Efficacy of vemurafenib in patients (pts) with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with BRAFV600 mutation.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9074-9074 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vivek Subbiah ◽  
Radj Gervais ◽  
Gregory J. Riely ◽  
Antoine Hollebecque ◽  
Jean-Yves Blay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Braf Mutations ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Braf Inhibition ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Prior Systemic Therapy ◽  
Grade 3

9074 Background: BRAFV600 mutations occur in 1–2% of pts with NSCLC. We previously reported the efficacy of vemurafenib, a selective BRAFV600 inhibitor, in BRAF mutation-positive non-melanoma tumors (VE-BASKET study). We now present final data for the expanded NSCLC cohort. Methods: This open-label, histology-independent, phase 2 study included 6 prespecified cohorts (including NSCLC) plus one ‘all-others’ cohort. Pts received vemurafenib (960 mg bid) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (RECIST v1.1). Secondary endpoints included best overall response rate, duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Because the pre-specified clinical benefit endpoint was met in the initial NSCLC cohort, the cohort was expanded. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01524978. Results: Database lock was 12 Jan 2017. Of 208 pts enrolled at 25 centers worldwide, 62 pts had NSCLC: median age 65 years; 56% male; 13% had no prior systemic therapy; 50% had ≥2 prior therapies. Responses were seen in previously treated and untreated pts (Table). The most common all-grade adverse event (AE) was nausea (40%); grade 3–5 AEs included keratoacanthoma (15%) and squamous cell carcinoma of the skin (15%). Six pts discontinued vemurafenib due to AEs; two had non-treatment-related fatal AEs. Conclusions: Vemurafenib showed evidence of encouraging efficacy in pts with NSCLC with BRAFV600 mutation, with prolonged PFS in previously untreated pts; median OS was not estimable due to ongoing responses. The safety profile of vemurafenib was similar to that seen in melanoma studies. Our results suggest a role for BRAF inhibition in NSCLC with BRAF mutations. Clinical trial information: NCT01524978. [Table: see text]

Endometriumkarzinom: Kombination aus Lenvatinib und Pembrolizumab zeigt Wirksamkeit unabhängig vom Mikrosatellitenstatus

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Sarah Matz
Keyword(s):  
Endometrial Carcinoma ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Efficacy Analysis ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Previously Treated Patients ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Prior Systemic Therapy ◽  
Grade 3

<b>Purpose:</b> Patients with advanced endometrial carcinoma have limited treatment options. We report final primary efficacy analysis results for a patient cohort with advanced endometrial carcinoma receiving lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in an ongoing phase Ib/II study of selected solid tumors. <b>Methods:</b> Patients took lenvatinib 20 mg once daily orally plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks, in 3-week cycles. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) at 24 weeks (ORRWk24); secondary efficacy end points included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Tumor assessments were evaluated by investigators per immune-related RECIST. <b>Results:</b> At data cutoff, 108 patients with previously treated endometrial carcinoma were enrolled, with a median follow-up of 18.7 months. The ORRWk24 was 38.0% (95% CI, 28.8% to 47.8%). Among subgroups, the ORRWk24 (95% CI) was 63.6% (30.8% to 89.1%) in patients with microsatellite instability (MSI)-high tumors (n = 11) and 36.2% (26.5% to 46.7%) in patients with microsatellite-stable tumors (n = 94). For previously treated patients, regardless of tumor MSI status, the median DOR was 21.2 months (95% CI, 7.6 months to not estimable), median PFS was 7.4 months (95% CI, 5.3 to 8.7 months), and median OS was 16.7 months (15.0 months to not estimable). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 83/124 (66.9%) patients. <b>Conclusion:</b> Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed promising antitumor activity in patients with advanced endometrial carcinoma who have experienced disease progression after prior systemic therapy, regardless of tumor MSI status. The combination therapy had a manageable toxicity profile. <b>Trial registration:</b> ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02501096.

