86 research outputs found
Safety and efficacy of ipilimumab to treat advanced melanoma in the setting of liver transplantation
Ipilimumab is a first-in-class immunological checkpoint blockade agent and monoclonal antibody against Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen 4 (CTLA-4) that has demonstrated survival benefit and durable responses in patients with metastatic melanoma. To date, solid organ transplant recipients have been excluded from clinical trials with cancer immunotherapies on the basis of their concurrent treatment with immunosuppressive agents. We present the first case to our knowledge of a patient with advanced cutaneous melanoma receiving ipilimumab status post orthotopic liver transplantation with a partial response. Transaminitis was observed 4 months after administration of ipilimumab that resolved with close observation. No evidence of graft rejection has been observed to date. This case advocates for further investigation of the safety and efficacy of cancer immunotherapies in solid organ transplant recipients
546 Results from Phase Ib study of tebentafusp (tebe) in combination with durvalumab (durva) and/or tremelimumab (treme) in metastatic cutaneous melanoma (mCM)
BackgroundTebe, a T cell receptor fused to an anti-CD3 effector, can redirect T cells to target gp100+ cells and in Ph3, demonstrated overall survival (OS) benefit as monotherapy in metastatic uveal melanoma. In Ph2, any tumor shrinkage (44% of patients) was a better predictor of OS than response rate. In Ph1, Tebe had monotherapy activity in mCM, also a gp100+ tumor, with 1-year OS ~74% in PD-1 naïve mCM. A Ph1 dose escalation of tebe with durva (anti-PD-L1) and/or treme (anti-CTLA4) was conducted in pre-treated mCM [NCT02535078], with nearly all patients having prior PD1-treatment, and where recently reported therapies have 1-yr OS of ~55%.MethodsHeavily pre-treated HLA-A2+ mCM patients received weekly IV tebe alone (Arm 4) or with increasing doses of durva and/or treme (Arm 1–3) administered IV monthly starting day 15 of each cycle. Primary objective was to identify RP2D of combination therapy. Secondary objectives included adverse events (AE) and efficacy.Results112 pts received ≥1 tebe dose. Median age was 59, 77% were ECOG 0, and 37% were BRAFm (of which 71% received prior BRAFi/MEKi). 91% of pts were 2L+, while 74% were 3L+. 103 (92%) received prior PD-1 inhibitor, of which 87% also received prior ipilimumab. 43 pts received tebe + durva (Arm 1), 13 received tebe + treme (Arm 2), 29 received triplet therapy (Arm 3), and 27 received tebe alone (Arm 4). Maximum target doses of tebe (68 mcg) + durva (20 mg/kg) and treme (1 mg/kg) were tolerated. MTD was not formally identified for any arm. Two DLTs occurred: prolonged grade 3 rash (Arm 1) and grade 2 diarrhea leading to treatment delay (Arm 2). Related AEs that were Grade ≥3 or led to discontinuations were: 44%/0% (Arm 1), 23%/0% (Arm2), 38%/7% (Arm3), 26%/4% (Arm 4). There were no treatment-related deaths.In prior PD-1 pts, tumor shrinkage occurred in 36% and 1-yr OS was 68%. Of 51 evaluable PD-1 resistant pts (best response CR/PR/SD to prior PD1), tumor shrinkage occurred in 28% and 1-yr OS was 73% (figure 1). In 35 evaluable PD-1 refractory pts (prior best response PD), tumor shrinkage occurred in 49% and 1-yr OS was 61%. For 38 prior PD-1 pts who received ≥10mg/kg durva, 1-yr OS was 81%.Abstract 546 Figure 1% tumor change from baseline in evaluable patients with known response to prior PD1 exposureConclusionsTebe with anti-PD-L1 and/or anti-CTLA4 had an acceptable safety profile. Tebe + durva demonstrated durable tumor shrinkage and promising 1-yr OS rates in prior-PD1 treated mCM relative to recent reports.Trial RegistrationNCT02535078Ethics ApprovalThe institutional review board or independent ethics committee at each center approved the trial. The trial was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization Good Clinical Practice guidelines
Efficacy and Safety of Nivolumab Alone or in Combination With Ipilimumab in Patients With Mucosal Melanoma: A Pooled Analysis
Selumetinib in combination with dacarbazine in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma: a phase III, multicentre, randomised trial (SUMIT)
Purpose:
Uveal melanoma is the most common primary intraocular malignancy in adults with no effective
systemic treatment option in the metastatic setting. Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) is an
oral, potent, and selective MEK1/2 inhibitor with a short half-life, which demonstrated single-agent
activity in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma in a randomized phase II trial.
