safety was assessed continuously. Candidate biomarkers were evaluated in tumor biopsies collected pretreatment and 24 to 72 hours after the second ipilimumab dose. Polymorphisms in immune-related genes were also evaluated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Objective response rate, response patterns, and safety were consistent with previous trials of ipilimumab in melanoma. No associations between genetic polymorphisms and clinical activity were observed. Immunohistochemistry and histology on tumor biopsies revealed significant associations between clinical activity and high baseline expression of FoxP3 (p = 0.014) and indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (p = 0.012), and between clinical activity and increase in tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) between baseline and 3 weeks after start of treatment (p = 0.005). Microarray analysis of mRNA from tumor samples taken pretreatment and post-treatment demonstrated significant increases in expression of several immune-related genes, and decreases in expression of genes implicated in cancer and melanoma.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Baseline expression of immune-related tumor biomarkers and a post-treatment increase in TILs may be positively associated with ipilimumab clinical activity. The observed pharmacodynamic changes in gene expression warrant further analysis to determine whether treatment-emergent changes in gene expression may be associated with clinical efficacy. Further studies are required to determine the predictive value of these and other potential biomarkers associated with clinical response to ipilimumab.</p

Defining the Critical Hurdles in Cancer Immunotherapy

ABSTRACT: Scientific discoveries that provide strong evidence of antitumor effects in preclinical models often encounter significant delays before being tested in patients with cancer. While some of these delays have a scientific basis, others do not. We need to do better. Innovative strategies need to move into early stage clinical trials as quickly as it is safe, and if successful, these therapies should efficiently obtain regulatory approval and widespread clinical application. In late 2009 and 2010 the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC), convened an "Immunotherapy Summit" with representatives from immunotherapy organizations representing Europe, Japan, China and North America to discuss collaborations to improve development and delivery of cancer immunotherapy. One of the concepts raised by SITC and defined as critical by all parties was the need to identify hurdles that impede effective translation of cancer immunotherapy. With consensus on these hurdles, international working groups could be developed to make recommendations vetted by the participating organizations. These recommendations could then be considered by regulatory bodies, governmental and private funding agencies, pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions to facilitate changes necessary to accelerate clinical translation of novel immune-based cancer therapies. The critical hurdles identified by representatives of the collaborating organizations, now organized as the World Immunotherapy Council, are presented and discussed in this report. Some of the identified hurdles impede all investigators, others hinder investigators only in certain regions or institutions or are more relevant to specific types of immunotherapy or first-in-humans studies. Each of these hurdles can significantly delay clinical translation of promising advances in immunotherapy yet be overcome to improve outcomes of patients with cancer

Defining the critical hurdles in cancer immunotherapy

Scientific discoveries that provide strong evidence of antitumor effects in preclinical models often encounter significant delays before being tested in patients with cancer. While some of these delays have a scientific basis, others do not. We need to do better. Innovative strategies need to move into early stage clinical trials as quickly as it is safe, and if successful, these therapies should efficiently obtain regulatory approval and widespread clinical application. In late 2009 and 2010 the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC), convened an "Immunotherapy Summit" with representatives from immunotherapy organizations representing Europe, Japan, China and North America to discuss collaborations to improve development and delivery of cancer immunotherapy. One of the concepts raised by SITC and defined as critical by all parties was the need to identify hurdles that impede effective translation of cancer immunotherapy. With consensus on these hurdles, international working groups could be developed to make recommendations vetted by the participating organizations. These recommendations could then be considered by regulatory bodies, governmental and private funding agencies, pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions to facilitate changes necessary to accelerate clinical translation of novel immune-based cancer therapies. The critical hurdles identified by representatives of the collaborating organizations, now organized as the World Immunotherapy Council, are presented and discussed in this report. Some of the identified hurdles impede all investigators; others hinder investigators only in certain regions or institutions or are more relevant to specific types of immunotherapy or first-in-humans studies. Each of these hurdles can significantly delay clinical translation of promising advances in immunotherapy yet if overcome, have the potential to improve outcomes of patients with cancer

Assessing quality of life in a randomized clinical trial: Correcting for missing data

Background Health-related quality of life is a topic of current interest. This paper considers a randomized phase III study of radiation therapy with concurrent chemotherapy (docetaxel) versus radiation therapy alone in non-small cell lung cancer, stage III A/B. Longitudinal data on quality of life have been obtained through repeated administration of a multi-item questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) developed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Missingness in the data is owing to patients having failed to complete the questionnaire at some of the scheduled filling-in times. Methods We have analysed a monotone (in terms of missingness) subset of the data as regards estimation of the mean score of a summary measure of self-reported quality of life in a hypothetical drop-out-free population at different points in time. Missingness is a difficult issue of great importance. We have therefore chosen to compare three different methods that are relatively easy to implement: the linear-increments method, the inverse-probability-weighting method and the Markov-process method. Single imputation has been applied in a supplementary analysis to fill in for all the non-consecutive missing score values prior to the execution of the estimation procedure. Results For the response in focus, the observed mean score at a certain time is larger than the estimated mean scores, which implies that the true mean score is easily overestimated unless the missingness is appropriately adjusted for. Comparison of the treatment arms shows a significant difference in mean score at the end of treatment. Conclusion Use of proper methodology developed for analysing data subject to missingness is necessary to reduce potential estimation bias. The quality of life of patients receiving radiation therapy with concurrent chemotherapy (docetaxel) appears somewhat worse than that of patients receiving radiation therapy alone in the period during which treatment is given. The conclusions are robust for the choice of statistical methods