SELECT: Randomized phase III study of docetaxel (D) or pemetrexed (P) with or without cetuximab (C) in recurrent or progressive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after platinum-based therapy.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7502-7502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward S. Kim ◽  
Marcus A. Neubauer ◽  
Allen Lee Cohn ◽  
Lee Steven Schwartzberg ◽  
Lawrence E. Garbo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Staining Intensity ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

7502 Background: SELECT investigated whether the addition of C to standard chemotherapy improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with recurrent or progressive NSCLC after failure of platinum-based therapy. Methods: SELECT was a multicenter, open label, randomized phase III trial. Per investigator choice, pts received either P (500 mg/m2) or D (75 mg/m2) on day 1 and then were randomized within each group to chemotherapy plus C (400/250 mg/m2) (initial/weekly) or chemotherapy alone. Therapy was given for up to six 3-week cycles; pts randomized to C continued weekly monotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was PFS for PC vs. P as determined by an Independent Review Committee (IRC). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) by IRC, and safety. Preplanned subgroup analyses for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) staining intensity by immunohistochemistry and histology were performed. Results for PC vs. P only are presented. Results: Between Jan 2005 and Feb 2010, 938 total pts were randomized. Baseline demographics were comparable between PC (n=301) and P (n=304): median age 64 years; male 60%; Caucasian 88%; KPS 80-100/60-70 84%/16%; squamous/non-squamous 24%/76%. Median PFS (months) PC: 2.89 and P: 2.76 (hazard ratio [HR] =1.03 [95% confidence interval (CI)=0.87-1.21]; p=0.76). Median OS (months) PC: 6.93 and P: 7.79 (HR=1.01 [95% CI=0.86-1.20]; p=0.86). ORR PC: 6.6% and P: 4.3% (odds ratio =1.59 [95% CI=0.78-3.26]; p=0.20). Median DOR (months) PC: 4.17 and P: 6.93 (HR=1.58 [95% CI=0.74-3.36]; p=0.24). There were no statistical differences in efficacy based on histology or EGFR staining intensity. More drug-related AEs/SAEs were observed in the PC arm, with differences mainly attributable to skin toxicities, GI (diarrhea/stomatitis), and hypomagnesemia. Conclusions: The addition of C to P did not improve efficacy in this pt population. Further biomarker analyses are planned. The safety profiles for C and P were consistent with existing data and no new safety signals were observed.

Updated efficacy and tolerability of durvalumab in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4525-4525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah M. Hahn ◽  
Thomas Powles ◽  
Christophe Massard ◽  
Hendrik-Tobias Arkenau ◽  
Terence W. Friedlander ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase 1 ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Anticancer Therapy ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3

4525 Background: Anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy shows promising clinical activity in UC. We report a planned update of the safety and efficacy of durvalumab in patients (pts) with locally advanced/metastatic UC from a multicenter, phase 1/2 open-label study. Methods: Pts received durvalumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to 12 months (mo) or until unacceptable toxicity, progression, or starting another anticancer therapy. Primary endpoints were safety and confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review (RECIST v1.1). Duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were key secondary endpoints. Tumor PD-L1 expression was assessed by Ventana SP263 assay (PD-L1 high = ≥25% PD-L1 expression on tumor or immune cells). Results: As of Oct 24, 2016 (data cutoff [DCO]), 191 pts had received treatment. Median follow-up was 5.78 mo (range, 0.4–25.9). All pts had Stage 4 disease and 99.5% had prior anticancer therapy (95.3% post-platinum). As of DCO, ORR was 17.8% (34/191), including 7 CRs, with responses observed regardless of PD-L1 status (Table). Responses occurred early (median time to response, 1.41 mo) and were durable (median DoR not reached [NR]). Median PFS and OS were 1.5 mo (95% CI, 1.4, 1.9) and 18.2 mo (95% CI, 8.1, not estimable [NE]), respectively; the 1-year OS rate was 55.0% (95% CI, 43.9%, 64.7%). Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 6.8% of pts; grade 3/4 immune-mediated (im)AEs occurred in 4 pts; 2 pts discontinued due to imAEs (acute kidney injury and autoimmune hepatitis). Conclusions: Durvalumab 10 mg/kg Q2W shows favorable clinical activity and an excellent safety profile in locally advanced/metastatic UC pts. Table. Antitumor activity in UC pts, including second-line or greater (≥2L) post-platinum pts Clinical trial information: NCT01693562. [Table: see text]

