Literature DB >> 25369488

Ipilimumab plus sargramostim vs ipilimumab alone for treatment of metastatic melanoma: a randomized clinical trial.

F Stephen Hodi1, Sandra Lee2, David F McDermott3, Uma N Rao4, Lisa H Butterfield5, Ahmad A Tarhini5, Philip Leming6, Igor Puzanov7, Donghoon Shin2, John M Kirkwood5.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) blockade with ipilimumab prolongs survival in patients with metastatic melanoma. CTLA-4 blockade and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF)-secreting tumor vaccine combinations demonstrate therapeutic synergy in preclinical models. A key unanswered question is whether systemic GM-CSF (sargramostim) enhances CTLA-4 blockade.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of ipilimumab plus sargramostim vs ipilimumab alone on overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic melanoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) conducted a US-based phase 2 randomized clinical trial from December 28, 2010, until July 28, 2011, of patients (N = 245) with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, at least 1 prior therapy, no central nervous system metastases, and ECOG performance status of 0 or 1.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, intravenously on day 1 plus sargramostim, 250 μg subcutaneously, on days 1 to 14 of a 21-day cycle (n = 123) vs ipilimumab alone (n = 122). Ipilimumab treatment included induction for 4 cycles followed by maintenance every fourth cycle. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary end point: comparison of length of OS. Secondary end point: progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, safety, and tolerability.
RESULTS: Median follow-up was 13.3 months (range, 0.03-19.9). Median OS as of December 2012 for ipilimumab plus sargramostim was 17.5 months (95% CI, 14.9-not reached) vs 12.7 months (95% CI, 10.0-not reached) for ipilimumab. The 1-year survival rate for ipilimumab plus sargramostim was 68.9% (95% CI, 60.6%-85.5%) compared to 52.9% (95% CI, 43.6%-62.2%) for ipilimumab alone (stratified log-rank 1-sided P = .01; mortality hazard ratio 0.64 [1-sided 90% repeated CI, not applicable-0.90]). A planned interim analysis was conducted at 69.8% of expected events (104 observed with 149 expected deaths). Planned interim analysis using the O'Brien-Fleming boundary was crossed for improvement in OS. There was no difference in PFS. Median PFS for ipilimumab plus sargramostim was 3.1 months (95% CI, 2.9-4.6) vs 3.1 months (95% CI, 2.9-4.0) for ipilimumab alone. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurred in 44.9% (95% CI; 35.8%-54.4%) of patients in the ipilimumab plus sargramostim group vs 58.3% (95% CI, 49.0%-67.2%) of patients in the ipilimumab-alone group (2-sided P = .04). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, treatment with ipilimumab plus sargramostim vs ipilimumab alone resulted in longer OS and lower toxicity, but no difference in PFS. These findings require confirmation in larger studies with longer follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01134614.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25369488      PMCID: PMC4336189          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.13943

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  36 in total

Review 1.  Opposite immune functions of GM-CSF administered as vaccine adjuvant in cancer patients.

Authors:  G Parmiani; C Castelli; L Pilla; M Santinami; M P Colombo; L Rivoltini
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2006-11-20       Impact factor: 32.976

2.  CTLA4 blockade and GM-CSF combination immunotherapy alters the intratumor balance of effector and regulatory T cells.

Authors:  Sergio A Quezada; Karl S Peggs; Michael A Curran; James P Allison
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2006-06-15       Impact factor: 14.808

Review 3.  Immunomodulatory effects of human recombinant granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (rhuGM-CSF): evidence of antitumour activity.

Authors:  Jason J Everly; Sagar Lonial
Journal:  Expert Opin Biol Ther       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 4.388

4.  Combination immunotherapy of B16 melanoma using anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and granulocyte/macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF)-producing vaccines induces rejection of subcutaneous and metastatic tumors accompanied by autoimmune depigmentation.

Authors:  A van Elsas; A A Hurwitz; J P Allison
Journal:  J Exp Med       Date:  1999-08-02       Impact factor: 14.307

5.  Therapy of advanced prostate cancer with granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor.

Authors:  E J Small; D M Reese; B Um; S Whisenant; S C Dixon; W D Figg
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor autoantibodies in murine ileitis and progressive ileal Crohn's disease.

