Search

PURPOSE Ipilimumab and nivolumab have each shown treatment benefit for high-risk resected melanoma. The phase III CheckMate 915 trial evaluated adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab alone in patients with resected stage IIIB-D or IV melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, phase III trial, 1,833 patients received nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks (916 patients) or nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks (917 patients) for ≤ 1 year. After random assignment, patients were stratified by tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and stage. Dual primary end points were recurrence-free survival (RFS) in randomly assigned patients and in the tumor PD-L1 expression-level < 1% subgroup. RESULTS At a minimum follow-up of approximately 23.7 months, there was no significant difference between treatment groups for RFS in the all-randomly assigned patient population (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.09; P = .269) or in patients with PD-L1 expression < 1% (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.14). In all patients, 24-month RFS rates were 64.6% (combination) and 63.2% (nivolumab). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 32.6% of patients in the combination group and 12.8% in the nivolumab group. Treatment-related deaths were reported in 0.4% of patients in the combination group and in no nivolumab-treated patients. CONCLUSION Nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks did not improve RFS versus nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks in patients with stage IIIB-D or stage IV melanoma. Nivolumab showed efficacy consistent with previous adjuvant studies in a population resembling current practice using American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition, reaffirming nivolumab as a standard of care for melanoma adjuvant treatment.

The multinational phase 3 CheckMate 238 trial compared adjuvant therapy with nivolumab versus ipilimumab among patients with resected stage III or IV melanoma (N = 906). In this Japanese subgroup analysis of CheckMate 238 (n = 28; nivolumab, n = 18; ipilimumab, n = 10), both the 12‐ and 18‐month recurrence‐free survival rates were 56% for nivolumab and 30% for ipilimumab (hazard ratio, 0.66; 97.56% confidence interval, 0.19–2.24; P = 0.4390). No new safety signals were reported for Japanese patients. Results were consistent with those from the CheckMate 238 global population, indicating that nivolumab has the potential to be a treatment option for Japanese patients with resected melanoma who are at high risk of recurrence.

Background: Since 2015, adjuvant therapy with ipilimumab is an approved treatment for stage III melanoma based on a significantly prolonged recurrence-free survival (RFS). At a median follow-up of 5.3 years, RFS, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS) were each significantly prolonged in the ipilimumab group compared with the placebo group, despite a 53.3% (ipilimumab) versus 4.6% (placebo) treatment discontinuation rate due to adverse events. We present now long-term follow-up results of this European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 18071 trial. Patients, methods and results: A total of 99 sites randomised 951 patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma (excluding lymph node metastasis ≤1 mm or in-transit metastasis) with adequate resection of lymph nodes to receive intravenous infusions of ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo, every 3 weeks for 4 doses, then every 3 months for up to 3 years. The RFS, DMFS and OS, as reported by the local investigators, were assessed by the intention-to-treat analysis. Among 431 patients randomised at 63 sites and who were still alive at the analysis reported in 2016, recent follow-up information could be obtained for 264 patients. The median OS follow-up was 6.9 years. The RFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63–0.88; P < 0.001), DMFS (HR: 95% CI: 0.76, 0.64–0.90; P = 0.002) and OS (HR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.60–0.89; P = 0.002) benefit observed in the ipilimumab group was durable with an 8.7% absolute difference at 7 years for OS. The benefit was consistent across subgroups. Conclusions: Adjuvant therapy with ipilimumab prolongs RFS, DMFS and OS significantly. The benefit is sustained long term and consistent across subgroups.