Randomized phase II trial of sorafenib, capecitabine and oxaliplatin (SECOX) versus single agent sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 365-365
Author(s):  
Thomas Cheung Yau ◽  
Vikki Tang ◽  
Roland Ching-Yu Leung ◽  
Gin Wai Kwok ◽  
Ann-Shing Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Agent ◽  
Hepatocellular Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Prior Systemic Therapy ◽  
Grade 3

365 Background: We aimed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of SECOX regimen with sorafenib alone as first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular cancer (HCC) in a multicenter, open-label and randomized setting. Methods: Patients not suitable for surgery or various loco-regional therapies and no prior systemic therapy for advanced HCC were recruited in 3 centres. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either SECOX (sorafenib 400 mg BD continuously, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 on D1, and capecitabine 1700 mg/m2 on D1-7 q2w) or sorafenib alone continuously in 1:1 ratio. Primary endpoint was time-to-progression (TTP). Secondary endpoints were tolerability, overall tumor response rate, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Forty-six patients were randomized and treated, of whom 22 were in the SECOX arm. Median age was 64 years and majority of the patients were male (72%). 40 patients (87%) were hepatitis B carrier, and 42 patients (91%) had Child-Pugh A liver function. Thirty patients (65%) had received prior non-systemic treatment for HCC. Median duration of follow-up was 7.8 months (mos) (range 0.3-25.8). At the time of analysis,one patient in the SECOX arm is still receiving treatment. Median TTP was 3.2 mos (95% CI 1.7-5.8) for SECOX vs 2.8 mos (95% CI 1.8-4.0) for sorafenib. The hazard ratio (HR) for TTP was 0.91 (95% CI 0.5-1.7; p=0.77; predetermined futility boundary HR ≥ 0.86). Median OS was 7.1 mos (95% CI 3.0-15.3) for SECOX vs 12.5 mos (95% CI 7.2-15.4) for sorafenib (p=0.29). Median PFS was 3.1 mos (95% CI 1.6-5.8) for SECOX vs 2.7 mos (95% CI 1.8-4.0) for sorafenib. 2 patients (9%) and no patients achieved partial response in the SECOX and sorafenib arms, respectively. The clinical benefit rate (CR+PR+SD) was 36% for the SECOX arm and 21% for the sorafenib arm (p=0.50). Incidence of treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) was common in both SECOX and sorafenib arms (64% and 71% respectively, p=0.75). The most common grade 3-4 trAE was ALP increase (14%) for SECOX and hand-foot skin reaction (25%) for sorafenib. Conclusions: The addition of capecitabine and oxaliplatin to sorafenib did not result in significant improvement in TTP. Clinical trial information: NCT02716766.

scholarly journals Pimasertib Versus Dacarbazine in Patients With Unresectable NRAS-Mutated Cutaneous Melanoma: Phase II, Randomized, Controlled Trial with Crossover

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 1727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Celeste Lebbé ◽  
Caroline Dutriaux ◽  
Thierry Lesimple ◽  
Willem Kruit ◽  
Joseph Kerger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Cutaneous Melanoma ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Unresectable Stage ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade 3

