16 research outputs found
Validation of Updated Diagnostic Criteria:IDH-Wildtype Diffuse Astrocytoma with Molecular Features of Glioblastoma
Comparison of efficacy in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab who did or did not discontinue treatment due to immune-related adverse events:A real-world data study
SIMPLE SUMMARY: This retrospective study of real-world patients with metastatic melanoma shows that discontinuing treatment with combination immunotherapy due to adverse events does not result in a poorer outcome compared to patients that did not discontinue due to toxicity. This is important knowledge for clinicians and patients, as discontinuing treatment may cause great anxiety for patients because they believe that it may limit the response. ABSTRACT: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are very prevalent when treating patients with ipilimumab and nivolumab in combination, and 30–40% of patients discontinue the treatment for this reason. It is of high clinical relevance to investigate the consequences of discontinuing the treatment early since combination therapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab is the first line of treatment for many patients with metastatic melanoma. In this follow-up study, with real-world data from the nationwide DAMMED database, we investigated whether there was a difference in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients who discontinued or did not discontinue treatment within the first four doses of treatment due to irAEs. In total, 448 patients were treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab. Of these, 133 patients discontinued due to irAEs in the induction phase. Using the Cox proportional hazards model, there was no significant difference in PFS when comparing the group that discontinued with the group that did not discontinue. The group that discontinued had a significantly longer OS than the group that received the full length of treatment. Therefore, we conclude that there is no significant negative impact on efficacy for patients who discontinue due to irAEs in the induction phase of combination immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma
ProTarget:a Danish Nationwide Clinical Trial on Targeted Cancer Treatment based on genomic profiling – a national, phase 2, prospective, multi-drug, non-randomized, open-label basket trial
PD-L1 is a biomarker of real-world clinical outcomes for anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-1 monotherapy in metastatic melanoma
Background: Metastatic melanoma (MM) is commonly treated with a combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab, regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. Methods: We conducted a population-based study including all patients with MM (except ocular melanoma) treated in Denmark with first-line combination therapy or anti-PD-1 monotherapy since January 2017. Baseline data including known prognostic characteristics were used in multivariable and propensity-matched score (PMS) analyses to assess progression-free survival (PFS), melanoma-specific survival (MSS), and overall survival (OS) according to PD-L1 expression. Results: We identified 1341 eligible patients, with known PD-L1 status for 1081 patients (43% PD-L1 ≥ 1%, 57% PD-L1 < 1%). PD-L1 ≥ 1% was an independent positive prognostic biomarker for survival in the overall cohort (MSS: HR 0.66, CI 0.52–0.83, p < 0.001). In the PMS PD-L1 ≥ 1% cohort, combination therapy showed similar clinical outcomes to monotherapy (PFS: HR 1.41, CI 0.94–2.11, p = 0.101; MSS: HR 1.21, CI 0.70–2.11, p = 0.49; OS: HR 1.17, CI 0.68–2.00, p = 0.567). In contrast, in the PMS PD-L1 < 1% and in the PMS PD-L1 < 1% BRAF WT cohorts, combination therapy improved PFS (respectively with HR 0.70, CI 0.53–0.93, p = 0.013; and HR 0.54, CI 0.37–0.78, p = 0.001), but did not reach statistically significant improvements of MSS (HR 0.72, CI 0.50–1.02, p = 0.065; and HR 0.79, CI 0.51–1.21, p = 0.278) or OS (HR 0.78, CI 0.56–1.08, p = 0.135; and HR 0.81, CI 0.54–1.21, p = 0.305) compared to monotherapy. Conclusion: Our findings support previous exploratory analyses of Checkmate-067, highlighting that improved clinical outcomes with combination therapy are not established in unselected patients with high (≥1%) tumor PD-L1 expression.</p
Seasonal variation in effect of anti-PD-1 initiation on overall survival among patients with advanced melanoma
The Danish metastatic melanoma database (DAMMED):A nation-wide platform for quality assurance and research in real-world data on medical therapy in Danish melanoma patients
Sustained improved survival of patients with metastatic melanoma after the introduction of anti-PD-1-based therapies
BACKGROUND: The introduction of modern therapies improved the median survival of patients with metastatic melanoma (MM). Here, we determined the real-world impact of modern treatments on the long-term survival of MM.METHODS: In a population-based study, we extracted all cases of MM diagnosed in four non-consecutive years marked by major changes in available 1st line treatments (2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018) from the Danish MM Database. Patients were grouped into "trial-like" and "trial-excluded" based on common trial eligibility criteria.RESULTS: We observed a sustained improved survival of "trial-like" patients diagnosed in 2016 or in 2018, compared to 2012 or 2014, but no major differences in 2018 versus 2016. In contrast, while survival of "trial-excluded" patients in 2016 was better compared to 2014 and 2012, survival in 2018 was improved over all previous years. We then developed a prognostic model based on multivariable stratified Cox regression, to predict the survival of newly diagnosed MM patients. Internal validation showed excellent discrimination and calibration, with a time-area-under-the-curve above 0.79 at multiple time horizons, for up to four years after diagnosis.CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of modern treatments such as anti-PD-1 has led to a sustained, improved survival of real-world patients with MM, regardless of their eligibility for clinical trials. We provide an updateable prognostic model that can be used to improve patient information. Overall, these data highlight a positive population-based impact of modern treatments and can help health technology assessment agencies worldwide to evaluate the appropriateness of drug pricing based on known cost-benefit data.</p