BackgroundSeveral therapeutic options are now available in the adjuvant melanoma setting, mandating an understanding of their benefit‒risk profiles in order to make informed treatment decisions. Herein we characterize adjuvant nivolumab select (immune-related) treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and evaluate possible associations between safety and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the phase III CheckMate 238 trial.MethodsPatients with resected stage IIIB–C or IV melanoma received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n=452) or ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses and then every 12 weeks (n=453) for up to 1 year or until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. First-occurrence and all-occurrence select TRAEs were analyzed within discrete time intervals: from 0 to 3 months of treatment, from >3–12 months of treatment, and from the last dose (regardless of early or per-protocol treatment discontinuation) to 100 days after the last dose. Possible associations between select TRAEs and RFS were investigated post randomization in 3-month landmark analyses and in Cox model analyses (including a time-varying covariate of select TRAE), within and between treatment groups.ResultsFrom the first nivolumab dose to 100 days after the last dose, first-occurrence select TRAEs were reported in 67.7% (306/452) of patients. First-occurrence select TRAEs were reported most frequently from 0 to 3 months (48.0%), during which the most common were pruritus (15.5%) and diarrhea (15.3%). Most select TRAEs resolved within 6 months. There was no clear association between the occurrence (or not) of select TRAEs and RFS by landmark analysis or by Cox model analysis within treatment arms or comparing nivolumab to the ipilimumab comparator arm.ConclusionResults of this safety analysis of nivolumab in adjuvant melanoma were consistent with its established safety profile. In the discrete time intervals evaluated, most first-occurrence TRAEs occurred early during treatment and resolved. No association between RFS and select TRAEs was evident.Trial registration numberNCT02388906.

Summary Background Previously, findings from CheckMate 238, a double-blind, phase 3 adjuvant trial in patients with resected stage IIIB–C or stage IV melanoma, showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival with nivolumab versus ipilimumab. This report provides updated 4-year efficacy, initial overall survival, and late-emergent safety results. Methods This multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was done in 130 academic centres, community hospitals, and cancer centres across 25 countries. Patients aged 15 years or older with resected stage IIIB–C or IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive nivolumab or ipilimumab via an interactive voice response system and stratified according to disease stage and baseline PD-L1 status of tumour cells. Patients received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or intravenous ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, and then every 12 weeks until 1 year of treatment, disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by investigator assessment, and overall survival was a key secondary endpoint. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients). All patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety analysis. The results presented in this report reflect the 4-year update of the ongoing study with a database lock date of Jan 30, 2020. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02388906 . Findings Between March 30 and Nov 30, 2015, 906 patients were assigned to nivolumab (n=453) or ipilimumab (n=453). Median follow-up was 51·1 months (IQR 41·6–52·7) with nivolumab and 50·9 months (36·2–52·3) with ipilimumab; 4-year recurrence-free survival was 51·7% (95% CI 46·8–56·3) in the nivolumab group and 41·2% (36·4–45·9) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [95% CI 0·60–0·86]; p=0·0003). With 211 (100 [22%] of 453 patients in the nivolumab group and 111 [25%] of 453 patients in the ipilimumab group) of 302 anticipated deaths observed (about 73% of the originally planned 88% power needed for significance), 4-year overall survival was 77·9% (95% CI 73·7–81·5) with nivolumab and 76·6% (72·2–80·3) with ipilimumab (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·66–1·14]; p=0·31). Late-emergent grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in three (1%) of 452 and seven (2%) of 453 patients. The most common late-emergent treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported were diarrhoea, diabetic ketoacidosis, and pneumonitis (one patient each) in the nivolumab group, and colitis (two patients) in the ipilimumab group. Two previously reported treatment-related deaths in the ipilimumab group were attributed to study drug toxicity (marrow aplasia in one patient and colitis in one patient); no further treatment-related deaths were reported. Interpretation At a minimum of 4 years' follow-up, nivolumab demonstrated sustained recurrence-free survival benefit versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB–C or IV melanoma indicating a long-term treatment benefit with nivolumab. With fewer deaths than anticipated, overall survival was similar in both groups. Nivolumab remains an efficacious adjuvant treatment for patients with resected high-risk melanoma, with a safety profile that is more tolerable than that of ipilimumab. Funding Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical.

