Ipilimumab administration for advanced melanoma in patients with pre-existing Hepatitis B or C infection: a multicenter, retrospective case series

Ipilimumab is a fully human, monoclonal antibody directed against Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte Antigen-4 (CTLA-4) that has demonstrated a survival benefit and durable disease control in patients with advanced melanoma. Ipilimumab is associated with potentially serious immune-related adverse events, including autoimmune hepatitis. Because clinical trials of ipilimumab excluded patients with pre-existing hepatitis B or C infection, there is a paucity of data on the safety of ipilimumab administration to that patient population. Here, we report the largest case series to date of patients with hepatitis B or C who received ipilimumab for advanced melanoma. Two of the nine patients described in this case series experienced fluctuations in their liver function tests (LFTs) and were subsequently treated with corticosteroids. Although this is a small series, the rate of hepatotoxicity appears similar to what has been seen in the general population treated with ipilimumab, and the ability to administer ipilimumab did not appear to be affected by concomitant hepatitis B or C infection. The use of ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma who have pre-existing hepatitis can be considered among other therapeutic options

Avelumab in paediatric patients with refractory or relapsed solid tumours: dose-escalation results from an open-label, single-arm, phase 1/2 trial

Background: We report dose-escalation results from an open-label, phase 1/2 trial evaluating avelumab (anti-PD-L1) in paediatric patients with refractory/relapsed solid tumours. Methods: In phase 1, patients aged \u3c 18 years with solid (including central nervous system [CNS]) tumours for which standard therapy did not exist or had failed were enrolled in sequential cohorts of 3–6 patients. Patients received avelumab 10 or 20 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. Primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). Results: At data cut-off (27 July 2021), 21 patients aged 3–17 years had received avelumab 10 mg/kg (n = 6) or 20 mg/kg (n = 15). One patient had three events that were classified as a DLT (fatigue with hemiparesis and muscular weakness associated with pseudoprogression; 20 mg/kg cohort). Grade ≥ 3 AEs occurred in five (83%) and 11 (73%) patients in the 10 and 20 mg/kg cohorts, respectively, and were treatment-related in one patient (7%; grade 3 [DLT]) in the 20 mg/kg cohort. Avelumab exposure in paediatric patients receiving 20 mg/kg dosing, but not 10 mg/kg, was comparable or higher compared with approved adult dosing (10 mg/kg or 800 mg flat dose). No objective responses were observed. Four patients with CNS tumours (20 mg/kg cohort) achieved stable disease, which was ongoing in two patients with astrocytoma at cut-off (for 24.7 and 30.3 months). Conclusion: In paediatric patients with refractory/relapsed solid tumours, avelumab monotherapy showed a safety profile consistent with previous adult studies, but clinical benefits were limited

Avelumab in paediatric patients with refractory or relapsed solid tumours: dose‑escalation results from an open‑label, single‑arm, phase 1/2 trial

Avelumab in paediatric patients with refractory or relapsed solid tumours: dose‑escalation results from an open‑label, single‑arm, phase 1/2 tria

Avelumab in paediatric patients with refractory or relapsed solid tumours: dose-escalation results from an open-label, single-arm, phase 1/2 trial

© 2022, The Author(s).Background: We report dose-escalation results from an open-label, phase 1/2 trial evaluating avelumab (anti-PD-L1) in paediatric patients with refractory/relapsed solid tumours. Methods: In phase 1, patients aged < 18 years with solid (including central nervous system [CNS]) tumours for which standard therapy did not exist or had failed were enrolled in sequential cohorts of 3–6 patients. Patients received avelumab 10 or 20 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. Primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). Results: At data cut-off (27 July 2021), 21 patients aged 3–17 years had received avelumab 10 mg/kg (n = 6) or 20 mg/kg (n = 15). One patient had three events that were classified as a DLT (fatigue with hemiparesis and muscular weakness associated with pseudoprogression; 20 mg/kg cohort). Grade ≥ 3 AEs occurred in five (83%) and 11 (73%) patients in the 10 and 20 mg/kg cohorts, respectively, and were treatment-related in one patient (7%; grade 3 [DLT]) in the 20 mg/kg cohort. Avelumab exposure in paediatric patients receiving 20 mg/kg dosing, but not 10 mg/kg, was comparable or higher compared with approved adult dosing (10 mg/kg or 800 mg flat dose). No objective responses were observed. Four patients with CNS tumours (20 mg/kg cohort) achieved stable disease, which was ongoing in two patients with astrocytoma at cut-off (for 24.7 and 30.3 months). Conclusion: In paediatric patients with refractory/relapsed solid tumours, avelumab monotherapy showed a safety profile consistent with previous adult studies, but clinical benefits were limited.N