Methods:
The Selumetinib (AZD6244: ARRY-142886) (Hyd-Sulfate) in Metastatic Uveal Melanoma (SUMIT)
study was a phase III, double-blind trial (ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT01974752) in which patients
with metastatic uveal melanoma and no prior systemic therapy were randomly assigned (3:1) to
selumetinib (75 mg twice daily) plus dacarbazine (1,000 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of every 21-
day cycle) or placebo plus dacarbazine. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by
blinded independent central radiologic review. Secondary end points included overall survival and
objective response rate.
Results:
A total of 129 patients were randomly assigned to receive selumetinib plus dacarbazine (n = 97) or
placebo plus dacarbazine (n = 32). In the selumetinib plus dacarbazine group, 82 patients (85%)
experienced a PFS event, compared with 24 (75%) in the placebo plus dacarbazine group (median,
2.8 v 1.8 months); the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.48 to 1.27; two-sided P = .32). The
objective response rate was 3% with selumetinib plus dacarbazine and 0% with placebo plus
dacarbazine (two-sided P = .36). At 37% maturity (n = 48 deaths), analysis of overall survival gave
a hazard ratio of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.39 to 1.46; two-sided P = .40). The most frequently reported adverse
events (selumetinib plus dacarbazine v placebo plus dacarbazine) were nausea (62% v 19%), rash
(57% v 6%), fatigue (44% v 47%), diarrhea (44% v 22%), and peripheral edema (43% v 6%).
Conclusion:
In patients with metastatic uveal melanoma, the combination of selumetinib plus dacarbazine had
a tolerable safety profile but did not significantly improve PFS compared with placebo plus dacarbazine
Peripheral blood clinical laboratory variables associated with outcomes following combination nivolumab and ipilimumab immunotherapy in melanoma
Both the combination of nivolumab + ipilimumab and single-agent anti-PD- 1 immunotherapy have demonstrated survival benefit for patients with advanced melanoma. As the combination has a high rate of serious side effects, further analyses in randomized trials of combination versus anti-PD- 1 immunotherapy are needed to understand who benefits most from the combination. Clinical laboratory values that were routinely collected in randomized studies may provide information on the relative benefit of combination immunotherapy. To prioritize which clinical laboratory factors to ultimately explore in these randomized studies, we performed a single-center, retrospective analysis of patients with advanced melanoma who received nivolumab + ipilimumab either as part of a clinical trial (n = 122) or commercial use (n = 87). Baseline routine laboratory values were correlated with overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR). Kaplan–Meier estimation and Cox regression were performed. Median OS was 44.4 months, 95% CI (32.9, Not Reached). A total of 110 patients (53%) responded (CR/PR). Significant independent variables for favorable OS included the following: high relative eosinophils, high relative basophils, low absolute monocytes, low LDH, and a low neutrophil-to- lymphocyte ratio. These newly identified factors, along with those previously reported to be associated with anti-PD- 1 monotherapy outcomes, should be studied in the randomized trials of nivolumab + ipilimumab versus anti-PD- 1 monotherapies to determine whether they help define the patients who benefit most from the combination versus anti-PD- 1 alone
Overall Survival Benefit with Tebentafusp in Metastatic Uveal Melanoma
Background: Uveal melanoma is a disease that is distinct from cutaneous melanoma, with a low tumor mutational burden and a 1-year overall survival of approximately 50% in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. Data showing a proven overall survival benefit with a systemic treatment are lacking. Tebentafusp is a bispecific protein consisting of an affinity-enhanced T-cell receptor fused to an anti-CD3 effector that can redirect T cells to target glycoprotein 100-positive cells. Methods: In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned previously untreated HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with metastatic uveal melanoma in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigator's choice of therapy with single-agent pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival. Results: A total of 378 patients