BACKGROUND:The EORTC 18071 phase 3 trial compared adjuvant ipilimumab with placebo in patients with stage III melanoma. The primary endpoint, recurrence-free survival, was significantly longer in the ipilimumab group than in the placebo group. Investigator-reported toxic effects of ipilimumab consisted mainly of skin, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and hepatic immune-related adverse events. Adjuvant treatment with ipilimumab in this setting was approved in October, 2014, by the US Food and Drug Administration based on the results of the primary outcome of this trial. Here, we report the results of the secondary endpoint, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), of this trial.METHODS:EORTC 18071 was a multinational, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial in patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma (excluding lymph node metastasis ≤1 mm or in-transit metastasis) in 19 countries worldwide. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by an interactive voice response system, to receive either ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo every 3 weeks for four doses, then every 3 months for up to 3 years. Using a minimisation technique, randomisation was stratified by disease stage and geographical region. HRQoL was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30 quality-of-life instrument at baseline, weeks 4, 7, 10, and 24, and every 12 weeks thereafter up to 2 years, irrespective of disease progression. Results were summarised by timepoint and in a longitudinal manner in the intention-to-treat population. Two summary scores were calculated for each HRQoL scale: the average score reported during induction (ipilimumab or placebo at a dose of 10 mg/kg, administered as one single dose at the start of days 1, 22, 43, and 64-ie, four doses in 3 weeks), and the average score reported after induction. A predefined threshold of a 10 point difference between arms was considered clinically relevant. The primary HRQoL endpoint was the global health scale, with the predefined hypothesis of no clinically relevant differences after induction between groups. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2007-001974-10, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00636168.FINDINGS:Between July 10, 2008, and Aug 1, 2011, 951 patients were randomly assigned to treatment: 475 in the ipilimumab group and 476 in the placebo group. Compliance with completing the HRQoL questionnaire was 893 (94%) of 951 patients at baseline, 693 (75%) of 924 at week 24, and 354 (51%) of 697 at week 108. Patient mean global health scores during (77·32 [SD 17·36] vs 72·96 [17·82]; p=0·00011) and after induction (76·48 [17·52] vs 72·32 [18·60]; p=0·00067) were statistically significantly different between groups but were not clinically relevant. Mean global health scores differed most between the groups at week 7 (77 [SD 19] in the placebo group vs 72 [22] in the ipilimumab group) and week 10 (77 [20] vs 70 [23]). Mean HRQoL scores differed by more than 10 points at week 10 between treatment groups for diarrhoea (7·67 [SD 17·05] for placebo vs 18·17 [28·35] for ipilimumab) and insomnia (15·17 [22·53] vs 25·60 [29·19]).INTERPRETATION:Despite increased toxicity, which led to treatment discontinuation for most patients during the induction phase of ipilimumab administration, overall HRQoL, as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30, was similar between groups, as no clinically relevant differences (10 points or more) in global health status scores were observed during or after induction. Clinically relevant deterioration for some symptoms was observed at week 10, but after induction, no clinically relevant differences remained. Together with the primary analysis, results from this trial show that treatment with ipilimumab results in longer recurrence-free survival compared with that for treatment with placebo, with little impairment in HRQoL despite grade 3-4 investigator-reported adverse events. BACKGROUND: The EORTC 18071 phase 3 trial compared adjuvant ipilimumab with placebo in patients with stage III melanoma. The primary endpoint, recurrence-free survival, was significantly longer in the ipilimumab group than in the placebo group. Investigator-reported toxic effects of ipilimumab consisted mainly of skin, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and hepatic immune-related adverse events. Adjuvant treatment with ipilimumab in this setting was approved in October, 2014, by the US Food and Drug Administration based on the results of the primary outcome of this trial. Here, we report the results of the secondary endpoint, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), of this trial.METHODS: EORTC 18071 was a multinational, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial in patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma (excluding lymph node metastasis ≤1 mm or in-transit metastasis) in 19 countries worldwide. