| Literature DB >> 26541511 |
Lisa Zimmer1, Thomas K Eigentler2, Felix Kiecker3, Jan Simon4, Jochen Utikal5,6, Peter Mohr7, Carola Berking8, Eckhart Kämpgen9, Edgar Dippel10, Rudolf Stadler11, Axel Hauschild12, Michael Fluck13, Patrick Terheyden14, Rainer Rompel15, Carmen Loquai16, Zeinab Assi17, Claus Garbe18, Dirk Schadendorf19.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab is an approved immunotherapy that has shown an overall survival benefit in patients with cutaneous metastatic melanoma in two phase III trials. As results of registrational trials might not answer all questions regarding safety and efficacy of ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma seen in daily clinical practice, the Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group conducted a phase II study to assess the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in patients with different subtypes of metastatic melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We undertook a multicenter phase II study in melanoma patients irrespective of location of the primary melanoma. Here we present data on patients with pretreated metastatic cutaneous, mucosal and occult melanoma who received up to four cycles of ipilimumab administered at a dose of 3 mg/kg in 3 week intervals. Tumor assessments were conducted at baseline, weeks 12, 24, 36 and 48 according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. Adverse events (AEs), including immune-related AEs were graded according to National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) v.4.0. Primary endpoint was the OS rate at 12 months.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26541511 PMCID: PMC4635983 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-015-0716-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Baseline patient characteristics (n = 103 patients totally)
| Patient characteristics | Cutaneous melanoma | Mucosal melanoma | Melanoma of unknown primary | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | N | % | |
|
| 83 | 100 | 7 | 100 | 13 | 100 |
|
| ||||||
| Median (range) | 63 | (29–85) | 63 | (33–37) | 62 | (40–77) |
|
| ||||||
| Male | 53 | 64 | 2 | 29 | 11 | 29 |
| Female | 30 | 36 | 5 | 71 | 2 | 71 |
|
| ||||||
| 0 | 51 | 61 | 2 | 29 | 12 | 92 |
| 1 | 23 | 28 | 5 | 71 | 1 | 8 |
| 2 | 9 | 11 | – | – | ||
|
| ||||||
| Not mutated | 29 | 35 | 3 | 43 | 5 | 39 |
| Mutated | 17 | 21 | – | 6 | 46 | |
| Not known | 37 | 45 | 4 | 57 | 2 | 15 |
|
| ||||||
| M1a | 6 | 7 | – | 3 | 23 | |
| M1b | 15 | 18 | 2 | 29 | 1 | 8 |
| M1c | 62 | 75 | 5 | 71 | 9 | 69 |
|
| ||||||
| <2 ULN | 67 | 81 | 5 | 71 | 11 | 85 |
| ≥2 ULN | 16 | 19 | 2 | 29 | 2 | 15 |
|
| ||||||
| No | 57 | 69 | 5 | 71 | 10 | 77 |
| Yes | 26 | 31 | 2 | 29 | 3 | 23 |
|
| ||||||
| No | – | – | – | |||
| Yes | 83 | 100 | 7 | 100 | 13 | 100 |
|
| ||||||
| 1 | 42 | 51 | 6 | 86 | 8 | 62 |
| 2 | 27 | 33 | – | 3 | 23 | |
| ≥3 | 13 | 16 | 1 | 14 | 2 | 15 |
| Not applicable | 1 | 1 | – | – | ||
|
| ||||||
| No | 67 | 81 | 7 | 100 | 11 | 85 |
| Yes | 16 | 19 | – | 2 | 15 | |
|
| ||||||
| Interferon alpha | 11 | 13 | – | 2 | 15 | |
| Vaccination | 5 | 6 | – | – | ||
| Kinase inhibitors | ||||||
| No | 71 | 86 | 7 | 100 | 9 | 69 |
| Yes | 12 | 14 | – | 4 | 31 | |
|
| ||||||
| BRAF inhibitor | 7 | 8 | – | 2 | 15.5 | |
| MEK inhibitor | 4 | 5 | 2 | 15.5 | ||
|
| ||||||
| 0 | 9 | 11 | – | 2 | 15 | |
| 1 | 47 | 57 | 6 | 86 | 8 | 62 |
| 2 | 20 | 24 | – | 2 | 15 | |
| ≥3 | 7 | 8 | 1 | 14 | 1 | 8 |
ECOG Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, LDH lactate dehydrogenase
Outcomes of patients with ipilimumab re-induction therapy
| Age, years | Best response at week 12 (RECIST) | Duration between 1st restaging (week 12) and re-induction therapy (days) | Response at 1st restaging after re-induction (RECIST) | Best overall response after re-induction (RECIST) | Time from 1st dose to death/follow-up (months) | Alive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 74 | PR | 91 | SD | SD | 17.1 | Yes |
| 56 | PR | 232 | PR | CR | 25.5 | Yes |
| 73 | PR | 217 | PD | SD | 24.8 | Yes |