were randomly assigned to either the tebentafusp group (252 patients) or the control group (126 patients). Overall survival at 1 year was 73% in the tebentafusp group and 59% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37 to 0.71; P<0.001) in the intention-to-treat population. Progression-free survival was also significantly higher in the tebentafusp group than in the control group (31% vs. 19% at 6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.94; P = 0.01). The most common treatment-related adverse events in the tebentafusp group were cytokine-mediated events (due to T-cell activation) and skin-related events (due to glycoprotein 100-positive melanocytes), including rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), and pruritus (69%). These adverse events decreased in incidence and severity after the first three or four doses and infrequently led to discontinuation of the trial treatment (2%). No treatment-related deaths were reported. Conclusions: Treatment with tebentafusp resulted in longer overall survival than the control therapy among previously untreated patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.). Copyright © 2021 Massachusetts Medical Society
Characterizing metastatic uveal melanoma patients who develop symptomatic brain metastases.
Metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) is an advanced ocular malignancy characterized by a hepatotropic pattern of spread. As the incidence of brain metastases (BM) in mUM patients has been thought to be low, routine CNS surveillance has not been recommended. Notably, no formal assessment of BM incidence in mUM has to date been published to support this clinical practice. We aimed to determine the true rate of BM in mUM and to clarify the clinical and genomic risk factors associated with BM patients through a collaborative multicenter, retrospective research effort. Data collected from 1,845 mUM patients in databases across four NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers from 2006-2021 were retrospectively analyzed to identify patients with BM. Brain imaging in most cases were performed due to onset of neurological symptoms and not for routine surveillance. An analysis of demographics, therapies, gene expression profile, tumor next generation sequencing (NGS) data, time to metastasis (brain or other), and survival in the BM cohort was completed. 116/1,845 (6.3%) mUM patients were identified with BM. The median age at time of UM diagnosis was 54 years old (range: 18-77). The median time to any metastasis was 4.2 years (range: 0-30.8). The most common initial metastatic site was the liver (75.9%). 15/116 (12.9%) BM patients presented with BM at the time of initial metastatic diagnosis. Median survival after a diagnosis of BM was 7.6 months (range: 0.4-73.9). The median number of organs involved at time of BM diagnosis was 3 (range: 1-9). DecisionDX-UM profiling was completed on 13 patients: 10-Class 2, 2-Class 1B, and 1-Class 1A. NGS and cytogenetic data were available for 34 and 21 patients, respectively. BM was identified in 6.3% of mUM cases and was associated with high disease burden and a median survival of under 8 months once diagnosed. Since most patients in this cohort were symptomatic, the incidence of asymptomatic BM remains unknown. These data suggest the use of routine brain imaging in all mUM patients at risk for developing BM for early detection
Long-Term Survival Follow-up for Tebentafusp in Previously Treated Metastatic Uveal Melanoma
BACKGROUND: Tebentafusp, a bispecific (gp100×CD3) ImmTAC, significantly improved overall survival (OS) outcomes for HLA-A*02:01+ adult patients with untreated metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) and showed promising survival in previously treated mUM with 1-year OS of 62% in the primary analysis of study IMCgp100-102. Here we report long-term outcomes from this phase 1/2 study in pretreated mUM.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously treated mUM received tebentafusp weekly intravenous at 20 µg dose 1, 30 µg dose 2 and either 54, 64, 68, or 73 µg (phase 1) or 68 µg (phase 2) dose 3+. The primary objective was overall response rate. Secondary objectives included OS and safety. OS was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methods. Association between OS and baseline covariates, on-treatment Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) response, baseline tumor biopsy and circulating-tumor DNA (ctDNA) changes were assessed.