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by an interactive voice response system, to receive either ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo every 3 weeks for four doses, then every 3 months for up to 3 years. Using a minimisation technique, randomisation was stratified by disease stage and geographical region. HRQoL was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30 quality-of-life instrument at baseline, weeks 4, 7, 10, and 24, and every 12 weeks thereafter up to 2 years, irrespective of disease progression. Results were summarised by timepoint and in a longitudinal manner in the intention-to-treat population. Two summary scores were calculated for each HRQoL scale: the average score reported during induction (ipilimumab or placebo at a dose of 10 mg/kg, administered as one single dose at the start of days 1, 22, 43, and 64-ie, four doses in 3 weeks), and the average score reported after induction. A predefined threshold of a 10 point difference between arms was considered clinically relevant. The primary HRQoL endpoint was the global health scale, with the predefined hypothesis of no clinically relevant differences after induction between groups. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2007-001974-10, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00636168.FINDINGS: Between July 10, 2008, and Aug 1, 2011, 951 patients were randomly assigned to treatment: 475 in the ipilimumab group and 476 in the placebo group. Compliance with completing the HRQoL questionnaire was 893 (94%) of 951 patients at baseline, 693 (75%) of 924 at week 24, and 354 (51%) of 697 at week 108. Patient mean global health scores during (77·32 [SD 17·36] vs 72·96 [17·82]; p=0·00011) and after induction (76·48 [17·52] vs 72·32 [18·60]; p=0·00067) were statistically significantly different between groups but were not clinically relevant. Mean global health scores differed most between the groups at week 7 (77 [SD 19] in the placebo group vs 72 [22] in the ipilimumab group) and week 10 (77 [20] vs 70 [23]). Mean HRQoL scores differed by more than 10 points at week 10 between treatment groups for diarrhoea (7·67 [SD 17·05] for placebo vs 18·17 [28·35] for ipilimumab) and insomnia (15·17 [22·53] vs 25·60 [29·19]).INTERPRETATION: Despite increased toxicity, which led to treatment discontinuation for most patients during the induction phase of ipilimumab administration, overall HRQoL, as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30, was similar between groups, as no clinically relevant differences (10 points or more) in global health status scores were observed during or after induction. Clinically relevant deterioration for some symptoms was observed at week 10, but after induction, no clinically relevant differences remained. Together with the primary analysis, results from this trial show that treatment with ipilimumab results in longer recurrence-free survival compared with that for treatment with placebo, with little impairment in HRQoL despite grade 3-4 investigator-reported adverse events.FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Background: NIVO has demonstrated significant benefit over IPI as adjuvant treatment in pts with resected stage IIIB–C or stage IV melanoma (AJCC v7). Combination NIVO + IPI has shown numerically longer survival than NIVO alone in pts with metastatic melanoma. CheckMate 915 evaluated adjuvant NIVO + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W vs NIVO. Methods: Pts aged ≥ 12 y with completely resected stage IIIB–D or stage IV melanoma (AJCC v8) were stratified by tumor PD-L1 expression and stage and treated with NIVO 240 mg Q2W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W (NIVO + IPI1) or placebo-controlled NIVO 480 mg Q4W alone for ≤ 1 y (NIVO + IPI were to be discontinued together). Dual endpoints were recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the PD-L1 < 1% and intent-to-treat populations. Distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in pts with stage III disease was an exploratory endpoint. Results: Of 920 pts randomized to NIVO + IPI1 and 924 to NIVO alone, most had stage IIIB (31% vs 31%) or IIIC (53% vs 52%) disease and had undergone complete lymph node dissection (64% vs 64%). Pts treated with NIVO + IPI1 vs NIVO alone had a shorter median duration of therapy (7.6 vs 11.1 mo) and therefore, a lower median cumulative NIVO dose (3840 vs 6240 mg). At a minimum follow-up of 24 mo, RFS and DMFS did not differ between treatment groups (table). