Literature DB >> 18281670

Phase III comparison of vitespen, an autologous tumor-derived heat shock protein gp96 peptide complex vaccine, with physician's choice of treatment for stage IV melanoma: the C-100-21 Study Group.

Alessandro Testori1, Jon Richards, Eric Whitman, G Bruce Mann, Jose Lutzky, Luis Camacho, Giorgio Parmiani, Giulio Tosti, John M Kirkwood, Axel Hoos, Lianng Yuh, Renu Gupta, Pramod K Srivastava.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the antitumor activity of vitespen (autologous, tumor- derived heat shock protein gp96 peptide complexes) by determining whether patients with stage IV melanoma treated with vitespen experienced longer overall survival than patients treated with physician's choice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (N = 322) were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive vitespen or physician's choice (PC) of a treatment containing one or more of the following: dacarbazine, temozolomide, interleukin-2, or complete tumor resection. This open-label trial was conducted at 71 centers worldwide. Patients were monitored for safety and overall survival.
RESULTS: Therapy with vitespen is devoid of significant toxicity. Patients randomly assigned to the vitespen arm received variable number of injections (range, 0 to 87; median, 6) in part because of the autologous nature of vitespen therapy. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that overall survival in the vitespen arm is statistically indistinguishable from that in the PC arm. Exploratory landmark analyses show that patients in the M1a and M1b substages receiving a larger number of vitespen immunizations survived longer than those receiving fewer such treatments. Such difference was not detected for substage M1c patients.
CONCLUSION: These results are consistent with the immunologic mechanism of action of vitespen, indicating delayed onset of clinical activity after exposure to the vaccine. The results suggest patients with M1a and M1b disease who are able to receive 10 or more doses of vitespen as the candidate population for a confirmatory study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18281670     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.11.9941

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  92 in total

Review 1.  Carbohydrate-based cancer vaccines: target cancer with sugar bullets.

Authors:  Chang-Cheng Liu; Xin-Shan Ye
Journal:  Glycoconj J       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 2.916

Review 2.  Immunotherapy for primary brain tumors: no longer a matter of privilege.

Authors:  Peter E Fecci; Amy B Heimberger; John H Sampson
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2014-11-15       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 3.  Therapeutic cancer vaccines: are we there yet?

Authors:  Christopher A Klebanoff; Nicolas Acquavella; Zhiya Yu; Nicholas P Restifo
Journal:  Immunol Rev       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 12.988

Review 4.  Beyond cancer vaccines: a reason for future optimism with immunomodulatory therapy.

Authors:  Michael Postow; Margaret K Callahan; Jedd D Wolchok
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2011 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.360

5.  The cancer vaccine roller coaster.

Authors:  Bruce Goldman; Laura DeFrancesco
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 54.908

Review 6.  "It is the antigen(s), stupid" and other lessons from over a decade of vaccitherapy of human cancer.

Authors:  Matthew R Buckwalter; Pramod K Srivastava
Journal:  Semin Immunol       Date:  2008-08-20       Impact factor: 11.130

Review 7.  Translating tumor antigens into cancer vaccines.

Authors:  Luigi Buonaguro; Annacarmen Petrizzo; Maria Lina Tornesello; Franco M Buonaguro
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2010-11-03

8.  Identification of the cellular sentinels for native immunogenic heat shock proteins in vivo.

Authors:  Michelle Nicole Messmer; Joshua Pasmowitz; Laura Elizabeth Kropp; Simon C Watkins; Robert Julian Binder
Journal:  J Immunol       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 5.422

Review 9.  Antigen-specific vaccines for cancer treatment.

Authors:  Maria Tagliamonte; Annacarmen Petrizzo; Maria Lina Tornesello; Franco M Buonaguro; Luigi Buonaguro
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.452

10.  Clinical evaluation of therapeutic cancer vaccines.

Authors:  Chizuru Ogi; Atsushi Aruga
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2013-03-01       Impact factor: 3.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.