RESULTS: 146 patients were treated with tebentafusp: 19 in phase 1 and 127 in phase 2. With a median follow-up duration of 48.5 months, the median OS was 17.4 months (95% CI, 13.1 to 22.8), and the 1-year, 2-year, 3-year and 4-year OS rates were 62%, 40%, 23% and 14%, respectively. Improved survival was associated with lower ctDNA baseline levels and greater ctDNA reductions by week 9 on-treatment, with 100% 1-year, 73% 2-year and 45% 3-year OS rates for patients with ctDNA clearance. Baseline gp100 expression was not associated with survival, despite more RECIST responses among patients with higher expression. No new safety signals were reported with long-term dosing.
CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the longest follow-up of a Tcell receptor bispecific to date and confirms the durable survival benefits achieved with tebentafusp in previously treated mUM with good tolerability long-term. A role for ctDNA reduction as an early indicator of clinical benefit was again suggested for patients treated with tebentafusp
Role of microRNAs in diabetes and its cardiovascular complications
Diabetes is the most common metabolic disorder and is recognized as one of the most important health threats of our time. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are a novel group of non-coding small RNAs that have been implicated in a variety of physiological processes, including glucose homeostasis. Recent research has suggested that miRNAs play a critical role in the pathogenesis of diabetes and its related cardiovascular complications. This review focuses on the aberrant expression of miRNAs in diabetes and examines their role in the pathogenesis of endothelial dysfunction, cardiovascular disease, and diabetic retinopathy. Furthermore, we discuss the potential role of miRNAs as blood biomarkers and examine the potential of therapeutic interventions targeting miRNAs in diabetes
Tebentafusp in combination with durvalumab and/or tremelimumab in patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma: a phase 1 study
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved outcomes in first line cutaneous melanoma. However, there is a high unmet need for patients who progress on these therapies and combination therapies are being explored to improve outcomes. Tebentafusp is a first-in-class gp100×CD3 ImmTAC bispecific that demonstrated overall survival (OS) benefit (HR 0.51) in metastatic uveal melanoma despite a modest overall response rate of 9%. This phase 1b trial evaluated the safety and initial efficacy of tebentafusp in combination with durvalumab (anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PDL1)) and/or tremelimumab (anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4) in patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma (mCM), the majority of whom progressed on prior checkpoint inhibitors.
Methods: In this open-label, multicenter, phase 1b, dose-escalation trial, HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with mCM received weekly intravenous tebentafusp with increasing monthly doses of durvalumab and/or tremelimumab starting day 15 of each cycle. The primary objective was to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or recommended phase 2 dose for each combination. Efficacy analyses were performed in all tebentafusp with durvalumab±tremelimumab treated patients with a sensitivity analysis in those who progressed on prior anti-PD(L)1 therapy.
Results: 85 patients were assigned to receive tebentafusp in combination with durvalumab (n=43), tremelimumab (n=13), or durvalumab and tremelimumab (n=29). Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of 3 prior lines of therapy, including 76 (89%) who received prior anti-PD(L)1. Maximum target doses of tebentafusp (68 mcg) alone or in combination with durvalumab (20 mg/kg) and tremelimumab (1 mg/kg) were tolerated; MTD was not formally identified for any arm. Adverse event profile was consistent with each individual therapy and there were no new safety signals nor treatment-related deaths. In the efficacy subset (n=72), the response rate was 14%, tumor shrinkage rate was 41% and 1-year OS rate was 76% (95% CI: 70% to 81%). The 1-year OS for triplet combination (79%; 95% CI: 71% to 86%) was similar to tebentafusp plus durvalumab (74%; 95% CI: 67% to 80%).
Conclusion: At maximum target doses, the safety of tebentafusp with checkpoint inhibitors was consistent with safety of each individual therapy. Tebentafusp with durvalumab demonstrated promising efficacy in heavily pretreated patients with mCM, including those who progressed on prior anti-PD(L)1.
Trial registration number: NCT02535078
- …