Authors:  Xiaonan Han; Kanji Uchida; Ingrid Jurickova; Diana Koch; Tara Willson; Charles Samson; Erin Bonkowski; Anna Trauernicht; Mi-Ok Kim; Gitit Tomer; Marla Dubinsky; Scott Plevy; Subra Kugathsan; Bruce C Trapnell; Lee A Denson
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2008-12-24       Impact factor: 22.682

7.  Involvement of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor in pulmonary homeostasis.

Authors:  G Dranoff; A D Crawford; M Sadelain; B Ream; A Rashid; R T Bronson; G R Dickersin; C J Bachurski; E L Mark; J A Whitsett
Journal:  Science       Date:  1994-04-29       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Role of tumor-derived cytokines on the immune system of mice bearing a mammary adenocarcinoma. II. Down-regulation of macrophage-mediated cytotoxicity by tumor-derived granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor.

Authors:  E M Sotomayor; Y X Fu; M Lopez-Cepero; L Herbert; J J Jimenez; C Albarracin; D M Lopez
Journal:  J Immunol       Date:  1991-10-15       Impact factor: 5.422

9.  Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor activates macrophages derived from bone marrow cultures to synthesis of MHC class II molecules and to augmented antigen presentation function.

Authors:  H G Fischer; S Frosch; K Reske; A B Reske-Kunz
Journal:  J Immunol       Date:  1988-12-01       Impact factor: 5.422

10.  Generation of large numbers of dendritic cells from mouse bone marrow cultures supplemented with granulocyte/macrophage colony-stimulating factor.

Authors:  K Inaba; M Inaba; N Romani; H Aya; M Deguchi; S Ikehara; S Muramatsu; R M Steinman
Journal:  J Exp Med       Date:  1992-12-01       Impact factor: 14.307

View more
  131 in total

1.  [Abscopal responses of local radiotherapy combined with systemic immunotherapy in patients with metastatic solid tumors].

Authors:  Cédric Panje; Matthias Guckenberger
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  A phase II study of ipilimumab plus temozolomide in patients with metastatic melanoma.

Authors:  Sapna P Patel; Dae Won Kim; Roland L Bassett; Suzanne Cain; Edwina Washington; Wen-Jen Hwu; Kevin B Kim; Nicholas E Papadopoulos; Jade Homsi; Patrick Hwu; Agop Y Bedikian
Journal:  Cancer Immunol Immunother       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 6.968

3.  Soluble PD-L1 as a Biomarker in Malignant Melanoma Treated with Checkpoint Blockade.

Authors:  Jun Zhou; Kathleen M Mahoney; Anita Giobbie-Hurder; Fengmin Zhao; Sandra Lee; Xiaoyun Liao; Scott Rodig; Jingjing Li; Xinqi Wu; Lisa H Butterfield; Matthias Piesche; Michael P Manos; Lauren M Eastman; Glenn Dranoff; Gordon J Freeman; F Stephen Hodi
Journal:  Cancer Immunol Res       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 11.151

Review 4.  Immunotherapy and targeted therapies in older patients with advanced melanoma; Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology review paper.

Authors:  Esther Bastiaannet; Nicolò Battisti; Kah Poh Loh; Nienke de Glas; Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis; Capucine Baldini; Ellen Kapiteijn; Stuart Lichtman
Journal:  J Geriatr Oncol       Date:  2018-07-17       Impact factor: 3.599

Review 5.  Immune checkpoint inhibitors in melanoma.

Authors:  Adam J Cooper; Matteo S Carlino; Richard F Kefford
Journal:  Melanoma Manag       Date:  2015-08-10

Review 6.  Renal complications of immune checkpoint blockade.

Authors:  Naoka Murakami; Shveta Motwani; Leonardo V Riella
Journal:  Curr Probl Cancer       Date:  2016-12-19       Impact factor: 3.187

Review 7.  Immunotherapy and hypophysitis: clinical presentation, treatment, and biologic insights.

Authors:  Alexander Faje
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 4.107

Review 8.  Evaluation of classical clinical endpoints as surrogates for overall survival in patients treated with immune checkpoint blockers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Howard L Kaufman; Lawrence H Schwartz; William N William; Mario Sznol; Kyle Fahrbach; Yingxin Xu; Eric Masson; Andrea Vergara-Silva
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 9.  Toxicities of Immunotherapy for the Practitioner.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Weber; James C Yang; Michael B Atkins; Mary L Disis
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 10.  Molecular regulation of dendritic cell development and function in homeostasis, inflammation, and cancer.

Authors:  Taylor T Chrisikos; Yifan Zhou; Natalie Slone; Rachel Babcock; Stephanie S Watowich; Haiyan S Li
Journal:  Mol Immunol       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 4.407

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.