Sequential administration of nivolumab and ipilimumab with a planned switch in patients with advanced melanoma (CheckMate 064): an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent administration of the immune checkpoint inhibitors nivolumab and ipilimumab has shown greater efficacy than either agent alone in patients with advanced melanoma, albeit with more high-grade adverse events. We assessed whether sequential administration of nivolumab followed by ipilimumab, or the reverse sequence, could improve safety without compromising efficacy. METHODS: We did this randomised, open-label, phase 2 study at nine academic medical centres in the USA. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma (treatment-naive or who had progressed after no more than one previous systemic therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1) were randomly assigned (1:1) to induction with intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks for six doses followed by a planned switch to intravenous ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, or the reverse sequence. Randomisation was done by an independent interactive voice response system with a permuted block schedule (block size four) without stratification factors. After induction, both groups received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was treatment-related grade 3-5 adverse events until the end of the induction period (week 25), analysed in the as-treated population. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients who achieved a response at week 25 and disease progression at weeks 13 and 25. Overall survival was a prespecified exploratory endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01783938, and is ongoing but no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS: Between April 30, 2013, and July 21, 2014, 140 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to nivolumab followed by ipilimumab (n=70) or to the reverse sequence of ipilimumab followed by nivolumab (n=70), of whom 68 and 70 patients, respectively, received at least one dose of study drug and were included in the analyses. The frequencies of treatment-related grade 3-5 adverse events up to week 25 were similar in the nivolumab followed by ipilimumab group (34 [50%; 95% CI 37·6-62·4] of 68 patients) and in the ipilimumab followed by nivolumab group (30 [43%; 31·1-55·3] of 70 patients). The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events during the whole study period were colitis (ten [15%]) in the nivolumab followed by ipilimumab group vs 14 [20%] in the reverse sequence group), increased lipase (ten [15%] vs 12 [17%]), and diarrhoea (eight [12%] vs five [7%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. The proportion of patients with a response at week 25 was higher with nivolumab followed by ipilimumab than with the reverse sequence (28 [41%; 95% CI 29·4-53·8] vs 14 [20%; 11·4-31·3]). Progression was reported in 26 (38%; 95% CI 26·7-50·8) patients in the nivolumab followed by ipilimumab group and 43 (61%; 49·0-72·8) patients in the reverse sequence group at week 13 and in 26 (38%; 26·7-50·8) and 42 (60%; 47·6-71·5) patients at week 25, respectively. After a median follow-up of 19·8 months (IQR 12·8-25·7), median overall survival was not reached in the nivolumab followed by ipilimumab group (95% CI 23·7-not reached), whereas over a median follow-up of 14·7 months (IQR 5·6-23·9) in the ipilimumab followed by nivolumab group, median overall survival was 16·9 months (95% CI 9·2-26·5; HR 0·48 [95% CI 0·29-0·80]). A higher proportion of patients in the nivolumab followed by ipilimumab group achieved 12-month overall survival than in the ipilimumab followed by nivolumab group (76%; 95% CI 64-85 vs 54%; 42-65). INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab followed by ipilimumab appears to be a more clinically beneficial option compared with the reverse sequence, albeit with a higher frequency of adverse events. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb

Efficacy and Safety of Nivolumab Alone or in Combination With Ipilimumab in Patients With Mucosal Melanoma: A Pooled Analysis

Purpose Mucosal melanoma is an aggressive malignancy with a poor response to conventional therapies. The efficacy and safety of nivolumab (a programmed death-1 checkpoint inhibitor), alone or combined with ipilimumab (a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 checkpoint inhibitor), have not been reported in this rare melanoma subtype. Patients and Methods Data were pooled from 889 patients who received nivolumab monotherapy in clinical studies, including phase III trials; 86 (10%) had mucosal melanoma and 665 (75%) had cutaneous melanoma. Data were also pooled for patients who received nivolumab combined with ipilimumab (n = 35, mucosal melanoma; n = 326, cutaneous melanoma). Results Among patients who received nivolumab monotherapy, median progression-free survival was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.2 to 5.4 months) and 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.1 to 7.5 months) for mucosal and cutaneous melanoma, with objective response rates of 23.3% (95% CI, 14.8% to 33.6%) and 40.9% (95% CI, 37.1% to 44.7%), respectively. Median progression-free survival in patients treated with nivolumab combined with ipilimumab was 5.9 months (95% CI, 2.8 months to not reached) and 11.7 months (95% CI, 8.9 to 16.7 months) for mucosal and cutaneous melanoma, with objective response rates of 37.1% (95% CI, 21.5% to 55.1%) and 60.4% (95% CI, 54.9% to 65.8%), respectively. For mucosal and cutaneous melanoma, respectively, the incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was 8.1% and 12.5% for nivolumab monotherapy and 40.0% and 54.9% for combination therapy. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the largest analysis of data for anti-programmed death-1 therapy in mucosal melanoma to date. Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab seemed to have greater efficacy than either agent alone, and although the activity was lower in mucosal melanoma, the safety profile was similar between subtypes

Platelet production and platelet destruction: assessing mechanisms of treatment effect in immune thrombocytopenia

This study investigated the immature platelet fraction (IPF) in assessing treatment effects in immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). IPF was measured on the Sysmex XE2100 autoanalyzer. The mean absolute-IPF (A-IPF) was lower for ITP patients than for healthy controls (3.2 vs 7.8 × 109/L, P < .01), whereas IPF percentage was greater (29.2% vs 3.2%, P < .01). All 5 patients with a platelet response to Eltrombopag, a thrombopoietic agent, but none responding to an anti-FcγRIII antibody, had corresponding A-IPF responses. Seven of 7 patients responding to RhoD immuneglobulin (anti-D) and 6 of 8 responding to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) did not have corresponding increases in A-IPF, but 2 with IVIG and 1 with IVIG anti-D did. This supports inhibition of platelet destruction as the primary mechanism of intravenous anti-D and IVIG, although IVIG may also enhance thrombopoiesis. Plasma glycocalicin, released during platelet destruction, normalized as glycocalicin index, was higher in ITP patients than controls (31.36 vs 1.75, P = .001). There was an inverse correlation between glycocalicin index and A-IPF in ITP patients (r2 = −0.578, P = .015), demonstrating the relationship between platelet production and destruction. Nonresponders to thrombopoietic agents had increased megakaryocytes but not increased A-IPF, suggesting that antibodies blocked platelet release. In conclusion, A-IPF measures real-time thrombopoiesis, providing insight into mechanisms of treatment effect