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 33% of pts treated with NIVO+IPI1 and 13% with NIVO alone; any-grade TRAEs led to discontinuation of therapy in 32% vs 10% of pts, respectively. There were 4 treatment-related deaths (all with NIVO + IPI1). Conclusions: The NIVO + IPI1 regimen did not result in RFS or DMFS improvement vs NIVO in stage IIIB–D/IV resectable melanoma; safety profiles were consistent with previous studies. NIVO 480 mg Q4W outcomes in CheckMate 915 were similar to previous NIVO results and reinforce NIVO as an adjuvant standard of care in a study population that included pts with and without complete lymphadenectomy. NIVO 240 mg Q2W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W (ITT)NIVO 480 mg Q4W (ITT)NIVO 240 mg Q2W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W (tumor PD-L1 < 1%)NIVO 480 mg Q4W (tumor PD-L1 < 1%)RFS24-mo rate64.6% (95% CI, 61.3-67.7)63.2% (95% CI, 59.9-66.4)53.6% (95% CI, 48.0-58.8)52.4% (95% CI, 46.8-57.7)Median, mo (events/pts)Not reached (327/920)Not reached (347/924)33.2 (159/349)25.3 (166/351)HR, NIVO + IPI1 vs NIVO0.92 (97.295% CI, 0.77-1.09); P = 0.2690.91 (95% CI, 0.73-1.14)DMFS in pts with stage III disease24-mo rate75.4% (95% CI, 72.1-78.4)77.4% (95% CI, 74.1-80.3)67.9% (95% CI, 61.9-73.1)68.4% (95% CI, 62.5-73.7)Median, mo (events/pts)Not reached (195/797)Not reached (194/798)Not reached (92/305)Not reached (96/307)HR, NIVO + IPI1 vs NIVO1.01 (95% CI, 0.83-1.23)0.94 (95% CI, 0.70-1.25) Citation Format: Georgina V. Long, Dirk Schadendorf, Michele Del Vecchio, James Larkin, Victoria Atkinson, Michael Schenker, Jacopo Pigozzo, Helen J. Gogas, Stéphane Dalle, Nicolas Meyer, Paolo A. Ascierto, Shahneen Sandhu, Thomas Eigentler, Ralf Gutzmer, Jessica C. Hassel, Caroline Robert, Matteo Carlino, Anna Maria Di Giacomo, Marcus O. Butler, Eva Muñoz-Couselo, Michael P. Brown, Piotr Rutkowski, Andrew Haydon, Jean-Jacques Grob, Jacob Schachter, Paola Queirolo, Alexander Menzies, Sandra Re, Tuba O. Bas, Veerle de Pril, Daniel Tenney, Hao Tang, Jeffrey S. Weber. Adjuvant therapy with nivolumab (NIVO) combined with ipilimumab (IPI) vs NIVO alone in patients (pts) with resected stage IIIB-D/IV melanoma (CheckMate 915) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr CT004.

2512 Background: Since 2015, ipilimumab (Ipi) is an approved treatment for stage III melanoma based on a significantly (P=0.0013) prolonged recurrence-free survival (RFS) (Eggermont et al, Lancet Oncology, 2015). At a median follow-up of 5.3 years, RFS (HR=0.76) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (HR=0.76), assessed by an IRC, and overall survival (OS) (HR=0.72) were prolonged in the Ipi group as compared to the placebo (Pbo) group (Eggermont et al, NEJM, 2016), despite a 53.3% (Ipi) vs 4.6% (Pbo) treatment discontinuation rate due to adverse events. Methods: In this randomized double-blind trial, eligible patients (pts) included those ≥18 yrs of age who underwent complete resection of stage III cutaneous melanoma (excluding lymph node metastasis ≤1 mm or in-transit metastasis). 951 pts were randomized (stratified by stage and region) 1:1 to Ipi 10 mg/kg (n=475) or placebo (Pbo, n=476) q3w for 4 doses, then every 3 mos for up to 3 yrs until completion, disease recurrence, or unacceptable toxicity. Here, we report the comparison between the Ipi and Pbo groups regarding the long-term efficacy outcomes using the local investigator assessments. Results: Overall, 20%/44%/36% of pts had AJCC-7 stage IIIA/IIIB/IIIC, 42% ulcerated primary, and 58% macroscopic lymph node involvement. Median follow-up was 6.9 yrs. The RFS, DMFS and OS benefit observed in the Ipi group was long-lasting (almost 10% difference at 7 years) and consistent across subgroups: no significant predictive factors could be detected. Conclusions: In this phase III trial, Ipi, administered at 10 mg/kg, as adjuvant therapy provided, at a 6.9 yr median follow-up, a sustained improvement in the RFS, DMFS, and OS long-term results in patients with high-risk stage III melanoma. Clinical trial information: NCT00636168. [Table: see text]

