Literature DB >> 28987768

Patient-reported outcomes in KEYNOTE-006, a randomised study of pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma.

Teresa M Petrella1, Caroline Robert2, Erika Richtig3, Wilson H Miller4, Giuseppe V Masucci5, Euan Walpole6, Celeste Lebbe7, Neil Steven8, Mark R Middleton9, Darcy Hille10, Wei Zhou11, Nageatte Ibrahim12, Jonathan Cebon13.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Report results of patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptoms from phase III KEYNOTE-006 study of pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in patients with ipilimumab-naive advanced melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 (Q2W) or every 3 weeks (Q3W) for up to 2 years, or four cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg Q3W. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) was administered at baseline and throughout the study. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) analyses were pre-specified exploratory endpoints; the primary PRO assessment was the score change from baseline to week 12 in EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/HRQoL score between the arms using constrained longitudinal data analysis.
RESULTS: The PRO analysis population included 776 patients: pembrolizumab Q2W (n = 270); pembrolizumab Q3W (n = 266); ipilimumab (n = 240). Baseline GHS was similar across arms. QLQ-C30 compliance rates at week 12 were 87% (n = 214), 97% (n = 226), and 96% (n = 178), for the pembrolizumab Q2W, pembrolizumab Q3W, and ipilimumab arms, respectively. From baseline to week 12, GHS/HRQoL scores were better maintained with pembrolizumab than with ipilimumab (decrease of -1.9 and -2.5 for pembrolizumab versus -10.0 for ipilimumab; p < 0.001 for each pembrolizumab arm versus ipilimumab). Fewer patients treated with pembrolizumab experienced deterioration in GHS at week 12 (31% for pembrolizumab Q2W; 29% for Q3W and 44% for ipilimumab), with similar trends observed for individual functioning and symptoms scales.
CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL was better maintained with pembrolizumab than with ipilimumab in patients with ipilimumab-naive advanced melanoma. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01866319.
Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Advanced melanoma; EORTC QLQ-C30; Health-related quality of life; KEYNOTE-006; Patient-reported outcomes; Pembrolizumab

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28987768     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.08.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  18 in total

1.  Patient-Reported Outcomes with PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors for Advanced Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Tomohiro F Nishijima; Shlomit S Shachar; Hyman B Muss; Kazuo Tamura
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2018-12-14

2.  Time to deterioration in cancer randomized clinical trials for patient-reported outcomes data: a systematic review.

Authors:  E Charton; B Cuer; F Cottone; F Efficace; C Touraine; Z Hamidou; F Fiteni; F Bonnetain; M-C Woronoff-Lemsi; C Bascoul-Mollevi; A Anota
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-11-27       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 3.  Kidney Complications of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Review.

Authors:  Roman Shingarev; Ilya G Glezerman
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2019-07-11       Impact factor: 8.860

4.  Meta-Analysis of Quality of Life in Cancer Patients Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Authors:  Brian D Gonzalez; Sarah L Eisel; Kristina E Bowles; Aasha I Hoogland; Brian W James; Brent J Small; Susan Sharpe; Kelly A Hyland; Hailey W Bulls; Shannon M Christy; Jori Mansfield; Ashley M Nelson; Raviteja Alla; Kelly Maharaj; Brittany Kennedy; Elizabeth Lafranchise; Noelle L Williams; Sarah Jennewein; Laura B Oswald; Michael A Postow; Adam P Dicker; Heather S L Jim
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2022-06-13       Impact factor: 11.816

5.  Association of Adjuvant or Metastatic Setting With Discontinuation of Cancer Drugs in Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Nibras Ahmed; Yasaswi Vengalasetti; Alyson Haslam; Vinay Prasad
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-05-02

6.  Hypophysitis induced by immune checkpoint inhibitors in a Scottish melanoma population.

Authors:  Khor Zhong Wei; Mark Baxter; Richard Casasola
Journal:  Melanoma Manag       Date:  2019-04-15

7.  SA-49, a novel aloperine derivative, induces MITF-dependent lysosomal degradation of PD-L1.

Authors:  Na Zhang; Yueying Dou; Lu Liu; Xin Zhang; Xiaojia Liu; Qingxuan Zeng; Yang Liu; Mingxiao Yin; Xiujun Liu; Hongbin Deng; Danqing Song
Journal:  EBioMedicine       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 8.143

Review 8.  Long-Term Survival, Quality of Life, and Psychosocial Outcomes in Advanced Melanoma Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Authors:  Anne Rogiers; Annelies Boekhout; Julia K Schwarze; Gil Awada; Christian U Blank; Bart Neyns
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2019-04-28       Impact factor: 4.375

Review 9.  Metabolic interventions: A new insight into the cancer immunotherapy.

Authors:  Tao Yu; Tianhan Dong; Haniyeh Eyvani; Yuanzhang Fang; Xiyu Wang; Xinna Zhang; Xiongbin Lu
Journal:  Arch Biochem Biophys       Date:  2020-11-02       Impact factor: 4.013

10.  Experiences of cancer immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ExCIm)-insights of people affected by cancer and healthcare professionals: a qualitative study protocol.

Authors:  Stephen Jennings; Sally Anstey; Janet Bower; Alison Brewster; John Buckman; Deborah Fenlon; Deborah Fitzsimmons; Tessa Watts
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.