This study investigated the efficacy and safety of pimasertib (MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor) versus dacarbazine (DTIC) in patients with untreated NRAS-mutated melanoma. Phase II, multicenter, open-label trial. Patients with unresectable, stage IIIc/IVM1 NRAS-mutated cutaneous melanoma were randomized 2:1 to pimasertib (60 mg; oral twice-daily) or DTIC (1000 mg/m2; intravenously) on Day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Patients progressing on DTIC could crossover to pimasertib. Primary endpoint: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints: overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life (QoL), and safety. Overall, 194 patients were randomized (pimasertib n = 130, DTIC n = 64), and 191 received treatment (pimasertib n = 130, DTIC n = 61). PFS was significantly improved with pimasertib versus DTIC (median 13 versus 7 weeks, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42–0.83; p = 0.0022). ORR was improved with pimasertib (odds ratio 2.24, 95% CI 1.00–4.98; p = 0.0453). OS was similar between treatments (median 9 versus 11 months, respectively; HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61–1.30); 64% of patients receiving DTIC crossed over to pimasertib. Serious adverse events (AEs) were more frequent for pimasertib (57%) than DTIC (20%). The most common treatment-emergent AEs were diarrhea (82%) and blood creatine phosphokinase (CPK) increase (68%) for pimasertib, and nausea (41%) and fatigue (38%) for DTIC. Most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were CPK increase (34%) for pimasertib and neutropenia (15%) for DTIC. Mean QoL scores (baseline and last assessment) were similar between treatments. Pimasertib has activity in NRAS-mutated cutaneous melanoma and a safety profile consistent with known toxicities of MEK inhibitors. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01693068.

Olaparib plus paclitaxel plus carboplatin (P/C) followed by olaparib maintenance treatment in patients (pts) with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer (PSR SOC): A randomized, open-label phase II study.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5001-5001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amit M. Oza ◽  
David Cibula ◽  
Ana Oaknin ◽  
Christopher John Poole ◽  
Ron H.J. Mathijssen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Parp Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Open Label Phase ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade 3

5001 Background: The oral PARP inhibitor olaparib has shown antitumor activity in pts with SOC. Our multicenter study compared the efficacy of (Arm A) olaparib capsules plus P/C for 6 cycles then maintenance olaparib monotherapy vs (Arm B) P/C alone for 6 cycles and no further therapy in pts with PSR SOC (NCT01081951). Methods: Pts received 6 x 21-day(d) cycles of olaparib (200 mg bid, d1–10/21) + P (175 mg/m2 iv, d1) + C (AUC4 iv, d1), then olaparib monotherapy as maintenance (400 mg bid, continuous) (Arm A), or 6 x 21d cycles of P (175 mg/m2 iv, d1) + C (AUC6 iv, d1) then no further therapy (Arm B), until progression. Randomization (1:1) was stratified by number of platinum treatments and platinum-free interval. Primary endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS) by central review (RECIST 1.1). Secondary endpoints: overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), safety. Archival tissue was collected where available for analysis of biomarker correlation. Results: Of 162 pts randomized (n=81 per arm), 156 received treatment (Arm A, n=81; Arm B, n=75) and 121 began the maintenance/no further therapy phase (Arm A, n=66; Arm B, n=55). Olaparib + P/C (AUC4) followed by maintenance olaparib showed a significant improvement in PFS vs P/C (AUC6) alone (HR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.34, 0.77; P=0.0012; median = 12.2 vs 9.6 months). OS data are immature (total events: 14%). ORR was similar for Arm A and Arm B (64 vs 58%). Most common AEs during the combination phase were alopecia (74 vs 59%), nausea (69 vs 57%) and fatigue (64 vs 57%) for Arm A vs Arm B, respectively. Pts with grade ≥3 AEs (65 vs 57%), serious AEs (SAEs: 15 vs 21%) and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (19 vs 16%) were similar for Arm A vs Arm B. Most common AEs during maintenance/no further therapy were nausea (50 vs 6%) and vomiting (29 vs 7%). 29 vs 16% of pts had grade ≥3 AEs, 9 vs 7% had SAEs and 8% vs N/A discontinued due to AEs in the olaparib vs no treatment arms, respectively. There were no fatal AEs. Conclusions: In pts with PSR SOC, olaparib plus P/C (AUC4) followed by olaparib 400 mg bid monotherapy maintenance treatment resulted in a significant improvement in PFS vs P/C (AUC6) alone.