BACKGROUND: On the basis of data from a phase 2 trial that compared the checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab at doses of 0.3 mg, 3 mg, and 10 mg per kilogram of body weight in patients with advanced melanoma, this phase 3 trial evaluated ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram in patients who had undergone complete resection of stage III melanoma. METHODS: After patients had undergone complete resection of stage III cutaneous melanoma, we randomly assigned them to receive ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram (475 patients) or placebo (476) every 3 weeks for four doses, then every 3 months for up to 3 years or until disease recurrence or an unacceptable level of toxic effects occurred. Recurrence-free survival was the primary end point. Secondary end points included overall survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and safety. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 5.3 years, the 5-year rate of recurrence-free survival was 40.8% in the ipilimumab group, as compared with 30.3% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.89; PBACKGROUND: On the basis of data from a phase 2 trial that compared the checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab at doses of 0.3 mg, 3 mg, and 10 mg per kilogram of body weight in patients with advanced melanoma, this phase 3 trial evaluated ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram in patients who had undergone complete resection of stage III melanoma.METHODS: After patients had undergone complete resection of stage III cutaneous melanoma, we randomly assigned them to receive ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram (475 patients) or placebo (476) every 3 weeks for four doses, then every 3 months for up to 3 years or until disease recurrence or an unacceptable level of toxic effects occurred. Recurrence-free survival was the primary end point. Secondary end points included overall survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and safety.RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 5.3 years, the 5-year rate of recurrence-free survival was 40.8% in the ipilimumab group, as compared with 30.3% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.89; PCONCLUSIONS: As adjuvant therapy for high-risk stage III melanoma, ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram resulted in significantly higher rates of recurrence-free survival, overall survival, and distant metastasis-free survival than placebo. There were more immune-related adverse events with ipilimumab than with placebo. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00636168 , and EudraCT number, 2007-001974-10 .).

9502Background: In the initial report of data from CheckMate 238, at a minimum follow-up of 18 mo, NIVO demonstrated significantly longer recurrence-free survival (RFS) vs IPI in patients (pts) with resected stage III or IV melanoma. Here, we report updated efficacy results from this phase III study with an additional 6 mo of follow-up. Methods: Eligible pts included those ≥15 yrs of age who underwent complete resection of stage IIIB/C or IV melanoma. 906 pts were randomized 1:1 (stratified by disease stage and PD-L1 status at a 5% cutoff) to receive NIVO 3 mg/kg Q2W (N=453) or IPI 10 mg/kg Q3W for 4 doses, then Q12W (from week 24) (N=453) for up to 1 yr, or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was RFS; distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in pts with stage III disease was an exploratory endpoint. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 24 mo, RFS continued to be significantly longer for NIVO vs IPI (hazard ratio 0.66, P

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab is an approved treatment for patients with advanced melanoma. We aimed to assess ipilimumab as adjuvant therapy for patients with completely resected stage III melanoma at high risk of recurrence. METHODS: We did a double-blind, phase 3 trial in patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma (excluding lymph node metastasis ≤1 mm or in-transit metastasis) with adequate resection of lymph nodes (ie, the primary cutaneous melanoma must have been completely excised with adequate surgical margins) who had not received previous systemic therapy for melanoma from 91 hospitals located in 19 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), centrally by an interactive voice response system, to receive intravenous infusions of 10 mg/kg ipilimumab or placebo every 3 weeks for four doses, then every 3 months for up to 3 years. Using a minimisation technique, randomisation was stratified by disease stage and geographical region. