Literature DB >> 31160251

Identification of the optimal combination dosing schedule of neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab in macroscopic stage III melanoma (OpACIN-neo): a multicentre, phase 2, randomised, controlled trial.

Elisa A Rozeman1, Alexander M Menzies2, Alexander C J van Akkooi1, Chandra Adhikari3, Carolien Bierman1, Bart A van de Wiel1, Richard A Scolyer4, Oscar Krijgsman1, Karolina Sikorska1, Hanna Eriksson5, Annegien Broeks1, Johannes V van Thienen1, Alexander D Guminski2, Alex Torres Acosta1, Sylvia Ter Meulen1, Anne Miek Koenen1, Linda J W Bosch1, Kerwin Shannon4, Loes M Pronk1, Maria Gonzalez3, Sydney Ch'ng6, Lindsay G Grijpink-Ongering1, Jonathan Stretch6, Stijn Heijmink1, Harm van Tinteren1, John B A G Haanen1, Omgo E Nieweg6, Willem M C Klop1, Charlotte L Zuur1, Robyn P M Saw6, Winan J van Houdt1, Daniel S Peeper1, Andrew J Spillane2, Johan Hansson5, Ton N Schumacher1, Georgina V Long3, Christian U Blank7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The outcome of patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma is poor. Neoadjuvant treatment with ipilimumab plus nivolumab at the standard dosing schedule induced pathological responses in a high proportion of patients in two small independent early-phase trials, and no patients with a pathological response have relapsed after a median follow up of 32 months. However, toxicity of the standard ipilimumab plus nivolumab dosing schedule was high, preventing its broader clinical use. The aim of the OpACIN-neo trial was to identify a dosing schedule of ipilimumab plus nivolumab that is less toxic but equally effective.
METHODS: OpACIN-neo is a multicentre, open-label, phase 2, randomised, controlled trial. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years, had a WHO performance status of 0-1, had resectable stage III melanoma involving lymph nodes only, and measurable disease according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were enrolled from three medical centres in Australia, Sweden, and the Netherlands, and were randomly assigned (1:1:1), stratified by site, to one of three neoadjuvant dosing schedules: group A, two cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks intravenously; group B, two cycles of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks intravenously; or group C, two cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks directly followed by two cycles of nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks intravenously. The investigators, site staff, and patients were aware of the treatment assignment during the study participation. Pathologists were masked to treatment allocation and all other data. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with grade 3-4 immune-related toxicity within the first 12 weeks and the proportion of patients achieving a radiological objective response and pathological response at 6 weeks. Analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02977052, and is ongoing with an additional extension cohort and to complete survival analysis.
FINDINGS: Between Nov 24, 2016 and June 28, 2018, 105 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 89 (85%) eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of the three groups. Three patients were excluded after randomisation because they were found to be ineligible, and 86 received at least one dose of study drug; 30 patients in group A, 30 in group B, and 26 in group C (accrual to this group was closed early upon advice of the Data Safety Monitoring Board on June 4, 2018 because of severe adverse events). Within the first 12 weeks, grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events were observed in 12 (40%) of 30 patients in group A, six (20%) of 30 in group B, and 13 (50%) of 26 in group C. The difference in grade 3-4 toxicity between group B and A was -20% (95% CI -46 to 6; p=0·158) and between group C and group A was 10% (-20 to 40; p=0·591). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were elevated liver enzymes in group A (six [20%)]) and colitis in group C (five [19%]); in group B, none of the grade 3-4 adverse events were seen in more than one patient. One patient (in group A) died 9·5 months after the start of treatment due to the consequences of late-onset immune-related encephalitis, which was possibly treatment-related. 19 (63% [95% CI 44-80]) of 30 patients in group A, 17 (57% [37-75]) of 30 in group B, and nine (35% [17-56]) of 26 in group C achieved a radiological objective response, while pathological responses occurred in 24 (80% [61-92]) patients in group A, 23 (77% [58-90]) in group B, and 17 (65% [44-83]) in group C.
INTERPRETATION: OpACIN-neo identified a tolerable neoadjuvant dosing schedule (group B: two cycles of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg) that induces a pathological response in a high proportion of patients and might be suitable for broader clinical use. When more mature data confirm these early observations, this schedule should be tested in randomised phase 3 studies versus adjuvant therapies, which are the current standard-of-care systemic therapy for patients with stage III melanoma. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31160251     DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30151-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Oncol        ISSN: 1470-2045            Impact factor:   41.316


  104 in total

1.  Association of Anti-Programmed Cell Death 1 Antibody Treatment With Risk of Recurrence of Toxic Effects After Immune-Related Adverse Events of Ipilimumab in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma.

Authors:  Angélique Brunot; Jean-Jacques Grob; Geraldine Jeudy; Florent Grange; Bernard Guillot; Nora Kramkimel; Laurent Mortier; Yannick Le Corre; François F Aubin; Sandrine Mansard; Céleste Lebbé; Astrid Blom; Henri Montaudie; Damien Giacchero; Sorilla Prey; Delphine Legoupil; Alexis Guyot; Mona Amini-Adle; Florence Granel-Brocard; Nicolas Meyer; Monica Dinulescu; Julien Edeline; Boris Campillo-Gimenez; Thierry Lesimple
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 10.282

Review 2.  Neoadjuvant checkpoint blockade for cancer immunotherapy.

Authors:  Suzanne L Topalian; Janis M Taube; Drew M Pardoll
Journal:  Science       Date:  2020-01-31       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 3.  Surgery for Metastatic Melanoma: an Evolving Concept.

Authors:  Alessandro A E Testori; Stephanie A Blankenstein; Alexander C J van Akkooi
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 4.  Learning from clinical trials of neoadjuvant checkpoint blockade.

Authors:  Judith M Versluis; Georgina V Long; Christian U Blank
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 53.440

Review 5.  Targeting novel inhibitory receptors in cancer immunotherapy.

Authors:  Quan-Quan Ding; Joe-Marc Chauvin; Hassane M Zarour
Journal:  Semin Immunol       Date:  2020-12-04       Impact factor: 11.130

Review 6.  Use of immuno-oncology in melanoma.

Authors:  M G Smylie
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 7.  Immune checkpoint blockade in solid organ tumours: Choice, dose and predictors of response.

Authors:  Vishal Navani; Moira C Graves; Nikola A Bowden; Andre Van Der Westhuizen
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 4.335

8.  Clinicopathological Features, Staging, and Current Approaches to Treatment in High-Risk Resectable Melanoma.

Authors:  Emily Z Keung; Jeffrey E Gershenwald
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 9.  Therapeutic Advancements Across Clinical Stages in Melanoma, With a Focus on Targeted Immunotherapy.

Authors:  Claudia Trojaniello; Jason J Luke; Paolo A Ascierto
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 10.  Management of V600E and V600K BRAF-Mutant Melanoma.

Authors:  Alexandra M Haugh; Douglas B Johnson
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2019-11-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.