The anti-disialoganglioside (GD2) antibody dinutuximab (D) for second-line treatment (2LT) of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory small cell lung cancer (RR SCLC): Results from part II of the open-label, randomized, phase II/III distinct study.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9017-9017
Author(s):  
Martin Edelman ◽  
Mikhail Dvorkin ◽  
Konstantin K. Laktionov ◽  
Alejandro Navarro ◽  
Oscar Juan-Vidal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cox Regression ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Initial Therapy ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Protein Biomarkers ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3

9017 Background: Although SCLC is highly responsive to initial therapy, most pts relapse < 1 y. Topotecan (T) and irinotecan (I) are used in 2LT of SCLC; however, treatment response is low: ≤10-25% and median survival is ~4-5 months. Preclinical studies support GD2 as an SCLC target. This study evaluated the combination of D+I vs. I alone or T alone in 2LT of SCLC pts. Methods: Pts with RR SCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0-1, were randomized 2:2:1 to receive D 16-17.5 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) plus I 350 mg/m2 IV (Day 1 q21d), I 350 mg/m2 IV (Day 1 q21d), or T 1.5 mg/m2 IV (Days 1-5 q21d). Randomization was stratified by duration of response to prior platinum therapy. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) in pts treated with D+I vs. I alone and was analyzed using stratified log-rank test and COX regression. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and clinical benefit rate, ORR + stable disease (CBR). Safety was assessed. Results: 471 pts were randomized to D+I (n = 187), I (n = 190), or T (n = 94). Baseline characteristics were balanced (24.2% women; mean ± SD age 61.6 ± 8.7 y). Median OS was similar in pts receiving D+I (6.9 [3.5,10.9] months) vs. I alone (7 [3.6,13.1] months) (HR [95% CI]: 1.12 [0.9,1.4]; P = 0.3132) or T alone (7.4 [3.8,12.8] months) (HR [95% CI]: 1.05 [0.8,1.37]; P = 0.7233). Median PFS was similar in pts receiving D+I (3.5 [1.5,6.2] months) vs. I (3 [1.4,5.7] months) or T (3.4 [1.6, 6.1] months) alone. ORR was similar in pts receiving D+I (17.1%) vs. I (18.9%) or T (20.1%) alone. CBR was similar in pts receiving D+I (67.4%) vs. I (58.9%) or T (68.1%) alone. Grade 3 or higher adverse events were experienced by 77% D+I, 69.5% I, and 86.4% T pts. Conclusions: Treatment with D+I was not superior to established 2LT for RR SCLC. Exploratory analyses are ongoing to evaluate GD2 expression in circulating tumor cells, select protein biomarkers, and any correlative impact on observed response. Clinical trial information: NCT03098030.

scholarly journals Camrelizumab Plus Apatinib in Patients With Advanced Cervical Cancer (CLAP): A Multicenter, Open-Label, Single-Arm, Phase II Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (34) ◽  
pp. 4095-4106
Author(s):  
Chunyan Lan ◽  
Jingxian Shen ◽  
Yin Wang ◽  
Jundong Li ◽  
Zhimin Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Cervical Cancer ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3

PURPOSE Camrelizumab is an antibody against programmed death protein 1. We assessed the activity and safety of camrelizumab plus apatinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2, in patients with advanced cervical cancer. METHODS This multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase II study enrolled patients with advanced cervical cancer who progressed after at least one line of systemic therapy. Patients received camrelizumab 200 mg every 2 weeks and apatinib 250 mg once per day. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) assessed by investigators per RECIST version 1.1. Key secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response, and safety. RESULTS Forty-five patients were enrolled and received treatment. Median age was 51.0 years (range, 33-67 years), and 57.8% of patients had previously received two or more lines of chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic disease. Ten patients (22.2%) had received bevacizumab. Median follow-up was 11.3 months (range, 1.0-15.5 months). ORR was 55.6% (95% CI, 40.0% to 70.4%), with two complete and 23 partial responses. Median PFS was 8.8 months (95% CI, 5.6 months to not estimable). Median duration of response and median OS were not reached. Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71.1% of patients, and the most common AEs were hypertension (24.4%), anemia (20.0%), and fatigue (15.6%). The most common potential immune-related AEs included grade 1-2 hypothyroidism (22.2%) and reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation (8.9%). CONCLUSION Camrelizumab plus apatinib had promising antitumor activity and manageable toxicities in patients with advanced cervical cancer. Larger randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate our findings.