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival, assessed by an independent review committee, and analysed by intention to treat. Enrollment is complete but the study is ongoing for follow-up for analysis of secondary endpoints. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2007-001974-10, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00636168. FINDINGS: Between July 10, 2008, and Aug 1, 2011, 951 patients were randomly assigned to ipilimumab (n=475) or placebo (n=476), all of whom were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. At a median follow-up of 2·74 years (IQR 2·28-3·22), there were 528 recurrence-free survival events (234 in the ipilimumab group vs 294 in the placebo group). Median recurrence-free survival was 26·1 months (95% CI 19·3-39·3) in the ipilimumab group versus 17·1 months (95% CI 13·4-21·6) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·75; 95% CI 0·64-0·90; p=0·0013); 3-year recurrence-free survival was 46·5% (95% CI 41·5-51·3) in the ipilimumab group versus 34·8% (30·1-39·5) in the placebo group. The most common grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events in the ipilimumab group were gastrointestinal (75 [16%] vs four [

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg was the first agent to demonstrate improved survival in previously treated patients with metastatic melanoma in a phase 3 trial (MDX010-20). Ipilimumab produced a characteristic spectrum of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) of special interest, consistent with its immune-based mechanism of action. METHODS: In MDX010-20, 676 previously treated patients were randomized 3:1:1 to receive ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus the glycoprotein 100 melanoma antigen vaccine (gp100), ipilimumab 3 mg/kg + placebo, or gp100 vaccine + placebo. For the current report, the authors conducted a detailed analysis of the time to onset and resolution of irAEs associated with ipilimumab therapy. RESULTS: Grade 2 through 5 irAEs generally developed during the induction phase of treatment (0-12 weeks). Most, including grade 3/4 irAEs, were reversible when managed with treatment guidelines using vigilant monitoring and corticosteroids. The median time to resolution (to grade 1 or 0 or to the grade at baseline) of irAEs that had an onset during the induction phase was approximately 6 weeks for grade 2 through 4 irAEs and 8 weeks for grade 3 and 4 irAEs. Across the entire study duration, most grade 2 through 4 irAEs resolved within 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Most ipilimumab-associated irAEs, including grade 3/4 symptoms, developed within 12 weeks of initial dosing and resolved within 12 weeks of onset. IrAEs were well characterized in their evolution and could be managed using published algorithms. Cancer 2013. © 2013 American Cancer Society.

Ipilimumab is a fully human, monoclonal antibody that blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 to potentiate an antitumor T-cell response. This agent improved overall survival in a phase III trial in previously treated patients with advanced melanoma. Because the mechanism of action for ipilimumab is thought to be HLA independent, most trials enrolled patients without regard to HLA subtype. However, enrollment in the phase III trial was restricted to class-I HLA-A*0201-positive patients because two of the three arms contained an HLA-A*0201-restricted gp100 vaccine. HLA typing was also performed prospectively in several phase II trials and was available for 93.5% of patients. In this retrospective analysis, pooled efficacy and safety data are presented according to HLA-A*0201 status and dose from pretreated patients randomized to 0.3, 3, or 10 mg/kg ipilimumab in four phase II trials. Median overall survival (OS) was similar for the 187 HLA-A*0201-positive [9.3 months, 95% CI (confidence interval) 7.4-11.5] and 266 HLA-A*0201-negative patients [11.4 months, 95% CI 9.3-15.1] randomized to ipilimumab at all doses across the four phase II trials. These data are comparable to the OS for the 137 HLA-A*0201-positive patients randomized to ipilimumab in the phase III study [10.1 months, 95% CI 8.0-13.8]. Ipilimumab-induced adverse events and immune-related adverse events (skin, gastrointestinal, hepatic, other) also occurred at similar frequencies among patients in the phase II and III trials, regardless of HLA-A*0201 status. These findings support the hypothesis that ipilimumab-treated patients with advanced melanoma have similar outcomes regardless of their HLA-A*0201 status.