RECIST response evaluation criteria in solid tumors, PR partial response, SD stable disease, PD progressive disease
Fig. 1Kaplan–Meier curves for 1-year overall survival (OS) rates of different melanoma subtypes. Pretreated patients with a metastatic cutaneous melanoma (1-year OS rate: 38 %), b mucosal melanoma (1-year OS rate: 14 %), and c occult melanoma (1-year OS rate: 27 %). All patients received ipilimumab 3 mg/kg
Overall response rates (ORR) and disease control rates (DCR) (n = 70 patients totally)
| Patients with measurable disease (and at least one tumor assessment) | Cutaneous melanoma | Mucosal melanoma | Melanoma of unknown primary | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | N | % | |
|
| 55 | 100 | 6 | 100 | 9 | 100 |
|
| ||||||
| Complete response | – | – | – | |||
| Partial response | 9 | 16 | 1 | 17 | 1 | 11 |
| Stable disease | 7 | 13 | 2 | 33 | 1 | 11 |
| Progressive disease | 39 | 71 | 3 | 50 | 7 | 78 |
|
| ||||||
| ORR (=CR + PR) | 9 | 16 | 1 | 17 | 1 | 11 |
| ORR at week 12 | 7 | 13 | 1 | 17 | – | |
| ORR at week 24 | 6 | 11 | 1 | 17 | – | |
|
| ||||||
| DCR (=CR + PR + SD) | 16 | 29 | 3 | 50 | 2 | 22 |
| DCR at week 12 | 15 | 27 | 3 | 50 | 2 | 22 |
| DCR at week 24 | 10 | 18 | 1 | 17 | 1 | 11 |
CR complete response, PR partial response, RECIST response evaluation criteria in solid tumors, SD stable disease
Fig. 2Kaplan–Meier curves for overall survival (OS) of subgroups (pretreated patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma). Subgroups were stratified as follows: by a the absence of brain metastases before the first dose of ipilimumab; Absence of brain metastases: median OS 12.3 months (95 % CI 6.0–19.4); brain metastases present: median OS 4.2 months (95 % CI 2.0–6.1); b the number of ipilimumab doses (4 versus <4); 4 doses: median OS 13.5 months (95 % CI 7.9–20.4); <4 doses: median OS 2.1 months (95 % CI 1.6–4.1); and c the absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) (≥1000/µl versus <1000/µl) before the second dose (i.e. week 4) of ipilimumab; ALC ≥1000/µl: median OS 9.9 months (95 % CI 6.1–18.5); ALC <1000/µl: median OS 3.6 months (95 % CI 1.8–5.6)
Reported adverse events in overall study population (n = 103 patients totally)
| Adverse events (AE)a | Cutaneous melanoma | Mucosal melanoma | MUP | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. patients (%) | 83 (100) | 7 (100) | 13 (100) | 103 (100) | ||||
| All grades | Grade 3/4 | All grades | Grade 3/4 | All grades | Grade 3/4 | All grades | Grade 3/4 | |
|
| 79 (95) | 36 (43) | 6 (86) | 4 (57) | 13 (100) | 7 (54) | 98 (95) | 47 (46) |
|
| 57 (69) | 14 (17) | 3 (43) | 2 (29) | 11 (85) | 4 (31) | 71 (69) | 20 (19) |
|
| 40 (48) | 12 (15) | 2 (29) | 1 (14) | 10 (77) | 4 (31) | 52 (51) | 17 (17) |
|
| 21 (25) | – | 1 (14) | – | 3 (23) | – | 25 (24) | – |
| Pruritus | 8 (10) | – | 1 (14) | – | 2 (15) | – | 11 (11) | – |
| Rash | 8 (10) | – | – | – | 1 (8) | – | 9 (9) | – |
| Erythema multiforme | 4 (5) | – | – | – | – | – | 4 (4) | – |
| Hand-foot-syndrome | 1 (1) | – | – | – | – | – | 1 (1) | – |
|
| 39 (47) | 15 (18) | 2 (28) | 1 (14) | 8 (62) | 4 (31) | 49 (48) | 20 (20) |
| Colitis | 6 (7) | 4 (5) | – | – | 1 (8) | 1 (8) | 7 (7) | 5 (5) |
| Diarrhea | 25 (30) | 8 (10) | 1 (14) | 1 (14) | 4 (31) | 1 (8) | 30 (29) | 10 (10) |
| GI-perforation | 1 (1) | 1 (1) | – | – | – | – | 1 (1) | 1 (1) |
| Otherb | 7 (9) | 2 (2) | 1 (14) | – | 3 (23) | 2 (15) | 11 (11) | 4 (4) |
|
| 5 (6) | 1 (1) | – | – | – | – | 5 (5) | 1 (1) |
| Hypophysitis | 4 (5) | 1 (1) | – | – | – | – | 4 (4) | – |
| Hypothyroidism | 1 (1) | – | – | – | – | – | 1 (1) | – |
|
| 4 (5) | 1 (1) | – | – | – | – | 4 (4) | 1 (1) |
| Increased ALT | 1 (1) | – | – | – | – | – | 1 (1) | – |
| Increased AST | 1 (1) | – | – | – | – | – | 1 (1) | – |
| Other | 2 (2) | 1 (1) | – | – | – | – | 2 (2) | 1 (1) |
ir immune related, GI gastrointestinal, ALT alanine aminotransferases, AST aspartate aminotransferases, MUP melanoma of unknown primary
aPatients may have had more than one adverse event
bOther gastrointestinal disorders were abdominal pain (n = 6 grade 1/2; n = 3 grade 3/4), constipation (n = 1 grade 1/2) and elevated lipase (n = 1 grade 3/4)