scholarly journals Talimogene Laherparepvec in Combination With Ipilimumab in Previously Untreated, Unresectable Stage IIIB-IV Melanoma

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (22) ◽  
pp. 2619-2626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Puzanov ◽  
Mohammed M. Milhem ◽  
David Minor ◽  
Omid Hamid ◽  
Ai Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Talimogene Laherparepvec ◽  
Duration Of Treatment ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Durable Response ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose Combining immunotherapeutic agents with different mechanisms of action may enhance efficacy. We describe the safety and efficacy of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC; an oncolytic virus) in combination with ipilimumab (a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen 4 checkpoint inhibitor) in patients with advanced melanoma. Methods In this open-label, multicenter, phase Ib trial of T-VEC in combination with ipilimumab, T-VEC was administered intratumorally in week 1 (106 plaque-forming units/mL), then in week 4 and every 2 weeks thereafter (108 plaque-forming units/mL). Ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) was administered intravenously every 3 weeks for four infusions, beginning in week 6. The primary end point was incidence of dose-limiting toxicities. Secondary end points were objective response rate by immune-related response criteria and safety. Results Median duration of treatment with T-VEC was 13.3 weeks (range, 2.0 to 95.4 weeks). Median follow-up time for survival analysis was 20.0 months (1.0 to 25.4 months). Nineteen patients were included in the safety analysis. No dose-limiting toxicities occurred, and no new safety signals were detected. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were seen in 26.3% of patients; 15.8% had AEs attributed to T-VEC, and 21.1% had AEs attributed to ipilimumab. The objective response rate was 50%, and 44% of patients had a durable response lasting ≥ 6 months. Eighteen-month progression-free survival was 50%; 18-month overall survival was 67%. Conclusion T-VEC with ipilimumab had a tolerable safety profile, and the combination appeared to have greater efficacy than either T-VEC or ipilimumab monotherapy.

First-line pembrolizumab (pembro) monotherapy in advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC): Updated results for KEYNOTE-427 cohort A.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4570-4570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott S. Tykodi ◽  
Frede Donskov ◽  
Jae-Lyun Lee ◽  
Cezary Szczylik ◽  
Jahangeer Malik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clear Cell ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Prior Systemic Therapy

4570 Background: KEYNOTE-427 (NCT02853344) is an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study to evaluate efficacy and safety of first-line single-agent pembro, a programmed death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor, in patients (pts) with ccRCC (cohort A) and non–clear cell RCC (cohort B). Updated follow up from cohort A are presented. Methods: Pts with histologically confirmed ccRCC, measurable per RECIST v1.1, and no prior systemic therapy were eligible. Pts received pembro 200 mg IV Q3W for 2 y or until confirmed progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or pt decision to withdraw. Primary end point was objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST v1.1 blinded independent central review). Additional end points included duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: 110 pts enrolled; median (range) follow-up was 18.0 (2.5-22.7) mo. Median age (range) was 64 (29-87); 38.2%, 47.3%, and 14.5% had favorable, intermediate, and poor IMDC risk, respectively; 47.3% were PD-L1 positive. Confirmed ORR was 36.4% with 3 (2.7%) CRs and 37 (33.6%) PRs. Median DOR was not reached. Median PFS was 7.1 mo (95% CI, 5.6-11.0) and median OS was not reached. Results by IMDC category are outlined in the table. By PD-L1 status, confirmed ORR was 44.2% and 29.3% for positive and negative, respectively. By sarcomatoid differentiation (n=11), confirmed ORR was 63.6%. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 80.9%, with pruritus (28.2%) and fatigue (28.2%) most commonly reported. One pt died of treatment-related pneumonitis. Conclusions: With a median 18-months’ follow up, first-line pembro monotherapy continued to show antitumor activity in pts with ccRCC. Meaningful responses were observed in pts with intermediate/poor IMDC risk, PD-L1 positive and sarcomatoid differentiated tumors. Safety profile was comparable to previously reported. Clinical trial information: NCT02853344. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document