TPS7608 Background: Phase III studies have not reported improvement for ED-SCLC beyond EP. Moreover, chemotherapeutic response in SCLC is short-lived, with a median survival of 8–12 months and 5-year survival rates ranging from 1%–2%. Ipi, a fully human monoclonal antibody which binds CTLA-4, augments antitumor immune responses and may potentially improve the clinical benefit of EP. A randomized phase II study of Ipi + paclitaxel/carboplatin (PC) in pts with ED-SCLC showed significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) [measured by immune-related response criteria (irRC)] over PC in pts receiving phased Ipi + PC; irRC were derived from WHO criteria to better capture response patterns observed with Ipi. Addition of Ipi trended toward prolonged overall survival (OS) and did not exacerbate PC toxicity; immune-related adverse events were managed using protocol-specific guidelines. This global (~227 sites among 34 countries), multicenter phase III study in pts with ED-SCLC (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01450761) will determine if adding Ipi to EP increases OS vs EP alone. Methods: Pts with first-line ED-SCLC and ECOG 0-1 will be eligible; pts with a history of autoimmune disease will be ineligible. Pts will be randomized (1:1 to either Arm A or Arm B) to 2 cycles of EP (etoposide [100 mg/m2, IV on Days 1-3 Q3W] and cisplatin [75 mg/m2, IV] or carboplatin [AUC=5, IV] once Q3W), followed by 4 cycles of blinded study drug (Ipi 10 mg/kg, IV in Arm A or placebo in Arm B, Q3W) with 2 concurrent cycles (during cycles 3-4) of EP and Ipi (6 cycles of total therapy). Eligible pts will receive Ipi maintenance therapy Q12W until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity; pts with a complete response will also be eligible for prophylactic cranial irradiation at investigator’s discretion. The primary endpoint is OS; secondary endpoints include OS among pts who receive blinded therapy, immune-related and mWHO PFS, best overall response rate, and duration of response. The trial will also characterize safety, and is estimated to enroll 1100 pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01450761.

TPS7113 Background: EP (4-6 cycles) is standard of care 1st-line therapy for metastatic SCLC, and no multinational studies have reported any improvement beyond that reported for EP. Evidence of an ongoing immune response to SCLC tumors suggests that immunotherapy that enhances this immune response to SCLC may enhance the clinical benefit of EP. Ipi, a fully human monoclonal antibody which blocks CTLA-4, augments antitumor immune responses. Because some responses to Ipi may differ from those observed with cytotoxic therapies, immune-related response criteria (irRC) were derived from WHO criteria to better capture response patterns observed with Ipi. A randomized Phase 2 study of Ipi with paclitaxel/carboplatin (PC) in pts with ED-SCLC showed significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), as measured by irRC, over PC alone in pts receiving Ipi and PC in a phased regimen (Ipi started after 2 cycles of PC). Furthermore, addition of Ipi did not exacerbate PC toxicity, and immune-related adverse events were managed using protocol-specific guidelines. This multicenter phase III study in pts with ED-SCLC (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01450761) will determine whether adding Ipi to EP increases OS vs EP alone. Methods: EP consists of 4 cycles of etoposide (100 mg/m2, IV on Days 1-3 every 3 weeks [Q3W]) and cisplatin (75 mg/m2, IV) or carboplatin (AUC=5, IV) once Q3W. Pts will be randomized to receive 4 doses of Ipi (10 mg/kg, IV) in Arm A or placebo in Arm B, Q3W during induction, starting after 2 cycles of EP (phased schedule). Eligible pts will then receive blinded study drug (Ipi in Arm A; placebo in Arm B) Q12W until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective is to compare OS. Secondary objectives are to compare OS in those who receive blinded study drug, compare PFS between study arms, and to estimate best overall response rate and duration of response. First-line ED-SCLC pts with ECOG performance ≤1 will be included. Pts with symptomatic CNS metastases or a history of autoimmune disease will be excluded. The study will randomize 1100 pts at a 1:1 ratio.